' Sec note, page 95.
DID THE GOSPEL COME TO BRITAIN FROM ROME? 211
■ — that is, " extremo," about the end of the reign of Tiberius Csesar, who died in the thirty-ninth year of Christ, five or six years at least before the foundations of the Roman church were laid ; xa/ raZra, (ih hn raZra. Tliese things we must speak unto, because you suppose them of imjoortahce unto your cause.
The second assertion ascribed unto your "Fiat" in the "Anim- adversions" is, "That whence and from whom we first received our religion, there and with them we must abide therein ; to them we must repair for guidance; and return to their rule and conduct, if we have departed from them." To which you now say, " This prin- ciple, as it is never delivered l)y ' Fiat Lux,' though you put it upon mie, so is it, in the latitude it carries, and wherein you understand it, absolutely false, never tliought of by me, and indeed impossible; for how can we abide with them in any truth, who may not, per- haps, abide in it themselves? Great part of Flandei's was first con- verted by Englishmen ; and yet are they not obliged to accompany the English in our now present ways." I am glad you confess this principle now to be false: it was sufSciently proved so to be in the " Animadversions," and your whole discourse rendered thereby use- less ; for to what purpose will the preceding assertion, so often inculcated by you, serve, if this be false? For what matter is it from whence or whom we received the profession of religion, if there be no obligation upon us to continue in their communion, any farther than as we judge them to continue in the truth? And to what purpose do you avoid the consideration of the reasons and causes of our not abiding with you, and manage all your charge upon the general head of our departure, if we may have just cause, by your own concession, so to do? It is false, then, by your own acknowledgment; and I am as sure, m the sense which I understand it in, that it is yours. And you labour with all your art to prove and confirm it, both in your " Fiat," pp. 44-47, and in this very epistle, pp. 88-41, etc. On the account that the gospel came vmto us from Rome, you expressly ad- judge the pre-eminence over us unto Rome, and determine that her we must all hear, aod obey, and abide with. But if you may say and unsay, assert and deny, avow and disclaim, at your pleasure, as things make for your advantage, and think to evade the owning of the Avhole drift and scope of your discourse by having expressed yourself in a loose flourish of words, it will be to no great purpose farther to talk with you.
" Quo teneam Tultus mutantem Protea nodo?" — Hor. Ep. i. 1. 90.
To lay fast hold, and not startle at a new shape, was the counsel his daughter gave to Menelaus; and I must needs urge you to leave off all thoughts of evading by such changes of your hue, and to abide by what you say. I confess I believe you never intended knowingly
212 A VINDICATION OF THE ANIMADVERSIONS ON FIAT LUX.
to assert this principle in its whole latitude, because you did not, as it should seem, consider how little it would make for your advantage, seeing so many would come in for a share in the privilege intimated in it with your Roman church, and you do not in any thing love competitors. But you would fain have the conclusion hold as to your Roman church only: those that have received the gospel from her must always abide in her communion. That this assertion is not built on any general foundation of reason or authority, yourself now confess ; and that you have no special privilege to plead in this cause hath been proved in the " Animadversions," whereof you are pleased to take no notice.
CHAPTER IV
Farther vindication of second chapter of the " Animadversions" — Church of Rome not what she was of old — Her falls and apostasy — Difference between idolatry, apostasy, heresy, and schism — Principles of the church of Rome condemned by the ancient church, fathers, and councils — Imposing rites unnecessary — Persecution for conscience — Papal supremacy — The branches of it — Papal personal infallibility — Religious veneration of images.
The third assertion which you review is, " That the Roman pro- fession of religion, and practice in the worship of God, are every way the same as when first we received the gospel from Rome ; nor can they ever otherwise be." Whereunto you say, " This, indeed, though I do nowhere formally express it, yet I suppose it, because I know it hath been demonstratively proved a hundred times over. You deny it hath been proved; why do you not then disprove it? Because you decline, say you, all common-places." All that I affirmed was, that you did suppose this principle, and built many of your inferences on the supposition thereof; which you here acknowledge. And so you have already owned two of the principles whereof, in the fore- going page, you affirmed that you could hardly own any one, and that hi the sense wherein by me they are proposed and understood ! But what do you mean, that you " nowhere formally express it?" If you mean that you have not set it down in those syllables wherein you find it expressed in the " Animadvei-sions," no man ever said you did : you do not use to speak so openly and plainly ; to do so would bring you out of the corners, which somewhat that you pre- tend unto never led you into. But if you deny that you asserted and laboured to prove the whole and entire matter of it, your fol- lowing discourse, wherein you endeavour a vindication of the sophism wherewith you pleaded for it in your " Fiat," will sufficiently con- fute you. And so you have avowed already two of the " hardly any