The Greek and Armenian Churches own Prayers for the Dead, and many other Things which the Papifts ufe,(and yet the Armenian Church Excommunicates the Pope every Year.) And although (as M. A. fays) that they fhak'd off the Pope's Jurifdiction, yet they retain'd Tranfubftantiation in King Henry VIII's Time: that was not enough to denominate them Papifts; they might be called Erroneous, but not Papists; yea Papifts may difown Tranfubftantiation and yet be Popish, as Bertram and Berengarius were. Yet None will deny, but Scotus and Durandus, two famous Schoolmen, were Popish, and yet difown'd Tranfubftantiation, Scot. in 4. Sent. Cap. 2. Q.3. Durand, in 4. Sent. Dift. 10. Q. 1. Num. 13. See Comber's Advice to the Roman Catholicks. I fhall here make a Parallel. To make a Presbyterian it is enough that he deny the Jurifdiction and Ordination by Diocefan Bishops, and affert, That by Divine Right fimple Presbyters can ordair without Bishops; and that every Paroch Minister is a Bishop: A Man may be a Presbyterian and yet fay the Lord's Prayer; yea more, and which is very rare, one may be a Presbyterian and yet be loyal to his Hereditary King; yea and may preach a Chriftmals Sermon on the 25. December. You argue against us as the fimple Ignorants amongst you argue against your felves. That it favours of Prelacy to fay the Lord's Prayer, and this they take as a Mark of Distinction betwixt Epifcopal and Presbyterian. I add further, That to own the Book of CommonPrayer as a lawful Worship, and preferring it to Extemporary Prayer, is not enough to denominate a Man Epiicopal: For a Presbyterian or Independent may own that Notion, and yet be Presbyterian or Independent ftill. Thus Mr. Baxter tells us, in his Cure of Church Divifions, Page 135. "Many a "time have I rather gone to the Common Prayers, for fear of being a Scandal, to "thefe fame Men who called the going to them a Scandal, that is, for fear of harden"ing them in a finful Separation or Error; because I knew that was not a Scandal "which they called a Scandal, that is, difpleafing or croffing their Opinion. I knew a Curate who was against the Book of Common-Prayer, and a prefent Kirkman, who told it was the beft Bond of Unity, and the greatest Bar of Schifm that cou'd be in a Christian Church, and yet the one Epifcopal and the other Pref byterian. But further, the Presbyterians, tho' they are not for Popery, yet they agree with the Jefuits in dethroning of Kings, or making a Conditional King, or fuch as they can make or unmake at their pleasure; yet this is not enough to fay that Presbyterians are Papifts, more than that they are Prelatifts, tho' they should go to the Book of Comnon-Prayer. Presbyterians plead Supremacy over all Kings, over all Perfons and over all Causes, as I have proven Numb. II. yet this is not enough to denominate them Papifts: All the Difference is, that Papifts plead a Monarchick and the Presbyterian a Republican Supremacy, as one would change a Guinea or a Crown into a Rabble of Turners. My Adverfary, Page 21. repeats what he had formerly faid, to wit, That the Liturgy is not fo good now as the Martyrs left it, and inftances that Petition, From the Tyranny of the Bishop of Rome good Lord deliver us. By the Roman Yoke was meant the Supremacy; and Page 21. Mr. Anderfon tells, That in King Henry's Time, People were hang'd for owning the Pope's Supremacy, and at the fame time were hang'd for denying Tranfubftantiation. I have told already what is truly and properly Popery; but I add, That I doubt not but when the Pope made Offers to continue the Service in English, but that even he wou'd part with the Word Tranfubftantiation too for his Supremacy, and take the Eucharift with the English Geniculation, and Calvin's Notion of the Sacrament, i Cor. 11. 24. This is my Body: "Neither does Chrift offer the Benefit ❝of His Death and Refurrection to us, but that very Body in which He suffered ❝ and rofe again. ( But then tho' I know the Anfwer will not pleafe) that Petition, From the Tyranny of the Roman Toke, &c. it was laid afide in Queen Elizabeth's Days, not to please the Pope, but to bring in Popish Subjects to Prayers in the Church; and it was laid afide upon a prudent Confideration, and to gain the fcrupulous Subjects to the Unity of the Church: For by an Act they were all obliged to come, under the Pain of a pecunial Mulet or Fine: So this Petition was laid afide to gain them. Thus, Mr. Durel in his Vindic. Eccl. Anglic. fpeaks of a malicious Ferfon that objects this to the Church of England, not out of Ignorance, for he knew there was such an A&t, but for Wrangling and and Contention's fake. I hear M. A. left the faying of the Lord's Prayer, contráry to his own Inclinatson, because fome few pitiful Bodies run out when he faid it: And his Brethren in fome Places in the North, are forc'd to fay it, to keep the People together: Altho' Mr. Hog fays, that the faying of it after Prayers, is an Ingine from Hell, and tho' the bigot ignorant Commons call it an Idol and a Rot-Rhime. I remember, fome Years ago, that I liv'd in a Place where I was in Friendship with the Presbyterian Teacher of the Parish,and inviting me to be his conftant Hearer, offer'd this Condition, That I fhould never hear him pray against Prelacy. But, to conclude, let it be observed, That the Church of England does not own the Pope's Supremacy in its Government, nor the Trent Creed in its Worship; and confequently it is Ignorance and Malice to the hight, to charge it with Popery. I here fubjoin the Special Profeffion of Pius IV. which proceeds in thefe Words: 1. I most firmly admit and embrace the Apoftolical and Ecclefiaftical Traditions, 2. I do also admit the Sacred Scripture, according to that Senfe which our holy 'Mother, the Church, hath held, and doth hold, to whom it belongs, to judge of the true Senfe and the Interpretation of the facred Scriptures: Nor will I ever take or interprete it, but according to the unanimous Confent of the Fathers. 3. I profefs alfo, that there are truly and properly Seven Sacraments of the New "Law,inftituted by Jefus Christ,our Lord, and neceffary for the Salvation of Mankind; though not all for every one. Scil. Baptifm, Confirmation, Eucharift, Penitence, "Extream Unction, Order and Matrimony; and that they confer Grace; and that of these, Baptifm, Confirmation and Order, cannot be reiterated with Sacriledge. 4. I do alfo receive and admit the received and approved Rites of the Catholick 'Church, in the folemn Adminiftration of all the Sacraments aforesaid. 5. I embrace and receive all, and every the Things,which,concerning Original Sin and Juftification, have been defined and declared in the holy Synod of Trent 6. I profefs likewife, That in the Mafs is offered unto God, a true, proper and 'propitiatory Sacrifice for the Living and the Dead;and that in the most holy Sacrament of the Eucharist is truly, really and fubftantially the Body and Blood, together 'with the Soul and Divinity of our Lord Jefus Chrift; and that there is a Conversion ' of the whole Substance of Bread into the Body, and of the whole Subftance of the • Wine into the Blood; which Converfion, the Catholick Church calls Tranfubftan tiation. I confefs alfo, That in one Kind only is Christ whole and entire, and a true Sacrament received. 7. 8. I conftantly hold, That there is a Purgatory; and that the Souls there detained, are helped by the Prayers of the Faithful: Likewise alfo, That the Saints reign⚫ing together with Chrift,are to be venerated and invok'd; and that they offer Prayers to God for us; and that their Relicks are to be had in Veneration. 9. I most firmly affert, that the Images of Chrift, and of the Blessed Virgin, Mother of GOD, and alfo of other Saints, ought to be had and retained; and that 'due Honour and Veneration ought to be given to them. 10. I affirm alfo, that a Power of Indulgences was left by Chrift in the Church, ' and that the Use of them is very helpful to the Chriftian People. 11. I acknowledge the Holy Catholick and Apoftolick Roman Church,the Mother and Miftref of all Churches; and I promife and fwear true Obedience to the Bishop of Rome, the Succeffor of Bleffed Peter, Prince of the Apostles, and the Vicar of Jejus • Chrift. 12. I also receive and profefs without doubt all other Things delivered, defined and declared by S. Canons, Oecumenical Councils, and especially by the H. Synod of "Trent; and all Things contrary thereunto, and all Herefies whatsoever condemned and rejected, and anathematized by the Church, I likewise condemn, reject and 'anathematize. • This true Catholic Faith, out of which none can be faved, which at present I freely ' profess,and truly hold, I N. do promife, vow and fwear moft conftantly (GOD affifting) to retain and profefs the fame entire and inviolate to the laft Breath of my Life; and that I will take Care, as far as I fhall be able, that it be held, taught ' and preach'd by my Subjects, or thofe, of whom the Care belongs to me in my Of fice: So help me GOD, and the Holy Gospels of GOD. AND AND now, Good Reader, when the Controverfy anent the true Notion of Popery is thus clearly stated; who fhould not lament the fad Condition of the poor mifled People, who are under the Tutory of falfe Teachers, who cry out against the Book of Common-Prayer as Popish? Who fhould not pity them who are depriv'd of a found and folid Worship, and are fed with nothing but Husks and Trafh, the dark and fowr Principles of the Nonfenfe and Blafphemy of Enthusiastick Extemporizers? Let every Reader then obferve, that the true and proper Notion of Popery is, owning the Pope's Jurifdiction and Supremacy over all Kings and Kingdoms, over all Perfons and in all Causes; and alfo that the Trent Creed is a Partition-Wall betwixt us and the Papifts. And let it be remembred alfo, for Reafoning in common Discourse, that the Church of England has fhaken off the Pope's Supremacy, which I told you is the true and proper Notion of Popery: And this furely is not the Government of the Church of England; neither does it practife the Trent Creed in its Worship. I add to this, that, if we should shake off all Things that Papifts do practise, we will be forc'd at last to feek for a new Gospel and a new Creed. I will here divert the Reader with Two or Three Queftions, upon the Ignorance of fome and Malice of others, in ftating the Queftion betwixt Papifts and Proteftants. i. Queft. Why do Presbyterians account themselves found Proteftants? Anf. Because they took a Toleration from a Popish King, and came in at the fame Door, and with the fame Design, to ruin the Proteftant Epifcopal Church, which was then establish'd by Law. 2. Q. Why do the Presbyterians think themselves not Popish? A. Because they would take the Pope's Supremacy and Power to themselves over all Perfons, and all Caufes; and they would dethrone Kings, and absolve Subjects from their Allegiance, who oppofe their Solemn League and Covenant; as well as the Pope does, for oppofing his Supremacy and the Trent Creed. 3. Q. Why do they look upon the Church of England as Popifh? A. Because it gainftands the Pope's Supremacy, and hath nothing of the Trent Creed in its Worship. There are feveral Things mentioned by the by, in this Section, by M. A. which shall be examined in a Number by themselves; as for Examples, p. 23. he vindicates that Expreffion, (The Impertinencies of the Epistles and Gospels) faying, Is it not impertinent to read the 40 of Ifa. for the Epistle of St. John? Does not (fays he) every one know,these are not Epiftles? To this we anfwer, That the Book of Common Prayer does not call them Epiftles,but fay the 40th of Ifa. is read for the Epistle, that is,instead of the Epistle. Had not this Author good will to quibble against the Liturgy, when he made this an Objection against it? 2do. He fays, that I palpably mifreprefent the Author of the Cafuiftical Effay, Mr. Hog by Name: Whereas I repeat his own very Words, pag. 318. thus, The frequent faying of the Lord's Prayer, is turning it into a Lifeleß, faples, and loathfom Worship. Again, pag. 320----The concluding with thefe Words, rather than at any other Time, is an Engine of Hell, not only far contrary to the Divine Prefcript, but likewife fubverfive of the Gospel of Chrift. Yea, he tells us, that he doubts not of the Concurrence of those that are exercised in Godliness, to fay with him. Now either M. A. is Godly or Ungodly: If he be Godly, he'll fay with Mr. Hog; if he be Ungodly, he'll diffent from him. And really I think the Ungodly right upon this Point. Again, pag. 27. he endeavours to free the Presbyterians from the Murther of King Charles I. But the Solemn League and Covenant, the Act of the Weft-Kirk, and the Penitentials of the Synod of Aberdeen, &c. will demonftrate to the World,who had the direct Hand in that barbarous and bloody Tragedy. Again, pag. 29. Hippolitus his Opinion of the Devil's being the Anti-Chrift,is as good Senfe as is fpoken upon the Head. All these Points fhall be treated in a Number by themselves. P Of the Reading of the Apocrypha. AGE 30. You cannot let pass that Mistake in citing the 6th English Canon, inftead of the 6th Article, viz. That the Apocrypha Books are read not to prove any Point of Faith, but very inftructive for Morals: And for this, the 6th Article cites St. Jerome's Authority. I added also, That these Books were not read upon Sundays: And I told, That what is omitted to be read in Scripture, is no Difadvantage to any Article of Faith. And I wish, the People were first principled in the Fundamentals of the Creed (of which they're generally ignorant) before they troubled their Heads with Chronologies, Genealogies, legal Sacrifices, and Catalogues of Hebrew Names and Places, ob-> fcure and dark Places of Scripture, which are abftrufe to the Clergy as well as to the Laity. Withal, the reading of the Chronicles is omitted for another Reafon; and that because (for the most part) the Matter contained in them, is to be found in the Books of Samuel and of the Kings. The Mistake of putting in Canon for Article, was mine; and yet you fay, That I had it out of Dr. Falconer; which when I lookt to, I found him right, and my felf in the wrong: So that I could not have it out of him. If I made a Noise of that grofs Error in your Title-Page, Crimine ex uno difce omnes, I was in the wrong; because I cannot impute it to Ignorance, but to Mistake. Page 31. Thou calls it bordering upon Blafphemy, that I fhould have faid, That the People are more edified by the reading the Apocryphal Books, than by the Chronicles, and other omitted Places. This you call, A preferring an human Composure to divine Infpiration: And you add, That the 17th Chapter of the 1 Chronicles, is more edifying than the half of the Apocrypha. And then thou mentions Tullie's Offices, Seneca, Plato, Horace, Jamblicus, Juvenal: Not one of all these (fay you) but is more inftructive than the Apocrypba, frequently more found Divinity, and always more elegant. I I here intreat the Attention of the judicious Reader. He tells the 17 of the 1. Chron. is more edifying than the half of the Apocrypha: Words befitting a Deift or an Atheift, who prefers Heathen Authors who were Aliens from the Common-Wealth of Ifrael, to the Writings of Holy Men, who were Members of God's Church, which comes next to the infpired Writings, and Canonical Books of the Old-Teftament, and written according to the Doctrine of the Law and Prophets Writings! for which primitive Fathers and Councils had a vaft Deference; and which the learn'deft of Prefbyterians have in high Veneration, as being written with fuch an Air of the Spirit of God, and fo conform to the infpir'd Writings, that 'tis furprifing to hear any go under the Name of a Christian, express himself at fuch a Rate. They are written in a majestick, lofty, feeling and humble Stile; and in fome Places prophetick of the Meffias, as 2 Efd. 7 Chap. 8. Sir, pray be ingenuous and tell me, did you ever read the firft Ten Chapters of the 1 Book of the Chron. or lecture on them, to your Auditory? Tell me, what would that fignify to an Auditory to read Hebrew Names of Perfons and Places, Genealogies or Myftical Chapters, which the Clergy cannot expound? Yea, and to an Auditory that is ignorant of the plain Points of the Chriftian Religion? Are not Mr. Hugh Binning's Sermons upon the Fundamentals of Chriftianity, more profitable than the reading of fome Chapters, which the People no more understand upon than they do Hebrew or Greek? I fhall allow the moral Difcourfes of the Heathens God & Providence,Mortality & Happiness,very edifying; & I think that which we call natural Religion, is Divinity, as well as reveal'd Religion: But to compare the Writings of Horace to the Apocrypha, which are written according to the Canonical Books of the Old-Teftament, and not only fo, but to make them excel these holy Penmen, is a Piece of avowed Blafphemy. The 17 of the 1 Chron. (you fay) is worth the half of the Apocrypha; but Horace is better than all the Apocrypha; and confequently Horace must be better than the 17 Chap. of the 1 Chron. which is a Part of the Canonical Scriptures. All Truths are Truths, but not of equal Importance; that St. Paul left a Cloak at Troas, is true; yet not fo neceffary to be preached upon as the Incarnation, Nativity, Death, and Refurrection of Chrift. So all the Chapters in the Bible are Canonical Scripture; but not equally edifying, nor equally fit to be read to a common Auditory. I When your When I told you Pag. 17 in my Pamphlet, That you prefer your own Difcourses, and make them to be more edifying than the Word of God; and that from both Larger and Shorter Catechifms in that Question. How is the Word made effectual to Salvation? Ans. The Spirit of God maketh the Reading, but especially the Preaching of the Word an effectual Mean of convincing and converting Sinners, &c. Thou was pleafed to pass this by: Sir, it is too choaking for thee. Now to have your own Compofitions mixt but too much with Ignorance, falfe Maxims, and falfe Doctrine, Fancies and your own Explanations of Scripture which favour the Corruptions of Nature, and to neglect the reading of the Scriptures, which is truly preaching according to the 15. Chap: of the Acts 21, 22. and to accufe us for omitting fome few Chapters, which are not fo edifying for ordinary Hearers, is a moft unaccountable Piece of Impudence. Next when I tell, That the Jews did not read all the Scriptures; that the Hagiogr. were omitted; yet Chrift did not defert their Communion: What then, fays thou, are we obliged to imitate the Jewish Fooleries? Nor did He defert their Communion, for the ungodly Doctrine of the Corban, or preferring their own Traditions to the Commandments of God. Sir, He did not reprove the one, but the other He rebuked feverely. Was not this Anfwer obvious to thy felf: But thou art refolved to be ftill contentious. Let him then that is wilful be wilful ftill: 'Tis not for Truth, but for Triumph thou contends; but that thou'lt never obtain in the Judgment of rational Chriftians. The Jews read an Hundred Times more Scripture than you do, and we read Six Times more than they; and yet thou ftill fnarles against the most rational and most edifying Church in the World. When I tell, That the primitive Chriftians read other Writings befide the infpir'd. Thou answers like thy felf, What then? I should prove that they omitted the reading of the Canonical Scriptures, to make Way for thefe. I answer, They did not omit the reading of Canonical Scriptures; it is prefum'd they did what was rational and edifying and that many Places of Canonical Scripture were not fo edifying, to a Vulgar Auditory as the Apocrypha, which were the Ecclefiaftical Writings in the Old Testament, as the Epiftles, of Barnabas, Hermas, Ignatius, &c. are the Ecclefiaftical Writings in the New Teftament. Thou tells us alfo, That the primitive Chriftians had a Custom of cramming the Eus charift down Infants Throats upon a mistaken Interpretation of the 6. S. Joh. 53. Except ye eat the Flefb of the Son of Man, &c. This, fay you, was the Practice of Cyprian's Time; but how long before thou doft not know. And yet Page 43. thou fays, That the ufe of the Cross was not more early than giving the Eucharift to Infants. This is a grofs Miftake,for you read not the giving the Communion to Infants more early than S. Cyprian, as I think Mufculus in his common Places (I have not the Book at Hand) tells, was a Custom in Lorain, whereas we read of the Crofs, an Hundred Years before, and was an universal Practice. I fear, Sir, there is one Book that misleads you all, as to this Point, and that of a Diocefan Bishop, and that's the Anonymous Author of the Enquiry into the Conftitution Difcipline, Unity, and Worship that flourish'd within the first 300 Years after Chrift, Part 2. Page 26 and 146. which fays the very fame thing that thou fays. But this will not import, that giving the Euchaaift to Infants, was as univerfal a Cuftom as the Sign of the Crofs, or the reading of the Apocrypha. We have (for ought I can learn) S. Cyprian and fome few others after his Time reporting it. V Poor Tobit, muft not escape without a Lafh of thy Pen, and not one Word to the Answer I have given. But it is fure, he was no Whigg: He held by the Aaronical Succeffion, in oppofition to Jeroboam's new, upftart Kirk and his Ordinationless PrieftsTob. 1, 2, 3. The ancient Fathers had another Opinion of Tobit than thou; St. Cyprian in his Book of Alms, calls it Scripture: The Spirit of God (faith the Father) fays, That by Alms and Faith Sins are done away. And St. Ambrofe in his Book on Tobit I Chap. calls this Book, Prophetical Scripture. St. Bafil in his Oration against Covetoufnefs, citing a Sentence out of Tobit, calls it a divine Precept. I told Page 19. what was objected against the Book of Tobit, to which I refer my Reader; for there is not one Word of it anfwered, and Page 17, 20. The Hiftory of the Idol Bel and Dragon, that it is neither impoffible nor improbable it should be a true Narration; and more are of the Mind it is, than that it is falfe. I told alfo, That the Hiftory of the Idol Bel and Dragon,was cited by Iraneus, Tertullian, Clemens Alexandrinus, Cyprian, Gregory Nazianzen,as a true Hiftory. And again, as I faid, |