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.

English Concord.* 1.1

WHy should I schoole an Asse? with whom, gently to claw, and curstlie to kick, Mule-like, is all one? Or why should I rubbe your memorie, to recognize these your owne words: Iames, the most renowned & potent King of England,* 1.2 in his Apology, and monitory Préface to the Emperour, &c. endeuoureth to proue, that himselfe in Eng∣land, and euery King in his kingdome, is Head, or Primat of the Church.

There, you confound Head & Primat, as one thing: heere, by a two-fold question, you sepatate them, as diuerse things. So the Mule scratcheth himselfe.

The King doth make no expresse mention of the word Primat: yet, (as you say) hee endeuoureth to

proue, and proueth demonstratiuely, that he is Primat of the Church. Therefore, as the King, wee, and your lelfe, understand it; it is all one, to have the Primacy of the Church, and to be Primat of the Church. Sith then, weeagree in the thing, why doe you wrafig be about the name, heere, of Primat, as before of Primacy?

Doctor Tooker, and Maister Burhill, lume openlie professed, subscribed, and sworne, that the King is the onely Supreme Gouernour in, and ouer, all causes, and per∣sons, Eoclesiasticall vvithin his Realine: that is, ••h•• Hain∣rick, and Thomson, and your selfe vnderstand it, in one word, Primat. But Tooker, and Burhill, deny the King to be Primat of the Church. They doe so, & that right∣ly: to weet, in your popish sense, of Supreme Primat of the Church Sacer do tall or Episcopall. By which distincti∣on well vnderstood and vsed, it appeareth, that among vs, there is no Iarre at all, touching the Supremacy, or Primat.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Pag. 29
• * 1.2

  Refut. Apol. & Praef. monit. Re∣gis, pag. 17.