when he doth expound the whole Creed five several times. Which is very strange, if the Creed received by the African Church had this Article in it. Ruffinus further takes notice, that it is not found in the symbol of the Churches of the East; by which he means the Nicene and Constantinopolitan Creeds, the latter of which is nothing else but an explanation, or more ample enlargement of the Creed Apostolical." Tho this indeed be not at this day read in the Greek or other Eastern Churches, or so much as known or received in that of the Copties and Abyssines.

But the Doctor having shown his malice against the Lord Primate's memory and opinions in those points, which I hope I have sufficiently answered, cannot give off so, but in the next section accuses him for inserting the nine Articles of Lambeth into those of the Church of Ireland, being inconsistent with the doctrine of the Church of England. But before I answer this accusation, I shall first premise, that as I do not defend or approve that Bishops, or others, tho never so learned Divines, should take upon them to make new Articles, or define and determine doubtful questions and controversies in religion, without being authorized by the King and Convocation so to do: yet thus much I may charitably say of those good Bishops, and other Divines of the Church. of England, who framed and agreed upon these Articles, that what they did in this matter, was sincerely, and as they then believed, according to the doctrine of the Church of England, as either expresly contained in, or else to be drawn by consequence from that Article of the Church concerning predestination. And certainly this makes stronger against the Doctor: for if with him the judgment of Bp. Bilson, Bp. Andrews, and Mr. Noel, in their writings, be a sufficient authority to declare the sence of the Church of England in those questions of Christ's true and real presence in the Sacrament, and his local descent into hell; why should not the judgment and determination of the two ArchBishops of Canterbury and York, with divers other Bishops and learned Divines, after a serious debate and mature deliberation, as well declare what was the doctrine of the Church of England in those questions of predestination, justifying faith, saving grace, and perseverance? But it seems with the Doctor, no Bishops opinions shall be orthodox, if they agree not with his But to come to the charge it self: the main reason why the Doctor will needs have the Lord Primate to be the cause of

own.

* Vid. Jobi Ludolfi, lib. 3. c. 5. 19. Hist. Æthiop.

the inserting these Articles of Lambeth into those of Ireland, agreed on in Convocation 1615, is, because the Lord Primate being then no Bishop, but only Professor of Divinity in the Unisity there, and a member of Convocation, was ordered by the Convocation to draw up those Articles, and put them into Latin, as if Dr. Usher could have then such a great influence upon it, as to be able to govern the Church at his pleasure; or that the scribe of any Synod or Council should make it pass what Acts or Articles he pleases; or that one private Divine should be able to manage the whole Church of Ireland, (as the Doctor would needs have him do in this affair.) Whereas the Doctor having been an ancient member of Convocation, could not but know that all Articles after they are debated, are proposed by way of question by the President and Prolocutor of either House, and are afterwards ordered to be drawn into form, and put in Latin by some persons whom they appoint for that purpose; and tho perhaps they might not be themselves in all points of the same opinion with those Articles they are so ordered to draw up; and that Dr.Usher did not hold all those Articles of Ireland in the same sence as they are there laid down, appears from what the Doctor himself tells us in this pamphlet; for p. 116, he saith, "That it was his (viz. the Lord Primate's) doing, that a different explication of the Article of Christ's descent into hell, from that allowed of by this Church; and almost all the other heterodoxies of the sect of Calvin were inserted, and incorporated into the Articles of Ireland." And p. 129, he finds fault with the 30th Article of that Church, "because it is said of Christ, that for our sakes he endured most grievous torments, immediatly in his soul, and most painful sufferings in his body. The enduring of which grievous torments in his soul, as Calvin, not without some touch of blasphemy, did first devise: so did he lay it down for the true sence and meaning of the Article of Christ's descending into hell. In which expression as the Articles of Ireland have taken up the words of Calvin, so it may be rationally conceived that they take them with the same meaning and construction also." But the Doctor owns that this was not the Lord Primate's sence of this Article; for p. 113, aforegoing, he says thus, "Yet he (viz. the Lord Primate) neither follows the opinion of Calvin himself, nor of the generality of those of the Calvinian party, who herein differ from their master; but goes a new way of a later discovery, in which altho he had few leaders, he hath found many followers." But as I shall not take upon me to enter into a dispute

with the Doctor or his followers, in defence of these Irish Articles, and to prove they are not contradictory to those of England, it not being my business; yet I cannot forbear to observe, that it is highly improbable that all the Bishops and clergy of Ireland should incorporate the nine Articles of Lambeth, containing all the Calvinian rigours (as the Doctor calls them) in the points of predestination, grace, free-will, &c. if they had thought they were inconsistent with those of the Church of England, and had not been satisfied that it was the doctrine then held and maintained in those points by the major part of the Bishops and clergy of our Church, as also believed by the King himself, who confirmed them, and certainly would neuer else have sent one Bishop, and three of the most learned Divines within his dominions, to the Synod of Dort, to maintain against the Remonstrants or Arminians, the very same opinions contained in these Irish Articles but if all those must be counted by the Doctor for rigorous Calvinists that maintain these Articles, and consequently heterodox to the Church of England, I desire to know how he can excuse the major part of our Bishops in Queen Elizabeth and King James's reign, and a considerable part of them during the reigns of the two last Kings of blessed memory (some of whom are still living) from this heterodoxy. And if all men must be guilty of Calvinism, who hold these opinions concerning predestination, grace, and free-will; then the most part of the Lutherans (who differ very little from Calvin in these points) must be Calvinists too. Nor are these points held only by Protestants, but many also of the Church of Rome hold the same, as witness the Jansenists, and also the Order of the Dominicans, who come very near to Calvin in the doctrines of predestination, &c. and are as much opposed by the Jesuits, as the Arminians are by the Antiremonstrants in Holland. But perhaps the Doctor may make St. Augustin a Calvinist too, since he is much of the same opinion with the Lord Primate in most of these points against the Pelagians.

Having now I hope vindicated the Lord Primate from these unjust accusations of his differing from the Church of England in matters of doctrine, I now come to answer his aspersions upon the Lord Primate in lesser matters; and that you may see how unjustly he seeks out a quarrel against him, he makes it a crime in him, because those who were aspersed with the names of Puritans made their addresses to him by letters, or visits, and because he was carress'd and feasted by them where-ever he

came, (as the Doctor will have it) as if the Lord Primate had no other perfections but his asserting those Calvinian tenets.

Then he goes on to tax the Lord Primate with inconformity to the rules and orders of the Church of England in several particulars but with how great want of charity, and with how many malicious inferences and reflections, without any just grounds, I leave to the impartial reader who will give himself the trouble to peruse that pamphlet, many of those passages being cull'd here and there out of Dr. Bernard's treatise, entitled The late Lord Primate's Judgment, &c. without ever considering what went before, or what followed after; and without taking notice that several things enjoined in the Canons of the Church of England had no force or obligation in that of Ireland, where those Canons were not yet subscribed to, or received: and consequently such ceremonies as were by them enjoined, being in themselves indifferent, as the Church declares, it had been singularity in him to have observed them there, and much worse to have imposed them upon others: for it is truly said of him by Dr. Bernard," that he did not affect some arbitrary innovations, (not within the compass of the rule and order of the Book of Common-prayer) and that he did not take upon him to introduce any rite or ceremony upon his own opinion of decency, till the Church had judged it so." p. 147. What the Lord Primate's behaviour was in England in relation to some of these ceremonies of lesser moment, either to the peace or well-being of the Church, the Lord Primate needs no apology, he having reason enough for what he did, if he conformed himself no further than the Doctor would have him. But to give one instance for all of the Doctor's want of charity towards the Lord Primate; Dr. Bernard having asserted his conformity to the Discipline, Liturgy, and Articles of the Church of England, . . . " and that many of those who were called Puritans, received such satisfaction from him, as to concur with him in the above-said particulars." The Doctor immediately makes this remark: "For this (says he) might very well be done, and yet the men remain as unconformable to the rules of the Church (their kneeling at the Communion only excepted) as they were before." Now what other rules of the Church the Doctor means I know not, since I always thought that whoever had brought over a Lay-Nonconformist to conform to the service and orders of the Church, had done a very good work; and I know not when that is done, what is required more to make him a true son of the Church of England.

66

But I shall say no more on this ungrateful subject, since I doubt not, but the Lord Primate's great esteem and reputation is too deep rooted in the hearts of all good men, to be at all lessened by the Doctor's hard reflections; tho I thought I could do no less than vindicate the memory of so pious a Prelate, since many ordinary readers, who were not acquainted with this good Bishop, or his writings, may think Dr. H. had cause thus to find fault with him. So avoiding all invidious reflections upon the Reverend Doctor, long since deceased, I shall now conclude, heartily wishing that whatever he hath written, or published, had never done any more prejudice to that Church which he undertook to serve, than any of those writings or opinions of the Lord Primate's, which he so much finds fault with.

END OF THE FIRST VOLUME.