I have S ^r Harry according to my promis brought here a worthy Divine to inlighten you in the way of truth: to the end that the lettance of popery removd we may at length com to that period you have so earnestly and so long desired. For I am resolvd before the conclusion of any such match either wth your self or any other so to provide aforehand, that I may meet wth nothing afterwards to disturb my union repos and peace with him I wed my self.

So indeed it is written: In the beginning God made heaven and earth. And then afterwards he gav himself rest: Gen. 1.

Your birth and breeding S ^r is noble, your person pleases me well, and your natur is very agreable, I lov your de­portment, your spirit is very pregnant and its endowments numerous, your condi­tions all good, your fortun is plausibl and kinred renownd, your knowledge and activity equally high and comendable, your conversation towards all men so­ber prudent and sincerly just. Onely one things spoils all your other good qualitys; you are a Papist.

It spoils all indeed, according as tis written. One knot of dead flies spoils a whol box of ointment. Eccl. 10.

To deal sincerly with you, I lov not popery: this you must renounce or me. If som few conferences with this wor­thy orthodox may avail to that purpos, your conversion once effected I am yours.

Madam I shall be willing to learn, very glad you may be sure to gain two paradises at once.

Well S ^r, I will show you in scriptur, that ther is not in the whol word of God any such thing, as Masses, Popes, Breviaries, Missals, Monks, Cardinals, Nuns, Beads, Liturgy, Shrines, Altars, Vows, Indulgences, Lents, Purgatory, Dirges, Priests, Free-will, Rosarys, Merit, Jesuits, and the rest of popish medly.

Well don sweet-heart, lay his load upon him that he may feel it and couch under it: for so it is written, Issachar is a strong ass couching down between two burdens, Gen. 49. You use to say that Issachar it Greek for a papist, and the two burdens a pair of panniers fild with popish trumpery.

Fair and softly good D, that we may not irritat but heal. Proceed we step by step, that my good Knight may chearfully accompany us in our conference beginning first with generalitys. S ^r. Harry you must not be obstinat in old errours, but be willing upon good sufficient motivs to leav any whatsoever opinion be it ne­ver so antient. Tis antiquity keeps you hood winkt.

Old things ar past away be­hold all things ar becom new, saith the Scripture, 2 Cor. 4.

The multiform grace and industry of severall reformers raised by the Lord have brought things to light wch wer hidden in former ages. And you may see daily new discoverys made both by particu­lar persons and parlaments, Luthers lamp that was first held up in the midst of dark­nes reveald very much of truth afortime unknown, but after him severall other torches lighted at his, opend yet more in severall Christian Countries. I need not travell far to show you this. Our English writers from Harry the eight unto this present day will make it sufficiently mani­fest unto you if you could peruse them, how that still the succeeding Doctours added ever new degrees of light to the discoverys of forgoing divines. Parlaments in the sam manner did not all at once remov super­stition out of the land, but perfected the work of reformation by degrees, wch is in­deed a progres most conformable both to to natur and art. Room was not built in a day, nor will it in one day be de­stroyd. The path of the just saith Solomon is as the shining light that shineth more and more unto the perfect day, Prov. 4.18.

This is handsomly spoken. [Page 5]Think seriously of this good S Harry: and be as ready to suspect that for an er­rour wch lay hid longer as that wch was sooner discovered; so shall all your popery melt away by degrees like icicls before the sun.

I see and acknowledg that new refor­mations in Religion are daily made; but whether to the edification or ruin thereof dos not yet so clearly appear. A continuall taking away is an odd kind of mending: nor do I know any thing in natur made better or greater therby save only a gap. The pre­tended lights that have risen from time to time one after another I have hitherto ta­ken to be meer unwholsom exhalations, sulphureous meteors, or som ignes fatui good for nothing but to lead men into lakes and ditches.

The daily rising of new opinions in Re­ligion maks me rather suspect all than ap­prov of any innovation; becaus thes opi­nions ar all of them but new denialls of som part of the ancient Catholik-faith wch former reformers had not yet at­tained the confidence to reject: so that it is stil but the same kind of audacity & the ve­ry self same pres [...]ption, wth an additiō of [Page 6]som new degree of daring. And ther was never any harlot that cast of all her cloths at once, but according as she grew by degrees more shamless. They that threw down the altar left a tabl standing in the Church, and the first vio­latours of picturs did not break al the glass windows, yet their succeslours hav finisht the work, and the bare walls now standing ar dangerously threatnd. In the same man­ner be articls of faith defaced and rased in the hearts and spirits of men by a graduall proceeding of infidelity and heresy still in­creasing in its growth of imodesty, til of the whol fabrick of Christian religion ther be not left one ston upon another; wch is the way not of composition but solution, it dos not renew but impair.

I should look strangely upon that Phe­sition who will first make me beleeve I am sick when I do not find in my self that I ill any thing or complain at all; and then taking upon him even against my will to reform me in my health, purges me too & again till I bee not able to stand on my legs, drawing still from me till my body be quit consumed, and never adding any positiv thing to sustain me. Or if he should [Page 7]begin on the outsid, and first tear of my cloths, then my skin, and so my flesh, and bones, still telling me it is for the renewing of my health and cheerfulnes, I could not judg this other than outragious mockery, and most cruell inhuman abuse. Yet such and no other be all reformations in religion; a continuall cancelling of doctrins formerly receivd and practised, a daily ta­king away without addition of any thing, and that in despight of the Church whos doctrine it is. This is one reason I like not to hear of thes reformations much les to behold wth mine eyes the wofull ruins and disorders accompany them both in Church and state.

Another is, I cannot see when there will be any end therof, the successours still pretending the unlimited right of innova­tion the unlimited right of innova­tion left them as hereditary by their fa­thers, wch right for aught I see all genera­tions ar equally ambitious to put in pra­ctis; so that nothing is stabl or secure, no­thing at all unchangeable; nor can any one tell either what faith he livs in, or in what he is to dy. Indeed such men as would not be containd in their bounds by a profes­sion of infallibillity wch they had in the [Page 8]Church, how shall a profession of fallibili­ty exhibited by heresy contain them! a fal­lible liberty and a free fallibility can never lin rolling; nor will they ever rest stated, till they be faln into the gulf of atheism.

Do not mistake us Sr Harry, we do not intend that variety of reforma­tions should afford an argument against your stiff standing Popery in that way you take it. But desire you onely to consider, that inventions have been perfected by degrees, all arts & sciences, customs, garbs, languages and wtever hath been at any time invented or used by man, as you shall soon perceiv and grant if you would let your thoughts descend unto any one par­ticular: The art of making of watches how is it betterd wthin forty or fifty years, and our English tongue purified. Thus runing over the whol employments of mens hands and understandings you will acknowledg wth us, that addition of new facultys in men of succeeding tims hath stil perfected the rude & unpolisht works of forgoing ages. In the same manner Re­ligion afortim obscur and mixt wth several superstitions is by latter times illustrated and clensd.

Tis therfor no marvell that every ten or twenty years new waies ar invented by fresher wits to oppugn Popery.

Madam, thes severall new ways of heresy argue first, that the ring-leaders and followers of the Lutheran faction the most dangerous epidemicall revolt I think hath ever happed since the Apostles days did not forsak the church for any reason they had so to do, but first forsook the church and then sought out a reason to colour their revolt. For had they had any one or many reasons for their division, thes being once cleard and answered by the Catholick church, so far that they could no longer insist upon their scattered principls, they would hav returnd unanimously unto that body whence they and their for-fathers had impiously apostatisd; and not have studied other shifts as vain as the for­mer and perhaps more wicked too, wherby to maintain themselvs and adherents in the wretched Schism whereunto they had formerly run purly indeed upon sensuall and carnall motivs, whatsoever themselves pretend.

Secondly thes new ways and daily altera­tions of sectarys do sufficiently demonstrat [Page 10]that out of the Catholick church ther is not that unity consent and stablnes wch may mov a prudent man to beleev that ei­ther all those Sects together, or any one of them ar that mysticall body of Christ that keeps an unity of spirit in the bond of peace. Eph. 4.2. and wch is fitly joind and compact together; v. 16. sith they nei­ther agree together in the articles of their heleef, nor yet in the motivs of their apo­stasy from that church that is and ever hath been so united and compacted in it self; nor have in themselves any stability or consistency at all. That is not grounded which never lins moving.

Again, thes new ways of oppugning the church are not onely new declarations of former negativs maintaind by their for-fa­thers against the church, but additions of new negativs and further apostasie: wch infers as much division from their prede­cessors, as they had from the first faith of the church; and so they give me no security at all of adhering unto any, sith I may still in prudence doubt of any, even the last separation, whether that be the unspotted spous of Christ or a new purification yet to be expected. And who can assure me that [Page 11]any such thing shall happen in my life time to be made use of by me, or that I shall ever see that glorious church not having spot or wrinkl or any such thing, holy and wth­hout blemish, Eph. 5.27. unto wch I may incorporat my self. For the last separation still exclaimes against' the former, as they did against the mother church, and that wch is to come will do the like against this.

Besides, these several new ways if they be well examined appear so to dash one against another, that altho all of them strike expressy at the mother church, yet they wound her through one anothers sides; and if any should beleev them he shall not possibly find any thing to adher unto, unles he blindly close wth the first he meets and condemn all others wth the sam folly he made chois of this.

Our later Writers here in England, L. Faukland, Chillingworth and others, driv if I mistake not against Religion in generall, and strike as much at any or all as at the Catholick. The Socinians they have sprung a mine under the church so deep and dangerous, that it makes the very battle­ments of heaven to shake, at least in the [Page 12]eyes of man; openly and wthout dissimula­tion oppugning the very divinity of the Son of God, & crucifying not so much the lord of glory, as the very lordship and glo­ry of that lord, finally calling many things in question wch former heretiks left un­toucht. And now one may meet here in e­very town & villag wth som or other blas­pheming openly against the whol Gospell of Christ, such as hear them laughing at the conceit without any sens at all or zeal of Gods glory and their own finall hopes. This is the fruit of thes new ways fresh wits and daily inventions, wherby the utter de­solation is day by day consummated. Nemo repente fuit turpissimus, no man on the sodain was ever made stark naught; and be degrees doth every heresy how slight soever it be in the beginning, sink it self in­sensibly into atheism, containing most of Catholick faith in the first and imediat se­paration, till by degrees it all expire. This is the perfection Religion gets by the addi­tion of new wits and the progres of inno­vation.

The knowledg and experience of these mischiefs makes the Catholik church wch is the wisest congregation hath ever been or [Page 13]possibly ever can bee upon earth, to curb and stifl every wtsoever innovation as far as lies in her power at its first uprising how small soever it be, knowing full well that from such a littl egg is by littl and littl formd a dangerous adder, and this in time wingd into a flying serpent.

Can you deny S ^r that arts and sciences are all perfected by time? so is Religion likwise.

By your favour, you ar much mistaken your self in your similitud, or would at least beguil me. If religion wer a human invention the consequence were good. For all inventions of man issuing from an imperfect principl, by the applica­tion of fresh hands and understandings superadded to the former, as new degrees of perfection in the principle, do receiv in­creas, and the arts ar then com to the height when they have past through so many hands and heads as be able to im­print so much perfection as the subject or matter is capable to receiv. So that all those heads and hands put together, as well that perfected as that first invented the science, do but make up one complet perfect principle of the art or invention [Page 14]resulting thence, wch receives perfection proportionabl to the gradual acces of its original from whence it flows, and still as natur and industry perfects that, so does the art increase. Thus much I can grant. And if Religion were an human invention, the very same affection would be found in it also. Tis here to be noted that we do not treat of Theology or scholasticall learning, wch is a science superadded to the primary principles of Religion; for this I shal grant to be humane as Physick or the civill law is, if it be taken precisely according to its conclusions and inferences without respect had to the principles whence it flowes, and it may alter in its manner and method as they do. But I speak purely of those pri­mary principles whereupon this Theology is founded, for these only are faith, and the unalterable doctrine of the Christian church.

This Religion and Faith deliverd unto us by God if the Gospell and Scripturs be true, differs as to our present purpose in two points from all other humane sciences. First, that it issued at first from a principle absolutly complet, secondly that ther is not upon earth any principl already existing or [Page 15]possible to exist that can join wth that principl to add to the perfection of the work.

God who reveald and taught this faith is an infinit intellect and an understanding infinitly actuated, of such excessive perfe­ction that it may easlier be admird and worshipt than exprest. And therfor the faith that issued from him must have its whol perfection at the first impression, and that infinit degrees more absolut than arts and sciences receive at the last; that coms forth absolutly pure and perfect, thes re­ceiv their perfection such as it is in their progres. The further Religion proceeds from its first institution or revelation, the more tis sullied by the comerce of man, whos practis by deviating from its dictats fouls it as it were by contagion of the ves­sell: but if he shall once dare to enterpose the results of his own judgment wth those revealed articles, to deny any or add to a­ny, mingling his own urin with that super­naturall current, then does the water of life run troubled, muddy and corrupted, and ceases to be divine; nor is ther any way to rectify it, but by having recourse to its first pure sours and according to that samplar [Page 16]to clarify it again. But human inventions arising at the first unpolisht and rough, if their perfection be to be measurd are not called back to their first originall, but exa­mind rather by the nearnes to the last and final experiment. This is the first diffe­rence as concerning our purpos in hand betwixt divine faith and human sciences, Religion and arts, gods worship and mans works.

The other is, that ther is not upon earth any other principl which may add any thing to Religions perfection, renew or al­ter it in any kind.

Arts, sciences, garbs, languages and fa­shions of men, thes do expect their perfe­ction from mans industry whence they had their first being: and humane industry and wit presumes rightfully to make severall additions, alterations and changes in them according to the variety that is in mens fansies. These alterations be either per­fections or at least so esteemd by men who introduce and receiv them, which is all one in human society; for amongst men that is the best wch is in use and fashion as may be seen in languages garbs and fashions of attire wch chang continually & stil for the [Page 17]best at least in vulgar opinion, till the fa­shions do insensibly wear out one another, and that return again by degrees wch afor­time was rejected, rendring that fashion contemptible by wch it self had been in former times made vile. Thus mans thoughts and al the works of his hands run incessantly in a circular motion wearing out one another wth a strang restlesness con­veyed into things from the instability of fansy their first contriver, wch can never stay, or remain in the fame state, but likes and dislikes, creats and destroyes, does and undoes continually, and seems to be pleasd wth nothing but variety. And so all hu­man workmāships of whatsoever kind they be, do meet with severall fansies of men un­to all wch they are equally subject, and apt at pleasur by them to be contrould alterd varied and subdud according tot he diver­sity of imaginations they meet withall.

All this is apparently tru, and lively set out by Salomon in his Eccelesiastes, where he affirms that ther is nothing new under the Sun and that ther is a season for every thing and a time for very purpos under heaven, a tim to break down and a tim to build, a tim to rent and a time to soe? As if he should have [Page 18]said, man now fansyes one thing, and then is pleasd wth the contrary, now heel plant an orchard & then heel turn it into a mea­dow, now he will build a hous in one fashion and then alter it into another, and the like; so that all his works chang and run in a circl, till his former rejected fansy perhaps return again, and seem to be som new busi­nes but indeed it is not: for all that is now brought up has been afortime rejected, as that wch is now refused hath been liked of and will be so again; so that under the Sun is nihil novi no new thing; either in lawes, states, governments, buildings, books, fa­shions languages or other thing invented or contrivd by man. The very dyet and company wch seven years ago displeasd us hath now lost its tast. Finally al that one mā does either himself or som other like himself will undo it again, and mould it in another fashion, the works of man being totally subject to his humour, and not issuing at first from any self-sufficient, self-singular, self-eternall uncontroulable intellect, are apt indifferently to follow the guidance of any thing that pertaks of that reason wch gave them their first being.

But religion is not thus subject to the understanding or fancy of any one man or all men together. For mans understand­ing and gods do not agree together in the same reason as two individualls in one spe­cies, and consequently wt is dictated by the one that is infinitely perfect, self-singular and incomunicable, cannot be contrould by the other wch is infinitely imperfect common and accidentally singularisd. A thing is naturally subject to his own caus or some thing at least unto wch that prin­cipl it self is subject and nothing els; the works and will of man to man, the works, and will of God to god, the thoughts and actions of man both to man and God also to whom man himself is subject, but the word and will of God are so his, that they can not be in mans power who is a poor vassail both to God and his will and word too. What man hath once willed, not onely God but man also may frustrat it by willing the contrary; but he cannot alter the will of God nor destroy any of his works: Towns he can overthrow, and Or­cards and Gardens wch himself hath planted; but where is the man can pull a star out of heaven, annihilat one of the ele­ments [Page 20]or add another to those wch God hath made.

In all reason I think it is apparent to every one that the will and Word of the Allmighty cannot be subjected to such a poore pittifull thing as man is: he must be led by it and not draw it to his pleasure, by adding or diminishing, by chopping and changing as he lists. Wherfore our B. Sa­viour, when som upon the doctrin they had heard him deliver, doubted and askt him wth a quomodo, how can man forgive sins: and again others, how can he give us his flesh to eat: It is very observable that our Lord never went about to satisfy their curiosity or declar to them how or in what manner it might be don, it being indeed below the Majesty of God to give his vassail a reason of his will: but he singly repeated again his owne assertion wthout showing the provability or possibility thereof; ther­by giving us to understand that the institu­tions and will of God ar not to be subjected to the understanding or man to be admitted or rejected according to that probability they shall carry in it, but humbly to be ac­cepted wth all submission and lowlines, as the will of that in finit suprem power unto [Page 21]wch mans understanding and the whol creation is subjected. And therefore good S. Paul willed that every intellect should be captivated to the obedience of Christ, 2. Cor. 10.5. that is to say, subject to the dicta­mens of his faith and Religion as a captive slave to the will of his maister; And conse­quently as a slave cannot controul his maister, so neither hath mans reason any right or power at all to chang or alter add or diminish from Gods revealed will; holy scripture denounceing therfor anathema to such as should dare to do it against their duty and allegiance.

All this being assuredly true, ther can be no place in religion for new ways of fresher wits, for innovations, reformations, clear­ings, clensings, additions, subtractions and other such like mouldings and workings upon it, as there is in arts and sciences and other such like effects of mans own contri­vance. In these mans understanding is the workman, trades fashions laws languages and the like human inventions ar the matter on wch the fansy & understanding works; and the matter is naturally subject to the workman, the clay to the potter, the buil­ding to the architect, as reason and scrip­ture [Page 22]teaches, Rom. 9.21. But in religion mans understanding is the clay and the will and word of God is the workman or potter to fashion and frame it to his plea­sur. Mans inventions as clay are subject un­to mans understanding as the potter, and again mans understanding as clay is subject to faith as the artificer: and the same rea­son that makes human inventions receive alteration from man, makes mans will to receive impressions from religion: So lik­wise on the other side Religion is no more in the power of man, then is the artificer in the hand of his clay, but hath absolut and full dominion over him, and every created intellect is fully in the power and captivity offaith.

To conclud, the word and will and works of God are absoluty superiour to every created thing, and not to be alterd or in­novated by man, nor to receive either di­minution or increas from him: and conse­quently the religion he has reveald to the sons of men of his owne free love and bounty is to remain sacred and untoucht by any creatur, how ever man may domi­neer over his owne inventions to perfect and mend them at his pleasur. What is [Page 23]invented and made by man may by man be either betterd or made wors at his pleasur by what change he pleases: But Gods works are altogether above his creaturs reach, and his will is unch angable: He made all things perfect, and if he did not, who is he can add to their perfection. Children be­got by men do by mans help and direction increas daily till they come to perfect age, but Adam created imediatly by God was in all liklihood made at first in his full per­fection and growth.

I must S ^r Harry cut of the thread of your discours, that the Doctour who hath in civility forborne to interrupt you may have his time to speak.

And indeed that is fulfild in me that is written: I held my peace even from good things, I was dumb wth silence and my heart was hot wthin me whils I stood mu­sting, the fire burned then spake I wth my tong, Ps. 39.

Well S ^r Harry, this your discours is all good and orthodox: but it maks so much to my purpos against your self, that I could not my self have contrived a mor convenient battery against popery. For if you consider right, it rather confirms than [Page 24]destroys our reformations. Religion is wthout all doubt above man and not sub­ject to any vassalage of his fansy. But you say wth all and that truly, that what man does, man may undo: And thers the point. Now popery in the pure and formall sens and acceptation of the word signifys one­ly that fardell of human additions superad­ded by the ignorance and superst [...]tion of men to the pure and sincer religion which the Lord taught us, and is therfor a sacri­ledg not to be suffred in the Christian world but to be taken away and severd from the sincerity of divin truth like chaff from the corn, so that our question is not, whether you may add unto faith, or we take from it; (wt is added or taken away being granted on both sides to be a part of faith, and yet put in or out by our selvs; for tis agreed upō by us both, that neither of thes things may be don without sacriledg) But whether it be lawfull for us to reform, or take away from the body of divin faith wt you hav impiously added thereunto of your own and obtrud upon us as divin reve­lation being indeed but human superstition. This is the thing wch Luther and Calvin began to do, and by other particular per­sons [Page 25]and parlaments is daily mor and more effected, not only wthout sacriledg, but wth much comendation of piety, so that our re­formations ar indeed diminishments, not of Gods religion but▪ of mans superstitions; we take from the church not the stones or rafters, but the rubbish mire and filth wch is brought in by slovenly autiquity even burdensom to the purity of faith. Reform­ing religion we touch nothing at all we meddl wth nothing that is Gods, but leaving al that untoucht we cast out the or­dur of human traditions whereby the fince­rity of faith was defaced, and so we give to every one his own, that wch in Cesars to to Cesar, and that wch is Gods to God: the legends of Damasus, Gregory, Anaclet, and I know not who, these being the dreams of his doating predecessors we cast forth to the Pope and popish to put up in their archivs, the pure tabls of the law re­maining in the ark of the Testament wth uswch being once happily purgd we purpos ever to conserv underfiled. If it be a cursed thing to add unto the word of God as Pa­pists hav don, tis blessednes to tak it away a­gain.

I may say to thee sweet heart [Page 26]as David said to Abigail; Blessed be the Lord wch sent the this day, and blessed be thy ad­vice, and blessed be thou who hast kept me this day from shedding of blood. For in very deed except thou hadst spoken this wise word (wch shall suffice at this time) I had brought a reason that had destroyd the Papists at a blow, even every one of them that pisseth against the wall, 1 King 25.

Tis the good Dr agreed on all sides, that nothing is to be added unto or taken from the word of God and our di­vine faith first delivered. You say also that your reformations tak away continually, some less som more, but onely such things as be of human invention, affirming this action not onely lawfull but comendabl. This is the sum of your reply.

That the articles of Christian religion re­jected by the reformation, and by you called Popery be no human additions I should easily make it appear, if I should run over the whole body of them, and show from point to point that each parcell and particl thereof is equally ancient and divine; wch would soon be evinced if the autority of those Scripturs you pretend to admit, the joint acknowledgment and practis of all [Page 27]times, and testimony of all antiquity, both councells, fathers and doctours, and severall other monuments left in the Christian world (which be greater than any we have to evince that William the Conquerour once raignd here in England) may suffici­ently prov them to be such. But this cours I intend not to enter upon, at least at this time, becaus we ar but yet in generalls; and besides this work is already done to my hands, so magisterially solidly & copiously by many renowned writers especially in the Latin tong that it were superfluous to insist theron, had I either time or place or will to do it. If you will not beleev them, I have little hopes to prevail over so prodigious and obstinacy, wch after such ample satisfa­ction given will say still that Catholik REli­gion so much as loos men listed [...] superstition and inventions of men.

I have morover one general ru [...] [...] I reserv for another discours, to demo [...]re that that Catholik faith you call popery [...]s truly divine. For if you do but read your own antiquities or the records of any other Christian kingdom you shall find that the conversion of our own and all other na­tions from idolatry and paganism was effe­cted [Page 28]by that Catholik faith wch at one and the same time brought into the land both the news of Christ to the ear and the sight of the Crucifix to the eye, both the ne­cessity of faith and the merit of works; both God in the fulnesse of time incarnat in the blessed virgin, and incorporat really in the Eucharist; both feast daies and lents: both the popes supremacy, and Priests power; the news of purgatory as well as hell or heaven; both contrition and pennance; both God and his blessed retinu of Saints and Angels; both preaching and Sacrificing: shrins, altars, unctions, seaven Sacraments, vows, Pilgrimages, and all whatsoever things the Catholik now beleeves or pro­fesses even to the least drop of holy water. And if that faith that hath the vertu and power to trample down idolatry, to chase away paganisme and triumph over all the power of darknesse be not divine, if this good tidings of truth benot the vertue of God and power of God, wch is it? From this power of converting nations the Pro­phets of old magnified the word and Go­spell of the Messias; and S. Paul upon that account cals it the vertu and power of God; and yet this efficacy is onely proper [Page 29]and peculiar to the Catholik Religion and non els. I shall onely at this time give some generall conjectures in a familiar discours wherby we may be moved to beleeve wt is indeed most cerainly true, that popery is no addition of mans, at least suspect that the report our reformers give of it sounds like a slander; leaving solider and more particular demonstrations for som other time.

It will not displeas us to hear you speak; so that after all is done you will follow our counsell.

I shall not be obstinat. But give me leave dear Lady, fully to vent my thoughts. For I conceive that a man is not capabl of better counsell, till he hath utterly discovered all whatever things de­taind him afortime in his sormer purpos, wthout any reservation at all. For even small reliques of former courses lurking in the mind undiscoverd, will still be egging him on to thos waies again after he hath embraced better counsell & repine against the advice he hath taken as ruinous and prejudiciall although it were in it self very behoofesull and good. So that the mind runs a hasard of lasting disquiet wch enters [Page 30]upon a new cours before the old be totally dislikt.

I out wth is S ^r Harry, our wth it fully, for so it is written, Counsell in the heart of a man is like deep water, but a man of un­derstanding will draw it out. Prov. 20.

Well S ^r let not my argument be forgot, wher by I prooud that popery was a human art, and therfore in mans power to reform, nay tis comendable to cashere falsities.

You said indeed so, but prooud it not; not was it ever prooud yet by any, tho it be in all mens mouths, nor ever will be, so long as the world lasts. The misery is, S ^r that men of your opinion, that is to say not catholik are all very little verst in our catholik authors especially such as be scho­lasticall subtile and voluminous, love and care I mean wife and children haply not permitting such brain-consuming studies; so that when we come to discours wch you, tis as equally hard to perswad you as the vulgar of the parish, being all of you equally ignorant of the Churches waies and doctrin. And yet popery, a thing indeed unknown to you, must be jeerd at, spoke against, preacht against and haply writ [Page 31]against too, by som pert Gentlman that has never so much as heard a whol cours of philosophy in his life (for a whol cours ei­ther of philosophy or divinity is a thing now a daies altogether unknown in both our universities) and that wth so many im­pertinencies lies and slanders, such vanity fraud and cosenage, such insulting babl wre­sting of Scriptur texts and falsifying of au­thors, that my heart has even startld within me to behold this shamles dealing.

You say that all your reformations are but the taking away from the purity of Go­spell the vain superstructurs of human su­perstitions, commonly cald popery. This you say becaus other reformers said so before you, taking it one from another since Luthers time, and your child will say it from you, and so will every bastard in the parish. Nor does it avail us any thing by all man­ner of proofs to assert the divinity and truth of our doctrin.

Altho you will not read or cannot hap­ly understand those sublim orthodox divins that would fully inform your judgement in this point, and convince you of an errour no less notorious than dangerous. Yet me thinks there be many things obvious [Page 32]and familiar might render you wary and suspitious of danger in this your asserion, wch concerns no les than your eternal sal­vation.

As first, that you never examend it; you know you did not, I appeal to your own conscience. The Church hath ever beene in possession of this her doctrin, and can­not possibly be dispossest but by some evi­dent demonstration, wch I am sure the power of man and angel can never effect: if you insist on any other autority, as sa­cred scripturs or councells, they are as sure hers, as any of your proper goods is your own. Nor is ther I am confident any one text, I say not any one single text of Scriptur if it be taken together wth the whole body, scope and intention of the book whence tis drawn, that shall urg or proov any thing for any Reformation against the Church, this I am able to main­tain against the wholl world. And yet you ar so far from considering or examining any of thes things, that you conclude upon bare hearsay or report wthout either auto­rity or demonstrative reason against the doctrin of the Church wherof she hath been time out of mind in possession: and [Page 33]all this slighnes is used in a matter of the highest concernment in the world, as if the talk wer onely de lana Caprina. Me thinks it should fright you to think, that if your assertion should be fals as for aught you know it is, then ar you certainly guilty of the accursed sacriledg of diminishing from the word and will of God.

Again you know and do acknowledg that you have substracted not only some part but the most and greatest parts of that religion was found planted in the land in Harry the eights daies. Pray tell me, that whol mass or body of practicall doctrin that is now cut off in this year 1655, was it known in King Charls, James, or Queen Elisabeths days to have been all of it popish additions? To this I am sure peopl of seve­rall reformations will give severall answers. Independency the last and purest reforma­tion will affirm it, but Protestancie the first and oldest apostasy will deny it; nor will the Protestant indure that his children should judg him as he condemnd his mo­ther Church, or reform his fallibility as he rebeld against the infallibility of his parent. And yet the Independent proceeds con­sequently to those very principles wch the [Page 34] protestant laid for his own revolt; namely the fallibility of men, the solesufficiency of scripturs, and the Spirit of God therin as­sisting his elect to the discovery of truth: Nor can the Independent be blamed for any thing, but for striking thes principls further hom than the amphibian protestant did. This I am fully assured of, that the Prote­stant is not abl to bring any one argument for himself against the Independent but what he borrows from the Catholik church, and which being admitted and prest home will destroy all his own protestancy, that is to say all thoss negative wherby he differs from the Catholik, and wch he hath striven thes hundred years to defend; and therfore it behovs him to take heed wt he does: for the Independent is quick and resolut and as well verst in his principles as himself, and able I am sure wth the Protestants own grounds to convince him neither to be fish nor flesh nor yet good red herring as the proverb speaks, neither sound Catholick nor pure reformd.

The Catholik doctrin is all fixt and per­manent, and therfor every reformation can find what to deny of it, but they can never all agree together wt and how much ther­of [Page 35]to affirm; the latter still denying more of the Catholick faith than the former had don alltho it proceed upon the same prin­ciples wth it. The Church will easily make good all her affirmativs against you all, so soon as you shall agree al together how much you will deny. But so long as you jar one amongst another and speak contra­ries, it is not possible to stop all your mouths at once. In a word all the changes made by the Independent are either legall just and religious, or els protestancy it self is an unjust, illegall and impious apostasy: for if all men be obnoxious to errour, and the Scriptur sole judg and guid of faith; by wt right can the Protestant oblige men to her tenets further than they approov of them by the test of Scriptur wch they hav in in their own hands: if thos principles be fals wth wt justice did the Protestant him­self revolt from the Catholik upon those sole grounds? Nay the Independent is far more honest and excusabl than the prote­stant, for he prefers his judgment onely be­fore a Church that profest her self to be fallible; but the protestant rebeld against an infallible guid and one that profest her self such. And altho the Catholik Church [Page 36]wer not infallible, yet professing her self in­fallible she has that caus of blaming the re­volting protestant, wch the protestant can never hav against the Independent: for an infallible Church may well expect an uni­versall subjection; whereas the protestant professing herself fallible cannot in mode­sty either oblige peopl to her cannons, or dislik their freedom of judgment however dissenting from her own. And so she must needs have the Presbyterian excusd; and the Presbyterian he cannot do otherwise than comend the Independent, as the nim­bler work man. For sith both of them went about to mend the Protestant refor­mation, and correct the dictats of that fal­lible mistres, the Independent did his work more speedily and fully than the other, and so indeed may be maliced by him as the better workman but never blamed. Finally, if this last reformation of Independency be indeed an abolishing of all reliques of pope­ry hanging upon the Protestant and not clearly casheerd by the Presbyterian; then does the Catholik and Independent stand like extrems, having the intermediat refor­mations of Protestancy and Presbytery and the like between then two, as white and [Page 37]black be the two extrems of colours, be­tween which are red blew green and the like borrowing their existency from the natur of both in a severall mixtur: And all other reformations interjacent are diver­sified in themselvs according as they do mor or les partake of the Catholik positivs, and Independents negativs. These two claim an absolute liberty of conscience in their own territories, the Catholick a free­dom of the Churches judgment, the Inde­pendent of his own particular. And either all is true that the Catholik affirms, or all the independent denys.

I mean not to interpose my self in the busines of reformations, let them be as they will; but do maintain onely in the ge­nerall that reformation of popery is good & lawfull, & not executed without the spe­ciall commission instinct & Spirit of Christ.

So it is written, Without me ye can do nothing, Jo. 15.

And I likewis do onely in generall wish you to consider yet two or three things: wherby you may suspect this busines not to be of God, and consequently the whol work of reformation unlawfull.

Thes speciall commissions do ever bring [Page 38]with them some peculiar seals and letters patents such as heaven uses to send to man­kind: as be signs, wondrous operations and miracles, wthout wch man cannot in reason desert his station. Reformers had none of thes to show. But I will not in­sist hereon (altho it be a worthy and waighty consideration) becaus tis copi­ously don by others. I say then

First it would seem strang to a reaso­nabl man and a thing of much suspition, that all reformations are but negativ abo­litions of the ancient Catholik religion without any positiv institution at all. Tis an odd kind of dressing a garden still to be grubbing up trees, and never plant any in the place; nor is it likly God should send workmen into his vineyard onely to destroy and pull up.

Again reformers do all of them equally pretend to be sent from God wth an extra­ordinary commission to enlighten the world. And yet they all hitherto did their work to the halfs, keeping still as much po­pery as they cast away. Gods extraordina­ry messengers use not to do their work imperfectly, or remain themselvs in that er­rour they were sent on purpos to correct [Page 39]Martin Luther that extraordinary light of the world did if we may beleeve the suc­ceeding reformations both liv and dy in as much popery as himself abolished. If popery be so damnable, as both Luther and other reformers cry out and say it is, I should think that half a score swinging articles of popery are enough to sink a man: and so much Luther must keep stil if we beleev the following reformation, and this detaind no les if we may credit the third. The purity of these times found so much popishnes still hanging on Protestants skirts, that they thought it worth the hazard of their lives to brush it off. And som think that even these purest are not themselves absolutly free from it; and surely never wil be, so long as the Bible wch is the Popes book and sent immediatly from him into this island, is yet in their hands.

Ar all these reformers sent from God? why then did non of them doe their work to the full, till at the end of a full age the Independent stept in to accomplish it, if yet he hath himself don the deed to the ut­most.

Why should I think ill onely of the Ca­tholik whom Luther raild against, and not [Page 40]as well hate Luther whom Calvin con­demnd; or judg Calvin whom the Protestant church of England censurd in many things and forsook; or detest also the Protestant Church wch the purity of thes times have destroied. Sith we be all so much severd from one another, whence is it that we all conspire to hate, condemn and rail against the Catholik Church, having as much cause to inveigh against one another and let her alone, as to rail against her alone and ap­plaud one another. This is a shrewd sign we ar all rebels to that one Church and hav no truth amongst our selvs. For one truth is opposit to twenty falshoods and these falshoods however they be contrary to one another, that one primary truth still stands against them all. Catilin and Cethegus and the other conspiratours against Rome their mother City could fall out one amongst another, tho they jointly resisted her, and she as indifferently confronted them all.

Besids, these reformers must needs be liars all of them if we may beleeve any of them. For as they did most vehemently inveigh against that part of popery wch themselves rejected; so did they tooth and nail defend the purity of that portion they [Page 41]still retaind, wch by the succeeding refor­mers was deeply censurd and condemnd: And so from the very first to the last, they still condemned one another for wt they retaind, as the Church of God condemnd them all for wt they rejected. Who shall unfold this riddle or tell me in wch refor­mation the truth lies? Surely in non of them, if by the mouth of two witnesses a truth may be established: for ther is ever the Catholik Church and one reformation against the judgment of any other refor­mation; & every sect hath still the Church against her for one, and some other sect if not all other reformations besides.

Ar all thes men sent from God for one and the same thing, & yet all fail in doing it, and al condemnd by one another in the deed? Still wt any one of them casts away is popery, and what he keeps is the sincere word and will of God, tho not only the Church that censurs them all together but even all other reformations say the con­trary.

So that if we put all judgments together ther will result thus much? That the Ca­tholik on the one side, & all sectaries of se­verall opinions on the other, they be all [Page 42] Papists; and differ but secundum magis & minus: So that the Roman is a Catholik Papist, and all the rest be heretick Papists, but Papists all. For every sect is con­demnd by his fellowes of some popery, and the Church as the source of all. And in­deed all sects do retain som thing more or les of that religion and faith wch our land received at first from the pape, and wtso­ever positive doctrin they still keep they had it onginally from him. At least they keep all of them the Bible eyther whol or in part, wch is the great book of the pope wch he ever sends wth his missioners (since he orderd and canonised it) to any na­tions conversion, as conformable to the great rule of Christian faith wch is tradi­tion. And consequently if the Papist be a child of Antichrist, all sectaries are no other, so far as they be Christian or have any thing of Christianity amongst them: onely wth this difference, that the mark of the beast, if he be a beast, is lesse in som than it is in others; but tis in the for heads of all so many as be baptised and beleeve in Christ, by his means and missioners, and by the Sacraments and precepts they had originally from him.

The Lord shield us from the fiend of darknesse! the pope upon my forehead! the Bible the popes! and all we Papishes! confute him husband some way or other if this be true, heel not fear texts at all.

S. Harry you have brought things about very strangly. Can you think ever to perswade us that we have any thing of popery in us?

Assuredly you have so much as is not yet clipt of by reformation, be it more or les: And this discours I have faln upon insensibly, to mitigat the strang rancour against Catholik religiō wch people conceiv by contagion of custome, and not any true knowledg they have thereof; and the plea­sing opinion each one fosters of the re­formation himself is part of.

Take the four generall opinions that be now in England; the Catholick, the Prote­stant, Presbyterian and independent: Con­sid er seriously and you shall find that as they be antecedent in time, so still the suc­ceeding is but a deficiencie from the fore­goer, and the last the greatest negation of the positions laid by the first; yet still what he holds positively he hath it from him; and the first wch is the Catholik had all [Page 44]his whole positive faith from the Pope, as himself professes and our own histories witnesse; part whereof was cut of by the Protestant, as the Presbyterian after him took away some things wch the Protestant still retaind, and the Independent others wch the Presbyterian kept.

He is very ignorant in history that dis­cerns not by his reading, how the Catholik now existent in England retains universal­ly all the points of faith wch were brought hither into England at its conversion from paganisme by S. Austin and other good children of blessed S. Bennet sent hither to that purpose by Pope Gregory eleaven hundred years ago; concerning priests, al­tars, sacrifices, the reall presence, merit of good works, consecrations, pennances, pur­gatory, lents, pilgrimages, popes supremacy and the rest to the least iota of wt they then received. Nor hath he any parcell of faith either over or under wt he re­ceived then, so that the Catholik is a papist in print, and a legitimat child of that ve­nerable pastour.

A thousand years after the Saxes or English-mens conversion, and the unani­mous profession of the Catholik faith all [Page 45]that while, in an unluky howt rises Lu­ther who having been himself born and and bred up in the bosome of the Church through the instigation of Satan and his two instruments pride and lust apostatised from the Church and made a reformation as he called it, wherunto the worst of peo­ple at first adhered, altho now both wise and honest minded people go along wth it, not so much by their own choise as un­fortunate custome. This protestancy took away at once almost three parts of the Churches practicall doctrin, retaining the speculative. Within the compasse of ten years, it had run into severall divisions or subreformations in Germany, Holland, Switzerland and Geneva. Upon Harry the eights schism and afterward these people of severall Reformations cam flocking over into England, by whos severall directions to pleas all parties was made up that mi­scellan of the English protestancy, by re­jection of severall points of the Catholik faith then in our land, some according to Luther, others according to Calvin, Swin­glius & the rest, together wth an establish­ment of an apish prelacy in stead of the Ca­tholik one (wch had beene overthrown) for [Page 46]the security of the state and of the fond Church they had then set up; the other few remainds of our Catholik faith now wholly dismembred, yet standing as the base of this humane superstructur.

Under this Protestant prelacy differing from all other reformations in the world bred the Puritan who was so chekt & kept under all the raigne of K. Iames, that when he came to be teemd forth, by strength of natur and multitud of seed he was born double and came two forth together, the younger brother supplanting the elder and thrusting himself into his place even in that instant that the elder had eat himself a passage through his Protestant mothers bowells. This was the Presbyterian and Jndependent both rejecting somthing of that had been conveyed to them by the Protestant, but the Independent more than the other. But what either of them kept he received it by the Protestant, as the Pro­testant had done from the Catholik the sole universall Professour of the whol Christian faith.

Now then the whol body of Christian faith and doctrin kept by the Catholik, as it was wholly receivd at first from the pope [Page 47]the generall father of the Christian church, so must it needs be all indifferently Papi­sticall upon that account, and not that part onely wch a Reformer dislikes and calls so; and consequently every parcell therof re­taind by any Reformer is as properly Papi­sticall as wt he rejects, and altho he cals it not so, yet tis so stiled by another Refor­mer who likes not to retain it as he does; and for no other reason but because as it issued, so is it maintaind and practised by the popish Church; wch reason holds good as well in him that likes it as him thy likes it not.

By this rule it will follow irrefragably that all the four professours be papists, as also be all others who professe Christiani­ty upon the face of the whole earth, either in whole or part, aswell those that keep their whole faith entire and respect the Pape, as they that retain onely some part and defy him: for ingratitud and pride can exempt no man from the denominatiō so long as he still beleeves or practises any part of that Christianity has been handed to him from the Pope and Popish Church, as all men in England I am sure do; and to avoid all further cavill tis solely of them I now speak.

If four or five generations of men ari­sing from one stock should be all of them shorter by the head one than another, the first generation completely resembling the father, the second les by the head than he, and the third yet less by the head than the former his imediate progenitour, so to the last in like manner. It would be ridiculous for the last descendents because they want much of the person & statur of the first originall or stock, to deny that they have therfore any thing of him or from him, & speaking against those severall inches they have not, at the same time to magnifie the few inches wch they have and blaspheme him from whence they have received them. And yet this is directly the case of all re­formers and reformations, to boast of the Christianity they keep and villify that part they reject, as superstitious and popish; whereas both wt they reject and wt they keep did descend equally and indifferent­ly from the Popish or Catholick Church. And if our English sectaries should ren­der up to the Pope and Popish Church all they have had from her, I do not know any one positiv point of Christianity, speculativ or practicall they should have remaining [Page 49]except that harmonious song of mellifluous Robin red breast Preserv us Lord.

Thus much may suffice to show that all England be Papists, some Catholick Papists other heretick Papists, but Papists all. Sith every part of Christian faith brought alto­gether in one entire body of doctrine by a messenger of Pope Gregory to the Eng­lish at our conversion from paganisme was equally papisticall, equally received in the Catholik church, and with the like indif­ferency communicated to our land from her Head and Pastour. And the having of it more or less maks som less papists than others, but not no papists Even as in musick if a sem breef be a full time, a minnom tho it be but half so much is a notion of time, so is likwis a crotchet tho it be but half a min­nom, and a quaver wch is but half a crotchet: so that a minnom is half a sem breef, a crochet the fourth part, and a qua­ver tho it be but the eight part, yet a part it is and nothing els. Even so be thes four severall religions in England every one of them either complet popery or part of it, the Catholick as it were a seem breef, the protestant a minnom, the Presbyterian a a crochet and the Independent a quaver, And [Page 50]truly to keep one piece of popery and re­ject others deliverd by the same hands, and upon the very selfsame grounds, seems to me neither a safe cours nor yet a reasonabl proceeding. For the whol stream of Chri­stian doctrin was deliverd unto us as issu­ing indifferently from a divin originall; and if this report be true, no man may tampar or meddl at all in that sacred issue of di­vin will, as I have already shown: if fals, tis all equally to be rejected, and paganism or atheism to succeed in its place.

But our reformers will have that to be popery or human wch any of them rejects wthout ever rendring a reason therof, to satisfy any moderat and indifferent man; sith what ever they say against any one thing may be as well applied to any other. Nor is religion like philosophy to be held by the propability it carrys in our under­standing, for then it wer not faith but rea­son, nor should our understandings be otherwis captivated to divin revelations that to human positions, or subjected to God more than to man. And yet again, if probability should carry it, a wise judici­ous man that is unprejudiced in his judg­ment shall I am comfident find more diffi­culty [Page 51]to beleev the very history of the Bi­ble than any articl of the Catholik religion rejected by reformers; and as much reason to keep all articles as any.

But sith reformers will have that popery wch any of them rejects, & that he retains pure Gospell; I for my part grant both. But then I make no difference at all betwixt popery and pure Gospell: nay the Gospell is so far pure as it is conformable to popery & the traditionall doctrin of the Catholik church, wch is the rule and square of all preachings, Writings, Letters, Sermons, E­pistls, Gospell andall.

And therfor that any reformation in re­ligion is a purification of the Gospell from popery taken in your sens, that is to say from human inventions superstitions and er­rours, this I must flatly deny; or that the popery men exclaim against is any such thing. And as I can never my self be per­swaded to the contrary, so me thinks I should perswade even you my dear Lady and you also Mr Parson with your witty bedfellow to be of my mind.

Who I? God forbid Let them cleav unto Baal that list, I & my people will fol­low the Lord, as it is written in Scriptur. For [Page 52]I will never beleev but this scriptur came from God and not from the Pope as you talk S ^r Harry, from heaven and not from Rome.

By your favour sweet Mistres, I have heard say that S. Marks Gospell was writ-ten in Rome, first and originally in La­tin, I find also in my Bible that some of Pauls Epistls were written and dated from Rome, as those he wrote to the Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, the second to Timothy, that to Philemon and haply that to the Hebrews wch was dated from Italy. And the Epistle which was written on pur­pose to the Romans, was assuredly carried to Rome before it was brought hither, and must come thence to us. So that if they did come from heaven, it seems Rome is either heaven it self or in the way twixt us and heaven, for they were there first either brought thither or written there; and thence cam over into England and other countries.

But to turn to you Sr. Harry, me thinks you ar now too confident, and seem to put on a refolution too much opposit to the hopes I have of you, and consequently to the hopes you may hav of me, for I cannot [Page 53]love an infidel as a friend much les as a husband.

So indeed Madam it is written. Be not unequally yoakt wth unbeleevers: for we fellowship hath righteousnes wth unrighteous nes, or wt communion hath light wth darknes.

I begd the favour Madam to utter my mind freely, and I think you granted it. For tis wth an il affected mind as wth a diseased body; neither can be made whol till they they hav purgd themselvs of their ill hu­mours.

I am ready Sr to prove from point to point, that al we hav in our reformation rejected is the pure inventions of men, whereof the principal is that tyrant of Rome that Babylonian Antichrist the Pope.

The whole Book of Revelations was made against that Beast. Let me but read six or seaven Chapters, and you will be af­frighted I warrant you. Now he rises out of the Sea, then tumbles out oth clouds, then ascends from the deep pit, on a fiery red Hors, or black hors, wth seaven horns or ten horns, accompanied wth armed locusts death and dragons.

We will not descend unto particulars as yet. Giv me leav now only to tell you in [Page 54]generall, that those rejected parcells of our ancient Catholik faith cannot in any pro­bability be thought human inventions.

For the Roman Catholik church whence all our religion issued, doth own them in­differently wth the rest for integrall parts of the Christianity she at first deliverd. And reformers never yet agreed together wt or how many of those parcells wer hu­man and upon that account to be rejected. And yet if they had had any certain know­ledg either from God or man, either by history or grounded reason, they would not wth so much disagreement amongst one another hav by degrees cast off som one part some another of that religion they receivd at first altogether upon one & the sam motiv of the Revealers infallibility. This disagreement of reformers as it can­not but bring themselvs if they would but open their eyes into some suspitiō of uncer­tainty; so to me unto whom uncertain grounds of faith are no grounds at all, they ar a sufficient conviction of errour & fraud.

Again, these presented popish superstiti­ons and human inventions rejected even by Protestancy were both very many and verry weighty, at about the reall presence, [Page 55]apostolicall traditions, the papes supremacy merit of good works, sacrifice of mass, sa­cramentall absolution, use of images, invo­cation of Saints, seaven sacraments, vows, shrines, priesthood and the like, even in a manner the whole body of practical reli­gion. Thes if they be additions of man must either be ignorantly taken up by the people, or imposed upon them by their pre­lats. As for the peopl, if nothing at the be­ginning had ere been taught them but on­ly to beleev in Christ, it is not possible mo­rally speaking that such things as thes should ever com into their heads: but tis al­together and absolutly impossible that they should be taken up universally by all peo­ple of the earth together, and that not by parcells as now they are cast away; but the whol body of them together wth such uni­ty and consent as hath been ever found in all Christian kingdoms of the world, none of the peopl in any kingdom gain say­ing their fellows, nor Prelats resisting.

If you say, the Prelats imposed them: This must be don either by violence or fraud, ei­ther by strong hand or som insensibl intro­duction. Such main weighty tangible points as thes wch were to be brought not onely [Page 56]into peopls heads but hands, and daily and hourly to be practisd, can never be thought by any sensibl man to have been insensibly introduced or insensibly receivd or insensi­bly liked of, wth so much prejudice of car­nall eas and sensuality; I say wth so much prejudice of sensuality as fastings, watchings, almsdeeds, justiciary satisfaction, vows of poverty obedience and chastity, pennances, cloisturs and religious monasteries must needs bring upon the world.

For the same reason violence offred to the people whether at the same time or se­verall ages in such businesses of main im­portance, of great weight, and of much ser­vitud could never pass so smoothly or be so tamly admitted by all Christian king­doms, wherof some be at deadly feud, op­position and war with one another, others of a natur more refractory and not so carfull to keep wt they have once receivd, som sooner som later converted, so that no nois should be made therof, no cours ta­ken to resist it, no dislike of the doctrin, no difformity of beleef.

He can never beleeve this who knowes either the nature of the world, or the dispo­sition of the Catholik Church. The world [Page 57]is naturally tumultuous, impatient of new yokes, apt to insurrections, slow to admit a restraint, and no les prone to omit ne­glect and reject wt is servilely imposd upon them, especially if it be don wthout just autority and contrary to peopls inclina­tions.

The Catholik Church on the other side he that knows her and hath beheld her pro­ceedings from age to age, may easily dis­cern how ticklish and scrupulous she is, how she startls at the very news of the least innovation or new fangldnes in any of her peopl, wch if it do increas how small so ever the matter may be in it self, the Ca­tholik body rises up against it & will not rest till by a councell it be condemnd. This is the motiv of calling so many councells as have been since Christianity first began, and of the severity ther used even in som things a man would hardly deem conside­rable. It would even delight a man rea­ding the history of the church in learned Baronius and others, to see the Churches industry and watchfulnes on all occasions to prevent new fangldnes: the labour and diligence of her councells; their faithfulnes study and exactnesse in examining, discus­sing, [Page 58]refuting upstart opinions; their up­rightnes and wisdom in defining & confir­ming the ancient Catholik doctrin against all innovations according to that general oracle of all Synods Nihil innovandum, veterum traditionibus standum; and lastly the severe penaltys inflicted by the church upon the authours of innovation if they did not humbly recant their errour, so that all things considered aright, tis as impossible for human innovations to incorporate wth the body of anicent Catholik faith as for wood or stone to concorporate wth the flesh of an animal.

You would M [...]. D ^r. save me the labour of perswading this truth any further, if you would pleas to call to mind, how severall Reformers have taunted at the scrupulosity of papists in this kind, yea and inveighed too against their severity; telling us that popish councels are so scrupulously severe that they question, meddle wth and censur things that ar of little or no concernment at all in Religion and oftims pure Philo­sophy; that they condemne good books written by their owne people and those men of sincerity and conscience one can hardly tell why or wherfore; that they so [Page 59]enslave excellent wits that they cannot invent or utter any thing that may rellish never so little of novelty; that they judg the faithfull and cast them out of the church even for small supposed deviations; that they set up inquisitions to prevent and sup­presse liberty of conscience even wth un-Christian cruelty. And they tell us severall storys of the Catholik churches scrupulosity in this kind: of Heliodor put out of his by­shoprick for writing his fained Romance; of Virgilius displaced in like sort for tea­ching that ther were Antipodes, an opini­on in those daies new and unheard of; of a Printer that together wth the losse of his place sufferd a heavy mulct for altering one letter wch had been falsly transcribed in that parable of the woman that lost a drachme and swept her house, & evertit do­mum; the Printer for evertit made it ever­rit as it ought to be, and forfeited say they his office for his pains.

It is possible that so much curiosity, so much scrupulosity and tendernes should so tamely admit of an insupportable weight of popery wthout any disturbance at all, nay wth the liking and universall consent of all men. God Catholikes are as tender of [Page 60]their faith as of the apple of their eye; so that if a friend or kinsman should once take up any noveltys therin, we are scanda­lised at it, rise up against him & cannot but show our aversion and dislike even wher natur and custom had united us. Nor can any one of our country-men broch an heresy, but all sound Catholiks will hate him for it and rise up against him: forrei­ners if it ever com to their ears will detest him much more; how ever he may draw some disciples after him, such light capri­tious people as will be led away wth every wind of doctrin: and som such there have ever been who forgetfull of God and their own safty will leav the rock of the church wherupon they are built to follow the new fangldnes of a proud instable mind; the whole Catholik body still resisting and con­demning the insolence. This is a quality as evident in good catholiks as that a man hath a nose in his face, nor needs it proof.

How then can it be thought that whol Kingdoms and severall nations should submit to the judgment of one proud de­viatour, be he never so witty ov eloquent; as for example all the Prelats of Spain, Italy, Germany, France, East and West-Ju­dys, [Page 61]Asia, in a word all over the world, to one haughty self conceited English Priest deviating from the ancient received faith of his ances tours, wthout any resistance dislike or noise. It is not a thing by a rea­sonable man so much as to be imagind. Nor hath a prelate in one countrey any more power over the prelates of another than wit and eloquence can afford him, wch reason and experience showes can ne­ver suffice for the bringing of all mankind into captivity to it self wthout resistance and clamour. The chief Priest is the fittest to offer this kind of violence: and yet how little he is able to prevail in an opinion contrary to the Churches universall tradi­tion appears sufficiently in the fact of pope Iohn the twenty second, who propounding to the consideration of some Christian universities the negativ of the soules fineal beatitud till the generall judgment, effe­cted no more but a commotion of the Christian world against himself. And the thing is remembred and spoke of to this day. Wherfor neither covin nor violence can be of any avail to the introducing of innovations by any person wtsoever con­trary to the churches custon and tradi­tion.

Deal sincerly wth me, and take any one point of those many wch English Cathe­liks hold at this day, masse, pilgrimages, vowes, pennance, absolution, reall presence or wt you will; and tell me in wch of the Kings dayes between William the conque­rour and Harry the eight it was first taken up here or brought into the land: look still further and see your self if the same was not beleevd and practisd by the Saxons even from their first conversion untill K. William the conquerours daies: go for­ward and you shall find that the religion the Saxons receivd from Pope Gregory did both in that point and all others agree wth wt the Brittons had receivd two or three hundred years before: This I am sure you shal find if you be not wāting to your self. How then can you ever hope to perswade me that all or any of these be innovations, wherof you can tell me neither the motiv, nor the occasion, nor the time they were introduced, nor the person by whom nor any event that followed theron. Tis an argument of desperat wretchednes to cast away all practicall religion upon no other account than the bare affirmation that tis popish superstition and popish inventions.

No Sr the inventions of men in matters of religion cannot be so universall in men and Kingdoms of differing humours and at enmity oftimes wth one another: they cannot be so imutable in so many altera­tions of states and governments as are and have been in the world: they cannot be so permanent, being both human and unlaw­full; for as divinity and essentiall truth are therfor eternall and unchangable becaus such; so humanity and falshood must needs decay and moulder away; contrariorum con­traria est ratio. It was a golden observa­tion that of Gamaliel a great doctour of law among the Iewes. If this counsell be of men it will come to naught, if of God ye can­not frustrat it, Act. 5. You see by the alte­rations that happen in human inventions, that tis much for mens conceits or fansies to stand unch angd for one age or two: & all Reformations are by their continuall vicissitudes convinced to be human coun­sells and works of men: whereas each par­cell of the Catholik faith even those you call popish additions have apparently stood permanent for eleaven hundred years to­gether, as all men know or may know if they will but read their own history; and [Page 64]by this imutability they are convinced to be raies of that unchangeable essence and truth wch is eternally the same.

But if we consider the promises of God to conserv his church in all truth, and for that end to be ever wth it even to the worlds consummation; and that it is now granted on all hands that the church hath not been visibly existent in all times and places, but onely in and by the Roman Ca­tholik: then will it appear altogether im­possible that human inventions and falsitys should ever be able to thrust in to that church or go for truths.

Nor is it les improbable that the imma­culat spous of Christ, wise, spotles and un­blamable should by an adulterous mixturs of errours destroy her self. We see that an ordinary secular state, be it Monarchy, ari­stocrasy or others will never admit of rules that be quite opposit to those in wch she was first founded, wherwth she has been fed and strengthend, and by wch she has triumphed and flourisht. And if she do it, she destroyes her self. Wch altho it may happen to worldly states built upon human prudence for to do; yet I do no doubt but that your selvs and all men will grant mee [Page 65]that the church of Christ was first raised upon divine principles, and setled upon the wisedom of God unto eternall perma­nence. And yet if she should admit of all these mixturs she would cease to be spotles and unblamable, and consequently cease to be her self. In all things much of ill cor­rupts the good; but Religion if it be not ab­solutly sincere is not properly religion. For ther is somthing of good even in paga­nisme and mahometisme, wch no man calls religion but superstition: the denomina­tion following the greater and worser part.

Reading M ^r Chillingworths book not long ago, I could not but smile in my self to see that flourishing Hixius Doxius so to play dance and triumph as hee does quite through his book upon a supposall himself never prooved nor any yet for him; namely that the Roman church had admitted er­rours in it self. We, saith he, saw and beheld to our grief that the Roman Church had tainted herself wth errours; we calld upon her to reform, she would not do it in her whole body; we therfore being part of that body pro­vided for our own safty, we reformd our selves, wch was lawful necessary and just [Page 66]both before God and man. This discourse in substance, for I have not the book now by me to set down just punctually his words, is over and over repeated in his book, and is indeed one of the chief ropes wherupon that fanatick funambulo dances. Such empty words may beguil others, not me dear Lady, they prevaile nothing wth me M ^r Parson, they do not indeed nor ever will M ^s Persona.

Come S ^r Harry I hope we shal have you in a better mind to morrow. We are now calld in to dinner. Let's go.

Let us in S ^r Harry, thers the fittest time and place in my mind to talk of reli­gion. I never found that dry discourses wrought any great effect.

Madam a word wth you now they are gone in. I marvell your Lap. would talk of to morrow, I never read of any one in my life that was converted to morrow. Is it not written, to day if you will hear my voyce? Ps. 95. Had you given me occa­sion I would have done the deed to dav even my self alone.

How.

I would have faln a dropping of texts wth [Page 67]him and kept him close to the word of God. I am sure where he has one text for him I have a thousand, and where he has ten, I have ten thousand, according as tis written, One of them shall chase a thousand & ten of them put ten thousand unto flight, Deut. 32. I like not human discours, tis tedious to me: I have fild al my bible wth dogs ears for good Sr Harries sake, and could not come in handsomly to use any of them all this while by reason of his redious oratory. Indeed I needed not to have bent down any one leaf at al; opening my bible at random I should be sure to meet wth somthing against popery; every chapter every verse cries it down. Open it Madam, and you shall find so much. Read. The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans. Paul a servant of Iesus Christ, Rom. 1. Look you there. The Epistle not a legend, of Paul not of Peter, the Apostle not the Pope, to the Romans not to the Romish, papish or popish, he would never write to them I warrant him. O the father! I'am even as full of scriptur as a new layd egge, as they say. I could confute Sr Harry, be­fore dinner com up yet as near as it is.

Sr Harry is not here now.

Al­tho [Page 68]he be not. Well Madam ther coms not a dish to the table, but Ile have a text for it, from the very first dish of porredg to the apples and chees.

Well, well.

Madam I could wthout the help of scriptur have mentiond twenty innovations that Papists have made in the world had I been incouraged to speak.

What I prithee.

The sect of Quakers lately brought up here in England is I think an innovation in reli­gion. And this was instituted by two fryars and two Iesuyts, as Mr Prinne witnesseth in a book of his lately set forth for that very purpos. For thou Mr Prinne be said to be a man of an ill hearing, yet is that defect recompensed by a fair length of language; his text is so orthodox that the Ministers have preacht upon it all England over, and illustrated it by pretty similitudes; as of those nine and thirty papists that flew over out of Lincoln shire into Norfolk amongst a flock of wild gees to pick up their corn, for wch crime their houses wer ransackt; of seaven other papishes that taught children to speak wth their elbowes: against wch innovation of nature our Ministers in­veighed bitterly in their pulpets; of three [Page 69]more papists that walkt in the ayr all over the citty of London passing from steeple to steeple at a step, and pist fire as they went upon the top of houses; wch our Mi­nisters wer stark mad at, & preacht violent­ly against thē out of the Revelations; saying that if they were not rooted out of the land they would sindg al their caps & fire their hayry scalps, as they stood in their pulpets. Many other pretty remembrances they had, wch have been recorded by M ^r Pyn and Prinne, Mr Iohn an okes & Will stiles: wherat people beat their breasts, shaked their heads & cryed Out upon these wicked papishes, tis pitty they are suffred to live.

I beleev papists will not own these things.

They must own them whe­ther they will or no: printing and prea­ching, presse and pulpet, Mr Iohn an oaks & Mr Prinne cannot utter any thing but truth. Innovations! papists do nothing else but make innovations; they cannot eat or drink, or sleep but the must do it; and mischief is their very life.

God mend all.

I have S ^r Harry brought you here again your souls phesitian, to un­derstand the symptoms of your diseas, and apply an agreeable remedy therunto.

I shall Madam as well as I may both declar my sicknes, and respectfully receiv his remedy.

Com doctour you look blith upont to day, I take it for a good sign.

And I am glad for sooth to see my husband cherfull; for sadnes as it is written dries up the bones, Pro. 17.

I bring you good news Sr Harry. The work of reformation we perswade you unto is as easily effected, as tis to cast of a heavy cloack in a burning midsommers day. All popish practises as I in order shall name them to you, do but you in the same method reject them, and you shall in one half hour becom a Protestant, in three quarters a Presbyterian, in a whol howre an Independent, and so be reformed at your leysur and wth eas.

You say not all this while, what shall guid me in this action.

The word of God that guides you S ^r to the will of God.

The means and end of his motion being coincident, a man may well hope for an undisturbd tranquillity in the period.

Wt can disturb you S ^r being built upon the rock of the bible, wth more or les hold thereon according to the natur of the reformation.

Wch reformation has the best hold.

Let them look to that, Ile not meddle wth those disputes.

I have both read and heard of the rock of the Church, but the rock of the bi­ble you are the first man I know ever used the phrase.

The Church and her doctrin be all one: the Churches doctrin and scriptur is the same; and so the rock of the church and rock of the bible cannot be two severall things.

Well said sweet heart. This is now a little above me. But so it is written, The husband is above his wife and she shall be un­der and subject to him, Gen. 3.

The summe of all is; Betake your self to the pure scripture. And tis enough.

Ther is much talk of Scriptur, and all the sectaries have ever risen tho never so many or never so opposit one to another [Page 72]have still pretended it; nay the devill urged his temptation wth a scriptum est, Matt. 4. so that I feare the proposall of this either means or rest will prove but wast of time.

Give me leav to tell you, that the messen­ger of the Gospell of peace who by a mis­sion from pope Eleutherius converted the Brittons from paynisme to Christian faith in the second age of the church, and the other from pope Gregorius who reduced the Saxes or English in the fift gave them all their religion as well explicitly in all the articles of their Christian faith, as impli­citly in the bible they deliverd into their hands, wherin those articles by incidentall occasion lay casually coucht. Now to take away all those explicite articles drest and prepared allready to our hands, and give us the bible, is the same thing as to take from men all the gold and silver already coined wth so much care and industry of princes, and show them a mine whence such things may be digd, wthout affording ey­ther work men skilfull in the art or instru­ments for the purpos.

Imagin in such a case wt disorder and confusion would happen, when thousands of people are gatherd together about a [Page 73] mountain; none verst in digging or fitted wth instruments for it, none accustomed to the hollowes of deep earth, none skild in finding out the vein, none expert in dis­cerning the oare, or to melt it into bullion or stamp it into coin. And yet all of them equally conceyted as undertaking ignorance uses to be, and indifferently judging and condemning the works of each other. It cannot otherwise happen in such a case, but that some should tumble into precipices, some be somtherd in the earth below, some after much toil bring forth a handfull of clodded earth, lead or iron oare, and per­haps a slat or peble in the stead of met­tall: and if haply any one meet wth the right, he will either not heed it as not appearing to be such, or loose it in the al­lay, melting or stamp. In fine, where so much curiosity and art is required in the manifold degrees of procedur, yet none had by any and profest by all to the dispa­ragement of one another, wt can result from such an attempt but disorder & nois, confusion and hazard, emulation & quar­rell amongst themselves. Nov can they ever effect any thing to the generall agree­ment & liking of all, or repair the coin that is destroyd.

This is in all points our very condition; when the Christian articles of faith wrougt out and stampt for us, and deliverd us by our primitiv pastours according as they had received them from Jesus Christ the prime Inventour and Work-man of our faith are principitously annuld, and the Bible put in mens hands to dig out from thence by their own skill and industry the results of their religion.

Nay the case here is so much the more desperat, in that the common people wth the tradition of the Bible receiv this cau­tion from the reformers; that they take heed of such and such abrogated articles of popery, wch as they do ever and anon ap­pear in the Scripturs they hav to peruse, so are they indeed the very pith and marrow of that sacred Book, and the golden metall they are onely to seek for. So that being left unto their own shallow judgments if it were then improbable they should ever light upon the whol sincere truth of good: now being adviced and prejudiced against it, altho they should happly light upon it, tis impossible wth that prejudice they should ever embrace and adhere un­to it.

That the articles of Catholik religion abrogated by reformers were all stampt out for us by our primitiv Pastours and have gon currant in the whol Christian world from the beginning to this day, hath been proved a hundred times over and over by learned Catholik divines both for the ge­nerall & in each particular. And that it is an impious tiranny to take them all away and put people to seek new out of the Bi­ble, I think it will easily appear to an un­derstanding man, if he do but consider the way-wardnes of mans will prone to evill and averst to good, such especially as is an­next to bitternes and pains, the fallacy of his fansy and weaknes of his understanding wch we cannot but perceiv to fail even in things that be in our very senses, and that both by deficiency and errour, both by want of apprehension and falsity of judg­ment: or if we consider on the other side the obscurity of Scriptur, not in it self but in order to our weak, obscure, sens-perverted intellect. Upon wch two generall Heads it coms to pas that men so frequently de­prave the Scriptures to their own perdition▪ as Scriptur it self complaineth 2 Pet. 3.

But over and above all this, to put men [Page 76]to put men to seek for a thing wth a fore-imprinted prejudice of that they go to find, to seek for faith with a prejudice against faith, is a tirannous cheat and abuse hardly to be paraleld.

If to people met together to try or search for silver and gold, one should give such like instructions, Take al that comes to hand; tis all good howsoever composed or mixt, two kinds onely excepted; such parts of earth as hav much of friability and inconsistency in them, lay hold of them: if there be any body cōposed of impure earth liquefied take that: if the earth, be not wel vanquisht, & the parts much dissimilar, tis good. But if the matter be more hard­ned by the egress of tenuity, uniformly com­pacted, white and lucid: take heed of that, cast that away. If the parts be yet more pure and equall, hardend and made yellow by the celestiall spirit an intrinsecall inmate in the body wch is therby made most flexi­ble by vertue of the similar softnes of the parts, and yet most ponderous of all mettals by the uniform closnes therof and the little porosity by wch the air may enter to confer a levity; This is stark naught. It will not rust by the similar purity of the parts, nor [Page 77]loose its weight by melting, through the equality therof, none being thinner than other to exhale by heat as it is in bodies unequally composed. And therefore cast it away, as a thing uselesse, and of no valiew or profit at all.

With these instructions shall they ever find matter for gold and silver coin? I trow not. Nor shall they ever be able to repair the loss of their currant coin which was conformable to the hidden treasure of that mine by searching in a place where it lay hid, wth so much ignorance as is naturally in unexperienced men, so much disagreement of judgment as is in a multitude not subor­dinate unto any one, such prejudicate opini­ons given them quite opposite to the design they have in hand.

With such like prejudice do all our En­glish people take the Bible in their hands and read it: being adviced aforehand by their reformers and fully beleeving that the Catholik mass is abomination, the reall pre­sence a chimera, the merit of good works a dream, fasting and all mortification of sensu­all desires a fardell of superstition, all en­deavour of fulfilling Gods precepts a vani­ty, and the imagination of any possibility [Page 78]thereof a delusion, the indifferency of mans free will unto good or evill an errour, the making of vows to god folly, restitution or satisfaction of injuries done to our neigh­bour a prejudiciall mistake, all expiation of our sins either for our selvs or others an inexpiable crime, the honour of blessed saints idolatry, and the imitation of their severe and holy lives childishnes, sacrifice altars and the whole priesthood of Christ prophanenes, the conscionable practise of sobriety justice and piety as necessary unto life eternall, detestable popery.

For Gods sake wt good can accrew to the soul of man by reading of Scripture wth these prejudices, these diabolicall anti­cipations, these antichristian preconcep­tions, these obstructions to all grace and salvation.

And yet thus forewarnd and prepossest do all our reformed Christians read the scriptures; no sound or solid fruit ariseing thence to their soules, but rather hardnes of heart, pride, schismes, fearlesnesse of Gods judgments, and where good nature (the best religion I know in England) hin­ders not, desperatenes in all sin and inju­stice.

Nor can any forreiner brought hither out of Catholik countreyes ever discern either by our Churches houses or practise of peopl, that we have amongst us any knowledg at all of Gospell, unles haply he hear the good-man leading his wife to bed over night wth a text, and the hous-wife next morning cudgelling her mayd wth another, the countrey boys whipping their tops wth a saying of Paul, and the girls wth another of Peter playing at last couple in hell, the drawer bringing his canary wth a verse of Iohn, and the tapster filling in his beere wth a text of Mathew. This he may see, and this is all he shall find for his edifi­cation.

And this indeed is all the fruit of our common and familiar reading of scripture, when it is don wth a prejudice against solid religion sincere worship & Catholik piety: aery shadowes, empty sounds, prophanenes and blasphemy. And therfore it was a heavenly caution and worthy of all consi­deration that wch we received by a voyce from heaven [...]. Act. 10. the things wch God hath sanctified do not thou make common.

When therefore M ^r Dr you advice me to [Page 80]apply my self wholly to scripture. You ei­ther mean I should do this having a fore­hand renounced and precipitously cast away all the positiue articles of beleef I hav received from my forefathers explicitely declared and formed for me by the primi­tive Pastours and Teachers of my religion; and then go seek for the results of faith in the Bible, where they be implicitely hidden conceald and coucht incidentally, wthout any method or intended order of any such conclusions, under severall parables, histo­ries, allegories, letters, canticles, psalms, pro­phesies, and the like. And then I should run my self into that inconvenience I have upon good reason disallowed: As to cast away all my gold and silver-coin that being stampt in primitive times by the first mai­ster of faith has gone currant in all ages, and go seek, into the mine for new, wth so much hazard trouble and danger, as I can­not but see to be in such a work, whether I consider the weaknes of mine own under­standing and my perverse inclinations wch I my self must needs be apt to favour in mine own cause; or the doubtfulnes laby­rinthes and obscurity of that hidden mine; or finally the ill successe that all people hav [Page 81]had in such a search as their personable wretchlessenesse and dissolutenesse, their disorder and disagreement one amongst another may sufficiently witnesse.

Or else you mean I should apply my self to scripture wth all my Catholike positions in my head, wch I conceive to be the very marrow and pith of that scripture you ad­vice me to peruse. And then I shall by rea­ding of scripture advance nothing at all ei­ther from my owne way or towards yours whatever it be. For finding my owne posi­tions to appeare in scripture at every turn, I shall still embrace and close wth them as wth matter that is genuin and connaturall to my self, and by their light be enabled to understand and interpret all the rest of scriptur I shall meet wthall.

Wch way soever you put me to it, the rock of the bible will either keep me still from you or split me wth you.

Wt shall we do wth you S ^r Harry sith you decline scripture wch as it is the purest so tis the easiest way for your conver­sion.

Shall I tell you? he wil even go out of his way as Balam and his ass did. Ile show you the story as tis written in 22 chapter [Page 82]of numbers, tis a very pretty one. Ther you wil see how the ass confuted his rider, and said unto him Am not I thine ass; so pretti­ly. Read here from the 22 vers to the 36. If you go not in the right way S ^r Harry as we would have you, be sure you shall be checkt by a very ass. When any such thing happens you may take it for a certaine sign that you ar out of your way.

Scriptur is a good instrument to drawn men from paganisme to Christianity, but no fit means to divert us from Catholik Religion to heresy. That heavenly seed wch makes sons of God can never make chil­dren of perdition except it self be mischie­vously corrupted. And therfore I decline it not at all, but admit, allow and embrace it, as containeing that irrefragable doctrine wch eminent persons in the church of God penned, wch industrious and religious per­sons in the same Catholik church coppied & transcribed wth their owne hands above a thousand years together before printing was invented, to keep that sacred letter alive; and lastly wch by the Catholik body of the said Church hath beene authenti­cated and canonised: and therfore it must needs be pure and holy being mad [...], con­serud [Page 83]and ratified by holy Church. But its facility and easinesse that I do not so easily conceive or agree unto; especially if you separate it from the Church whose book it is: The mind and meaning of any writing no man can understand so well as the Au­thour, no man can interpret aright con­trary to the Authour, no man where it is obscure and uncouth may peremptorily in­terpret wthout the Authour.

You will soon grant it to be easy if you consider that tis called a light to the understanding. Wt thing is there more apparent than light? And therfore tis said in the Ephesians: if our Gospell be hid, tis hid to them that are lost.

Sweet heart you are mistaken, that sayeing is not in the Ephesians but Corin­thians, 2. Ep. and the 4. c.

Tis no matter Mr person so we find out your riddle tho it be by plowing wth your heyfer according to the saying of Samson, Iud. 14.

I told you even now Madam that the ass will rebuk his rider when he goes astray.

A light if it be set behind us, or un­der a bushell, or to an eye ill affected in­lightens [Page 84]not, and a prejudiced mind is a veyld understanding where light cannot enter. I must say more, he that goes out of the Church puts out his own eyes, and he that never enterd in, never had any but gropes in darknes. Light is come into the world saith our Lord, but men love darknes more than light, Jo. 1. namely, because they shut their eyes against it; and no marvell that unto such the Gospell should be hid. Catholikes all of them have indeed the whole Gospell by heart, and comprehendit sufficiently for the life and spirit of it; yet still the bark and letter of it hath obscurity enough wch is opend and manifested as far as is needfull & upon occasion by the lips of priests wch preserve knowledg. No man understands the mind of man but the spirit that is in man, nor the meaning of scrip­tures can any comprehend but the spirit of that Catholik body whose the scriptures be. For these be imediatly the word and do­ctrin of the Church, and therfore called the Word of God, because that Catholik body from whence it issued, is animated by the spirit of Jesus Christ her naturall head who is God blessed for ever, and the particular penmen therof being members of the sayd [Page 85]church were peculiarly illustrated by that spirit unto such an effect. So then the word of God is a light and enlightens good Ca­tholiks, it enlightens not others that re­main blinded in infidelity and separated from that holy mysticall body of Christ: and yet tis a light still, tis hid to them that are lost.

People that live in a family colledg or corporation, by the daily sight and practis of things to be don therin do fully compre­hend all that is to be said or acted there. But others who be out of those societys shall never by bare reading of books writ­ten of such emploiments, so long as them­selves stay out, attain to any satisfactory light therof, but remain pusled in a wood of dark words, and either mistake or not apprehend the reality and truth of things. So our people wthin the Church see di­stinctly and clearly the truths of God, in whose practis they are daily conversant; so that words and writtings are not necessary unto such as be in a continuall exercise of their trade; but sectaries paymins & al infi­dels who be aliens and strangers to this So­ciety & out of the family; altho they should look upon their book of statutes scripturs [Page 86]or laws, yet will they still be pusling about words and never clearly understand the secrets of the profession. One artist or tradesman knows more by heart and pra­ctise, than the whole world besides that is out of that body or not conversant in the society can ever attain unto by reading. A man may demonstrat by Philosophicall reason, that light it self enlightens not but by reflexion; no more do the word and scripturs except they reflect upon us from the bosom of the Catholik body wch actuats them in their operation.

If you would seriously ponder these few words, you should quickly perceive unto whom the scriptures be obscure and unto whome they be easy; and how they be easy to Catholiks for the practise life and mea­ning of them, tho the letter may still keep its obscurity: as children of a family may clearly understand all the whol affaires and businesses of the house, tho if books should be written therof they might not so easily understand the letter of those books. Yet these have great advantage in the under­standing of such books abov those who are not coversant in the affairs being aliens and strangers to the family. For tis easier [Page 87]by the knowledg & perfect comprehension of things to understand words that be written of them; than by reading of words to perceiv things we are altogether unex­perienced in.

But to speak abstractively of the letter of Scriptur wthout reference unto persons: as if the case were that neither you nor I ever knew any thing of the Christian re­ligion but what we get out of the Bible or new Testament put now into our hands. Could either of us or all of us together see clearly in this letter the whole state of the Catholick Church? or without obscurity discern wt is to be said and done, wt is to be thought and beleevd, wt is to be hoped and feard; wt concerns God and his crea­turs; wt angels and men; wt earth and hea­ven; wt our creation and redemption; wt the beginning and end of things. First where is the order and method to find out these things. You will find that the sto­ry and doctrinall part goes hand in hand together, wch is not the ordinary way of teaching. If I peruse the story of Gospell by it self, I shall scarcely find it answerable to my expectation whiles I find mention onely of one howr of Christs birth and not [Page 88]a word more for twelv years together, and then but one single action of his appearing in the publick Schools, and not a word again of his whole life till almost twenty years after, and then onely some works he did in publick for the space of about three years, & so his death: wch is far less than I should expect or desire to know. And the do­ctrine our Lord deliverd is no more of it set down, than what he spake incidentally in fields and streets and publick places, the three years space of his publik appearance, and not a word of any thing he taught his Schollers or Disciples in particular, on set purpose (& without reference to publick speeches) which was without all doubt the main doctrin primarily intended both by the Maister & his disciples and most copi­ously explicated. Moreover those publick speeches of or Lord we have set down in Gospell, they are deliverd us but under cer­tain generall heads and brief notes, wthout any order or connexion at all that can appear to any the subtillest wit that is. Our Lords Sermon on the mount is the largest piece of doctrin we hav of his deliverd at one time, (and most heavenly and divine it is like its authour) but he that reads the [Page 89]sift, sixt and seaven Chapters of S. Mathew, where tis set down, shall desire connexion. And indeed the holy Evangolists colle­cting their Gospels as brief memorialls did it wthout all doubt the best way: And tis sufficient, and far better than if all had been set down in that order and fulness of dis­cours our Lord deliverd it. For the few separated notions of Christian morality set down in Gospell wer enough to give testi­mony to the traditionall doctrine the A­postles had methodically received from their master for his Church. Finally those speeches of our Lord recorded in Gospell be only some brief sentences, and parables, questions and replies to interrogatories; wch be far short to a whol body of divi­nity, tho abundantly enough for a Church in whos bowels the Messias would imprint his law and intire will.

It appears then both by the mingling of the story and dogm together, by the few par­cells of the history it self, by the want of that method and connexion in the dogma­ticall part wch our dull capacities require for learning, and the omission of great ma­ny things we should need to be imformd in far more amply than we can find it set [Page 90]down in Scriptur concerning the use of Sacraments, government of the Church and a thousand difficulties rising about the exercises of charity and faiths; I say it ap­pears by these and such like things that the Scripture of the New Testament was ne­ver pend on any purpose to teach us our religion, but rather to confirm and ratify by incidentall passages therein, such religion and doctrin as should be deliverd by the Church the prime and sole mistresse of faith after God and in place of him, in all clearnes of methodical beleef and practise. To you, saith our Lord to his Apostles, Luc. 8.10. it is given to known the mysteries of the Kingdom of heaven, to others in parables, that seeing they may see and not understand. The Apostles and the Church derived from them were made acquainted wth the myste­ries and secrets of Christian religion for their beleef and practise, and the same Church clearly knows and understands them as the mysteries of her own profession and art, wch she hath receivd and practisd from the beginning to this day. But to others that be aliens and out of the Chu [...]ch it seems our Lord so orderd his speech that they should hear and yet not understand; [Page 91]nor everfully perceiv his will till beleeving they were incorporated into his mysticall hody unto which alone all the mysteries of religion are delivered in perspicuity and clearnes. This generall purpos and inten­tion of penning the Gospell and other parts of the New Testament as short manuall notes for Christians within the Church or such as are to be congregated unto it, from wch Churches hands they have both a lar­ger explicit declaration of their faith and a full and ample practis thereof in her bo­som, must needs infer such an obscurity as shall obstruct all possibility out of the Church of God by this bare letter ever to arrive to a clear understanding of the waies of Christian Religion.

This is the first and great cause of that obscurity scripture carries with it unto such as come to seek their religion in a Book wch was never made to teach it, nor written for such a propos. The churches doctrin as it comes out of her lips, that is the thing that converts nations and regenerats unto hea­venly life: and this written word is a good milk to nurs us up after we are rege­nerated; wch made S. Peter to exhort Chri­stians 1 Pet. as new born babes to desire that [Page 92]sincere milk of the word that they may grow by it. 1. Pet. 2. But it is not the thing that givs us the first life. Indeed the Scriptur does little or no good, but as it is presented by the Church, and received with her inter­pretation, and practisd in her bosom, wth­out wch three things I wil be bold to say it is not the Word of God, nor hath it any vertue at all. The Ark of God so long as it was upheld by the Priests it comforted and sanctified them, but touched or lookt into by others it destroyd them; nor was it unto them an Ark of salvation but an offence and occasion of fall.

If we descend to particulars we shall espy reasons enough of obscurity, such as will frustat all desire of any perspicuous disco­very of faith to be made by any man wth­out the churches help. The very history doth afford disputs enough, hardly to be an­swered by the learnedst of divines; as they will easily grant that have examind them. The Prophesies and mysteries of faith con­taind therein who is able to trace them. And the morall or dogmaticall part, tho it seem familiar yet hath it a profoundnesse beyond all human writting. Indeed by this it is demonstrated to be the Word of God [Page 93]wch must needs be like himself, unsearch­able. Out of the abundance ef the heart the mouth speaketh saith our Lord; and where the heart is immense the word is also incom­prehensible. I doubt not but there be too many amongst our people in England who read the Scriptures as our boyes and girles do at schoole, judging the sense compre­hended as soone as the sillables be speld; I speak not to such.

Greater divines to whome I speak must and will acknowledg that the Scriptures be often argumentative, passing from one point to another wthout giving any do­ctrinall notice therof. This will make the reader hable to continuall mistakes, whiles he conceivs the writer to go still along upon the same subject, whereas he is past over to a new or a contrary one. As also in the Psalmes, canticles & Prophecies tis very familiar wth those holy men under one & the same number & person to act themselvs in one verse, God or his church in the other imediately succeeding; in one half line to decipher things present, in the other con­junctivly connext, things onely to come and not appliable to wt was then in hand tho the speech be united. The good Eunuch [Page 94]in the Acts of the Apostles was it seems ad­viced hereof, when reading the Prophesy of Isaias he asked Philip of whome doth the Prophet speak this verse (he was led as a sheep to the slaughter.) of himself or of some other man, Act. 8.34.

Again in the whole course of scriptur a man may meet wth propositions here and there desperst wch being taken apart from the other discours, and according to their own bare sound are quite opposite to other formal assertions in the same book, nay to the very drift and intention of the Au­thour; as will soon appear unto him that shall make an analysis of the whole book: such be the semisentences, depraved texts and ill applied autorities used by sectaries. For example in that sublime and learned Epistle of S. Paul written to the Romans, our people of England do cull out many places for the solesufficiencie of faith against the necessity & merit of good works, wch is as far from the dift and intention of the Apostle as hell is from heaven, and unbeseeming such a Catholick doctour as S. Paul was, to write to such a Catholik place as Rome. The busines and occasion of the letter was an emulation risen in Rome [Page 95]betweene the converted Jewes and the converted Gentiles; those who had been made Christians from Iewes disabling the Gentiles, as being ever aliens from God, wheras the Iewes converted were first Gods servants under Moses & then under Christ, and so pleasing God in the whole course of their linage by their good con­versation according to the law they used: the Gentils on the other side diminisht the Iewes, for that themselves by the very light of reason doing wt they could was a law to themselvs, and so far pleasd God that he therfore brought them equally wth the Iewes unto the light of Gospell wch the Iewes indeed deservd not, sith they had▪ murderd the Messias and Lord of glory. This childish emulation arising haply upon some slight word at their meetings pro­ceeded so far that it brake forth into open rancour one against another, insomuch that their Priests and Pastours who were amongst them could not well allay it. Wherfore S. Paul notice therof being given to him wrote that letter of his to them, wherin he layes about him now at the Iewes, then at the Gentils confuting their pride and folly and giving them both [Page 96]to understand that neither of them had aught to boast of, sith God of his free mercy had equally cald them both to the saving faith of Gospell and made them Christians: and therfore that they should all live toge­ther in humility peace and brotherly cha­rity. This is the scope and subject of that sacred and most Catholik Epistle, so wretchedly abused by our pittifull Secta­ries, who understanding nothing of the Apostles purpose deprave him as they do other scripturs to their own ruin. And tis an odde kind of riddle, that Catholik divines who do onely understand the scriptures should affirm them to be hard and difficil to understand; heretiks who understand them not at all should maintaine them to be easy.

Again we see that scriptur ever & anon takes up figures, allegories and parables wherin are inclosed truths of a differing strain to wt the letter relates. This will caus an obscurity almost invincible. For who can look through a veyl? none surely but the church and church men singularly assisted and inspired; so S. Paul lookt through the story of Sara and Agar, and perceivd the two churches decipherd therin, [Page 97] Gal. 4. And this custom is it seems so fre­quent in Scriptur that the same Apostle gives a caution against too much adhereing to the bark and letter of sacred scriptur, averring peremptorily that the letter kills, but the spirit or meaning couched under the letter, that is life, 2. Cor. 3. For that the bare letter of the history too much insisted upon will often lead if not to a contrary errour vet besides the intended truth.

Besides, the same phrase or letter is used in scriptur somtimes one way, somtimes another, as sin (not to stand upon further exemplification) is taken commonly for an offens, and yet somtimes again for an expia­tion therof, 2. Cor. 5.21. wth is almost con­trary.

Somthings in scriptur are spoken of God according to his essence, wch wthout good heed may prejudice the right beleef of a trinity: some things of Christ according to his humanity wch may d [...]sh the conceit of the diety in him: som things of the church triumphant wch may falsly be applied to the militant: somthings of the Messias his second coming wch may be a stumbling block to the truth of his first. And con­trary. All these things have caused errours [Page 98]mistakes and heresies in the world. And may still do the like, if private judgment have free and uncontroulable dominion over the letter and text of scripture to in­terpret it at pleasur.

Lastly sacred scriptur being a masse or body of writing both made up by severall Authours, and a miscellan of severall kinds of words, histories and lawes under a figure, histories and lawes wth out figure or dog­maticall, Prophesies of severall stiles or phrases, and all of them obscure and para­bolicall, prudentiall Proverbs close coucht together, and so antimetrically sited that rare wits can search into their depth; Psalms and canticles so highly elevated above ordinary conceit, that for aught I see they may suffice to amuse the under­standings of all ages; parables not yet fully explicated; and dogmaticall Epistles of the good Apostles, wch if they be taken so far as may concern pure Christianity wthout their economicall morall and politicall precepts (wch be easy and well enough known wthout them) are enough to exer­cise the understandings of mankind. Scrip­tures I say made up of all these severall in­gredients argue first, that they were never [Page 99]pend to teach us our faith; but for a meer help of meditations, for exhortation & in­citement of devotion and piety in people already beleeving. Secondly that it would be a lost labour to go cull our beleef out of thē, where no such purpose is intended, no method used for it, and all kind of obscuri­ty contrary to such an end.

But to conclude; If Scriptur be indeed so clear and easy for each capacity to read, out of them to cull his faith and by them to frame his religion, as sectaries pretend, and this be indeed the judgment of all re­formers; wherfore do they themselves so multiply their catechists, interpretours and expositours theron? to wt end is all their preaching and weekly teaching? this if it be indeed to any end, must needs be either to expound faith, or promote good works; if the faith be clear enough, the expounding is in vain; as for good works they be long ago exploded & bannisht out of the land, and the empty preaching for aught I know may go foot it after them: for words are in vain that tend to no end. In fine, whence comes all these diversities of opinions a­mōgst us here in England about matters of faith and religion, and so opposit one to an­other? [Page 100]and yet all grounded upon Scriptur. Is that way so uniform and easy that leads men so diversly? Nor am I satisfied at all in hearing som answer as they do, that this coms not of Scriptur but the disorder and mistakes of men: so lōg as I see it may wth­out the Churches help be so shreudly mista­ken, I have reason to suspect mistakes in my self too, if I once lean upon mine own spirit and industry as others do, being my self no better than my neighbours. And therfore I am loth nay I shall never be per­swaded to leav the secure footing I now hav in all tranquillity peace & uniformity wth the Catholik body of Gods Church, by the result of truth delivered us by antiqui­ty consonant to Gods word both written and unwritten; and run my self with the confusd rout of disagreeing sectaries upon the rock of the Bible, so apt as it appears by the event to be mis-understood and and wrested awry, that I am clear of the opinion that no man out of the Church of God, nor nobody of meē besides the Church of God understands it right. Nor shall I be so mad now in my old age to go to dig my self religion having so fair a one already stamped to my hands wch all the art of [Page 101]men and angels put together can never mend. Put him in Bedlam that undertakes both labour and hazard for naught.

Do you think S ^r Harry ever to per­swade me, that reading the Gospell I do not sufficiently understand the story of Christ, his birth and life, death, and passion, resurrection, and ascension. I fear not to af­firm that I understand it perfectly and (by your favour) as fully as is necessary. I do also conceiv well enough (nor is it hard so to do) wt his doctrin and miracles conduced to mankind. I am moved also wth the di­vine discours of Christ and his Apostles. E­very Sabboth-day I go to Church and hear the word of God preacht. I cannot see wt is more to be done, he that reads and hears and beleevs the word of life cannot miscar­ry.

And I for my part understand all that ever I either read or hear. Alas when I was a young girle I was even then so to­wardly that I could read the Scripture as I ran up and down the house, according as it is written, write the vision and make it plane upon Tables that he may run that readeth. Hab. 2. My husband and I every Sabboth day go hand in hand to Church together [Page 102]like the beasts that went into the ark by two and by two, the Male and his Female, Gen. 7.2. Surely this is sufficient for the salva­tion of all flesh.

Madam you have now toucht upon the main busines wherein all sectaries be most pittifully deluded. If they do but go to Church and hear a Sermon, each one according to his fansy, their duty is done and all his safe.

I will not stand now to examine whe­ther the preaching be orthodox or no. Be it what it will, It will not serv the turn.

I have already to my ability declared that the reading of Scriptur is no sufficient means of finding out our faith, tho so much as it is, it doth all of it confirm and verify the Churches doctrin. I shall now go for­ward and evince two truths more. First that reading or preaching of Gods word or the hearing therof (tho it be indeed Gods word and pure and orthodox) is not the essentiall or cardinal work of Christian reli­gion. Secondly that a man may hear and read it all his life time and yet be lost at the end both for want of grace and truth.

Our Lord wrote nothing himself, as all men know, yet notwthstanding he would [Page 103]never have failed either to have done it himself or commanded others to have done it, if reading or hearing had been the great work of his religion to be imposed upon mankind. For reading you know, and ex­pounding of Scriptur presupposes writing, and his great work had been no other than to see things written if our great work had been no other than to read or hear them. The four Evangelists afterwards put together some few heads of our B. saviours life and doctrin, haply to carry about wth them in their bosom, and entertain their converts wthall. But we do not read that our Lord gave them any command to do so. And this is an argument in your principles that he gave them none at all. And as he gave them no order to write, so neither did the promise them any assistance in their writing; for all the concurrence we find promised either them or their successours, was onely for the pectorall custody of their traditions orall doctrine and Church- go­vernment. And therfor since you deny the constancy of Christs assistance in the con­tinuall government of his Church, internall beleef, and externall doctrin unto wch that assistance was promist, affirming that the [Page 104] Church of Christ as it is not in it self infal­lible so hath it gone astray both in practis and doctrin; me thinks you might wth as much ease and indeed more plausibility de­ny the same concurrence to any of the Churches writings whereunto it was never promist at all, nor the Scriptur or writing it self so much as commanded by him wthout whose order nothing of force or autority could be done.

Nor it is to be thought but that Peter, James, Andrew, and others of the Apostles had been both as able and as willing to write Evangells as the other four, wherof two of them were but disciples of a far in­feriour rank to the Apostles and indeed but companions and attendants upon them as may be seen in the Acts. Nay if writing had been such a capitall work, S. Peter would never have neglected to have writ a Gospell himself, especially when S. Mark his pupil and companion wrote one. But this is an argument they had some greater work in hand and more nearly enjoind than that was. Nor can we find by any mo­nument that any of the other ten Apostles who were sent severall waies for the worlds conversion carried any written Gospell at [Page 105]all wth them wch might be made by them­selves; much less is it to be thought that they staied to write out theirs, having their own breasts so well fraught wth all that, and far more than they found ther written, especi­ally considering that two of the Evange­lists were but their pupills and disciples. Nay before those Gospels were written out and completed, especially that of S. John, the Church of God was spread up and down the world and flourisht in all the duties of Christianity. By wch it may appear that even the written Gospell is neither it self ne­cessary to the being of the Church, nor the reading or expounding of a text the essen­tiall work of Christianity.

As for the Epistles wch be the other part of the new Testament written by S. Paul and others. These tis well enough known were pend a long while after the Church of God was perfectly formd and grown up in most parts of the known world; & in particular after those Churches of Rome, Corinth, Ephesus, Galatia, Thessa­lonica and the rest unto whom they are ad­drest were perfected in all the essentialls of Christian faith; and they were occasiond merely accidentally upon the creeping in of [Page 106]some disorders and errours in those places contrary to the tradition of faith they had received, as may soon appear to him that reads and understands the tenour of those spirituall Epistles.

So then; the Church is antecedent to her Scriptur, and altogether independant ther­on either for her being or profession: helps of memory as all these writings be do pre­suppose both the memory and the things to be remembred before those helps were brought to light: And so, the reading of these Scriptures or hearing them expound­ed can no wise be the essentiall work of Christian religion or the totall exercise therof; but somthing that is altogether in­dependent of them, more ancient than they be, and that is more intrinsecally a wor­ship, homage, adoration and service of the most high God, than hearing or looking up­on words and syllables can be.

I make no doubt but the whol Scriptur or writing of the new Testament, both Epistles and Gospells was merely casuall and acci­dentall. For I find it long ago foretold by the Prophets that the law and government of the Messias should in this differ from the Law of Moses, that Moses Law was all [Page 107] committed to paper but the doctrin of Iesus should be writ in the heart and entrailes of his Church. You may see one place in the Prophet Ieremy, c. 31.33. wch the Apostle in his Epistle, to the Hebrewes applies unto Christ our Lords dayes, Heb. 10.16. and S. Paul doth not obscurely allude unto it in one of his letters he wrote to Corinth. c. 3.3. Indeed to imprint in the churches breast a law from wch she should never deviat, is in my judgment a greater argument of divi­nity than any written Gospell could afford. The things wch Solon, Numa, Lycurgus, Draco, and other such like men contrived and dictated for the good of their common wealths, did much commend their gravity, vigilance and wisedome; and elevated them above other men, not above manhood. Mo­ses himself the most profound & judicious Lawmaker the world ever had, by the ex­cellency of his written Laws hath merited the title of a divine and sacred legislatour: but he is known to be a man by his hand­writing, and the paper he wrote on. He is a God that writes on the velin of the heart characters indelible unto eternity. The Law of Christ onely is written not wth ink but wth the spirit of the living God not in tables [Page 108]of stone but in fleshly tables of the heart.

I do also verily think, that the religion wch the Son of God deliverd to his church was neither commanded by him to be writ­ten; nor yet ever intended either by the Euangelists or other of those primitiv wri­ters to be totally set down, under the no­tion of a rule of faith: altho so much as ther is of it, drawn principally for the use of devotion and charity, be a rule of faith also. What the occasion might be that moved the four Euangelists to write their com­pendious Gospells, by the little learning I have I could never yet assuredly gather: altho I remember I have read somthing thereof in a learned latin book, made by a friend of mine called Systema fidei put forth some few years ago, wherein be very many things of excellent learning worthy of the Authour, but I have not now the book at hand. Wt occasion moved S. Paul to write his Epistles unto Rome, Corinth and other places is manifest enough, and I shall after­ward declare it, when I shall come to dis­cover the religion of the Apostles and Euan­gelists, and make it appear that they were all papists, and of the very self same reli­gion Catholiks be of at this day.

All this put together; that Christ him­self neither wrote any thing nor comanded any thing to be written, yea gave notice that he would use his speciall prerogative of legislatourship and write his law in hearts, promising to animate the body of his Church wth his own spirit wch should lead them into all truth; and that the church was disperst over the earth before any Chri­stian writting was made, wch was after­wards drawn to confirm and strengthen the faith and devotion it found already planted: All this being true, it follows ap­parently that hearing or reading or prea­ching upon a text is not the great capitall work of Christian Religion. Indeed tis childishnes to think that God unto whom all prostration, adoration, all homage ser­vice and worship both of the outward & inward man is more than due, should be sufficiently served wth a little labour of the lips or ears when a man thinks good so to do.

Preaching is indeed necessarily antece­dent to Christian faith; yet it onely disposes unto furrher actions, as may easily appear both by autority of Scriptures, wch ex­claime bitterly against such as hear and go [Page 110]no further; and also by the very natur of hearing and all kind of exhortation wch ever tends to somthing besides it self. For who ever heard onely to hear and no fur­ther: who but our mad reformers ever preacht onely to be heard? And how can speaking on one side and hearing on the other complete the whol duty of man to his God? as if one were nothing but tongue and ear, or had receivd nothing from him but those two organs.

Tell me Madam ingenuously: Do not you think you have sufficiently done your duty to God, if you go but forth once a Sunday to hear a Sermon? and if you read a chapter or two in a week day, this is no­thing else in effect: altho by your favour you do not think you self bound under sin to either: but if you like the weather, or the parson pleases, or your clothes be neat and handsom, then you will go forth to church, if not you will stay at home: if you find your self disposed in the week time to be godly, you read a chapter, if not you let it alone. And this is all you do or ever mean to do. And if your preacher do sometimes upon occasion exhort you to the abnegation of worldly desires, to the [Page 111] castigation of your body by fasting and dis­cipline that you become not reprobate, to hospitality or almsdeeds, to a generall ab­dication of all things for Christ by leaving father and mother wife and lands to follow him in that nakednes himself practised, finally to an universall conformity to the Son of God in piety and poverty. These and such like things he speaks by cours and out of formality to make a plausible noise in the Church and fulfill his houre. But he is not so mad as to think you will ever practise any of these things, nor do you hear him wth any such purpos; the practise of such things being well enough known by both of you or at least beleeved to be down right popery by all reformations dis­carded. His preaching is a talking to your eares, and your hearing a listning to his lips, till the sound cease, and then the essen­tiall work of your religion is done. But if haply you like the wit of the preacher and give him your applaus, then you have both of you your finall expectation: and the whole work of religion both essentiall and accidentall is accomplisht.

This kind of hearing and preaching ten­ding to no further end is so far from being [Page 112]the sole act religion that tis no religion at all; nay tis a mere mockery and abuse of religion condemnd by the Scriptures both of the old and new Testament where tis concluded that not hearers but doers are ju­stified.

I could wish you would remem­ber Sr that Christ said more than once, he that hath ears to hear let him hear: but he never said, he that hands to work let him work; or he that hath knees to kneel let him kneel; or he that hath meat to eat let him fast. Leave your talking S ^r Harry and read the bible.

The acts of the Apostles, will make it manifest that after Pentecost Peter and Iohn, and Paul, and others of the Apostles were wholly taken up in preaching as the sole act of Christian religion.

Christian preaching is of two sorts. The first is absolutly necessary, the other onely expedient. The first is made to Pay­nims and such as have not yet heard of Christ or respect him not as they ought, to convert them to his religion and faith; the other to Christians, to put them in mind of the practis and end therof: the first is the parent and productiv power of faith, the [Page 113]second a mistres and overseer of works. Of the first kind of peaching is often mention both in the Acts of the Apostles and other parts of the new Testament. For both in Gospell when our saviour sent out his Apo­stles to preach unto all nations, and when they exercised this their mission in the Acts preaching before Iewes and Pagans, and when S. Paul in his Epistle to the Romans and elswhere speaks so much of preaching, tis every where meant of this preaching unto Gentils, Paynims and unbeleevers for their conversion. But concerning the se­cond kind of preaching made unto Christi­ans ther is no news or mention at all ther­of in the whole book of the Acts; nor did ever any of those primitiv beleevers come together to hear a Sermon, but onely to supplication and prayer, and fraction of bread wch is the Catholik Masse.

Indeed on the day of Pentecost after the Holy Ghost had visibly descended upon the Catholik church congregated together in one place, and made them all speak wth strang tongues: Upon noise herof all sorts of people both Iews and Gentils came floc­king in to behold the wonder, then S. Pe­ter took the occasion to make a Sermon to [Page 114]those strangers who stood amased at the sight, Act. 2. but that speech was not di­rected at all to the Christians, as may ap­pear by the very matter and tenour therof; and all the Christian service was ended be­fore the people unto whom he addrest his speech came in. Nor for some hundred years after do we find or hear tell of any preaching made to Christians; nor were they ever accused by the Roman prefects for other, than for meeting together and brea­king of bread; wheras Sermons if they had had any made, had afforded a more plausi­ble accusation against such as already, tho wthout any desert of theirs, bore the name of seditious.

As soon as any person or nation had embraced his Christian faith he then wth­out expecting further preaching fell pre­sently to those works his faith dictated to him, and according to his obligation ap­plied himself to the rule he had received, as may be seen in the book of the Acts. And doubtles all prelats who had care of soules held forth unto beleevers that great dictamen of perfection and justice wch S. Paul calls [...]. We will and co­mand that all who have once beleevd in God [Page 115]do make it their care to attend unto good works, Tit. 3.8. Tho indeed in after times when that first fervour of Christian charity grew cold, and especially upon times of singular mortification and fasts, as in Lent and Advent, as also upon high solemnitys, the Catholik Church hath ever made use of this secondary preaching wch is made unto Christians for the incitement of works of piety. This secondary peaching is indeed a religious exercise & profitable to distrest and slack spirits for comfort and advice. But no good Christian ever lookt upon it as the great work of his religion or ever thought his duty to be don when the Ser­mon was ended.

In a word, the Catholik church uses both these kinds of preaching, the one to infidels for their conversion, the other to Christi­ans for their exhortation. But she places the sum of her religion in neither of them; but in the performance of those things wherunto people are converted and ex­horted. And a third kind of preaching wch is to no further end at all, but onely to spend time, was never thought of by Chri­stians till this wretched heresy invented it. For your preaching is not Mr Parson to [Page 116] convert your auditours, who have already received their faith and be as good Chri­stians as your self, nor yet to excite them to good works wch be in both your judg­ments justly casherd long ago as popish. But your preacher, he preaches till for his livelihood he has stood his howr, and the hearers hear till they have sat their hour, and then all hasten home and the work of God is ended. This is all your holocaust, an ear-offering: and he that wants his ears, or has them stopt by cold may stay at home as unfit for service.

In my judgement tis pure non sens and no religion at all to be still preaching faith as reformers do unto people wch already understand their faith as well as their tea­chers, or think they do at least: and if they chance for formalitys sake to fall upon any practicall point to speak therof wth no pur­pos, hope or intention of their practise. For tis agreed on both sides, both preacher & people that such practis is popery, and no­thing requisit to salvation but onely to beleeve.

Hear a parable. Two artificers had each of them an apprentis. The first having de­livered to his servant exactly all the rules [Page 117]of his art, put him presently to work and practis by them, assuring him that practis will better his knowledg, wch the servant in all singlnesse of heart applying himself to labour according to the dictats of his rule advanced accordingly, and so became emi­nent in the eyes of men, and excceedingly beneficiall to the common wealth. The other tradesman wth drew from the sight of his prentise all the particular rules and whole method of his art, & onely deliverd unto him in grosse som experiments and feats thereof, by wch notwthstanding he could not perceiv at all either where to be­gin or how to go on; nay he gave his ser­vant one generall caution, not to put his hands to any thing, his duty being onely once a week to com and sit down before him, and hear him discours of the usefulnes and benefit of his trade: Onely beleeving in him his work is ended. The prentise un­der such a teacher grew to be a great pro­ficient in works and sentences, but never put his hand to any thing either for his own credit or the benefit and service of mankind. Nay he mockt at the other ap­prentis and cald him simple drudg. The first of these artificers is the Catholik [Page 118]church, the other is the Reformation. Do you apply the rest.

The Catholik Religion is a noble, a ratio­nal religion, well beseeming a complete man to profess, well beseeming the Son of God to plant. The reformation a vain emp­ty businesse, befitting none to receive it but a company of cripples, that have nei­ther hands nor feet to use; nor none to in­vent it but dawes and magpies. It begins in teaching and ends in preaching. Wo to you Pharisees saith our Lord for ye tith mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and passe over judgment and justice and the love of God▪ those ye ought to have done, and not leave the other undone, Luc. 11. Preaching if it be right and pious may be used; nay, when in­structions, advise and comfort is necessari­ly to be applied, it ought to be done: but the practise wherunton it tends, this is not to be left undon. The tithing of mint, rue and cumin does but figur out under a tipe a consecrating unto God part of the good things we do enjoy from him, by fasting almsdeeds and prayer: that is to be done, these not to be left undone. Preaching puts in mind of the works of faith hope and charity: that wher is need, is to bee used, [Page 119]these not to be neglected. At one and the same time to preach good things in the pul­pet, and to cry down the same things by the rules of Reformation is to open a mans mouth and stop his wind pipe. All your people go to your Churches wth such a prejudice against the customs of Catholik Church, whence they are cut off by the re­formation, that altho the minister should chance wth singular zeal and eloquence to declaim against sin, and cry up the exer­cises of Christianity; yet the auditory is promoted nothing at all therby, being aforehand prejudiced by the rules of refor­mation incorporated and naturalised in their spirit. For who can take such words to heart, or ever heed them effectually, that shall firmly beleev that all we do or can do is sin, and wt sin soever we commit, we shall sure enough be saved if we do but be­leev in Christ. People imbued wth these principles shall never by any Rhetorick ei­ther of man or angel, be either affrighted from evill, wordly pleasures and sin; or perswaded to the laborious works of mor­tification and pennance. The sowr grapes of Reformation have so set peoples teeth on edg, that they cannot chew good mear. Tis [Page 120]in vain, tis utterly in vain to bid dead men walk, or exhort those to the works of life who by the poyson of reformation are made dead and sensles. Preaching is to Catholiks a profitable and religious exer­cise; to hereticks if it be orthodox tis a vain work, if pseudodox tis a wicked work: but to no people nor in no kind is it or can it be the onely work or sole Christian duty.

Wt be those works Sr Harry you require over and above preaching.

Even such as the Word of God it self requires. The works of faith hope and charity and use of Sacraments, prescribed in Gospell: a serious and effectuall indeavour against sin according as sacred scriptur prescribes, whose precepts must be heeded as obligatory, and counsells respected as meritorious offerings. We must both be­leev in Christ as mediatour, and beleev him too as our legislatour. Both love him and observ his will; and when we do fail, re­concile our selves unto him by the means-himself hath ordayned; captivating both our will and understanding to his pleasure, who is our redeemer and maister and om­nipotent Lord.

To speak more particularly; the works [Page 121]wch Catholiks by their faith are directed and exhorted unto be of two sorts, perso­nall and conventuall. The personal works be first, a constant obedience to the Church in all her dictamens of faith: upon this great hinge hangs indeed all true and solid Christianity: then an effectuall exercise of homage and piety to God, of justice and charity towards our neighbour, of sobriety and continence in our selves. These things must be done: he that does them best shall fare best for it. The conventuall, a reverent use of Sacraments, and a presence at divine psalmody and Sermons, according to our occasion and need.

But the great capitall conventuall work and worship is the venerable and blessed Sacrifice of the Altar, every holiday so­lemnly exhibited; & every Christian stands obliged to be then present at it: tho his de­votion may find it each day of the week in our Catholik churches; and many thousands of good people serv God every day in this holy rite. But this is a free offering of their own not wthout great benefit and comfort to themselvs, unto wch Holy church will not oblige.

This is that great work wch constitutes [Page 122]and essentiates Christian Religion. By this it was perfected in its fundamentall wor­ship and duty towards God long before our people had any Scripturs to read; and by wch, especially seconded wth its other Catholik appurtenancies, it would still re­main intire altho there were no Scriptures at all either to read or hear. For Scriptur as it is expounded by Holy church, or ra­ther the traditional doctrin of the church, whereof Scripture is a short and compen­dious coppy, is to us Christians a light, not to sit idle by, but to work by.

This is the work wch the Disciples and Apostles fell upon imediately after the as­cension of our Lord according as he had taught them to do at his passion: where by word and action showing his Apostles the manner of that great work he added his charg, Hoc facite, This do ye. For saith holy text. Then returned they from Jerusalem, and when they wer com into an upper room, they all continued wth one accord in prayer and supplication wth the women and Mary the mother of Jesus. Act. 1.12. The great work here was bowing of knees not squat­ting down in a pew, supplication not ex­hortation, praying not sermoning. And the [Page 123]sweet penman of that story speaking of the presence of the other sex, out of his peculi­ar devotion exprest by name Mary the mo­ther of Jesus who wth her presence graced the first high mass of the Church in all an­gelicall purity. And the church since that time had never high mass without her. The sacred text insinuats that this great work held them no small time together, by say­ing that they continued wth one accord therin. Tis likely they were constant and daily at it all the ten dayes between Ascen­sion and Pentecost, for they were comanded to keep together till they were endued wth power from on high, Luc. 24.49.

And in som one of those dayes, (proba­bly after the sacred ceremony was ended) S. Peter stood up and propounded to the body of the church an election of some one in place of Iudas, that the sacred hierarchy might be made up against Pentecost, when the holy Ghost was to descend upon them: when indeed he did descend upon them all, united wth one accord in the same exercise. S. Peter declareing and defending the no­velty of that strang infusion, to such Iews and Gentils as came running in amongst them at the noys therof. And as before [Page 124] Pentecost they Christians did constantly persever in that sacred solemnity, so did they after the holy Ghosts descension wth excee­ding chearfulnes and joy of heart persist therein much more. The same holy pen sets forth this their Eucharisticall action both before and after Pentecost in most significant terms: the words in originall Greek are more emphaticall than can be rendred in English. Our Lord ascending saith the Euangelist, lift up his hand & blest his people, who having worshipped him as he ascended returned back to Jerusalem wth great joy, [...]. Et erant om­nino in sacro, laudātes & benedicentes Deum. Luk. 24.53. And they were wholly or altoge­ther in the sacred action or sacrifice praising and blessing God. I know Translatours read it thus, They were continually in the Temple; for [...]. sacrum in his primary acceptance signifies the sacrifice, and secondarily the place where it is performed, or the temple: and Catholiks may render it the temple, because that sacred action renders the place where it is done a temple or sacred ground. But that the word in this place must of it self signify the religious exercise, liturgy of [Page 125]sacrifice of the primitive Christians, and not the temple in that sense the word tem­ple is commonly understood, I am induced by three reasons to beleev. First becaus the Christians had then no Church or Temple of their own, as it is manifest: and as for the temples or Synagogues of the Jews, tho one or two of the Christians might upon som occasion go thither, haply to inform the people that went in and out, of the truth of the Messias, and by some signe or mira­cle to testify his power; as Peter and John heald a lame man at the Temple-gate, Act. 3. Yet it is not to be thought that al the whole Flock and Congregations of Chri­stians people would be permitted to take up those places day by day, and to fulfill their Christian rites and ceremonies in the Jews Churches, who lookt upon them all as apo­stats and excommunicated men, and hated and persecuted them unto death. And therfore when tis here, and in other places of the Acts said that the Christians were wholly or altogether [...], in sac [...]o this word in sacro cannot signify the place of worship as it is usually taken, but the action or worship it self. Secondly this wil yet more demonstrativly appear, if we join [Page 126]the latter end of S. Lukes Gospell now mentiond, wth the beginning of the Acts of the Apostles, wherein the story is con­tinued and more largly exprest. For in the end of S. Lukes Gospell are compendiously set down the religious exercises of the Chri­stians after our Lords ascension, who are said to have come back to Jerusalem and there to be continually in sacro, blessing God: v. ult. And in the beginning of the Acts the same thing is repeated again wth some addition and inlargment of the story; the text saying that the Christians returning from the mount, whence our Lord ascended, unto Jerusalem, they betook themselves in the City [...], unto a gallery or upper chamber to do their devotions where they all continued wth one accord in praiers. Act. 1.12. This is spoken of the same people, at the same time and in the same action. And therfore they were not in the Temple as we commonly take the word temple to signify, but in a gallery or upper-chamber of som house, where mass or Christian liturgy was celebrated: and yet they were [...], in sacro as S. Luke expresses it. And men that are but meanly skild in Greek and Latin know that [...] sacrum is a word [Page 127]of elegance wherby the sacred work of re­ligiō is exprest: & to this day a Priest at mas is said to be in sacro or in sacris. Thirdly the same holy Scripture expressing this Chri­stian worship as it was don after Pentecost, saith of the Christians that they were [...] in sacro domi, in this sacred action or sacrifice at home, or in their own houses, Act. 2.46. [...]. And day by day they strongly perseverd unanimously in sacro, & at their houses breaking the bread they re­ceived the food in exultation and singlenes of heart praising God & having grace wth al peo­ple, Act. 2.46. The whol Christian synaxy is here described, both the sacrifice and com­munion, the circumstance both of the place & persons who were in sacro at their sacri­fice, and comunicated wth exultation in their own houses. That his sacrum and fraction of bread was a high religious ceremony is apparent by the constant mention of it in such places of that book as do purposly treat of the religious exercises, piety, and devotiō of the primitiv Christians, who are comended and described unto as perse­vering [Page 128]daily either [...] in sacrifice, or [...] in communion, or [...] in breaking of bread, praier, sup­plication, and the like. As also for that the two Disciples travelling to Emaus wth whom our Lord joined himself in the way knew and discernd him [...] in fractione panis in his breaking of bread, Luk. 24.35. For that religious work they knew was done by none but Christ him­self or his Priests.

This discours upon the words of Scriptur I hav somwt inlarged beyond my custom, not to teach Catholiks; for altho the Greek should be rendred by them in templo they know well enough that every place where that most sacred rite is done is a temple, and so tis indifferent to them to translate it either in templo or in sacro, but to let others (who be not Catholik) understand that more is implied in such expressions than they do ordinarily think of; and that the religion of the primitiv Christians was not preaching (wherof here is no mention at all) but prayers, supplications, sacrifice, or fraction of bread: Wch religious emploi­ment is in another place of the sam chapter yet more fully exprest. They were saith he [Page 129] firmly persisting in the doctrin of the Apostles and in comunion and in fraction of bread and supplications, v. 42. They firmly persisted both in the Apostles doctrin; unanimously united in faith wthout schisme, division or any singularity of opinions, wch might se­parat them from the main body into par­ticular conventicles; and also in comunion one wth another both by fraternal charity, Ecclesiasticall obedience and Christian Sa­craments: & in Fraction of bread wch was the great Cardinall capitall work of their faith and the very quintessence of Chri­stianity; and in supplications (in the plurall number) both for living and dead, both for pastour and people, for every degree, for every necessity. This was a right Ca­tholik body and the right exercise of their Catholik faith. And such and no other is the faith & religion of all Catholiks to this day, those I meane who are traduced by frivolous people under the notion & name of Papists, wch is a barbarous word and nei­ther Latin, Greek, or Hebrew, nor yet good English; and if it signify any thing it is as much as to say Fatherists, because they per­sist unanimously and firmely in the doctrine of Apostolical pastours and fathers, in comu­nion [Page 130]with them, in fraction of bread and sup­plications, day by day persevering in sacro, and breaking the bread at their houses, wch they take together in exultation and singlnes of heart praysing God, and having grace to­wards al good people. Pray God bless thē all.

To make themselvs worthy of this Holy comunion our Catholiks do frequently exa­min and clens their consciences as P. Paul advises to do, wch clensing and examining of conscience none but Catholiks know wt it means.

This sacred Action and venerable service of God was by the first Christians named Missah, a notion they had out of the old Testament, where the Sacrifice of the Mes­sias peculiar onely to his people and reli­gion by way of constitution & distinction from all others, is so named: and the La­tin and western part of the church did ever keep the name as well agreeing to the La­tin tongue. But the Eastern and Greek churches called it ordinarily [...] or Liturgy, wch was their own language, and o word wherby that sacred action was ex­prest in the new Testament. In the Acts of the Apostles tis frequently called [...] breaking of bread. The primitiv [Page 131]Christians gave it severall names, the Eu­charist, the Synaxy, the Dominicum, and the like, changing the word as souldiers do the watchword, that uncircumcised pay­nims should not know wt they meant; as our Catholiks now in England use some by-expressions therof for concealment. And the antient doctours of the church wrote very cautiously of it, especially in such books as they thought might haply fall into the hands of pagans as may be seen in severall places of Origen, S. Austin and others. I observed the last time I read over S. Austin de civitate Dei a very no­table passage to this purpose (tho I have not now the book to turn to it) where speaking accidentally of the venerable bread of Christians he presently recalls himself saying, they know wt I mean whose bread this is and in whose cause I write. And a certain Roman prelat in antient times denied to send by writing an answer of som doubts propounded by ultra-marin Christians concerning some circunstances of the mass, least the pagans intercepting his letters should therby discover the my­stery of Christian Religion; but he promist to send a messenger to the petitioners, who [Page 132]should inform them by word of mouth. So carfull they were not to cast this pearl before swine. Yet as soon as Paganism was subdued, their writings came abroad copiously, and gave ample testimonies therof. S. Ambrose was in the third age of the church, and yet he began to be bold, and writ not onely of the substance of the thing, but betrayed the very name, wherby it was generally known and called, namely missa or mass. But they all frequently spake of the Altar, and Priests, the Sacrifice and service of the most high God per­formd in Christian Religion, and the like. And the writers of the last twelv hundred years speak so amply and so plainly therof, that the very citation of their evidences would fill a volume.

For this divine service were all our churches in England erected by Catholiks in the form of a cross: the high Altar now called the Chancell being placed in the head of the church, and the Tabernacle over it for the body of our Lord to repose on for Christian mens solace, wth candles and lamps before it; below it was the quire for the clargy, to sing prayses night and day before their redeemer: on both sides [Page 133]of the church, lesser Altars for other priests to celebrate in at their devotion; and the nave or body of the church kept clenly and vacant for the people to kneel in, & con­tinue wth one accord in their supplication and prayer, according as it is written, My hous is the hous of prayer.

If churches had been onely buylt for preaching and hearing Sermons they would not have been made in the form of a cross as they be, but of a theater or amphitheater rather, wth scaffolds about for that pur­pose, and such stalls or pews below as now all our churches are pesterd wth, in Catho­lik times utterly unknown.

And if a man look into the places of de­votion the Christians resorted unto in times of paganism before they had any churches erected, wch were for the most part in dens and caves & bottoms of mountains (wher­of many are still to be found in all King­doms of Europ) he shall easily discern what their busines was there. I once saw one of them in a hill neare Paris cald mount Dam­martin wch descended as I remember three score steps into the hill; at the bottom there is a place, of the bignes of a chamber, and an Altar stone at the head of it in part [Page 134]still remaining, and a hole in the same rock over the Altar for the Priests chalice to stand in. And generally, wher ever such places are found, ther is either an entire Altar stone, or some remnants or signes of it.

This sacred Synaxy was the only thing that brought Christians together in times of hottest persecution, at wch most of our Christian Martirs were taken. And yet notwthstanding others could not forbear; for that they could not have that comfort any other way nor yet were they able to live wthout it: As appears in the Acts and processe of our ancient Martirs; particular­ly the proconsulary Acts of S. Saturnin. Wher we read that when the pagan empe­rours had given a comand that no Chri­stian should dare to be present any more at their Mass, wch the Christians at that time called their Dominicum, the martirs replied sine Dominico esse non possumus, we cannot live wthout Mass. And therfore S. Saturnin being askt by Analin the pro­consul whether he had been at Mass he an­swered Christianus sum as if he had said being as I am a Christian I cannot do otherwise; tis Christianity, tis my very life [Page 135]and being. If all the Religion of those an­cient Christians had been onely a little bea­ring or reading, and their onely work to beleev in Christ; they had never needed to expose their lives for that: for Reformers do not think themselvs bound under sin to hear any body; sith they beleev already, wch is all that is necessary to salvation. We cannot live wthout absolution and Mass, they may live wthout a pratling preacher wch most of them do but censur; and none of them be advanced by him either in their faith or good works: onely their ear is somtime tickled a little wth a witty actour in the pulpet; as there be indeed som of them so ingenious, that tis as much pleasur to hear them speak as Ben. Iohnsons Catilin or Sejanus.

By all this discours I would infer that hearing or preaching the word is not the sole act of Christian Religion; nor yet the main and principal act therof: sith of its own natur it is but a preparativ and disposition to some further work; and the disposition is ever les noble than the form it disposes unto. And if it dispos unto no other thing, as Reformers preaching does not, then is in no Religion at all but a meer mockery. This was my first thesis.

My other was, that a man may all his life time either read or hear the word and yet at length be undon both for his sin and infidelity, if in any one thing he misbeleev or fail.

If we let you alone S ^r Harry, you wil not com to a period wthin your time; the glas is run.

I will dispatch in a word.

Do so S ^r Harry, for it is written; In a multitud of Words ther wants not sin, but be that refrains his lips is wise, Prov. IC

That any one errour in faith suffices for destruction, altho a man otherwise be­leev the story of Gospel is apparent in rea­son: For all the Articles of faith being re­ceived upon one and the same motiv wch is the verity of the revealer; the formal de­niall of any one must needs be a vertuall deniall of all; and consequently the destru­ction of faith, wthout wch no man can be saved. Wherfor S. Paul is bold to con­demn Hymeneus & Philetus known Chri­stians for one onely errour. Shun saith he prophane and vain bablings, for they wil in­creas unto more ungodlines. And their word wil eat as doth a canker, of whom is Hyme­neus and Philetus who have erred from the [Page 137]truth, saying that the resurrection is past al­ready & overthrow the faith of some, 2. Tim. 2.16. By this example we see that one errour overthrowes faith. And yet tis worth no­ting too, that the errour those two are con­demned for is not any thing formally op­posit to Scriptur; for Christ told his dis­ciples of a resurrection to come, but did not say that in Hymeneus his time it was not past: but their mistake and misdemeanour was merely against the judgment of the church whose Priests expounding Scriptur told them that the resurrection was not then past; and yet they would not be quiet notwthstanding, nor resign their judg­ment.

Another like president we have in his other Epistle wher he saith; The younger widdows refuse, for when they begin to wax wanton against Christ they will marry, ha­ving damnation becaus they have cast of their first faith, 1. Tim. 5.11. Tho marriage be in it self lawfull, yet undertaken against the churches autority as it is it self a mor­tal sin, so is it a casting off and a destruction of all faith. And yet those widdows were beleevers, and fil devotes too, such as lookt to the dressing of their churches and Al­tars, [Page 138]washing of their sacred vestments ar [...] other works of charity.

As for mortall sin, that any one will ruin the soul even of a beleever, appears by the tenour of the whole new Testament, espe­cially of S. Pauls Epistles, wherin he de­horts the Christians in Rome, Corinth, Ephe­sus and others from sin in generall & each mortall sin in particular, because the wager of sin is death, & neither adulterers, theeues, or murderers shall ever enter into the King­dom of God & of Christ. Wch exhortatiō had been of no valiew and nothing to the pur­pose, if sin had been nothing prejudiciall to one that beleeveth.

By this account a man may both hear & read Scriptur all his life time, and yet be condemnd at length both for sin and infi­delity, if he do not adhere closely to all truths revealed by the church, and use all Sacraments and helps of salvation she pro­pounds.

This point requires further discus­sion than we have now time for. And my servant hath put me in mind that dinner is brought up. Wherfor break of and lets go in.

Let's in, lets in to the great work: [Page 139]where we shall meet wth an abstract of Metaphysiks, In vino veritas, in pane uni­tas, in carne bonitas. Nay thers divinity & Sacraments too. Lets in good Sr Harry, on my conscience I have such a gaping appe­tite, I could swallow a camell.

Me thinks D ^r we ar at a good feast already, according to those sacred words, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me and to finish his work, Ioh. 4.

After two or three cups of wine S ^r Harry Ile repeat over all this discours of yours, and refute it to the full. Foecundi ca­lices. It was the first & best miracle Christ ever did to turn water into wine, I would he had turnd a little more of it.

O Husband sweet wine and fair women are seldom found in the same coun­trey. Content your self you had better have me wth a pot of your ale, than a french face wth a whole Butt of claret. Go to now.

Thats right too. But did you never hear wt the Scotch-man said to King James when he askt him wch Byshoprick he would have, Bath or Wells. Marry beath, beath, quoth the Scotch-man. The King for the conceit put both the Byshopricks [Page 140]into one, and gave him beath together. Wine and wife are to mee as Bath and Wells. Let me have beath as the Scotch­man said.

Go your wayes, go. Wer it not that you cast a glance of your eye now and then upon me, when you ar in your pulpet, you would be but a dry preacher. Tis even so Madam.

Even so be it.

LO I com, according as it is writ­ten, Psa. 40.9. Dear Madam good morrow to your La ^p. It seemes I am the first to day, somewhat earlier than or­dinary; but so it is written. Thou shalt heare my voyce betimes in the morning, Psa. 5. O S ^r Harry, wellcom, wellcom; you could not stay long from us, when both the spirit and the bride say, Com, Rev. 22. Ile be the spirit for once, especially when I am got up in a morning out of my bed. And why not I pray you, sith the very ruler of darknes, when people are got up, for conformities sake transforms himself into an angel of light, 2. Cor. 11.14.

Health and happines attend my no­ble Lady this day and ever. It pleases my eye Madam to behold the chear of your countenance this morning, wch seems to promis to my purposes a good succes.

I doubt not of good successe both to my wishes and your own, if you will but relent a little of that hardnesse and obsti­nacy is in a manner naturall unto Papists. I would not S ^r Harry proceed so rigorous­ly as to request you all at once to abjure the whole body of popery, but to let fall at first the super fluous parts of it, that do hāg looser on, and be of least concernment and use; and to stand so disposed, as to think obstinacy unhandsom in any thing. Papists say truely that they are built on a rock; I think all their whole church is rock; for one may as soon wth his teeth bite off a piece of marble, as wrest from them any of their very least opinions: so firm, tenacious and obstinat ye be all of you. Nay to save a whole Kingdom you will relent nothing at all: What a masse of money did Harry the eigth spend for six yeares together in Embassadours and agents in Italy, France, Spain, and Germany to procure the testi­monys of Universityes; and yet he was not▪ [Page 142]able either for love or money, although he were a magnanimous noble Prince, to pur­chase so much as the hands or consent of any one University, for the lawfulnesse of his affection to his sweet Lady Anne Bullen. And the popes Cardinals, although they received no small weight of good En­glish gold from our Princely Harry, inso­much that they could have wisht he had had his fill of her, yet would they not be brought by any means to say he might law­fully do it. Your Popes themselvs tho I con­fes they have been many of them very holy and learned personages, yet som of them hav been known to be as bad as the worst; and yet even thes have been as Zealous of the integrity of their faith as the greatest Saints; and would sooner do ill, than say it might be done. Simony, Pride, Gluttony, known and acknowledgd sins these some of them would act of their own accord; but all the power of earth summond together should not force any of them to abrogat one article of their faith or traditions, though it were but the sprinckling of holy water. I read not long ago in an authen­tick story, that the nobls and Prelats of England perceiving the resolution & rage [Page 143]of K. Harry upon the forementiond af­front, certified the Pope by a privat Em­bassadour, that if he did not some what re­lent, and condescend to the Kings desires, the whole frame of Catholik Religion in England wch already crackt would be ut­terly overthrown, the nobility disgraced, monasterys ruind, Byshops deposed, thou­sands imprisond, and perhaps martyrd, and the whole land undon. To wch the pope replied, (frantick man as he was) though the whole body of Christs church should be destroyed, yea tho heaven and earth should mingle together in its old Chaos of confusion, yet would he not declare that lawfull wch in conscience he thought was not so. What a crabbed perversnesse was this. He was certainly no Gentleman S ^• Harry, that would not be perswaded, tho heaven and earth should come together, to chang his judgment.

To be obstinat and heady in our own proper opinions is oftimes unseasonabl and unhandsom. But the tradition wch the Church preservs is the very depositum of our B. Saviour, whether it concern faith or manners, practicall or speculativ beleef, (and no conceptions of privat or human [Page 144]judgments) and therfor in al honesty to be preserved entire by the trustee of our Lord, who committed it unto his church wth this caution that not one jota or apex therof should be altered. And therfore that Pope who would not declare against his conscience, although heaven and earth should com together, did no more than what his Lord and Maister had said before him. Heaven and earth shall pass away, my word shall not pass not one jota orapex therof, Luc. 21. And it was a doubl madnes in Har­ry the eigth, doing himself evil to expect the church of God should say it was good. Nor be there Madam in Faith any superfluous parts, but the whole body of it hangs so cō ­catenated and cemented together, that the taking away of any one particl would ruin the whole fabrick; nor will you find in faith any portion less strong than another, but al equally invincible: Som may be more leading points, wherupon others depend, and more materiall in their quality; but in respect of our beleef the least hath as much firmnes of truth as the greatest. And wt­soever sophistry may seem to shake any one, apply the like engin to any other and in shall do as much: that is to say, in very [Page 145]truth, nothing at al, whatsoever it may ap­pear to do in self beguiling minds. Wher­fore Madam bereaving me of any of my faith you rob me of all; for it is an uncon­troulable rule in faith what the Apostle also does as in a good sense it may be ap­plied unto manners. Qui delinquit in un [...], factus est omnium reus, Jam. 2.10. He that fails in one is made guilty of all.

This you would easily understand if you would consider how we receivd our faith and Christian doctrin. For it was all equally handed to us at once, and that from the autority of one and the same originall; and it was extant in the world before any Scriptures were pend. And these sacred Scripturs, and other pious Books, and also all generall councells that hav ever been celebrated in the Church were formed af­terwards, directed, swayed, rectified, and ordered by this rule of Traditional doctrin committed to the Church and kept by her. So that issuing conformably from one and the same sours, all points of faith have an equall proportion of truth, however they may differ in their own materiall weight. The intrinsecall valiew of some articles may infer more of necessity and obligation [Page 146]to an explicit beleef and practis, but the least and smallest points do wth as much right as the greatest exclude a positiv mis­beleef. I am not bound to know or practis all things of the churches doctrin, but I am bound not to disallow condemn or reject any of her traditionall Christianity has been equally handed from age to age unto us. He that formally rejects any thing of this as fals, doth vertually deny all the rest; sith one and the same veracity deliverd all. No mans privat reason invented any part of my beleef, and therfor no mans reason can reject it. Nay the highest points ar of­times most contingent, and consequently the least capable of a proof, as Gods in­carnation, passion, and resurrection: and if mans conceits be once permitted to inter­medle & determin of the lesser or greater probability of points, and cast away at his pleasur what himself thinks unlikly, he will undoutedly go on from one negation to another, till all be overthrown.

It may chance, that in discoursing I may say somtime that all the articles of our Catholik faith be taken out of Scriptur wherin they be implicitly contained: But in this I do but speak wth the vulgar and ac­cording [Page 147]to the capacity of hearers; and tis indeed true in this sens, for that all Catho­lik beleef is conformable to those sacred writings. But in very truth (to speak with wise men as well as we do think and ever shall beleev wth them) the Scripturs them­selvs (those I mean principally wch make up the new Testament) were drawn by the rule of our traditionall doctrin & explicit faith, and not our explicit faith gathered out of them.

This may appear by part of my former discours, wherein I declared that the pen­ning of Scripturs was meer accidentall and casuall; and that all our traditionall faith was more ancient than Scriptur, and alto­gether independent of it; So that Scriptur and tradition go indeed hand in hand to­gether as a joint rule of faith; yet so, as that Scriptur gives tradition the right hand as being its elder and judg of it self, aswell as as cojudg wth it of all other doctrins. For both Gospells and Epistles written in A­postles name were so far approved or re­jected by the Church (however they came equally armed wth Apostolicall names pre­fixt before them) as they were found con­sonant or dissonant to the churches tradi­tion. [Page 148]For ther were more Gospells writ­ten than the four we hav, and far more E­pistles than thos the church admitted to her cannon.

And this is the reason: why the Apostles themselvs and Disciples met together, to try whether the preachings and writings of all their missionaries were punctually con­formable to the tradition they had re­ceived; from wch meeting S. Paul himself (though an Apostle not of men, neither by man but by Jesus Christ and God the Father, Gal. 1.1.) Yet would he not be exempted from that meeting. After three years saith he, I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter and abode wth him fifteen dayes, Gal. 1.18. Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jeru­salem wth Barnabas and took Titus wth me also. And I went up by revelation, and comu­nicated unto them that Gospell wch I preach among the Gentiles, but privatly to them wch wer of reputation, least by any means I should run or had run in vain, Gal. 2.1.2. By wch I think it may be gathered that the church is above the Scriptur and of greater auto­rity than either Paul or Barnabas or any wtsoever single man and member of the Church, sith she judges every ones doctrin, [Page 149]to the approbation or rejection of it: For a judg is more noble than the thing wch is subject to his censur, the rule than the thing examined and ruled by it, and to giv an ap­probation is in that formality more excel­lent than to receiv it.

Neither was ever any generall councell cald together to teach the church her do­ctrin. But upon the rising of heresys, judg­ing by the rule of their tradition the Pre­lats in councell confirmd the Catholiks in the way they found them in, and declared against hereticall innovations that they might desist from further commotion.

This rule of tradition found in the hands & practis of Christians disperst over the earth, left them by their forfathers, could not fail so long as it was found universally agree­ing in the whole Catholik body wch is animated by the spirit of infallibility: espe­cially being strengthened by testimony of Apostolicall writings wch were nothing but a part of the churches tradition coppied out, or the fathers that succeeded them, or other monuments that were yet remain­ing amongst them. As for example the Christians found an injunction of praying for the dead upon the very wals, windows, [Page 150]gravstones and monuments of their decea­sed forfathers, commended also unto them both by teachers, their living books, and by books, their dead teachers; and all children found their parents in the beleef and pra­ctice of it: And therfor it was concluded that it could be no other than as it was thē esteemd an article of pure Christianity; sith the whol body of Christians then pre­sent held it so, their forgoers and fathers deliverd it, sacred Scriptures sufficiently in­sinuated it, Catholik writings and monu­ments confirmd and comended it unto them.

So that Madam that piece of popery you would take from me, being a part of this Catholik tradition, will be as hardly wrested from me as the Gospell it selfe, wch the same tradition has deliverd as a coppy conform­able for so much as it is, unto it selfe the first and universall rule of faith; by wch pape himselfe and all generall councells are guided, & so subject unto it that they can act nothing against it: as may appear by the proceedings of the Catholik church from its very first birth and uprising unto this present day. Pope Iohn the 22 ^d. a lear­ned man, & much given to reading found [Page 151]in many places of the Greek and Latin fa­thers, as also in texts of sacred Scriptur, as he conceived, that the souls of Christians deceased went released out of purgatory thence into some place of repose on this side heaven and eternall bliss, where they expected the consummation of their num­ber; that all the Catholik body might at the end of the world enter paradis together. This opinion by the multitud of autoritys and arguments appeard unto him so pro­bable, that he sent it to some Christian Uni­versitys, to have their judgment, if that were not indeed Christian beleef. But they rose up against it, and rejected it as disso­nant to tradition. For the Pape, tho he be Overseer of the whole church, yet being but one single man he cannot of himself dis­cern the universality of a tradition so well as the whole Catholik body may do, and therfor he never defines faith but with that Body conciliarly assembled: and if himself ith interim should light upon an opinion, how probable soever it may seem by hu­man arguments yet must he himself as well as other Christians lay it aside if it be confronted by Catholik tradition the great and unresistable Rule of Christianity, & re­sign [Page 152]himself. And it seems a principle of faith had delivered unto Christians this be­leef, that a soul once expiated goes to heaven. Pope John tho he had reason to suspect so much, so that he might hav abstained from propounding his thesis: yet he did not propound it in councels where faith is de­termined, but in Schools wher opinions are disputed, and distinguisht from faith; and upon that account was he justly to be excused. Yet was that good Prelat so ten­der conscienced, that he is said to have askt the world forgivenes at his death, if they took any offence therat; adding wthal that he did it only to give them occasion to search more narrowly whether the opinion were not consonant to tradition, although it had not been yet heeded.

If then neither Pape nor councell can go contrary to the received waies of the Church in any thing: how shall I be able to do it, except I make shipwrack of my faith as S. Paul affirms Hymeneus to have don even by one fals opinion, though otherwis a Christian. 1 Tim. 1.19. For a lesser leak will drown a ship, if it be not stopt or pumpt out; so will any one errour in faith sink a self opiniating spirit. For in the least [Page 153]we shall as truly resist God the first revea­ling verity as in the greatest: and to gain­say him in any little thing who is equally infallible in all, is no les than blasphemy and an insolence intolerable. Sith it stands not wth his diety to be mistaken in the smallest matter, or mislead his church ther­in.

The church me thinks for the quiet and safty of a kingdom might well con­descend to som opinions that be not so much materiall, put case they were fals: for in evills the les is to be chosen, and that opi­nion cannot be so bad as the ruin of a whol Kingdom.

The Church being a just depositary cannot teach otherways than she has re­ceivd in any affair. Besides Christ will hav his spous to be wthout spot or wrinkle or any such thing, Eph. 5.27. and that opinion being against her tradition, it cannot but make a wrinkle or spot or some such thing at least in her. Tis sacriledg wth us to rob or steal any thing out of a materiall temple; what then would it be to purloin the Churches doctrin. To rent her own seam­les garment or make the least hole in it, were an action unbeseeming the wis­dom [Page 154]and modesty of the heavenly spous. Shee will never do it, nor no member of her body, (such as by Gods grace I am) can do it without death and ruin to it self. Try that will; whosoever entertains but one particular misbeleef, he shall soon find that being therby separated from the Ca­tholik body, he or his successours will soon attempt another, and never lin till all be layd wast. Besides the Church being but a depositaty, or keeper of the doctrin commit­ted to her charg, hath not power over it to exhang, distrain or make it away at her pleasur, against the rules of honesty. And if she should to content one sort of inno­vatours, chang or relent in one thing; others that would innovat in another may justly challeng the same favour, and what should she then have had remaining to her self after so many innovations made by hereticks in so many ages? I think very little or nothing at all by this time.

Tis worth your consideration to ponder this. For so you may perceiv both the in­tegrity of this immaculat spous in conser­ving the doctrin wherwith she has been in­trusted intire and wholly sincere: and the madnes of all sectarys, who would each in [Page 155]their wild fansys have the churches com­pliance wth them to her own ruin: and be­ing denied, flew out into all exorbitances against her, and forfeyted at once by their self opinions and obstinacy both the title of Catholik they had till then enjoyed, and the security they had in the churches bo­som. This is a worthy and profitable specu­lation. And therfor I shall indeavour to speak therof, wth as much order & method as can well be used in a matter of such dis­order as the confused heap of heresys jum­bled together may admit.

THe Churches doctrine is partly about the creation and Scriptures of the old Testament; partly about our redemption, and things peculiar to Christianity, their persons or places, precepts or counsells, vices or vertues, Sacraments, and works, either morall, naturall or politicall; in all wch severall hereticks have at times sought to bring in innovations; wch had the church complied wthall, she had had little or nothing left her by this time. Nay she should have contradicted her self continu­ally, and said and denied the same things.

The extravagancys concerning the crea­tion, either opposed the autority of cano­nicall books, or judgd amiss of the divine natur, angels and souls, the beginning of the world, the condition of Adam and Eve our first parents, Melchisedek and the like things wch wer antecedēt to our redēption.

Carpocrates and Cerdon in the time of pope Hygin rejected all the old Testament; Ebion on the other side made the old Te­stamēt to be of equal autority wth the new, and out of the new he cast forth al S Pauls Epistles as erroneous. Cerdon and Marcion disallowed all the Gospells besides S. Luke. Cerinthus all but S. Mathew: the Alogians received all but S. Iohn. Luther cast away S. Iames Epistle, and the books of Macca­bees; tho he knew that not onely S. Austin but the whole councell of Carthage had re­ceived them as canonical. Severus the Acts of the Apostles. Apelles taught that the Pro­phets spake contradictories and lies; Mon­tanus, that they understood not what they said; though they are called seers for their understandig, Isa. 1. and are said to speak as inspired by the holy Ghost, 2. Pet. 1. With which of these should the church comply? and how.

The Gnosticks would have two Gods, one from whence issue good things, the other author of evill. The Anthropomor­phits in the time of pope Damasus would have God to be truly corporeall as man is. The Armenians becaus God had said that Cain should not be slain by any man, would needs have him a lier, becaus Cain slew himselfe. Sabellius in the time of pope Sixtus 2. would not admit any more then one person in God▪ Arrius in pope Syl­vesters time opposed the equality of the three divine persons. The Alogians ac­knowledged not the Son of God to be the word. The Ignoites maintained that Christ was ignorant of som things, in particular of the day of judgment. Macedonius in the time of pope Liberius made the Holy Ghost inferiour to the Father and Son, not of the same essence wth them, but a crea­tur. Petrus Abaylardus said that the Holy Ghost was the soul of the world. The Greeks that he proceeded not from the Father and Son. Abaylardus again, that power was not appropriated but proper to the Father, wisedom to the Son, and boun­ty to the Holy Spirit.

The Manichees contended that the de­vill [Page 158]is evill by his owne natur and not made so by his fall. Origen, that the devills should at length be deliverd from hell. Herman­nus Risswick in the year 1512. held wth much stiffnesse that neither the good An­gels nor bad were created of God. The church of God resisted all these: could she do otherwise?

Others denied the creation of the soul imediatly by God; Seleucus affirming that it is made by Angels, of spirit and fire. Tertullian, that the soul of the Son is made by the soul of his Father, as his body by his body. The Gnosticks on the other side, said it was made of the substance of God him­self: wch was afterwards defended by the Manichees the wild ofspring of Manes a Persian, who affirmd himself to be both Christ & the Paraclet too, & sent out his twelv Disciples about the world to spread abroad his haeretical dogmes, who were much multiplied in the time of pape Foelix. Tertullian thought that the souls of wicked men were after death turned into devills; wch surely is an errour if he speak of a physical and not of a morall turning. The Arabians on the other side affirmed that all souls quite perish wth their body: wch [Page 159]atheism was also defended by the above named Rissnick the Hollander. The Albi­genses in the time of Pope Jnnocent 3. averd according to Pythagoras his doctrin that souls pas from one body to another. Ori­gen, that they were created before the bo­dy, and imprisond therin for some offence committed; wch opinion is assuredly a­gainst the common judgment of Catholiks. The Gnostiks, that all bruit beasts were maisters of understanding and reason. The church if she had desired to have done it, would have found somthing to do to comply wth all these men.

Seleucus and Hermias would have the matter wherof the world was made to be coeternall wth God and not created. Foe­lix a Manichean affirmd the same of the Earth. Others of Water. The Albanenses said, that the world should never end. Si­mon Magus, as also the Gnosticks & Manic­hees said that the world was made of the ill God, and not by the good one; and that corporall creatures and mans body were therfore evill in themselves and in their own substance. Florinus in the time of Pope Eleutherius, taught that God (whom he acknowledgd to be both one & good,) [Page 160]did notwthstāding evill things wth a posi­tiv purpos of il, as to harden mens hearts & deceiv them. Coluthius an Egiptian on the other side denied God to inflict so much as the evill of punishment. Tatianus in the time of Pope Julius the first, affirmed that Adam and Eve were for their sin perpetu­ally damned. And yet notwthstanding wisdom is said to have brought him who was first formed and father of the world, out of his sin. Sap. 10. Origen, that Adam lost by sin the image of God; wch was an errour sure­ly, if he spake properly of his image that is founded in natur, and not of similitud founded in grace and blessednes. Pelagius in the time of Honorius and Theodosius the younger, avouched that Adam died not through demerit of his fault, but condition of natur, and so had died although he had not find. The Armenians, inhabitants of A­sia betwixt Taurus and Caucasus after their separation from the Catholik church (wch happend as I remember upon the councell of Chalcedon wherein Eutiches Abbot and Dioscorus Byshop of Constantinople were condemnd, whos conciliary acts the Arme­nians would not receiv but made them­selvs a primat of their own) they fell into [Page 161]many errours; amongst wch one was, that Adam and Eve if they had not sind had never ingendred children; and therfore they held marriage to be unlawful. Philaster mentions others who maintained that A­dam and Eve before they had sinned were blind. Thes be blind guids for the church of Christ to follow. How many wayes should she turn to trace all these mens steps. In a a word, (not to insist longer upon the old Testament) S. Austin and S. Epiphanius in their Books of Heresys mention som who taught that Melchisedeck was not a pure man but som diuine vertu or Christ him­self. Tis easy to say any thing of every thing.

O the father, what a number of pretty opinions be here. Truly I find in my heart to hold som of them. They were most witty interpreters of Scriptur. Pray go on sweet S ^r Harry, this is the best discours you ever made yet, go on, it delights me ex­ceedingly, according as it is written Thy lips drop as the honey comb, Cant. 4. The more you speak the more my appetit encreases.

Pray S ^r let us break this discours wch I was not aware of, and com to mat­ter I have furnisht my self wthall for your conversion. This talk corrupts my wife.

Earth to earth, and ashes to ashes. Pray be content & let me be corrupted thē. Thou fool that wch thou sowest is not quic­kend except it dye. Look in the 15. c. of the Corinthians, and expound me that place. And then tell me first, if in right Logick corruption go not before generation; tell me secondly who is that same Thou fool.

I could willingly have S ^r Harry to go on in this his speech, for it is not altogether unprofitable to hear it, and I conceiv not dangerous to us. For nothing (I hope) can hurt such as be well confirmd in their reli­gion.

No forsooth, for it is written of pro­testants & Independents, If they drink any deadly thing it shall not hurt them, Mar. 16.

The errours and wild opinions that have rose in Christianity about the parti­culars of the new Testament have been so many and various in severall ages of the church, that it is hard to bring them into method. Our Doctours set them down in every age as they rose; naming wth them the Catholik divines who wrote against them, the councels that condemnd them, the time they lasted, and the mischiefs they did in the world. I shall endeavour as wel [Page 165]as I may to reduce them all according to my forementiond method unto three sorts; errours namely against persons, places and actions of Christian faith. Persons, as Christ our Lord, the blessed Virgin Mary, S. John, the Saints, Pope, Councells, &c.

As concerning Christ our Lord

• I. Ebion about the time of Pape Cletus main­tained that Christ our Lord was but pure man; against whom S. John, intreated by the Byshops and Priests of Asia wrote his Go­spell. Wth Ebion joind Cerinthus and Car­pocrates; and after them Theodotus of Bi­zantium who being under persecution de­nied Christ; also Paulus Samosatenus in Syria under Pape Victor; wth his disciple Photinus.
• II. Others on the other side denyd him to hav any human natur at all; as Cer­don in the time Pape Higin; and the Pro­clianites, people of Galatia, who taught that Christ came not in flesh.
• III. Apelles after them said that Christ took not flesh of his mother, but of the elements; wch at his re­surrection he rendred again to the world, entring heaven wthout any flesh or body at all.
• IV. The Manichees affirmd his body was phantasticall: so also Priscillianus, who therfore neither heeded his nativity [Page 164]nor resurrection 5. Valentinus contempo­rary wth Cerdon; that the body of Christ was no true body, but heavenly, wch passed through his Virgin mother as through a pipe.
• VI. Apollinaris of Laodicea in Syria in the time of Constantius sō of Constantin the Great, that Christ in his incarnation con­verted some part of the divine word into flesh, and so took not flesh of the Virgin. S. Athanasius, Ambrose and Cyrill wrote against this heresy.
• VIII. Nestorius By­shop of Cōstantinople in the time of Emp. Theodosius the younger taught, that ther wer in Christ not only two naturs, but two persons also; After him dead and con­demnd in the councell of Ephesus, Gna­pheus Byshop of Antioch renewed his er­rour; and was himself also condemned in the fift Synod of Constantinopl.
• IX. On the otherside Eutiches abbot of a certain mo­nastery in Constantinople in the time of Pape Leo the first, taught that ther wer in Christ not only one person, but one natur also. This Eutiches was wthstood by Fla­vian Byshop of the place who condemnd his opinion: wherupon arose a great feud among the Christians of the East, som de­fending others condemning Eutiches; and [Page 165]in that tumult a Synod was appointed at Ephesus by Theodosius junior, wherein Dioscorus Byshop of Alexandria who was himself infected wth Eutiches his error, presided; there Eutiches was restored and Flavian condemnd: This was the second Ephesin Synod wch all Catholiks abhord, being made wthout the presence or apoint­ment of the Pape, and consisting onely of men infected with Eutichism. But the here­sy was afterward judged and condemned in a legall councell at Chalcedon, and al­so an Ephesin councel called the third Sy­nod about the end of their decrees.
• X. Ar­rius and after him Apollinaris maintain­ed that Christ had onely a body and not a soul: against this also is the said Chalcedon and Ephesin councell in 13. cap. of their Decrees, as also a Roman councell under Pape Damasus.
• XI. Ma­carius Byshop of Antioch wth his Mono­thelits affirmed ther were in Christ but one will: for wch he was condemnd in the sixt Constantinopolitan Synod under Pape Agatho about the year 698.
• XII. Basili­des, in the Apostles time and after him Marcus and the Marcites said that Christo was not crucified, but Symon Cyreneus [Page 166]who carried his cross. S Paul was of another mind, we preach Christ crucified, 1 Cor. 1.
• XIII. Bassus about the Apostls times, taught that salvation was not to be hoped for, either in Christs corporall presence or Majesty: And a long while after him Pe­trus Abailardus, that the Son of God was not incarnat to the end he might redeem man, neither had Satan ever any right in man. This heresy as it is against the Ni­cen crede, so also is it opposed by a Crede made in the Constantin councell called the second Synod, and by the Ephesin councell called the third Synod. ult. o. Decretor. and by the Chalcedon councell called the fourth Synod.
• XIV. Petrus Joannis, averd that Christ on the cross was gored wth the Souldiers Lance whilest he was living, and not after his death: this opinion being contrary to Gospell was dasht in the coun­cell of Vienna under Pope Clement the fift.
• XV. Cerinthus affirmed that Christ was not yet risen from the dead. But then saith the Apostle, Our faith is in vain, 1 Cor. 1.

These be the principal heresyes I read of concerning Christ our Lord, contrary to the churches doctrin; wch teacheth that [Page 167]Christ our Lord was perfect God, and per­fect man, being one person in two naturs, the one divine by eternall generation re­ceived from the Father of light and being, the other human from the Virgin Mary, consisting of a true body and perfect soul; unto wch two naturs he had answerably two wills divine & human; the human na­tur hypostatically united to God was nail­ed to the crosse for our reconciliation, and after he had rendred up his spirit, gored wth a lance; wch natur after our Lords resurrection ascended up into heavenly glory.

Concerning the Blessed Virgin Mary ever most highly reverenced under God by all Christians upon earth, till Luther opend to this wicked world a door of blasphemy, I find few or no ancient heresys at all. Good S. Denis the Areopagit hav­ing the happiness to see her while she was yet living, is said to have been so astonied at the unusuall Majesty of that sacred per­sō that he is reported to hav said, that if Ca­tholike faith had not taught him otherwise he should wthout any demur have adored her as a diety. I hav read also of som amongst the ancient Christians that were [Page 168]blamed by the Catholik Prelats for some excess of devotion towards that sacred Vir­gin; as if they had held her a diety by su­preme adoration and incense; but I have forgot their names; I suppose being better advised by their Byshops, they soon con­formed themselves to that reverence was due to so blessed an instrument of our wel­far, and so the errour was redrest. But who should dare to disable or diminish either in word or deed that divine Virgin I never read of any who bore the name of Chri­stian (according to her own prophesy in Gospell, Lo from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed) untill Helvidius con­temporary wth S. Jerom was bold to say, that after the birth of Christ she accom­panied S. Joseph: wch all Christians ears abhord, the whole church ever reverencing her as perpetuall Virgin, both before, and in, & after child-birth: for wch virginity & solitud our Lord upon the cross commit­ted her to the care of S. John the Evange­list, saying to him, Ecce mater tua. The body of our Lord being indeed of so vene­rable a sanctity, that he would not that any should so much as ly in his sepulcher, much less in the tēple of his nativity. I do not find [Page 169]that either Luther or Calvin vented any blasphemy against this Venerable Creatur: but followers of heresy do som of them out go their leaders.

Som Manichees held that S. John Baptist (that glorious morning star) was damnd for not beleeving in Christ, as Bernard de Luxenburg recounts in his Catalogue of Hereticks. Yet Christ himself testified that there was not amongst men a greater than hee.

Concerning saints in generall, their wor­ship and power:

• I. That the saints in hea­ven are not to be honoured or prayed unto, was the heresy of Eustachius con­demned in the councell of Gangres c. 20. decret. and after him Vigilantius, Wicleph and Luther. This heresy is also judged in the councel at Orleans, c. 23. decret.
• II. The Lollards in England following Wicleph, and before him Vigilantius who was a French Priest, and before him Euno­mius taught that the Reliques of Saints were not to be kept or reverenced. S. Je­rome rose up against this heresy, and the councell of Lateran under Pape Innocent the third censurd it.
• III. That no true miracles are done at Saints shrines was [Page 170]stiffly maintained by the Waldenses a com­pany of men no les insolent than ignorant, and indeed plaine idiots, who denied any Miracles ever to have been wrought in the Church, not knowing perhaps that our Lord had said, In my name they shall cast out devills, Mar. ult.

As cōcerning other persons in the church, Byshops, Priests, judges, Magistrates, Reli­gious.

• I. Wicleph following the simple Wal­denses, and Huss following Wicleph taught, that all Byshops are equall in autority and jurisdiction. Luther being excomunicated by Pape Leo the tenth for his innovations and pertinacy therin, following Huss said that the Pape was no more than another Byshop. In the same errour for som time were the Grecians who for the heresies of Nestorius condemnd in the Ephesin Synod, and of Dioscorus and Eutiches condemned in the Chalcedon councell had separated themselves from the unity of the Church; as also the Armenians who had don the like upon contempt of the decrees of Chal­cedon: but in the councell of Florence un­der Pape Eugenius the fourth, both the Greeks and Armenians after a long dispute submitted themselves to the Church: and [Page 171]in that councell the Papes primacy was con­firmed & acknowledged by all both Greeks and Latins.
• II. The Pseudapostoli, Wi­cleph and Huss avouched, that both Prelat and Prince, by any mortall sin forfeited all their autority; condemnd in the councell of Constance, Sess. 8. as also in the councell of Trent both under pope Paule, Sess. 7. and Iulius, Sess. 4.
• III. The Waldenses, denied he had power of indulgences, or remission of temporall penaltys; censurd by the councell of Constance, Sess. 8.
• VI. The Pseudapostoli denied any obedience to be due either to Pape or Prelats, or any one but Christ: as also the Beguins and Bogards taught that a man that is come to the state of perfection is bound to obey no man.
• V. The simple Waldenses and their ape Wicleph affirmd, that neither the Apostles nor their successours had autority to make any decretalls or cannon Law. Against these is the councell of Vienna under Pope Clement the fift, and the councell of Con­stance, Sess. 8. & 15.
• VI. The Vadians or Anthropomorphits and after them the Waldenses held that neither pape nor church could enjoy any temporall posses­sions. The same mischieuous doctrin was [Page 172]taught afterward by Wicleph the poor men of Lions shadow, and after him by Luther that grand licker up of excrements, who by that doctrine invited the German Princes to rob the goods of the Church. This er­rour is condemnd also in the said councell of Constance, Sess. 8.
• VII. Iohn de Wes­salia condemnd at Mentz in the time of the emperour Frederick the third taught that both Pape & Church might erre.
• VIII. Do­natus in Africa, in the time of Pope Libe­rius and emperour Constantius taught that none but good men were wthin the church. This Donatus taking it ill that Cecilianus was ordaind Byshop of Carthage, he ca­lumniated him in things he could not prov or make good, for the wch he was declared by the judges a jugling knave: upon this ignominy he divided himselfe from the Church, giving it out that the true Church was onely on his side, and not wth them that favourd Caecilianus; and so going on from one thing to another infected almost all Africa in the time of Pape Iulius. This heresy of his was taken up by Rogatus and the Circumcellions, and afterward by Huss and Luther; and written against by S. Au­stin in very many places, and condemnd at [Page 173]last by the councell of Constance, Sess. 15.
• IX. That the noble senate of Christian Prelats met together in generall councells erred in their decrees and canons was the opinion first of Arrius, who was himselfe condemnd in the councell of Nice; then of Nestorius who had been censurd in the councell of Ephesus; then of Eutiches and Dioscorus who had been judgd in the coun­cell of Chalcedon; then of Huss the Bohe­man & Wicleph who was cast in the coun­cell of Constance; & lastly of Luther whose wicked doctrin was anathematisd in the councell of Trent. This heresy (if it may not rather be stiled blasphemy against Christ and his church whom he promisd to confirm in all truth) is largely confuted by Iohn Byshop of Rochester, Iodocus Chlitoueus, William Ockam, Iohn Eckius, and severall other Catholik doctours.
• X. That all Priests are equall, and a By­shop is nothing above an ordinary Priest was the errour first of Aerius, then of the Waldenses, Wicleph and Luther; condemnd by S. Austin in his book of heresies, c. 53. Whether Episcopacy be another order or onely another degree in the same order, tis certain that in the old Law the chief priest [Page 174]or Byshop had distinct vestments, and en­tred the Sancta sanctorum wch others did not; and in the new Testament a Byshop constitutes Priests, Tit. 1. not contrary; nor is any Disciple in the Acts of the Apostles read to have used imposition of hands, but onely the Apostles. And so the second councell of Hispala declares that confirma­tion belongs onely to the Byshop.
• XI. Lu­ther more fondly added that all Christians are equally Priests, forgetting that Holy Scriptur expresly speaks of segregating or setting apart some from the rest to that function; I left thee at Crete that thou shouldst constitute Priests, Tit. 1.
• XII. The filthy fellow added that Priests ought not to be unmarried or separated from women (wherein he exceeded Iovinian who indeed equalled marriage wth virginity, but bla­med none for remaining single, himself liv­ing so to avoid the troubles of wedlock.) This he taught the better to justify himself who being a Priest and a Religious man of the Hermits of S. Austin had revolting se­duced a Nun. The same was done & taught by Occolompadius who had been a monk of S. Brigit, Bucer a Dominican fryar, & the rest of Luthers retinue. Impiously wthout [Page 175]doubt for it was prohibited a Priest to mar­ry in the very beginning of the church by the canons of the Apostles, can. 27. and afterwards by the Neocesarian councell, c. 1. decret. and it appears in sacred Scrip­tur it self that such was the practis of pri­mitiv times.
• XIII. The Pepusians of old promoted women not onely to the Priest but Priesthood too.
• XIV. All universitys or generall studies for clargy men are con­demnd by Wicleph, as brought into the church by paganism; forgetting, that the Apostle exhorts Timothy a good Christian to remain permanent in the things he had learnd, 2. Tim. 1. and that in the very Apo­stles days the Christians constituted schools at Antioch, Act. 14. and afterwards at Alexandria, wherin Panthenus was first prefect, then Clemens, then Origen. And therfor the councell of Constance justly condemnd this errour amongst the rest, sess. 8. against the 29. articl. XV. As also that other opinion of his, wherin he taught that superiours, be they Ecclesiasticall Pre­lates or Kings, may be punnisht by subjects at their pleasur, by wth drawing tithes or tribut, or otherwayes, sess. 8. against his 27. art. Indeed the opinion is a way to all re­bellion [Page 176]and disorder in church and state.
• XVI. Finally that no degree may scape, the Waldenses and Luther inveighed bitterly against religious orders, as the invention of the devill, affirming that the founders of them were damnd for it if they repented not, and that none could be saved in them: wch desperate madness was censurd also in the said councell of Constance, Sess. 8. And strongly confuted, by Chlitoveus, Roffensis Albertus, Thomas Waldensis a Carmelit, and before them by S. Thomas and S. Chryso­stome.
• XVII. To prevent all danger on any hand for any heresy or disorder, the Wal­denses spread abroad that no judg can con­demn any man to punishment. But they either forgat or simple souls never knew that S. Paul saith, if ye do evill fear; for the magistrat bears not the Sword in vain.
• XVIII. There were others who taught that no hereticks were to be punisht but left to Gods judgment.
• 19. The Rhetorii saies Philaster, affirmed that al hereticks thought aright.
• XX. Nicolaus Eimericus reports of others in the time of Pape Gregory the eleaventh, who affirmed that any one that commits a mortall sin is an heretick.
• XXI. S. Austin testifies of the hereticks [Page 177]called Ophitae, that they worshipt the Ser­pent that beguiled Eve; and the Caiani re­spected Judas for a Saint, for that he was cause of our redemption.

These be some extravagant opinions of sectarys concerning severall persons in the church, kings and subjects, religious men, clargy men, priests, students, byshops, the Senate of prelates, popes, Saints, Christ and what not; so sensles, so wild, so incon­sistent, so contradictory, that the wisedom and integrity of the Church of God were not able to suffer, much lesse approve them; being contrary many of them to common honesty, others to right reason, all of them to Christian faith. How shall the immacu­late spous comply? heaven and hell may sooner come together I think.

Tis a marvellous thing S ^r Harry, you can have all thes opinions in your head, and hold none of them. What difference is ther betwixt having and holding. If I should ever think of them, they would mingle wth my creed. I can beleev any thing if it be not popery; and take all that coms, as I did my Husband, to have and to hold for better and for wors, as it is written.

Com, you speak like one of the foo­lish women.

How did you speak when you took me wth the very same words, and said wth a blith and bucksom countenance I Iohn. You have been a year or two at a pagan university, where you learnt to worship Judas for a Saint, & you are so proud upon it: deny if you dare that I understand the bible wch is the highest book in the world: wherin then can you exceed mee? Tis true, you are a parson; but is it not written, I have more understanding than my teachers, Psa. 119.99. You would fain com in wth your few texts against S ^r Harry that you have been scribling out of a concordance, being out of all patience that his Discours keeps you back. Pray be content, tis as plea­sing to me to hear talk of these men, as of my owne father and mother that begat mee, expect your kue good sweet Husband. Your hour is not yet come, as tis written.

Tis agreed upon S ^r Harry that you proceed in your discours. M ^r Doctour in the end will I beleev make use of it all to his owne advantage.

I have declared som severall odd con­ceptions of men concerning sundry per­sons in the church. Others there be con­cerning places, as the temple or place of [Page 179]worship; purgatory after life; hell and hea­ven: wch opinions maintained wth perti­nacy caused the authours thereof to be cast out of the Catholik body of Gods church wherin they had been members.

• I. Eustachius derided all Saints temples. The Waldenses afterward would have all churches taken away as too much strait­ning the majesty of God whose temple is the wide world. The Pseudapostoli added that a consecrated church is no more worth than a swine sty; as also Zisca the German, who wth his companions whom he called Taborites from mount Tabor where Christ was transfigured, spoild and defaced all holy places they came neare: The councell of Gangres defined against this madnesse, c. 5. decret.
• II. The same Wal­denses would not endure that time should be spent in saying the canonicall hours in the church: and their ape Wicleph gave his reasō for it, becaus forsooth it is not fit that Christians should be tied to prayer at any time. This reason, if it wer worth any thing would destroy the Sabboth. But all singing in the church they scofft at, as nois made to Baal. The Arrians before them disprooud singing in Catholik churches; but their rea­son [Page 180]was, becaus of so many Hymns and an­thems made in the honour of Christ against their impious opinion. Against al thes is the councel of Gangres, c. 30. decret.
• III. That all images are to be taken out of churches was stifly maintained both by the said Walden­ses and their squire Wicleph: For wch he­resy long before their time Leo the third, emperour in Constantinople was excomuni­cated by Pape Gregory the third: yet not­wthstanding the emperour Constantin the fift, and emperour Leo the fourth his son adhered still to it; but after his death Irene his wife ruling the empire in the name of the Infant Constantin the sixt, obtained the second Nicen counsell to be called, where by three hundred and fifty Byshops the heresy was condemnd; though Constantin the sixt being of age would not submit to the coun­cell: wch was one of the mainest causes of the dislike and grudg between the Latin & Greek emperours. The errour was after­ward condemnd in the councell of Frank­ford under pape Adrian the first.
• IV. The adoration given in Catholik temples unto the cross and crucifix, the above named Iohn Wicleph an english Priest who lived about the yeare 1380. would by all means [Page 181]have taken away; But Thomas Waldensis his country man & almost contemporary still confuted him and his blind Lugdunian guides, who were also judgd & condemnd by all the Prelats in Constance.
• V. There also was censurd another errour of theirs; that preaching in temples should be lawfull for any, although prohibited by superiours.
• VI. The said Wicleph denied tiths to be due to Priests, serving at the Altar, preaching and praysing God; wch errour was also condemnd in the 18 place at Constance. But this opinion he had from the Pseuda­postoli whose ringleader was Gerardus Sa­garellus of Parma who was burnt in the yeare 1260.
• VII. Both the Waldenses and Wiclevits blasphemd all benedictions of water, candls, palms, altars, challices, chur­ches; forgetting or not beleeving that eve­ry creature is sanctified by the Word of God and Prayer, 1. Tim. 4.
• VIII. No less pe­remptory was Wicleph, Huss and Luther against excomunications from church and altar, inflicted on scandalous sinners and obstinate Hereticks, calling them the cen­surs of Antichrist; not heeding that S. Paul himselfe practised it, I thought good saith he, to deliver him up to Satan, that his Spirit [Page 182]might be safe, 1. Cor. 5.
• IX. Finally all Christian buriall in holy ground the said Waldenses contemned as impertinent and vain. These be the extravagant opinions concerning Temples.

As for Purgatory:

• I. Some Greeks and Armenians avoucht ther is no such place, wherin soules after their separation are purgd from dregs contracted in the body. But the councell of Florence under pope Eu­genius the fourth confirmd the contrary Catholik doctrin.
• II. Luther afterward, allthough he held Purgatory, yet he had three errours concerning it: first he taught that souls there might themselvs either me­rit or demerit; again that a soul there was not certain of his salvation; thirdly that a soul ther, doth sin so long as it abhors those pains, and seeketh rest. The same autority from whence he had the beleef of purgato­ry, might if he had listed have conserved him from these misbeleefs concerning it.
• III. That almsdeeds, prayers, pennances and Sacrifices made by the living for the dead and souls in purgatory, do nothing at all avail for their releasment; was the here­sy and errour first of Aerius, then of the Armenians, then of the Albigenses then of [Page 183]the Waldenses, and lastly of Luther. But it is confuted by S. Austin, S. Gregory, Theo­phylact and S. Chrysostome. And four coun­cells have defined against it; Carthaginense quartum, c. 95. Valense, c. 4. decr. Toletanum, c. 22. and Florentinum for the union of the Greeks under pope Eugenius the fourth.

As for Hell.

• I. Almaricus stifly denied it; affirming there was no other hell, but onely a mans owne conscience guilty of sin; The Albanenses said that the punish­ments of hell were no other than what we suffer in this world: Hermannus Risswick wthout any exposition denied any such thing as hell at all.
• II. Origen taught that the pains of hell were not to be eternall. Both these fansies are against Gospell; and rejected by the councell of Lateran under pope Innocent the third.

Heaven the place of eternall bliss I make no doubt but that many men born Christi­ans if they fell into heresys came at length to that Atheism as to deny it, sith I meet wth so many here in England who deride it as a fiction: But I have not read of any in authentick authours who did so: though concerning the resurrection unto that bliss, and finall beatitud many are said to have held erroneously.

As for Resurrection, ther have been at times five erroneous opinions.

• 1. The sad­ducees amongst the Jewes, and among the Christians, first Simon Magus, then Valen­tin, Apelles, Marcus and Cerdon, denied all resurrection of the flesh. Against these writes S. Paul. 1 Cor. 15.
• II. Eutichius Byshop of Constantinople taught that the body after its resurrection should be invi­sible and unpalpable. S. Gregory (not then Pope) sent thither embassadour from the Apostolick sea confuted him openly before Tiberius Constantin then emperour, so that Tiberius caused Eutichius his book to be burnt.
• III. Origen said that our bodies after resurrection should be still mortall, and after many ages fall to dust, never to rise more. Expresly against Scriptur wher tis said that mortall shall put on imortality, 1 Cor. 15.
• VI. The Armenians, defended that all should rise again in mans sex. But if this had been true doctrin, thē our Lord by saying so, had easlier answered the Sad­duces argument, than by saying as he did, that none should marry, but they shall all be as the Angels of God, Math. 22. Lastly the same Armenians affirmd that our Lord rose not upon sunday, but on the Saturday [Page 185]before. Me thinks it should be a hard task for them to show how he rose the third day sith he died on Fryday.

As for Beatitude.

• 1. the Armenians, and after them Petrus Abailardus, a French man in the time of Pape Innocent the se­cond; then Arnaldus Brixiensis, from whence perhaps came those hereticks Ar­naldistae excomunicated yearly at Rome in caena Domini; and lastly Almaricus, affirm­ed that the blessed in heaven do not see Gods essence, but behold him in his crea­tures. S. Paul is contrary to these, Now we see by a mirrour in an enigm, then we shal see face to face, 1 Cor. 13.
• II. Cerinthus would have heavenly beatitude to consist in the delights of the flesh, and that Christs kingdom after the resurrection should be earthly: wch errour he drew from some carnall Jews, being himself contemporary wth S. John the Apostle. But tis gainsayed by S. Paul, The Kingdom of God is not meat and drink but justice and peace and joy in the holy Ghost, Rom. 14. Papias Byshop of Hierapolis did indeed teach that Christ after the general resurrection should raign upon earth wth his faithfull retinue, who had been sufferers here, a thousand [Page 186]years; drawn to that opinion by such a speech in Apocalips; c. 20. and after him Ir­neus, Apollinaris, Lactantius, Victorius Pi­ctavensis. But they held not the same as Cerinthus: nor were pertinacious in their opinion against the church, wch I think ex­pounds that place of the blesseds reign wth Christ according to the soul, from the howr of death to the generall judgment: for there tis added Haec est resurrectio prima, this is the first resurrection, namely of the soul after the bodies death.
• III. Origen taught that neither misery nor beatitude should be eternall; for he conceived certain alter­nations or vicissitudes of both; so that the blessed souls after som years should return to mortal bodys, and thence be called again to beatitude, in a kind of circle. But all Scripture is against this fansy. Between us and you is a great Chaos, so that such as would pass from hence to you, cannot &c. Luk. 16.
• IV. That most perfect finall beatitude is to be had in this life, was one of the errours of the Bogards and Beguins, religious men and women in Germany; censured as I re­member in the councell of Vienna under Pape Clement the fift. The Bogards suffred for their obstinacy, whereat the women af­righted [Page 187]submitted themselvs and remain to this day, living honestly in a society wthout emission of any vow, so that when they pleas they may go forth and marry.
• V. The same partys said, that an intellectuall natur is blessed naturally in it self. It had been well, they had remembred that the grace of God is life eternall, Rom. 6.
• VI. The Arme­nians taught that no soul is beatified before doomsday (as also some Greeks, adding that sinners are not punisht till that day.) This is the opinion Pope John the 22. propounded to the University of Paris. But it was gainsayed by the councel of Florence under Pope Eugenius the fourth, as contra­ry to the churches beleef; and the Scripture it self does in a manner expresly refute it. We know if our earthly house of this habita­tion be dissolved, we have a hous not made by hands eternall in the heavens, 2 Cor. 5. At least Catholik tradition wch is the only in­terpreter of Scriptur and judg of all con­troversies hath cast it.
• VII. That all shall be equall in glory was the paradox of Jo­vinian a Roman monk in the time of Pape Damasus and Siricius, who leaving his pro­fession ran himself into many heresies: this opinion is no other; for there is one clarity [Page 188]of the Sun, another brightness of the moon, another of the Stars, & as one star differs from another in glory, so also shall be the resurre­ction of the dead Cor. 15. Jerom wrote two books against Jovinian; and this opinion is disabled by the autority of the councell of Theles in Africa under Pape Siricius; & of Florence under Pape Eugenius the fourth.

You might Sr Harry have named my husband & me for many of these opiniōs wthout troubling your self wth such ūcouth names; for we hold them too, and so long as God gives us life and health shall do so stil; according as it is written, Hold that fast wch thou hast, Rev. 3.11. Nay I hold others too wch you now mentiond, though I ne­ver heard of them before according as it is written, We beseech you brethren that ye in­creass more and more, 1 Thess. 4.

Pray S. Harry speak somthing con­cerning the Sacraments, and what devises have been about them.

Madam I am now come to it.

• I. the hereticks called Cathari denied all Sacra­ments; the Armenians, and long after them Martin Luther Father of the Protestants admitted some according to their owne li­king, but denied that any had intrinsecall [Page 189]vertue to confer grace. But the councell of Trent under Pape Paule the third, sesse. 7. both defined the Sacraments to be seaven in number according to the Catholik tra­dition, and to confer grace ex opere operato.
• II. That sacred things and spirituall gifts might be purchased wth money was the er­rour of Simon Magus, (and the action from him termed Simony) condemnd in the 11 Toletan councell, c. 8. decret. and before by S. Peter himself, Non est tibi pars, Act. 8.
• III. Luther taught that in no Sacra­ment was imprinted any character: con­trary to the churches doctrine wch tea­cheth such a seal to be made in baptism, confirmation and holy orders; confirmd by the councell of Carthage, Florence and Trent under Paul the third. Sess. 7. can. 9.

In particular, concerning Baptism there have been many errours.

• I. Seleucus and Hermias Galatians baptised not in water, but fire. But the councell of Florence under Eugenius the fourth defined water to be the naturall matter of Baptism.
• II. The Marcites, disciples of one Marcus a magi­cian, about the Apostles time changed the form of Baptism, doing it In the name of the unknown Father of all things, and in truth [Page 190]the Mother of all, and in him who descended upon Jesus. For they held that God preacht in the old law was not the Father of Christ, becaus he was unknown. The Cataphygians and Paulianists also did not baptise in the name of the Trinity as Catholikes do, ac­cording to comand of Gospell, Baptiseing them in the name of the Father Son, and holy Ghost, Mat. 28.
• III. The said Cataphygians baptised the dead: They had their name from the Province of Phrygia whence they came; their leader was Montanus (who called himselfe the Paraclet) and Prisca & Maximilla his two Prophetesses. The Marcionists did the same, who finding any to dye unbaptised they put a living man under the hers of the dead, and asked him as if he were the dead man, if he desired to be baptised; answering yea, they baptised him for the dead, wch thing they said S. Paul himself did practise, 1. Cor. 15. al­though Marcion their leader is not read to have don any such thing: but few hereticks content themselvs wth the errours of their leaders. Marcion himself was in the time of Antoninus Pius, his countrey Pontus, a great stoick Philosopher, and being con­verted to Christian faith, he followed the [Page 191]dogmes of Cerdon, intermingling many Philosophicall things wth his Christian re­ligion, and coming to Rome he seduced many Catholiks, where meeting wth S. Po­lycarp, and asking him if he knew him, I know, quoth S. Polycarp, and do acknowledge the eldest son of Satan. But against this er­rour both of the Marcionits and Cataphy­gias is the definition of the third conncell of Carthage, where tis declared that neither the Eucharist nor baptism may be given to the dead.
• IV. The Psallians and Euchitae attributed no vertue at all to Baptism, but made all sins to be rased onely by Prayer: so likewise the Messalians and Enthusiasts. The Manichees also thought that baptism exhibited in water was worth nothing. The Albanenses & Albigenses likewise rejected baptisme: & the Armenians took from the Sacraments all power of conferring grace. Against this heresy is the decre of the coun­cell of Florence under Eugenius the fourth.
• V. Petrus de Bruis a Frenchman of Nar­bona, who was afterwards burnt in the Town of S. Giles, said and taught that baptism was of no avail to Infants that have not the use of reason. After him one Henricus bore his Standard, from [Page 192]whom the followers of the heresy were cal­led Henricians and Brusians. After four hundred years the Anabaptists raised up the heresy again. But S. Denis the Areopa­gite witnesses that children were baptised in the Apostles time c. ult. Eccl. Hier. And S. Cyprian two hundred years after, and S. Austin after him testify that it was done in their days. And the Catholik practise is confirmd by the councell of Lateran under Pope Innocent the third, by the coun­cel of Vienna under Clement the fift, and the councell of Trent under Paul the third in two Sessions, 5. Sess. c. 4. 7. Sess. can. 19.
• VI. The Donatists rebaptised such as came over to their side: beleeving that such as came to the true church was to be baptised again. But the first councell of Carthage, c. 1 decret. as also the councell of Vienna under Pape Clement the fifth, and the coun­cell of Florence under Eugenius the fourth defined this opinion as erroneous. S. Cy­prian and other Byshops of Africa held also, that hereticks coming to the Catholik church were to be rebaptised; But this they did not defend against the church wth per­tinacy as hereticks did, but disputed it as a probable opinion not then in their dayes [Page 193]defined, and happly upon suspition that hereticks used not the right form and mat­ter. One Baltasar a Dutchman of late held morover that all people are to be baptised again when they come to years of discre­tion, becaus he thought the baptism of in­fants were of no valiew. But faith teaches there is but one Baptism, Eph. 4. as ther is but one death of Christ wch it figureth: Do ye not know that so many as are baptised unto Christ, are baptised to his death, Rom. 6.3.
• VII. The Armenians taught that baptism ought to be conferred wth the Eucharist; and that none can be validly baptised un­less he be anointed wth chrism. Claudius Taurinensis held baptism without the sign of the cross imprinted on the forehead to be inefficacious. Indeed the church uses both the sign of the cross and crism: wch the ancient Christians would by no meanes have omitted, and the minister of the Sacra­ments should sin in omitting those or other rites of the church; yet if in case baptisme should be administred in the right matter and form wthout these, it would have its valiew; so the same church ever beleeved. And the Eucharist though haply it might be given to som wth baptism, yet not of ne­cessity; [Page 194]sith baptism was instituted long be­fore it.
• VIII. The Waldenses on the other side, affirmed that baptism by all means ought to be received wthout mixtur of ho­ly oyle. The leader of these so often named Waldenses was one Waldo of Lions in France and therfore they were sometime called Waldenses, sometime Pauperes Lug­dunenses, the sect began about the yeare 1570. condemnd at Rome in a generall councell.
• IX. That infants are not to be baptised was the assertion first of Pelagius, because he thought they had not originall sinne; and then of Wicleph, because he thought that the faith and prayers of their parents sufficed them. But the Milevitan councell defined that baptism was absolutly necessary to infants salvation, as also the councell of Florence under Eugenius the fourth, & the councell of Trent, Sess. 6. c. 4.
• X. Others ther were on the other side, who held that a man in age and of mature judg­ment could no wayes possibly be saved wthout baptism, how much soever he might be contrite in heart. But the sayd Tridentin councell under Paule the third silences thes also, Sess. 6. c. 4.
• XI. Luther, Melanchthon and Bucer taught that baptism takes not [Page 195]away all sin, becaus concupiscence remains. But then baptism should not be a laver of renovation, Tit. 3. Nor should we by bap­tisme be buried wth Christ unto death, Rom. 6 Radical or habitual concupiscence is no sin at al except it be actuated by the consent of reason.
• XII. The Flagellantes maintained that in their time baptism of water had ceased, and baptism of blood succeeded; wch thing say they was signified in Cana of Galile, when at the end of the feast water was turnd into wine: And so they went up and down France whipping themselves till the blood came: when they were told by their Catholik Prelats, that castigation of body was good, and allowa­ble, and practised even by the best Christi­ans, but it ought not be don wth the pre­judice of other parcells of faith, reveald in Gospell; they replied that the whole Go­spell at their coming had ceased. These be the principall mistakes I have taken notice of concerning baptism.

As for Confirmation (wch ancient Chri­stians called Consignation from the fact of the Byshop signing the forhead wth crism) the Waldenses denied it to be a Sacrament. Wicleph their squire did not com home wth [Page 196]them in this point, for he acknowledgd it a Sacrament, but taught it might be conserd by any Priest. Against both these is the Ispalen councell, c. 7. dec. the Tridentin un­der Paule the third, Sess. 7. can. 1. as also the Florentin, Toletan, third and fourth coun­cell of Carthage.

As for Pennance; Luther bables odly about sacerdotall absolution; affirming that it is not in it self necessary at all; and that tis efficacious not because tis given, but be­leeved to be given, whether it be indeed given or no; and that a man beleeving him­self to be absolued is absolued, whether he be so or no, although he have not so much, as contrition. The Tridentin counsell un­der pope Julius the third blasted this er­rour, Sess. 4. can. 9. II. The same Luther added that a woman or child gave as good absolution as the Pape. III. Again he de­nied ther were three parts of Pennance, contrition, confession and satisfaction, as the church had taught. But the councell of Flo­rence under Eugenius, in their definition of faith about the Sacraments given to the Armenians defined the three parts accor­ding to Catholik faith: as likewise the coun­cell of Trent in the sixt session, c. 14. and [Page 197]againe in its fourth session under Julius, c. 4. IV. Novatus a priest in Rome was peremp­tory, that no pennance wtsoever should ever procure remission to one that had fal­len and finned mortally. The Roman coun­cell under pape Cornelius, of fifty Byshops and as many priests disabled this pernicious errour; as also the councell of Trent under Paul the third, the sixt session, in their do­ctrine of Justification, c. 4. V. Luther af­firmed that contrition or sorrow for sins arising from the fear of hell, was unprofi­table; nay a mortall sin. Against this also is the councell of Trent under pope Paul, Sess. 6. can. 8. and again under Julius, Sess. 3. c. 4. VI. That confession to a priest was instituted by man and not by God, was taught by Petrus Osmensis reader of divi­nity in Spain; but he was condemnd by Al­phonsus Carillo Archbyshop of Toledo, and Primat of Spaine by the autority of pape Sixtus the fourth. Luther after him taught the same. Some orientall Hereticks called Iacobits said it was not necessary to confess to a priest but to God onely: Wicleph thought it superfluous, because of contri­tion. Waldenses also tooke away all con­fession. But yet that this Catholik confes­sion [Page 198]notwthstanding was instituted by Christ himselfe, S. Leo, S. Austin, S. Am­brose, S. Cyprian, S. Cyrill and all doctours agree; and that it was practisd in the pri­mitiv times is evident enough in the Acts of the Apostles, where tis said that the new converts or beleevers came confessing and declaring their deeds, Act. 19. And that tis necessary even wth contrition is witnessed by the councell of Constance, Sess. 8. and by the councell of Trent under Julius the third, Sess. 4. can. 3.6. VII. Some Greeks also denied restitution to be necessary. But against the very law of natur wch bids to do as we would be done by, & that famous aphorisme of S. Austin, Non dimittitur pec­catum nisi restituatur ablatum.

Against the truth of the holy Eucharist ther have risen many fals judgments.

• I. The Manichees made not their Eucharist of bare bread wch they judged unclean, but mingld human seed wth it; for wch purification, they were called Catharists.
• II. The Greeks made their Eucharist in leavend bread, thinking our blessed Saviour had conse­crated in leaven. And a very great dispute rose about it; three Gospells saying expresly that our Lord eat his last supper in the first [Page 199]day of azyms or unleaved bread, & S. Iohn, the day before the Pasch; wch the Latins in­terpreted to be the evening or beginning of the azyms, the Greeks the day before it, when leaven was eaten. He that thorougly ponders the Gospell may see the Greeks were deceived: And though the church in her councell of Florence under Eugenius the fourth for the Union of the Greeks, acknowledged that a consecration in fer­mented bread was valid, yet she binds all her priests to consecrat stil in azym.
• III. The Waldenses in their Eucharist are said not to consecrat wth the usuall words of the Church, but wth seaven Pater Nosters.
• IV. That in this Sacrament is not really contained the true body of Christ severall Hereticks at times have avoucht it; yet dis­agreeing in their manner and reasons for it. Nestorius putting two persons in Christ, said in the Eucharist was indeed the true flesh, not of God but of pure man. Beren­garius placed the flesh of Christ the Son of God there, not really, but onely significativly. He was the first that broched this wicked fansy in the church; he was by na­tion a French man & deacon in the church of S. Maurice, a captious logician, other­wise [Page 200]wise of small learning in comparison of his great pride and turbulency, wch proceeded so far that pope Leo the ninth to prevent the fall of Catholiks called a councell at Ver­celles, wher Berengarius not appearing was anathematised; Victor the second succeed­ing Leo celebrated another councell at Ty­rone by Hisdebrand a Roman Cardinal Pre­sident therin, wherin Berengarius appear­ing was confuted by many learned men, especially Lanfrank our byshop of Canter­bury: but he returnd afterwards to his vo­mite; for wch cause pape Nicolas the second succeeding Victor congregated a councell at Rome of a hundred and thirteen Byshops, where Berengarius being present recanted, and died penitentially. About a hundred yeares after, one Almaricus raised up the heresy againe. A hundred yeares after him Wicleph revived it, & in this last age Oecol­ampadius followed by Suinglius and Cal­vin. But Luther curst all these Sacramen­taries wth a bitter curs, as perverters of the last will and Testament of the Son of God.
• V. Luther admitted the reall presence of our Lords body in the Eucharist, but the substance of the bread to remain also. This companation is rejected as not conform­able [Page 201]to Catholik tradition by the councell of Lateran under Innocent the third, & the councell of Trent under Iulius, Sess. 3. c. 4.
• VI. The Aquari [...] would not consecrat wine but water.
• VII. The Armenians on the other side put no water at al in the challice, as Ca­tholiks have ever done even from the first beginnings of the church, as witnesseth S. Cyprian.
• VIII. The Messalians, Euchetae or Enthusiasts, said that the Sacrament of the Eucharist was of no worth. They attri­buted so much to praier as the Flagellantes did to their bloody discipline, that neither of them esteemd of any other observance. But the excellency of this Sacrament is maintaind by the councell of Florence un­der Eugenius, and the Tridentine under Julius, Sess. 3. c. 2.
• IX. Some Greeks are said to hold that this Sacrament consecra­ted in caena Domini is of more worth than any other day.
• X. Luther would that examination, discussion of sins and con­fession is no preparatory to this Sacrament but onely faith. Expresly against Scriptur, Let a man examine himself, &c. 1 Cor. 11.
• XI. Magister sententiarum makes mention of some, that held men comunicating in sin receiv not our Lords body. But Judas [Page 202]it may easily appear received the same thing as the rest of the Apostles though not to the same effect, Joh. 13.
• XII. Many Lutherans have taught that the body of our Lord is onely present in the use, and therfore not to be kept: yet this opinion is not to be found in Luthers work, though it be in Bucer.
• XIII. The Bohemians said that comunion is necessary to be given un­der both kinds, though they had not this conceit from John Huss their prophet, but one Petrus Dresensis a German, who being driven out of his countrey for the Walden­sian heresy wherwith he was infected, went to Prague in Boemia where having per­verted one Jacobellus Misnensis a notable preacher, by his means he drew after him great multituds of people from the Catho­lik body. Something more than a hundred years after, Luther infected Germany wth the same errour. But the church hath ever taught us, that Christ is wholly under any species for comunion; though she com­mands consecration to be made in both: for although whole Christ be under either either kind quoad continentiam, yet not quoad significationem; the consecration or immolation must signify the effusion of [Page 203]blood, but comunion is of the thing con­taiend.
• XIV. The Quatradecimans would have the Christian Pask or Easter, (when this Sacrament was instituted and first ce­lebrated) to be kept expresly on the four­teenth day of the first moon. This raised a controversy in the time of Pape Anicetus between the Orientall and Occidentall By­shops; those standing for the 14 day, these for the Sunday following: and the conten­tion lasted till the time of Pape Victor the first, who would have excomunicated al the Byshops of the East for their contumacy, had not Ireneus strongly wthstood it. It was raised again after Victor, but quite en­ded in the councell of Nice, where it was decreed to be kept on the Sunday.
• XV. That Mass was not instituted by Christ, was the wicked beleef of Wicleph condemnd in the councell of Constance. And its institution by Christ (clear enough in Gospell This do ye) is expresly asserted by most vene­rable and ancient fathers, Rabanus, Iside­rus, S. Ambrose, Eusebius, S. Chrysostome, S. Cyprian, Pope Alexander the first, and sixt from S. Peter, Martialis one of the 70 disciples and companion of S. Peter, and Telesphorus.

That mass is neither sacri­fice [Page 204]nor yet good work is blasphemously maintaind by Luther and Calvin. But this venerable Liturgy is ratified by the first Toletan councell, c. 5. By the councell of Lateran under Innocent the third, c. 1. decr. by the sixt generall Synod, and the Ephe­sine councell, c. 32. decr. Me thinks these men should not be ignorant, that the trans­lation of the law infers translation of priesthood, and where is a peculiar priest­hood is a peculiar sacrifice as the Apostle discourses, Heb. 7. Now Melchisedek is the only figure of Christ & his priesthood, as it is there affirmed by the Apostle; & els wher by the prophet stiling our Lord a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedek, Psal. 109. And yet that Priest of the most high God offered nothing to him but bread and wine as Fathers & Scriptur testify. Gen. 14.18. This very function of Melchisedek did Christ our Lord exercise when he offered up to God his body and blood, telling his Apostles present what he did, and what he would have done hereafter: what he did, when he said, This is my body wch is given, not wch shal be given for you on the cross, but wch is immolated and offerd now; This is my blood wch is shed. He showed what he [Page 205]would have done when he said Hoc facite, This do ye. Here is the order of the new priestood according to Melchisedek set up. I would to God our Countrymen would seriously ponder these things, and not so slightly pass over a thing of such impor­tance, saying that Melchisedek did but bring forth that bread and wine only to re­fresh Abram and his Souldiers. If that were all, why should the Scriptur add pre­sently, for he was a Priest of the most high God, unless it were brought forth to exer­cise his priesthood on: and if that were not an exercise of his function, according to what rite or order must his priesthood be? for we never read one word or any men­tion at all of him, but onely there. Besides the kings for whom Abram fought, wher­of one went forth to meet him at his re­turn, had made provision enough for A­bram, so that he needed not a poor priests bread, especially returning back laden wth the spoils of the camp of four kings. XVII. That mass onely availed the priest that offerd it, and not others for whom it is offered; was another assertion of Luthers Against wch is Concilium Cabilonense, put into the volume of the Decretes.

As for ordination Luther denied it to be a Sacrament. Yet Scriptur sufficiently expresses both the sign and thing signified, imposition of hands and grace accrueing by it, 1 Tim. 4.14.

As for matrimony,

• I. The Armenians denied it to be a Sacrament; so did Luther after them. Yet tis expresly so named in the Scriptur, Eph. 5.32.
• II. Tatianus, Marcion, the Aerians, and Priscillanists held mar­riage unlawfull. This opinion S. Paul seems to have forseen, and censurd it; In the last times saith he some will depart from faith, forbidding to marry. 1 Tim. 4. And it was afterward condemnd in the councell of Gangres c. 10. decret.
• III. The Cataphry­gians whose leader was Montanus, as also Novatus a Roman priest in the time of Pape Cornelius condemnd all second mar­riages. But S. Paul does not so. A woman if her husband be dead is not adulteres if she be wth another man, Rom. 7.
• IV. The Ana­baptists taught that one man may have two wives. But our Lord not onely said that the first wife remaining, a man cannot marry a second, but proved it also by those words in Genesis, Erunt duo in carne una, Mat. 19.
• V. Montanus held that the bond [Page 207]of wedlock may be dissolved at the pleasur of the married couple. But the church teaches further, that nothing, no not adul­tery it self dissolves it quoad vinculum, though quoad torum it may; as appears in the Milevitan councell c. 7. decret. and the generall councell of Florence in the defini­tion of faith given to the Armenians.

Extreme-unction is rejected from the Sacraments by Luther and his adherents. But the councell of Florence under Euge­nius 4. and Trent under Iulius the third, in the fourth session defined in a Sacra­ment. And tis plain enough it came from Christ himself; for when our Lord sent out his Apostles two by two; in the execution of that comand they preacht and dispossest people, and whome they found sick they anointed them wthoyle that they were healed, Mar. 6.12. This they could not do of their own autority; nor did our saviour make surgeons of them but spirituall phesitians and dispensers of his word & Sacraments.

You have don well for one day Sr Harry, our hour is spent, and by reason of this continued narration M ^r Doctour has had no occasion to dispute.

O good Madam let him make an [Page 208]end, that he be not like the foolish builder. My Husband may talk all dinner time, ac­cording as it is written, Open thy mouth wide and I will fill it.

Madam, that I may be yet more brief, the other extravagant opinions that re­main concerning actions, morall, naturall and politicall, I will but meerly mention, wthout adding text of Scriptur or councell against them.

As for Christian morality.

• I. Luther and Melanchthon taught that the Evangelicall rule wherby our actions are guided, is no law at al; & that there is not so much as one precept in the whole Gospell.
• II. Calvin, that there is no difference at all betwixt a precept & a counsell.
• III. Spangeberg a Lu­theran, that nothing is pleasing to God ex­cept it be comanded.
• IV. Luther, that all Gods precepts are impossible to be kept.
• V. Ebion and Cerinthus, that the old Law is universally to be observed wth the new.
• VI. Marcion & the Manichees, that the old Law is wholly evill.
• VII. Others, that every man may be saved in his owne Law & reli­gion.
• VIII. Luther, that al works of mā how­soever comanded by God are sins.
• IX. Buga­urius de Monte Falcone, that any work don [Page 209]in hope of eternall reward is evill.
• X. The Bogards and Beguines, that a perfect man ought not to exercise good works.
• XI. Lu­ther, that no work is of valiew unto life eter­nall, nor no hope in merits: that a man may be certain of his salvation wthout them; & that servile fear is damnable.
• XII. Pelagius, that life eternall may be obtained by our own working wthout the assistāce of grace.
• XIII. Iovinian, that a just man can never sin whatsoever he does, kill, ly, sweare, steal.
• XIV. That all Prayer is unprofitable was taught by Pelagius, because he thought our nativ liberty sufficient for all; by Wicleph & Huss, becaus they thought that all things happen by absolute necessity.
• XV. Wicleph, that prayers applied to one do him no more good than al others.
• XVI. The Messa­lians, that onely prayer wthout other good works is sufficient to life eternall; and that in no instant of time we are to cease from prayer.
• XVII. Iovinian, that fasting is of no moment.
• XVIII. Aerius, that we are not to be bound to any certain abstinencys.
• XIX. The Bogards, that a man come to perfection is not bound to any austeritys.
• XX. Eunomius, that faith saves wthout any good works at all.
• XXI. Luther, that [Page 210]faith is lost by a mortall sin.
• XXII. Abailar­dus, that nothing is to be beleeved but what we understand.
• XXIII. Bardesanes a Syrian, and Priscillianus, that all mens actions are to be imputed to fate, and not their owne free will.
• XXIV. The Lamperians, Pseuda­postles, and Luther, that all vowes made to God are impious, paganish, judaicall, dia­bolicall.
• XXV. The Wittenburgians later Lutherans, that nothing can be vowed but what is comanded.
• XXVI. Wicleph, that it is not law full for Christians to give almes to the poor, and that all mendicity and po­verty is unlawfull; and Desiderius a Lon­gobard, that it is not lawfull to leave our possessions for Christ.
• XXVII. Guilielmus of Anwerp, that by poverty all sins are blotted out; and that a poor whore is better than a rich matron.
• XXVIII. Wicleph, that every sin is venial to the elect: Calvin, that there is no difference at all betwixt mortall sin & venial: Jovinian, that all sins are equall: Aetius, that no sin is imputed to a be­leever: Valentinus, that every sin is from the devill and not from our free will: Pelagius, that there is no such thing as original sin: Some Greeks that single fornication is no sin at all.
• XXIX. The Armenians, that all [Page 211]were damned for their sin before Christs passion.

As for things & actions naturall.

• I. Abai­lardus held that nothing in affaires is con­tingent, but all things of necessity; Wicleph, that God himselfe cannot do things other­wise than they are done.
• II. The Turrelu­pini, that we should be ashamed of no na­turall thing; & therfor they coupled openly like dogs.
• III. Simon Magus, the Nico­laites, Adamites & Waldenses, that the pro­miscuous use of women is lawfull.
• IV. The Bogards and Beguines that a kiss is a sin, but copulation is not.
• V. The Adamites, that corporall nakedness is to be used; and ther­for they walkt and prayed naked, calling their congregation Paradise.
• VI. The Va­lesij, that no man can pleas God, except he be gelt and made an eunuch.
• VII. Severus, that wine is unlawfull and the vine sprung up from the earth and Satan.
• VIII. Tatia­nus, that it is not lawfull to eat flesh at any time or for any necessity; and according to the Catharists, neither eggs, chees nor milk.
• IX. Iovinian, that a man upon any day may lawfully eat any thing, either egges or flesh in Lent, or upon good friday.
• X. The Dis­calceati, (as S. Austin calls them) that no [Page 212]Christian man may wear shoos. Lastly the naturall liberty of mans free will is quite taken away by Bardesanes, Manicheus, Abailardus, Wicleph; and Iovinian said, that no man can do amiss after he has received the grace of Baptism.

As for things and actions politicall.

• I. The Waldenses and Wiclevists maintained, that we must not obay to any power upon earth.
• II. Basilides, if any power raise a persecution against Christians, that we are rather to deny Christ than suffer martyrdome.
• III. Pe­tilianus a Donatist, that tis a comendable martirdom for a man to kill himself.
• IV. The Waldenses, that no man can be justly put to death by any autority.
• V. Joannes Parvi, that a tirant may lawfully be murdred by any vassail, and that of his owne privat au­tority, notwthstanding any oath to the contrary.
• VI. The Waldenses, that it is ne­ver lawfull for Christians to take an oath.
• VII. Priscillanus, that Christians may law­fully forswear themselves.
• VIII. Luther, that tis lawfull in no case for Christians to demand before a judg any reparation for an injury.
• IX. Manicheus, that tis never lawfull to wage war; and Luther, that tis unlawfull for Christians to fight against the [Page 213]Turk.
• X. Som Greeks, that tis lawfull to cheat our enemies, and that usury is no wayes unlawfull.
• XI. Diotrephes in the Apo­stles time, that Hospitality is not to be showed to strangers, especially Catholik Priests.
• XII. Willielmus de Sancto Amore and Wicleph, that monks and Religious men are not to have any food but what they get by manuall labour; as on the other side the Psalliani, Euchetae or Enthusiasts erred no less in affirming, that no manuall labour was lawfull for them; as also the Waldenses, that no perfect man ought to labour wth his hands in the common wealth. These be the chiefest extravagancies I find concern­ing Christian actions morall, naturall and politicall.

O S ^r you have made too much hast, and crowded these brave spirits too close together. Great wits love freedom & can­not indure to be straitned. Your speedy narration makes them thrust and crowd & trample upon one anothers heels, as the herd of swine in Gospell wch the devills drave head long into the Sea. In this great hast of yours I have let slip not onely their opinions, but their very names. But so it is fulfilled that is written of you, I said in [Page 212] [...] [Page 213] [...] [Page 214] my hayst, All men are lyers. Psa. 116.

To bring my speech to a period. The Catholik Church an indulgent mother as she could not but be affected to see children that came from her own bowells bandy and rise up against her so tumultuously from time to time, so hath she showed no less industry and watchfullnes to repress them all; being her self still peremptorily resolued not to depart whatsoever should happen, so much as an apex or jota from the word she had received. And truly her majesty and power appears in that she still livs to see all her rebells under her feet: however through the frailty of revolting men they may grow strong and multiply somtimes for two or three ages together, in some parts of the earth against her. I shall ever love and reverence this divine integrity wisedom and power of the Catholike and immaculate spous of Christ; wch can neither tamely let fall the truths she has received, nor yet by violence be forced out of her right. Indeed besides the generall honesty whereby she stood obliged as a depositary to keep unalterable and entire all the whol tradition committed to her custody; the Paradoxes of Sectaries were so dissonant [Page 215]for the most part to right reason morall justice & piety, that the wisedome sobriety and faith of the Church Catholik could not in any sort comply wth them though she should sink under the persecution of Apo­states. Nor had she more reason to comply wth any one than all, according as they rose: and so she should ever and anon gain­say herself; do and undo, say and unsay, affirm and deny the very same things; for fectaries were quite contradictory to one another: Nor by this time had she kept any considerable portion of that body of tra­dition she received from her Redeemer wth the threat of a heavy curs on him should dare to altar or diminish from it. Let him be accursed that loves it, the spous of Christ is blessed, and so united wth her head that she cannot depart from the truth emboweld wthin her breast, and as it were identified in herself.

There is morover one thing I could wish you take notice of; That the whole heap of Reformation, begun by Luther this last age, and made up by the additions of whosoever will do it, is but onely so many severall hand fulls of execrable ashes taken out of the urns of condemnd Hereticks long ago deceased, as for example.

Nay S ^r Harry if you mean to speak any longer at this time, you shall talk to the carpet. The weather is cold and our howr past. Besides, dinner is not to be lost.

Indeed, as it is written, There is nothing better for a man than that he should eat and drink, and enjoy the fruit of his la­bour. Eccl. 2.

These extravagant opinions were doubtles hereticall in the first Authours, not afterwards in us; Plures cum faciunt idem, non est idem.

Let's go, let's go.

Let them go Madam, thers not a dish brought to table yet I do assure you, tis twenty pittyes time is so far spent, I have somthing to say would have made S ^r Harry blush; a whol half howrs talk Madam.

When we are set at table I shal giv you occasion Mistres to utter it.

S ^r Harry, if you observd so much, in his Ca­talog of errours made mention of many that by those opinions were cut off from the Papists & excomunicated, having been aforetime of their number; but the standing body of Papists he accuses of no errour at [Page 217]all. But Madam I have gathered nine and thirty Articles wch they hold contrary to truth.

Those that wer made in K. James his days.

No, no; of myne own observation, wch I noted at times in my own privat reading, never before taken notice of by any.

So much the better, for new things do excite attention.

First you know, that the Papish church sends forth her Priests and Religious to reduce nations from paganism and con­veigh their faith up and down the World, contrary to expres Scriptur; Hast thou faith, have it to thy self, Rom. 14.21.

• II. Christ sayeth, When thou dost fast, anoint thy head & wash thy face, Math. 6.17. Papists never ob­serve this, nor do they think themselves bound in Lent, ember & other fasting days, to put painting or black patches on otheir face, to curl and powder their hayr, anoint their head with jessamy butter, spiknard & other sweet ointments; but the Gospell is neglected by them wthout any fear or con­science at all.
• III. They hold that no body should forsake their religion; directly con­trary to Gods will, The Spirit saith expresly that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, 1. Tim. 4.1. God sayes some shal, [Page 218]they say they shall not, and by their good will they would let no body do it.
• IV. They hold that the virgin Mary was taken up soul and body into heaven; and would perswade us we shall be so too; yet truth says that flesh and blood cannot in herit the Kingdom of heaven, 1. Co. 15.
• V. They will tell you pun­ctually on what day of the month Easter Christmas or any holiday happens. Of such tis written, Ye observ days and months and times and years, I am afraid of you least I have bestowed labour in vain, Gal. 4.10.
• VI. Such of them as be strong and healthy fast in Lent, & if any be sickly he eats flesh; contrary to wt is writtē; He that is weak let him eat herbs. Ro. 14.2.
• VII. Tis written, If thine enemy hunger feed him, & if he thirst give him drink, Rom. 12.20. here the Pa­pists commit two errours; first they hold that a man may give both meat and drink to one that is hungry, secondly they will do this not onely to their enemyes but neigh­bours and friends.
• VIII. They bring the Virgin Marys Pictur into the church wth a child in her arms, tho they cannot but know that she stiles herself the handmayd of the Lord, and tis written, Cast out the Bondwoman & her son, Gal. 4.30.
• IX. Pa­pists [Page 219]will have the church forsooth to teach us our Religion and faith. But it is written, Wo unto him that saith unto the wood A­wake; and to the dumb stone, Arise, it shall teach, Hab. 2.19. Is the church any thing but wood and stone? Tis flat idolatry thus to worship wood and stone and the works of mens hands. Wo unto them for it.
• X. They teach that righteousnes pleases God & sin displeases; wher as indeed they are both equally reprovable: When the com­forter is come he will reprove the world of sin and of righteousnes, Io. 16.8.
• XI. You know Madam we sit in our pews all service and Sermon time wthout uttering word, nor can any discern our lips to stir all the while; but the Papist women as soon as they enter their churches, down they fal on their knees, & so long as they remain there patter forth pra­yers; you may see hundreds of their lips moving together, & somtimes you may hear them cry Jesu, Jesu: I dare swear they speak in the church, & their religion teaches them to do it, contrary to what is written, It is a shame for women to speak in the church, Cor. 14.34.
• XII. They hold that both prodigality & covetousnes in respect of our own goods, fornicatiō & leache ry in regard of our own [Page 220]bodys is unlawfull; contrary to expres Scrip­tur, Is it not lawful for me to do what I will wth mine own, Mat. 20.15.
• XII. They hold that they abstain from all kind of flesh in Lēt & yet they eat fish &c. not understāding the Scriptur, Ther is one kind of flesh of men, another of beasts, another of fishes, another of birds, Co. 15.39.

XIII.

Nay thirt­eenthly & fourteenthly be words too long, we have not time to proceed sweet mistres, you hear I am cald.

Many are called but few ar chosen saith the Scriptur. Give me leav but to say over my nine and thirty articles.

They will serv for good dis­cours at table: how come they to be so many?

Articles against popery can never be more or les than nine and thirty. K. James could have made his up to forty if he had pleasd, but they must be no more than nine and thirty nor yet no les, accor­ding as tis written, Of the Iewes receivd I forty stripes save one, 2. Cor. 11.24.

You are so witty.

A parsons wise must needs be witty as tis written. He that walks wth a wise man shall be wise, Prov. 13.20. It should be she that walks, but the Scriptur is compendious and somtimes leavs out a letter; nay somtimes a whol syllable, as in [Page 221]that saying, God made man upright. Eccl. 7.29. Ther man is set for woman; for tis wel enough known that Adam had a stitch in his side, and so went up and down stoop­ing.

Let us carry in your nine and thirty articles to the table.

For S. Harry now and then to bite upon, according as tis written, man livs not by bread alone.

Enough, enough.

So indeed it is written, Luc. 22.38. Satis est, It is enough.