The English concord in ansvver to Becane's English iarre: together with a reply to Becan's Examen of the English Concord. By Richard Harris, Dr. in Diuinitie.

❧ Becans Iarre. (Book 1)

The I. Question. Whether the King of England haue any Pri∣macie in the Church. (Book 1)

1. THE first Iarre or contention then is, concerning the name of Primacy. Many of our Aduersaries admit this Name: but M. Richard Tompson had rather haue it called Supremacy, then Primacie. His reason is, because Primacy doth signifie a power of the same Order. Now, the King hath not power in the Church of Eng∣land of the same Order with Bishops and Ministers, but a pow∣er of higher and different Order from them. Ergo, hee hath not the Primacy, but the Supremacy. The vvords of M. Tomp∣son pag. 33. of his booke are these: Nos in Anglico nostro idio∣mate belliores longè sumus, quàm per inopiam Latini ser∣monis, nobis Latinè esselicuit. Nō enim dicimus, The Kings Primacy, Regis Primatum, sed The Kings Supremacy, Regis Suprematum: Quo vocabulo nos quoque deinceps vte∣mur.

Multùm enim differunt Primatus & Suprematus. Illud enim Potestatem eiusdem Ordinis videtur significare, hoc non item. Wee in our English tongue, doe speake much more properly, then vvee can doe in the Latine speech, through the penury thereof. For wee doe not say, The Kings Primacy, but The Kings Supremacie: which word 〈…〉〈…〉 For that Primacy and Supremacie doe greatly differ: Prima∣cie seeming to signifie a power of the same Order, but Supre∣macie not so.

2. Out of which words, wee gather two things. The one, that all Englishmen, vvho vse the Name of Primacie, doe ei∣ther erre or speake improperly, if vve beleeue M. Tompson. For if they speake propertie; seeing that the vvord Primacy doth properly siguifie a Power of the same Order; they doe plainely vnderstand that the King hath Power of the same order with the Bishops and Ministers of his Church. But this now according to M. Tompsons opinion, is an error: wherefore either they doe erre, or speake improperly.

3. The other is, that a Coniecture may be made of the thing signified, from the word signifying. The vvord Supre∣macie is a new and lately inuented vvord, vnknowne to the Ancient Fathers, not vsed in Scriptures, vnheard of in the Christian world.

Moreouer, vvhat doth it signifie? The Supreme power (for∣sooth) of the King in the Church? Wherefore this is new also. Surely, if the ancient Fathers, either Latine or Greeke, had knowne this power, they would haue found out at least som word, whereby to haue expressed the same properly. But this it seemes none of them did.

English Concord.* 1.1

IS Becane the Iesuite become a captious cauiller at syllables, Pri. and Sapre? Our Soueraigue Lord K. Iames, translated the english word Supremacy,a 1.2 into the Latin word Primatum; and M^r. Thomson translated the same English Supremacy, into his Latine word Su∣prematum. Here is full agreement in the thing it selfe; and will the Iesuit striue about words, or diu••rs names of the selfe same thing? Certainely, a Christian king, is neither Presbiter Priest: norb 1.3 chiefe of Presbiters, that is, Bishop: nor chiefe among the Bishops, that is, Archbishoppe: nor chiefe of Archbishops, that is, Patriarke: nor chiefe of Patriarkes, to weet, Pope; and in that sense he is no Primate, or hath Primacy; but he is the onely Supreme gouernour of all Presbiters, Bi∣shops, Archbishops, Patriarkes, and Popes; within his dominions; whose supreme gouernment, we call in English Supremacy, or (after the Latin word, which our king v••ed) Primacy; and acknowledge the same, by our oath, thereof taken. But now let vs attend these two goodly consequences which the Iesuite maketh.

1. R. Thomson hath deuised a new Latin name, to ex∣presse the selfe same thing, and the selfe same English name of the same thing: Therefore the thing it selfe is new.

The Fathers of the Nicene Councell deuised a new name, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to expresse the Deitie of Christ, or Christ in respect of his Deity. Therefore is Christ his Deitie new? or Christ in respect of his Deitie, new?

Take heede Becane of such a consequent.

Thus rather perhaps the sequell would runne more roundly: The name (Iesuits) is new; Therefore de∣seruedly may the Iesuits be called, as blasphemous, so new, sectaries. Indeede, if the ancient Fathers had ac∣knowledged the power of Vniuersall Bishoppe, they would haue found, at least, one word, whereby to haue expressed the same properly: especially considering that (if we will beleeue Gregory the great).* 1.4 To assume that arrogant, profane, sacrilegious, & Antichristian name, of Vniuersall Bishoppe; is all one, and the same, as to be the king of pride: Lucifer, who set himselfe before his brethe∣ren: to be an Apostate from the faith, and the forerunner of Antichrist.

In the Canon law, we read thus:* 1.5 Let not the Bishop of the first Sea, be called the Prince of Priests, or high Priest, or any the like: but onely the Bishop of the first Sea; but let not the very Bishop of Rome, be called Vniuersall Bishop.

Let Becane tell me which of the ancient Fathers, ei∣ther acknowledged the Popes supreme power ouer the whole Church; or in proprietie of speech, and, as proper vnto him, called the same Primacy: touching which, Chrysostom, as hee is cited in the Canon law,* 1.6 writeth thus: Whosoeuer shall desire Primacy in earth shall finde confusion in heauen: neither shall he be numbred among the serwants of Christ, who doth handle, or contend for Primacy.

His second consequence is this: M^r. Thomson deui∣sed a new word or name, whereby to expresse in Latin more fully and properly (as be tooke it) the English word Supremacy: Therefore whosoeuer doe not call Supremacy, in Latin, Suprematum, speake improperly.

Fy! how hang these together? Forsooth, please it the Iesuites, as scattered broomeshaggs.

To conclude. Becane himselfe, Quest. 12. page 43. brings in M^r. Thomson speaking thus: Primacy is a royall good thing, or the Prerogatiue royall, vvhich can not be ta∣ken away by Ecclesiasticall censure: neither is it absurd, that an heathen king should be Primate of the Church. There∣fore, according to Becane his dispute here, They, vvho ascribe Primacy to the king, and call him Primate of the Church, erre not, but speake properly.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Page 20
• a 1.2

  Apol. ••ur. fid. pag. 54
• b 1.3

  August. Q ex viroq, Testa. mixt. Q. 101
• * 1.4

  Gregor. li. 4. Ep it. 76.78.80. et lib. 7 Epist. 79
• * 1.5

  Dist. 99 Primx.
• * 1.6

  Dist. 40 Multi.