An answer to Monsieur de la Militiere his impertinent dedication of his imaginary triumph,: to the king of Great Britain to invite him to embrace the Roman Catholick religion. / By John Bramhall D.D. and Lord Bishop of London-Derry.

* 1.1Would you know then what it was that Conjur'd up the storm among us? It was some feigned jealousies and fears, (which the first broachers themselves knew well enough to be fables) dispersed cunningly among the people, That the King pur∣posed to subvert the funda∣mentall Lawes of the King∣dome, and to reduce the free English Subject to a condition of absolute slavery under an Arbitrary Government. For which massy weight of mali∣tious untruth, they had no supporters, but a few Bull∣rushes. Secondly, that he meant to apostate from the Protestant Religion to Pope∣ry,

and to that end had raised the Irish Rebellion by secret encouragements, and Com∣missions; For which mon∣strous calumny, they had no other foundation (except the solemn religious Order of di∣vine Service in his own Chap∣pell, and Cathedral Churches) then some unseasonable dis∣putes about an Altar, or a Table, and the permission of the Popes Agent, to make a short stay in England, more for reasons of State than of Religion. And some sensless fictions of some Irish Rebels, who having a Patent under the great Seal of Ireland for their Lands, to colour their barbarous murthers, shewed it to the poor simple people as a Commission from the

King to levy forces. And last∣ly some impious pious frauds of some of your own partie, whose private whispers, and printed insinuations did give hopes, that the Church of England, was comming about to shake hands with the Ro∣man in the points controver∣ted; Which was meerly de∣vised to gull some silly crea∣tures, whom they found apt to be catched with chaff; for which they had no more pre∣text of truth, than you have for your groundless intimations in this unwelcome dedication.

These suspitions being com∣pounded with Covetousness, Ambition, Envy, Emulation, desire of Revenge, and dis∣content, were the sourse of all our Calamities. Thus much

you your self confess in effect; that, this supposition, that the King and Bishops had an in∣tention to re-establish the Ro∣man Catholique Religion, was the venom which the Puri∣tan faction infused into the hearts of the people,* 1.2 to fill them with hatred against a King worthy of love; And the Parliament judged it a fa∣vourable occasion for their de∣sign, to advance themselves to Soveraign Authority, Be Judge your self how much they are accessary to our suf∣ferings, who either were, or are the Authors, or fomenters of these damnable slanders.

There was yet one cause more of this cruell persecuti∣on, which I cannot conceal from you, because it concerns

some of your old acquaintance. There was a Bishop in the world (losers must have leave to talk) whose privie Purse, and subtill Counsells, did help to kindle that unnatu∣rall war in his Majesties three Kingdomes. Our Cardinall Wolsey complained before his death, That he had served his King better than his God. But certainly this practise in your friend, was neither Good service to his God, to be the author of the effusion of so much innocent blood, nor yet to his King, to let the world see such a dangerous president. It is high time for a man to look to himself, when his next neighbours house is all on a flame.

As hitherto I have follow∣ed

your steps, though not al∣together in your own Method, or rather your own confusion; So I shall observe the same course for the future. Your discourse is so full of Mean∣ders and windings, turnings, and returnings, you congre∣gate Heterogenious matter, and segregate that which is homogeneous, as if you had made your Dedication by starts, and snatches; and never digested your whole discourse; On the contrary, where I meet with any thing, it shall be my desire to dispatch it out of my hands, with whatsoe∣ver perteins unto it once for all. I hope you expect not that I should amuse my self at your Rhetoricall flowers, and elegant expressions; they

agree well enough with the work you were about; The Pipe playes sweetly, whilst the Fowler is catching his prey. Trappings are not to be condemned, if the things themselves are good and use∣full, but I prefer one Pome∣granate Tree loaden with good fruit, before a whole row of Cypresses, that serve onely for shew. Be sure of this, that where any thing in your E∣pistle reflects upon the Church of England, I shall not miss it first or last, though it be but a loose unjoynted peece, and so perhaps hitherto un∣touched.

* 1.3Amongst other things which you lay to our charge, you glance, at the least twelve times, at our supposed Schism.

But from first to last, never attempt to prove it, as if you took it for granted. I have shaped a Coat for a Schisma∣tick, and had presented it to you in this answer, but con∣sidering that the matter is of moment, and merits as much to be seriously and solidly weighed, as your naked Cri∣mination without all pretext of proof deserves to be sleigh∣ted, lest it might seem here as an impertinent digression, to take up too much place in this short discourse, I have added it at the Conclusion of this Answer, in a short Tract by it self, that you may per∣use it if you please.* 1.4

You fall heavily, in this Discourse, upon the Presbyte∣rians, Brownists, and Inde∣pendents,

if they intend to return you any answer, they may send it by a messenger of their own. As for my part, I am not their Proctor, I have received no Fee from them. And if I should under∣take to plead their Cause up∣on my own head, by our old English Law, you might call me to accompt for unlawfull maintenance. Onely give me leave as a by-stander to won∣der why you are so cholerique against them, for certainly they have done you more ser∣vice in England, then ever you could have done for your selves.

And I wonder no less why you call our Reformation, a Calvinisticall Reformation, brought into England by Bu∣cer,

and Peter Martyr, a blind Reformation, yea, the intire ruine of the Faith, of the ve∣ry form of the Church, and of the civill Government of the Common-wealth instituted by God.* 1.5 Though you confess a∣gain in our favour, that if our first Reformers had been in∣terrogated, whether they meant:* 1.6 * 1.7 any such thing, they would have purged themselves,* 1.8 and avouched their Innocence with their hands upon the new Gospell. The gifts of Enemies are no gifts. If such as these are all your courtesies, you may be pleased to take them again; Our first Reformers might safely swear upon any Gospell, old, or new, that they meant no such thing. And we may as securely swear upon

all the books of God, old or new, that there is no such thing. But why our Gospell should be younger or newer than Sixtus Quintus his Gos∣pell, or Clemens Octavus his Gospell, passeth my under∣standing, and yours also.

Comparisons are odious, therefore I will not say, that the true English Protestant standing to his own grounds, is the best subject in the world. But I do say, that he is as good a subject as any in the world, and our princi∣ples as Innocent, and as auxi∣liary to civill Government, as the Maximes of any Church under Heaven. And more than yours, where the clashing of two Supreme Authorities, and the exemption of your

numerous Clergy from the Coercive power of the Prince, and some other novelties which I forbear to mention, do alwayes threaten a storm.

Tell me Sir, if you can, what Church in Europe hath declared more fully, or more favourably for Monarchy than the poor Church of England,* 1.9 That the most high and Sa∣cred Order of Kings, is of Divine Right, being the Or∣dinance of God himself, foun∣ded in the prime Lawes of Nature, and clearly establish∣ed by express Texts, both of the old, and new Testament. Moreover, that this power is extended over all their Sub∣jects, Ecclesiasticall and Ci∣vill; That to set up any Inde∣pendent coactive power above

them, either Papall, or popu∣lar, either directly, or indirect∣ly, is to undermine their great royall Office, and cunningly to overthrow that most Sacred Ordinance, which God himself hath established. That for their subjects to bear Arms against them, Offensive, or defensive upon any pretence whatsoever, is to resist the powers which are ordeined of God.

* 1.10And why do you call our Reformation Calvinisticall, contrary to your own Con∣science, contrary to your own confession, That in our Re∣formation we reteined the an∣tient Order of Episcopacy,* 1.11 as Instituted by divine authority, and a Liturgy, and Ceremo∣nies, whereby we preserved the

face, or Image of the Catho∣lick Church.* 1.12 And that for this very cause the disciplina∣rians of Geneva, and the Pres∣byterians did conceive an im∣placable hatred against the King for the Churches sake, and out of their aversion to it. Did they hate their own Re∣formation so implacably? If these things be to be reconci∣led, reddat mihi minam Dio∣genes. He that looks more in disputation to the Advantage of his partie, than to the truth of his grounds, had need of a strong memory; We reteined not onely Episcopacy, Liturgy, and Ceremonies, but all things else that were conformable to the discipline, and publick ser∣vice of the primitive Church rightly understood.

No, Sir, we cannot pin our faith upon the sleeve of any particular man, as one used to say We love no nismes;* 1.13 neither Calvinism, nor Lutheranisme, nor Jonsenianism, but onely one, that we derive from An∣tioch, that is Christianism, We honour Learning, and Pi∣ety in our fellow servants, but we desire to wear no o∣ther badge or Cognizance, than that we received from our own Master at our Bap∣tism. Bucer was as fit to be Calvins Master, as his Scho∣lar. So long as Calvin conti∣nued with him in Germany, he was for Episcopacy, Litur∣gy, and Ceremonies, (and for assurance thereof subscri∣bed the Augustane Confessi∣on) and his late learned Suc∣cessor,

and assertor in Geneva, Monsieur Deodate, with sun∣dry others of that Communi∣on were not averse from them. Or why do you call our Reformation blind? It was not blindness, but too much affectation of knowledge, and too much peeping into con∣troverted, and new fangled Questions that hath endama∣ged our Religion. It is you that teach the Colliers Creed, not we.

Howsoever you pretend to prove that our Reformation was the ruine of the Church, and Common-wealth: wee expect you should endeavour to prove it. You cannot so far mistake your self as to conceive your authority to be the same with us, that Py∣thagoras

had among his Scho∣lars, to have his Dictates received for Oracles without proof; what did I say, that you pretend to prove it? That's too low an expression, you promise us a demonstra∣tion of it,* 1.14 so lively and evi∣dent that no reason shall be able to contradict it. Are you not afraid that too much ex∣pectation should prejudice your discourse by diminishing our applause?

Quid tanto dignum feret hic promissor hiatu? Do you think of nothing now but Triumphs? Lively and evi∣dent demonstration, not to be contradicted by reason, is like the Phenix much talked of, but seldom seen. Most men, when they see a man strip up

his sleeves, and make too large promises of fair dealing, do suspect jugling. No man pro∣clameth in the Market that he hath rotten wares to sell; And therefore we must be carefull, notwithstanding your great promises, to keep well Epicharmus his Jewell, Re∣member to distrust. By your permission, your glistering de∣monstration is a very coun∣terfeit, not so valuable as a Bristol Diamant, when it comes to be examined by the wheel.

Sometimes nothing is more necessary than Reformation.* 1.15 Never was house so wel buil∣ded, that now and then nee∣ded not reparation. Never Garden so well planted, but must sometimes be weeded.

Never any order so well in∣stituted, but in long tract of time there will be a ben∣ding and declining from its Primitive perfection, and a necessity of reducing it to its first principles. Are your Houses of Religion which are Reformed, therefore the less Religious? Why then did all the Princes and Com∣monwealths in Europe, Yea the Fathers themselves in the Councill of Trent, cry out so often, so earnestly, for a Re∣formation? yet were forced to content themselves with a vain shadow for the sub∣stance, as Ixion embraced a Cloud for Juno, or Children are often stilled with an emp∣ty bottle.

* 1.16But Reformation is not

agreeable to all persons. Ju∣das loved not an Audit, be∣cause he kept the Bag. Dull Lethargick people had rather sleep to death than be awa∣ked; to and mad phrenetick Bigots are apt to beat the Chirurgion that would bind up their wounds; but none are so averse from Reforma∣tion as the Court of Rome, where the very name is more formidable than Hannibal at the Gates, yea than all the five terrible things. No mer∣vail they are afraid to have their Oranges squeesed to their hands; if they were in∣fallible as they pretend there was no need of a Reforma∣tion, we wish they were, but we see they are not.

On the other side,* 1.17 it can∣not

be denyed that Refor∣mation, when it is unseaso∣nable, or inordinate, or ex∣cessive, may do more hurt than good; when Reformers want just Authority, or due information, or have si∣nister ends, or where the re∣medy may be of worse con∣sequence than the abuse, or where men run out of one extreme into another; there∣fore it is a rule in prudence, Not to remove an ill custom, when it is well setled; Un∣less it bring great prejudices, and then it is better to give one account, why we have taken it away, than to be al∣waies making excuses why we do it not. Needless alte∣ration doth diminish the ve∣nerable esteem of Religion,

and lessen the credit of an∣tient truths. Break Ice in one place, and it will crack in more. Crooked sticks by bending streight are some∣times broken into two.

There is a right mean be∣tween these extremes,* 1.18 if men could light on it, that is nei∣ther to destroy the body out of hatred to the sores and Ulcers, nor yet to cherish the sores and Ulcers, out of a doating affection to the body, that is, neither to destroy an∣tient Institutions, out of a zealous hatred to some new abusers, nor yet to do at so upon antient Institutions, as for their sakes to cherish new abuses.

Our Reformation is just* 1.19 as much the cause of the ru∣in

of our Church and Com∣mon-wealth, as the building of Tenderden Steeple was the cause of Goodwins Sands, or the ruin of the Country thereabouts, because they hap∣pened both much about the same time.

—Careat successibus opto,

May he ever want success who judgeth of Actions by the Event. Our Reformation hath ruined the Faith, just as the plucking up of weeds in a Garden, ruins the good Herbs. It hath ruined the Church, just as a body full of superfluous and vicious humours is ruined by an healthfull purgation. It hath ruined the Common-wealth, just as the pruning of the Vine ruins the Elm. No, no

Sir, Our sufferings, for the Faith, for the Church, for the Monarchy, do proclame us Innocent to all the world, of the ruin either of Faith, or Church, or Monarchy. And in this capacity we choose ra∣ther to sterve Innocents, than to swim in plenty as No∣cents.

But this is but one of your doubles to keep us from the right forme. It is your new Roman Creed that hath ruined the Faith. It is your Papall Court that hath ruined the Church. It is your new Doctrines of the Popes Omnipotence over tempo∣rall persons in order unto spirituall ends, of absolving subjects from their Oaths of Alleageance, of exempting

the Clergy from secular ju∣risdiction, of the lawfulness of murthering Tyrants and excommunicated Princes, of aequivocation and the like, that first infected the world to the danger of Civill Go∣vernment. Yet far be it from me to make these the Uni∣versal Tenets of your Church, at any time, much less at this time, when they are much faln from their former cre∣dit; neither can I deny that sundry dangerous positions, destructive to all civill socie∣ties, have been transplanted by our Sectaries, and taken too deep root in our quar∣ters, but never by our fault. If God should grant us the benefit of an Oecumenicall or Occidentall Councill, it

would become both you and us in the first place to pluck up such seditious opinions root and branch.

You say our Calvinistical Reformation (so you are plea∣sed to call it as you would have it, for the moderate and orderly Reformation of Eng∣land, was the terror, and eye∣sore of Rome) is founded up∣on two maxims,* 1.20 The on•• ••hat the Church was faln to ruin and desolation, and become guilty of Idolatry and Ty∣ranny.* 1.21

This is neither our foun∣dation, nor our superstru∣ction, neither our maxim, nor our Opinion. It is so far from it, that we hold and teach the direct contrary. First, that the Gates of Hell

shall never prevail against the Universall Church, that though the rain descend, and the floods come, and the winds blow and beat upon it, yet it shall never fall to ruin or de∣solation; because it is builded upon a Rock. Secondly, we beleeve that the Catholick Church is the faithfull Spouse of Christ, and cannot be guil∣ty of Idolatry, which is spi∣rituall Adultery. Thirdly, we never said, we never thought, that the Oecumenical Church of Christ was guilty of Ty∣ranny. It is principled to suffer wrong, to do none, and by suffering to Conquer,* 1.22 as a flock of unarmed Sheep, in the midst of a company of ravenous Wolves, A new and unheard of kind of warfare

as if one should throw an hand∣full of dry flax, into the midst of a flaming fire to extinguish it.

But I presume this is one of the Idiotisms of your lan∣guage,* 1.23 in which by the Church you alwaies under∣stand the Roman Church, making Roman and Catho∣lick to be convertibles. As if Christ could not have a Church, nor that Church any privileges, unless the Court of Rome might have the Monopoly of them. There is a vast difference, between the Catholick Church and a Pa∣triarchall Church. The Ca-Catholick Church can never fail; any Patriarchall Church may Apostate and fail. We

have a promise that the Candle shall not be put out, we have no promise that the Candlesticks shall not be re∣moved.* 1.24

* 1.25But suppossing that (which wee can never grant) the Catholick Church and Ro∣man Church were Conver∣tibles, yet still you do us wrong. First we do not maintain, that the Roman Church it self is faln to ruin and desolation, we grant to it a true metaphy∣sicall being, though not a true morall being; we hope their errors are rather in superstructures, than in fun∣damentals; wee doe not say that the Plants of saving truth (which are common

to you and us) are plucked up by the roots in the Ro∣man Church, but we say that they are over-grown with weeds, and in danger to be choked.

Next for Idolatry,* 1.26 whe∣ther, and why, and how far, we accuse your Church of it deserves further Considera∣tion. First you agree with us, That God alone is the Object of Religion, and con∣sequently that all Religious worship is due terminative∣ly only to him, that God a∣lone is to be invocated, ab∣solutely or ultimately, that is so as to grant our requests and fulfill our desires by him∣self, and that the Saints are not the objects of our pray∣ers, but joynt petitioners

with us, and intercessors for us to the throne of Grace.

Secondly, we profess as well as you that there is a propor∣tionable degree of honour, and respect, due to every crea∣ture in Heaven and Earth, according to the dignity of it, and therefore more honour due to a glorified Spirit, than to a mortall man: But with∣all we adde, that this honour is not servitutis but chari∣tatis, not of service as to our Lords and Masters, but of love and charity as to our friends and fellow servants, of the same kind and nature with that Honour which we give to holy men on Earth. And herein we are confident that we shall have your con∣sent.

Thirdly, we agree in this also, that abundant love and duty doth extend an honou∣rable respect from the person of a dear friend, or noble be∣nefactor, to his Posterity, to his memory, to his Monu∣ment, to his Image, to his Reliques, to every thing that he loved, or that pertained to him, even to the Earth which he did tread upon, for his sake. Put a Liefhebber, or Virtue∣so, among a company of rare Pictures, and he will pick out the best pieces for their proper value: But a friend or a child will more esteem the Picture of a Benefactor, or Ancestor, for its relation. The respect of the one is terminated in the Picture, that of the other is radicated in the exemplar.

Yet still an Image is but an Image, and the kinds of re∣spect must not be confounded. The respect given to an I∣mage, must be respect proper for an Image, not Courtship, not Worship, not Adoration. More respect is due to the person of the meanest beggar, than to all the Images of Christ and his Apostles, and a 1000. Primitive Saints or Progenitors. Hitherto there is neither difference nor pe∣rill either of Idolatry; or su∣perstition.

Wherein then did consist this guilt of Idolatry contra∣cted by the Roman Church? I am willing for the present to pass by the private abu∣ses of particular persons, which seem to me no other∣wise

chargeable upon the whole Church than for Con∣nivence. As the making I∣mages to counterfeit tears, and words, and gestures, and complements, for advantage, to induce silly people to be∣lieve that there was some∣thing of divinity in them; and the multitude of fictiti∣ous Relicks and suppositi∣ous Saints, which credulity first introduced, & since cove∣tousness hath nourished. I take no notice now of those remote suspitions or suppositions of the possibility of want of inten∣tion, either in the Priest that consecrates the Sacrament, or in him that Baptised, or in the Bishop that ordeined him; or in any one through the whole line of succession;

in all which cases (according to your own principles,) you give divine worship to cor∣poreall Elements, which is at least materiall Idolatry.

I will not stand now to examine the truth of your distinctions, of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, yet you know well e∣nough, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is no reli∣gious worship, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is coin lately minted, that will not pass for current in the Catholick Church. Whilst your common people under∣stand not these distinctions of degrees of honour, what holds them from falling down∣right into Idolatry?

Neither do I urge how you have distributed the Pa∣tronage of particular Coun∣tries, the Cure of severall

Diseases, the protection of all distinct professions of men, and all kinds of crea∣tures, among the Saints, just as the Heathen did among their Tutelary Gods; nor how little warrant you have for this practise from experience; nor lastly how you build more Churches, erect more Altars, offer more presents, powr out more prayers, make more vows, perform more offices to the Mother than to the Son. Yet though we should hold our peace, me∣thinks you should ponder these things seriously, and either for your own satisfa∣ction, or ours, take away such unnecessary occasions of scandall and disunion.

But I cannot omit, that

the Councill of Trent is not contented to enjoyn the A∣doration of Christ in the Sa∣crament, (which we never deny,) but of the Sacrament it self, (that is, according to the common current of your Schoolmen, the Accidents or Species of Bread and Wine, because it conteins Christ.) Why do they not adde upon the same grounds, that the pix is to be adored with di∣vine worship, because it con∣teins the Sacrament? Divine honour is not due to the very Humanity of Christ, as it is abstracted from the Deity, but to the whole person, Deity, and Humanity, hypo∣statically united. Neither the Grace of Union, nor the Grace of Unction can con∣fer

more upon the Humanity, than the Humanity is capable of. There is no such Union between the Deity and the Sacrament, neither immedi∣atly, nor yet mediately, mediante corpore.

Neither do you ordinarily ascribe 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or divine wor∣ship to a Crucifix, or to the Image of Christ, indeed not Terminatively but transeunt∣ly, so as not to rest in the I∣mage or Crucifix, but to pass to the exemplar or person crucified. But why a piece of Wood should be made partaker of divine honours even in Transitu, or in the passage, passeth my under∣standing. The Heathens wanted not the same pretext for all their gross Idolatry.

Let them plead for themselves Non ego, &c. I do not wor∣ship that stone which I see, but I serve him whom I do not see.

Notes

• * 1.1

  The true causes of the trou∣bles in Engl••••d.
• * 1.2

  P. 11.
• * 1.3

  We are onely ac∣cused of Schism.
• * 1.4

  Presbyte∣rians and Brownists have been Romes best friends.
• * 1.5

  P. 16.
• * 1.6

  P. 19.
• * 1.7

  P. 14.
• * 1.8

  P. 17.
• * 1.9

  L. Cant. 1643. C. 1.
• * 1.10

  The Eng∣lish Refor∣mation not Cal∣vinist. cal.
• * 1.11

  P. 9.
• * 1.12

  P. 10.
• * 1.13

  M. Tho. Sq.
• * 1.14

  P. 19.
• * 1.15

  Reforma∣tion is sometimes necessary.
• * 1.16

  Reforma∣tion not a∣greeable to all per∣son, espe∣cially the Court of Rome.
• * 1.17

  There is danger in Reforma∣tion.
• * 1.18

  The right rule of Re∣formation.
• * 1.19

  Our Re∣formation not the ru∣in of Faith Church or Common-wealth.
• * 1.20

  Our first supposed Maxim.
• * 1.21

  The Ca∣tholick Church cannot come to ruin or be be guilty of Idola∣try or Ty∣ranny.
• * 1.22

  Chrysost.
• * 1.23

  Catholick and Ro∣man not Conver∣tibles.
• * 1.24

  Rev. 2.5.
• * 1.25

  The Ro∣man Church it self not absolutely faln to ruin.
• * 1.26

  Whether the Roman Church be guilty of Idolatry.