Proof as the Articles of the old Creed, in which all Churches agree. No lefs degree of Evidence will convince Nine parts of Ten in Christendom, which are not united in Communion with the Church of Rome under her fupreme Vicar, that they are in fo fatal and woful a Mistake, as they must be, if your definition of the Catholick Church, and the Doctrines which flow from it, are true. Therefore, Sir, before you undertake this Proof, let me advise you to confider,

First, How it came to pass, that of all the Writers before Canifius and Bellarmine, who defined or described the Holy Catholick Church, and expounded the ixth Article in the Creed, none ever made Union with the Church of Rome under her fupreme Pastor, the Vicar of Jefus Chrift, the effential difference in their Definitions or Descriptions, or declared the Roman Church and the Holy Catholick Church to be convertible Terms?

Secondly, How that definition of the Holy Catholick Church could agree with it, before there was a Church or Bishop at Rome?

Thirdly, How it came to pafs that fo great a part of the Chriftian World were ignorant of this necessary Doctrine, and rejected it as utterly falfe, when it was proposed to them?

Fourthly, How the Greek Church, which hath now adopted your Doctrine of Tranfubftantiation, yet cannot endure this Doctrine, which their Writers declare is invented to uphold the Papal Tyranny and Ufurpation, and give all the Churches of Chriftendom juft caufe to refufe Communion with the Roman Church?

Fifthly, How this Doctrine can be reconciled with the Treatment which the Catholick Bishops jointly and severally gave Pope Stephen, acctising

Concil. Carth. de Bapt. Hæret. Cyprian. Epiff. ad Pomp Firmil. Epift. ad Gyptianum.

him

him of Tyranny, Obftinacy, Perverfnefs, Ignorance, Indifcretion, Inhumanity, Boldnefs, and wicked Deeds?

Sixthly, How it agrees with their calling the Bifhop of Rome no otherwife than as they did one another, Fratrem, Collegam, Coepifcopum? &c.

Seventhly, How it came to pafs that no General Council ever gave the Title of Univerfal Church to the Roman Church? or the Title of Catholick in any other Senfe, than as it was given to other faithful Churches, or Churches fo reputed?

Eightly, How it came to pass that Pope Gregory the Great abhorred and condemned the Title of Univerfal Bishop?

Ninthly, How it came to pafs, that in ancient Times there were fo many duroxipañol, or independent Churches, as the Church of Cyprus, and the old Britannick Church, not fubject to the Bishop of Rome, or any other Bishop as ordinary Superior, but only to their own Bishops?

Tenthly, Whether by confequence from your definition of the Holy Catholick Church, it be not all one, as the Greek Writers have obferved, to fay, I believe the Roman Church, and I believe the Holy Catholick Church?

Eleventhly, Suppofing all the National Churches, and Churches in Nations, fhould fall off from the Church of Rome and her fupreme Paftor, as many have already done; whether according to your definition, the Urbicarian, or as it may happen the fingle Diocefan Church of Rome, which had no Churches left to infufer Univerfality into, would be the Holy Catholick Church?

In the Twelfth place, Let me ask you, whether of old, in a vacancy of the fingle Church of Rome, the whole Catholick Church look'd upon her felf as vacant; which he must have done, if fhe believed the Bishop of Rome to be her fupreme Paftor, the univerfal Bishop, and Vicar of Jefus Chrift?

2

Lastly,

Laftly, Let me ask you upon fuppofition, St. Peter had faid the Words of St. Paul, 2 Cor. xi. 28. Befides thofe things that are without, that which cometh upon me daily, the CARE OF ALL THE CHURCHES; I fay, upon fupposition St. Péter had faid thofe Words of himself, tell me if they had not been a more plaufible Argument for the Bishop of Rome's fupreme and univerfal Pastorfhip, than all the other Texts of the New Teftament, which your Writers are wont to produce for it? What, faid one, would the Papists give that St. Peter had spoken those words.

Sir, I humbly lay thefe Confiderations before you, and pray you to think well on them before you begin your Anfwer to my new Challenge; and then begin as foon as you please.

I am now come to my conclufion, in which I proteft to you, that what I have written in this Answer to your Paper, I have written without any ill Will to your Church, which I wish with all my Heart were a pure, and found part of the Holy Catholick Church. As we fay of our immoral Friends, that we have no ill to their Perfons but to their Vices; fo I have not the least ill Will to your Church, but to its great Errors and Corruptions in Doctrine, Worship, and Government; from which I verily believe it would foon and easily reform, were it not with-held from fo good and neceffary a Work by the Pride, and Policy of the Court of Rome. And as I have no ill Will to your Church, fo have I none to any Person in her Communion; not to you, Sir, in particular, though your new Definition of the Catholick Church gives me juft reafon to think that you are one of her Court-Writers, for whom I wish I could have more respect. You would have been in no danger, if you would have come with the Lady to the free Conferences, to which I invited her; but to which, I prefume, you would not, because you durft

1 2

durft not let her come. I defire you, and my former Adversary, and all other Perfons of your Religion to believe, that I understand and practise my Christianity better, than to think that a Proteftant is difcharged from any of the relative Duties of it to a Papist; and I wish every Papist thought the fame with respect to Proteftants, as I believe those who have not drank of the Cup of the Court of Rome's Enchantment, generally do. I think an Husband, or Father's, or Master's, or King's departing from the true Religion, ought not in the least to abate the conjugal Duty of the Wife, the filial Duty of the Children, the Subjection and Obedience of the Servants, or the Fidelity and Loyalty of the Subjects, or any Duties of Humanity; particularly of Juftice or Charity to our Neighbours, Faithfulness to our Friends, or Gratitude to our Benefactors. And therefore, Sir, as far as I differ from you in Religion, do not after this declaration think, or treat me, which fame Roman Catholicks have done, as an Enemy upon that account. For I call God to witness, I would turn Roman Catholick (for fo you call your felves) with all my Heart, if I could; and if I may be judge of my felf, I think I could chearfully lay down my Life upon condition, that the Church of Rome were fuch a Church as all other Churches, could fafely hold Communion with: But alas, that is not to be done upon the Principles and Terms of truly Catholick Communion; it is not to be done without for faking the ancient Catholick Church and her truly Catholick Faith, Worship, and Government; in which all the more Primitive Churches, and that of Rome among the reft, for many Ages agreed. It is not to be done without the violation of them all, and by confequence without running a very dangerous rifque of eternal Damnation, and partaking of her Plagues, as well as her Sins. Such a dangerous change do they make, who change our for your Religion: And fuch a fad

account,

account, without Repentance, must you, Sir, make unto God, whofe bufinefs is to go to and fro, and pervert our People from ours and the Primitive Catholick Church, to yours; which differ as much in Purity of Faith and Worship from the Catholick Church of Old, even from the ancient Roman Church, as the old Commonwealth of Rome after fix Hundred Years, did from it felf in Purity of Morals, when the Hiftorian faid of it, Labente deinde paulatim difciplina, donec ad hæc tempora, quibus nec vitia noftra, nec remedia pati possumus, perventum eft.

a