must tell you, that all you make them fay in this Period is true; and particularly what they fay of the Trent-Doctrines in Pius's Creed, that they were not then known to the Catholick Church. And

here you bring no other Proof to the contrary, but repeating your former Interrogatives, Did not the Fathers of that very Catholick Church erect Altars? &c. All which Interrogatories are anfwer'd before, except this, Did they not make Appeals to the fupreme Paftoral Authority of the Bishop of Rome? To which it is answer enough, Firft, To obferve in what a fophiftical and precarious manner you fuppofe the Pastoral Authority of the Bishop of Rome to be Supreme, which you fhould first prove. And then to answer you with another Question, Did they then make Appeals to the Paftoral Authority of the Bishop of Rome, as Supreme, and as he was efteemed the Vicar of Jefus Chrift? Anfwer me this Queftion, prove that they made Appeals to him under that Capacity and Character: But before you undertake it, pray confult fome of your own learned Writers, in particular Dr. Du Pin, De Antiqua Ecclefia Difciplina, who will teach you other things.

Then you proceed: Are not thefe Doctrines of the Church of Rome, which you call Errors? Yes, Sir, they are Doctrines, falfe Doctrines, and yet Doctrines de Fide, of your Church. And because they are visibly Doctrines of the Catholick Church of our Time, you rather choofe to live Schifmaticks than Catholicks. Here you are at your old prefumptuous fuppofition, which we deny, That the Church of Rome is the Catholick Church of our Time; and that by confequence the Trent-Doctrines must be Catholick Doctrines, and we Schifmaticks, who do not believe them to be Doctrines of Faith.

The long Period, which follows, is made up of feveral falfe Propofitions and Suppofitions, which to be confuted, only need to be obferved. First, Then

H 4

you

you affert, that the ancient Catholick Church and the prefent, by which you mean your own, taught the Trent-Doctrines, which you fay are visibly the Do&rines of the Catholick Church of our Time. Secondly, That all the difference between them is, that the ancient Catholick Church taught and practifed those Doctrines with lefs Noife than the prefent; or as you explain your felf, that the ancient Catholick Church taught them without a Creed, but the prefent Catholick Church, moved by the perverfe oppofition of Luther against those Doctrines, formed them into a Creed; and that thefe Doctrines are Apoftolical, and pertained to the Faith once delivered to the Saints. All these Propofitions you have learnedly advanced without any Proof, or fhew of Proof; only you fay, with an afsurance, which adorns every Period of your Paper, that thofe Doctrines appear to be Doctrines of the ancient Catholick Church from numberless Quotations of the ancient Fathers; which, as I muft tell you again, is faying without proving, at which I acknowledge you are very expert.

As to your falfe fuppofitions, they are likewise many. First, The common Crambe, that your Church is the prefent Catholick Church. Secondly, That the Authority of the Council of Trent to define Matters of Faith, was as great as that of the first four General Councils; feeing all the Advantages applicable to the first four General Councils are but fo many confequences from the Truth of the ixth Article of the Creed (viz. I believe the Holy Catholick Church) and (by confequence) the Promifes of the Divine Spirit, the Prefence of Chrift to his Apoftolick, Holy Catholick Universal Church; all which Advantages, if that Article be still true, pertain as much to the prefent Catholick, as to the former. Here is fuppofition upon fuppofition, even a Metalepfis of falfe, precarious Suppofitions: To all which I anfwer, That the ixth Article of the Creed

is ftill true, even as true as it was at the first General Council of Nice; and that Chrift will ftill perform his Promifes to his Church, and that the Divine Spirit will still affift all Councils, and Christ by it be prefent, as I faid before, not only in all General, but all Diocefan, Provincial, and National Councils, Qua non obicem ponunt, that do not refift Truth, that Holy Spirit of Truth, as the Council of Trent did.

Sir, the last Period of your Paper, as far as it is an Answer to my Challenge, is of its' kind a Jewel of Tautology; and it may be you would take it ill if I fhould fupprefs Expreffions of fuch Refolution, as you declare in it. Had I lived then (fay you) I should have heard the fame Catholick DoEtrines, and feen the fame Worship I do now, though I should not have heard them dreft into Articles of a Creed, as now, and this is all the difference; and for this Men will live Schifmaticks. O fenfeless Galatians! who hath bewitched you not to obey the Truth? Sir, I'll tell you who hath bewitch'd us poor Galatians, not to believe, and practice the Errors, which you mif-call Truth, and declare to be Articles of Faith; the Scriptures have bewitched us, the ancient Fathers and Councils have bewitched us: It is to them that we appeal against the Council of Trent; it is in them that I challenged my Adverfary to shew me the fame Doctrines, either in or out of a Creed. And let it not offend you, if I call not only God, and Angels, as Sir H. Lynde did, but Men alfo to witnefs, that in your Answer to my Challenge, you have not fhewed Antiquity, Univerfality, and Succefion for the Trent-Doctrines; nor prov'd them, or any one of them, to have been Doctrines of the Faith once delivered to the Saints. Far from this, your Anfwer is but one intire falfe Suppofition, made up of many particular ones; as that your Church is the Catholick Church; that you of its Communion, whether in National Churches,

Churches, or Churches opprefs'd in Nations, are the only Catholicks; and that your Trent-Doctrines are Catholick Doctrines, and are to be fo called, and not Romish; and that your Church could not err in declaring Doctrines of Faith, because it is the Holy Catholick, Apoftolick, Univerfal Church, fignified by the ixth Article of the Creed. Indeed your Answer jingles all along with the words Catholick, Catholicks, Catholick Church, Catholick Nations, Catholick Creed, Catholick Doctrines, &c. You have used them about Threefcore times in your Anfwer, and in your fhort Vindication of it, which is fully answered in this Reply, you use Catholick Church, and Holy Catholick Univerfal Church about Ten times, to puzzle and perplex the poor Lady's Understanding, and turn her Brains round with the found of it; and by ringing it always in her Ears, at last to make her think that the Church of Rome and the Holy Catholick Church are, and always have been convertible Terms, and the very fame Thing, as much as a Circle and roundness, or as Man and rational living Creature is.

In the Bishop of Meaux's Letter to Mr. Nelson, he tells him, he wonders how Bishop Bull could fpeak fo advantagionfly of the Church, and continue a Moment without acknowledging her. To which the learned Bishop in his Answer to that Letter, which I recommended to the Lady's perufal, asks what Her the Bishop of Meaux meant? Doubtless, faith he, the prefent Church of Rome, in the Communian whereof he himself lives, and to which his defign feems to invite me. Then Bishop Bull proceeds to Thew what he meant by the Catholick Church, in his Judicium Ecclefia Catholica trium primorum feculorum, and what he means by the prefent Catholick Church. After which, faith he, I wonder why Monfieur de Meaux fhould ask me, whether by the Catholick Church I mean the Church of Rome or the Church of England? He knows full well, I mean neithey

ther the one nor the other. For to Say either of the Church of Rome, or of the Church of England, or of the Greek Church, or of any other particular Church of what denomination foever, that it is the Catholick or Universal Church, would be as abfurd, as to affirm that a part is the whole. And to be fure I never meant the Church of Rome to be the Catholick Church, exclufive of all other Churches. Sir, for fear this Answer to the Bishop of Meaux's Letter fhould give the Lady a clear and diftin&t Notion of the Catholick Church, and convince her that the Church of Rome in its pureft State was but a part, and now a very unfound and corrupt part of it; which hath changed the Primitive Rule of Faith, altered the Primitive Ecclefiaftical Government, and miferably corrupted the Primitive Form of Divine Worship; you proceed again to ring the Chimes of Church Catholick and Catholick Church in the fame impertinent manner against the learned Bishop, in the latter part of your Paper, as I have fhew'd you have done in the former; and multiplied Words without Senfe in that as well as this: And in that as well as this you ftill childishly fuppofe, what you fhould prove, that Church Catholick, and the Church of Rome are the very fame. Though it is very uneasy to be no better employ'd, yet I must, Sir, prefent the Reader with a little of your idle Prattle against the Bishop, that he may fee what an excellent Sophifter you are, not much inferior to my Adverfary, to whom I made the Challenge, which you pretend to anfwer, fome Years ago; and that you and he are equally skilled in the noble Science of Defence. The Bishop of Meaux, fay you, congratulates him for the Service he hath done the Church Catholick, but wonders that fo great a Man, who speaks so well of the Church, &c. can be a Moment without acknowledg ing her. The Doctor feems hard of Understanding,

and