Here it is manifest, that the article of the queen's supremacy, which not only cut off England from the ancient faith, the Catholic church, but was the very basis, and has ever since been the chief bulwark of the English reformation, was so far from being countenanced or assented to by those of the prelatic order, that on the contrary they expressed their utmost abhorrence and detestation of it; and all but Kitchen, to the dishonor of his character, persisted to their very last breath in their opposition to it. But let us now see, whether the convocation, which represents the body of the inferior clergy, or the two universities, were more favorable to it than the bishops.

Mr. Fuller, L. 9, writes thus of the convocation, which sat at the same time with queen Elizabeth's first parliament: It is observed in nature, that when one twin is of unusual strength and bigness, the other born with it is weak and dwindles away. So here queen Elizabeth's first parliament being very active in matters of religion, the convocation, younger brother thereunto, was little employed, less regarded. It seems it was not judged safe at that time to trust churchmen with church affairs, though our blessed Saviour was of another mind, and appointed first bishops, and under them pastors and teachers, to be spiritual) guides and rulers of his church unto the end of the world.

However, neither the convocation nor universities were wholly idle, or unconcerned spectators of what the secular power was busily

carrying on to the prejudice of the ancient religion. For, as the same author tells us, L. 9, the convocation put forth five articles, subscribed to by the universities, as a public testimony of their faith: The three first contained a short exposition of the Catholic doctrine of the real presence, transubstantiation, and the mass. The two last were these, viz:-1. That the chief power of governing the church of Christ was given to St. Peter, and his lawful successors, in the see apostolic, as to the vicar of Christ. And 2dly. that the authority of treating and defining matters relating to faith, sacraments, and church discipline has always hitherto belonged, and ought only to belong to the pastors of the church, whom the Holy Ghost has appointed in it for that end, and not to laymen.

Thus we plainly see that the settling of the spiritual supremacy upon queen Elizabeth and her successors, was carried in direct opposition to the judgment of the whole body of the English clergy.

Whence I infer, first, that since this was a matter purely spiritual even of the highest importance, and therefore belonged by divine right to the ecclesiastical tribunal, it was decided by illegal and incompetent judges; as being unqualified by God's own law; who never appointed laymen, but the successors of the apostles to govern his church and decide ecclesiastical causes.

I infer 2dly, that the divine institution of episcopacy and episcopal government was

doubly violated in the very laying of the foundation of the present Protestant church of England. First, by entailing for ever the supreme ecclesiastical government of it upon a lay person, whether man, woman, or child. 3dly, By setting up this new system of church government in utter contempt of and opposition to the whole national episcopal authority then in being.

But

Whence I conclude with this dilemma, to wit, episcopal government is either essential to the constitution of Christ's church, or not. If it be, the present protestant church of England has an essential defect in its very foundation. I mean, the supreme spiritual authority of a lay-head, which also it derives wholly and solely from the secular power, without the least concurrence or approbation of the episcopal authority, as has been fully proved. if episcopal government be not essential to the Constitution of Christ's church, and may be either set up or laid aside like ordinary human institutions, according to the will and pleasure of men, then the Presbyterians and other enemies of episcopacy have as fair a title to be a part of Christ's true church, as the church of England can pretend to. For if episcopal authority may be laid aside at one time, I see no reason why it may not be cast off for good and all. And if the secular power may legally new-model the hierarchy, so as to constitute a lay head over the church, and even that independently of the episcopal authority, I am not sharpsighted enough to see any solid reason,

why the same power may not as legally commit forever the whole government of it to such persons as it thinks fitting, whether they be layministers made so by lay ordination; or of that rank, whom the church of England calls bishops. Nay I do not see, why the secular power, when their hands were in, might not have gone further, and declared Queen Elizabeth, in express terms, universal patriarch, as well as supreme head of the church of England. For the one is no more than the other contrary to the express institution of Christ.

SECTION XV.

Some remarks upon the progress and motives of queen Elizabeth's Reformation.

Although the bishops were violently deprived by the lay power both of their sees and liberty, yet like the apostles in chains, they did not therefore forfeit that spiritual jurisdiction and authority, which belonged to them by divine right, and could not be taken from them but in the case of some canonical fault, and by a canonical trial, and judgment pronounced against them.

Whence it follows, that whatever the inferior clergy did to the prejudice of the ancient faith of England, whether by a forced or voluntary compliance with the times, was of no

manner of weight, because they acted without authority, and contrary to the obedience they had sworn to those who were their lawful superiors in the sight of God. So that the only consequence that can be drawn from it is, that there are always great numbers in the visible church of Christ, who generally discover themselves either in time of persecution and trial, or when they have a fair opportunity offered them of gratifying some predominant inclination; which two circumstances concurring in the reign of queen Elizabeth; it is no wonder that great numbers of the inferior clergy abandoned the ancient religion; some for safety, others for ease or profit; according as their prevailing passions swayed them. And I cannot here forbear observing, with how much partiality and little judgment, some Protestant writers glory in the number of these miserable proselytes: Since it is apparent, that the charms or terrors of this world had the greatest influence upon their pretended conversion. The very nature of the thing justifies my observation. For when punishments are inflicted on the one hand, and considerable advantages offered on the other: when non-compliance is attended with bitter sufferings, and temporizing encouraged with rewards, a sudden change in matters of religion is justly ascribed either to the fear of the one, or the hope of the other. And this was the case from the very beginning of queen Elizabeth's reformation. Great numbers of the inferior clergy, who came over to it, were frightened into a compliance, and taught