Nation, both how before and after the coming of St. Auguftin, till theDeathof St. Gregory I. as Mattathias faid of ferufalem in the Time of Antiochus Epiphanes, That he who was a free Woman was now become a Bond-flave.

It would take up much Time to fhew your Ladyfhip how under this Papal Ufurpation over the English Church many other intolerable Abuses and Corruptions were introduc'd, which, befides the Ufurpation it felf, juftify our Separation from the Church of Rome, and cafting off the Papal Toke.. I will but name them: As first, the intolerable Exa&tions, Extortions and Rapins committed by the Spiritual Monarch in Church and Kingdom, fo often complain'd of, as I can fhew your Ladyship, both in Convocation and Parliament.. Secondly, his intolerable Encroachment upon all Rights Sacred and Civil, and the Violation of them, both belonging to the Church and the Crown. As to the Church, the Papal Supremacy gave, and ftill gives the Popes a Pretence of oppofing the Divine Right of Epifcopacy, and to look upon Bishops no better than their Apoftolical Vicars, and Curates, and Vassals, whom they might treat as they please, and how they opprefs'd our English Bishops by Difpenfations, Penfi ons, Exemptions, Inhibitions, Vifitations, Tenths, Firft-fruits, Appeals, &c. would alfo confume a great deal of Paper to write. As to the Crown, I need fay nothing, prefuming your Ladyflip knows the History of your own Country, and then you cannot be ignorant how the Popes have treated our Kings, and what Claims they have made to a Right of disposing of the Crown even to Foreigners; and thereupon how they took upon them to pull down lone and fet up another.

A third Caufe of our Separation from Rome, was the Inconfiftency of that tyrannical foreign Jurifdiction of the Supream Spiritual Monarch to the Primitive Apoftolical Government and Difcipline

3

P 3

and

and the Liberty, Peace and Welfare of all Churches, as well as of the Britannick Churches, which it enflav'd to unlawful Oaths, to profeffing of new Doctrines and new Creeds, to the great Peril of Idolatry, to adhere to the Pope and his Church against all the other Bishops and Patriarchs of other Churches that renounc'd his Supremacy, and to forfake their Communion.

Laftly, the Claim of the Bishops of Rome to their Spiritual Monarchy and Supremacy, which was the Mother of all thefe Evils, not by Human but Divine Right, made them alfo irremediable, and therefore our Ancestors, both the Kings, Priefts and People, fhook off the Papal Soveraignty, which was the Source of them; and for doing of it they were so far from being guilty of Schifm, that they did their Duty, and had they continu'd longer under it, they had continu'd longer in Slavery, and Sin.

I now proceed to your Two other Reafons for which you think them guilty of Schifm: First, because they not only own'd the Bishop of Rome for their Head and Superior, but were under the Obligation of Oaths to obey him, and maintain the Rights of the Church of Rome: and in the next place, that they obey'd him, and were fworn to obey him, and maintain thofe Rights, when most of the Corruptions they complain'd of, were crept into the Church and embrac'd by them.

Madam, In anfwer to the first of these Reasons, we muft examine whether or no the Popes were lawful Heads and Superiors of the English Church, and if they were, whether or no the Exercife of their Authority and Jurifdiction was regular, according to the Rules of the Gofpel, and the Holy Canons, or Laws of the Church.

First then, Madam, let us confider, if the Popes were lawful Heads of our Church; if they were, it was as univerfal Bishops, or as Patriarchs. Not as univerfal Bishops, for that Title of Pride, Arrogance

and

ufurpation, was, as you have read, disclaim'd by St. Gregory 1. as contrary to the Patriarchal Parity, the Constitution of the Catholick Church, and as Preparatory to Antichrift, and therefore the Greek and Oriental Churches have many Ages refus'd, and to this Day refufe Communion with the Bishops of Rome, because they challenge an univerfal Headship or Supremacy, to which all other Churches ought to be fubject; and for the fame Reason they refuse, our Ancestors broke off Communion with the Popes, who, by giving this juft Cause both to thofe Churches and ours, are the true Authors of the Schifms. In fhort, Madam, nothing is more contrary to the Rules of the Gospel, and the Canons of the Church, than the Papal Supremacy; it is perfect Spiritual Tyranny and Ufurpation, and our Ancestors, by whom perhaps you principally understand our former Bishops, were fo far from contracting the Guilt of Schifm by cafting it off, and the Popes for it, that they had finn'd had they continu'd longer under it, and then as for their Oath of Fidelity and Obedience to St. Peter and his Regalities, and to maintain the Roman Papacy, with its pretended Rights, Privileges and Authorities, I fay, as for their Oath, from which you aggravate their Separation, it was for the fame Reafon an unlawful Oath, the Matter of it being finful. And therefore those who took it were perjur'd in the very Act of taking of it, for which Reason, when they had taken it, they were oblig'd to nothing but Repentance, becaufe it was a Bond of Iniquity, I mean of Tyranny and Ufurpation over their own, and the univerfal Church.

Nor, Secondly, could they be lawful Heads or Superiors of the English Church as Patriarchs, after they laid aside that Title for universal Bishop, and acted in virtue of the Regalities of St. Peter in a moft irregular and unlawful manner, contrary to the Rules of the Gospel, and the Canons of the Catholick Church. Wherefore tho' they had never taken уроп

P 4

upon them the Tyrannical Title of Universal Bishop, but contented themselves with the Title of Patriarch of the Western Churches: yet since they became notoriously guilty of the fame Tyranny under this Title as under that, and exercis'd their Authority and Jurifdiction in the fame arbitrary defpotick manner against the Apoftolical Conftitution in Government and Discipline, and the Canons of the Catholick Church, our Ancestors would have had juft Reason to withdraw their Obedience from their Patriarchal Power for the irremediable and intolerable Abuses of it, especially confidering that Patriarchates were but Human Conftitutions, and regulated by the Canons of the Church.

What your Ladyship faith of the Rights of the Roman Church, which our Ancestors took Oaths to maintain, I need fay nothing to them, or those Oaths, because by the Rights, to which that Church preteħded, were principally meant the Papal Encroachments and Vfurpations, claim'd for their Rights and Privileges by the Bishops of Rome as univerfal Bishops, and Vicars-General of Chrift, as Succeffors to St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles. And then as for your faying, to exaggerate the Schifm, that our Ancestors fell off from the Bishop and Church of Rome when most of the Corruptions and ufurpations they complain'd of had been receiv'd, and embrac'd by them and their Predeceffors: I must first beg Leave to inform your Ladyship, that you are mifinform'd as to this Point, if you mean that all those Corruptions and Ufurpations were always receiv'd by our Ancestors of the English Church before the Reformation. The English Saxons kept the ancient Apoftolical Faith pure and entire. They had no other Creeds but the Apostles Creed and Nicene Creed, which they call'd the Lefs-Creed, and MessCreed, and that afcrib'd to St. Athanafius, as foon

Several Letters, &c. from p. 64. to p. 75.

as

as it came to be us'd in the Church. They ftoutly oppos'd the Worship of Images, and the Interceffion and Invocation of Saints after the second Council of Nice, and the Doctrine of the Corporal Prefence of Chrift in the Holy Eucharift, afterwards call'd Tranfubftantiation, to the very Conqueft, as your Ladyship may fee in their Anniversary Eafter-Homily, tranflated out of Saxon into modern English by Mr. Life. They alfo had the Holy Communion in both Kinds from the Time of St. Gregory to the Time of the Conqueft, which was about 466 Years the Thoufand, in which you fay our Ancestors receiv'd and embrac'd the Corruptions we complain of: But, Madam, fuppofing St. Auguftin had brought them into England, and that our Ancestors had profefs'd them from his Time to the Reformation, yet granting they were Corruptions; and Corruptions of fo long ftanding, yet that very Conceffion, as I have fhew'd, and as any Roman Catholick muft Gonfefs, will vindicate our Reformation from the Charge of Schifm. For Error, Madam, can by no Length of Time or Numbers of Men prefcribe against Truth, and therefore it was the Sin and Unhappiness of our Ancestors to continue fo long unreform'd under those Corruptions; for which our Reformers juftly thought themselves difcharg'd and from their fworn Obedience and Subjection to the Bishops of Rome. For, as I have already told your Ladyship, the Point of this Controverfy about Schifm is plainly this: Whether or no the Innovations, Errors and Ufurpations we complain of are truly fuch? If they are, no Oaths could bind our Ancestors from reforming, because no Oaths can bind unto Sin. The Priests of the Church of England take Oaths of Obedience to their Bishops, as their Ecclefiaftical Superiors, and the Bishops of both Provinces to their Metropolitans, as their Superiors. But then, Madam, they are Oaths of Canonical Obedience, for if any of them profefs, or determine, or enforce any