If perchance you be not furnished with this Book , be pleased only to peruse that learned Treatise , Entituled , The Three Conversions of England , and you will meet with substantial proofs to a non-prejudging Understanding , asserting the Affirmative of the aforesaid Question .

Your second Answer unto the Question in particular , is Negative : And why ? Because ( say you ) we may presume , that Austin' s Religion was the same that his master Pope Gregory professed ; and his Religion differs from yours in these particulars , The Canon of the Scripture ; The Sufficiency of the Scripture ; The Reading of the Scripture ; The Real Presence ; The Private Mass ; Communion in both Kinds ; Merit of Good Works ; Veneration of Images ; The Popes Supremacy ; His Doctrine in these , being the same that is Maintained by the Church of England , as can be evidenced out of his Writings . Thus you .

Sir , I remember in your verbal Triumph over my Cautional Conclusion ( occasioned by your wilful mistake , sciens & prudens , mis-interpreting my words quite contrary to the sense they were spoken in ) you told me , That you returned me many Thanks , for the courtesie which I dropt you at unawares ; withal promising , That if ever you met with an opportunity , you would return my Courtesie . Now Sir , you have met with an opportunity , and I challenge your promise : For , all the Courtesie that I do require , is , That you would be pleased to shew all these foresaid Points ( nay , rather than I should impose too great a task upon you ) or any one of them all ; pick and choose where you please , evidenced out of St. Gregory's Writings . Mark ( I beseech you ) your own word , Evidenced , not wrested by your own sinistrous interpretation ; be pleased to set down the Saints own words , or at least cite the place where they are to be found ; which to do , will require in you a longer time , than the Elephant is in bringing forth her Young.

Your third Answer to this Question , Whether the Religion of St. Austin was the same with that of the Britains , is also Negative : Your first Reason is this , Because the antient Britains told Austin , that they had a Bishop of their own , to whom they were to submit ; therefore they would have nothing to do with the Bishop of Rome .

Sir , the Fountain from whence this Objection Originally sprang , was Galfridus Monumetensis , lib. 11. c. 7. whose words , if they be but duely considered with an impartial Judgment , allow not at all of this your inference ; therefore they would have nothing to do with the Bishop of Rome ; for his words are these , There was an Abbot of Bangor , named Dynoot , that had above two thousand Monks under his charge , who answered to Austin ( when he required Subjection of the British Bishops , and that they would joyn with him to convert the English Nation ) That the Britains owed no Subjection unto him , nor would bestow the labor of Preaching upon their Enemies , seeing the Britains had an Archbishop of their own , and that the Saxons took from them their Country , for which cause they hated them extreamly , nor did esteem their Religion , nor would communicate with them more than with Dogs .

Behold , here is all that is to bee found in this Author to this purpose , which is nothing else ( as any impartial Reader may see ) but a passionate and cholerick Answer of the Britains , as of men afflicted and exasperated : here is not so much as one word of their having nothing to do with the Bishop of Rome ( as you and they , the Magdeburgians many years before you infer ) but only that they acknowledged not the Superiority of Austin over the Britains ; seeing he was sent only unto the English , and the Authority of their own Archbishop , was not taken away by his coming , for any thing they yet knew , but remained as before : Which Question of Jurisdiction between two Archbishops falleth out daily , even where the Popes Authority is most acknowledged , and so any one that hath Eies to Read , and Judgement to understand what he reads , may clearly see , that it is a vain and malicious inference in you and the Magdeburgians to infer so peremptorily ; therefore they would have nothing to do with the Bishop of Rome : for they speak as you see of Austin's Authority , and not of the Bishops of Rome , from whom we read not , that he shewed to them any Authority to place him over their Archbishop ; and consequently it is a vaine inference , which both you and the Magdeburgians do make out of the Britains Answer , that for so much as they admitted not of Austins Authority , they would have nothing to do with the Bishop of Rome .

Your second Reason , why St. Austins Religion was not the same with that of the Britains , is this ; Because ( say you ) they rejected Austins Traditions .

Sir , I believe the Reason , why you did not set down the Traditions in particular rejected by the Britains , was because you cannot shew any one Article of Faith ( which unless you do , your Objection is nothing to purpose ) in which they dissented from St. Austin ; for all the difference that was between them , was only concerning some certain tollerable differences for that time ; as namely , their Dissent from the use of the Roman Church in their Ministring of Baptism and keeping of Easter ; which latter , as your learned Osiander doth testifie in Epitom . Cent. 2. l. 3. c. 2. was tollerated , in like manner by the Apostles , in regard of the known weakness of some , as for like respect Circumcision was by them in like sort tollerated , and Abstinence from blood , and that which was strangled , especially prescribed , Act. 15. 29. all which argue no more differenee in Articles of Faith betwixt the Britains and St. Austin , then the keeping of Easter , &c. argued difference in Articles of Faith betwixt the Apostles , and their new Converts .

Now that the Britains rejected only the Traditions of St. Austin in these ( for that time ) tollerable differences ; in the first place venerable Beda , doth testifie , Hist. l. 2. c. 2. where he mentioneth this saying of St. Austin to the Britains , Si in his tribus obtemperare mihi vultis , ut pascha suo tempore celebretis , ut ministerium Baptizandi quo deo renascimur , juxta morem Romanae & Apostolicae Ecclesiae compleatis , ut genti Anglorum una nobiscum predicetis Verbum domini , cetera quae agitis , quamvis moribus nostris contraria , aequanimiter cuncta tollerabimus : The like is testified by these following Protestant Writers , Hollinshead . vol. 1. p. 103. Mr. Goodwin in his Catalogue of Bishops . p. 6. and by the Protestant Author of the History of Great Britain , printed Anno. 1606. who l. 3. c. 13. saith hereof , The Britain - Bishops conformed themselves to the Doctrine and Ceremonies of the Church of Rome without any difference in any thing , specially remembred , save only in the Celebration of Easter , &c.

By which their so earnest dissenting , about these only matters of smaller importance , is most plainly signified unto us , their full Agreement in all Articles of Faith : for the Britains who contradicted St. Austin , and that so earnestly , about these so few and small matters , would never have been silent ; but much rather have withstood in the other so many and incomparably much greater points , had they in like sort disagreed from him therein : nay , and their Union in Faith is yet farther proved ; because the Britain-Bishops as then confessed , that it was the right way of Justice and Righteousness which Austin taught : Tum Britones quidem confitentur intellexisse se , veram esse justitiae viam , quam proedicaret Augustinus : Beda l. 2. c. 2. The which is farther confirmed by your learned writer Mr. Fulke , affirming that Austin did at the last obtaine the aid of the British-Bishops , to the Conversion of the Saxons . Fulke in his confutation of Purgatory : p. 335.

And whereas you peremptorily affirm , that Austin , because the Britains rejected his Traditions , inflamed the wrath of Ethelbert King of Kent against them , who raised his Forces , and murthered about twelve hundred of them , the Monk himself being in his company , is ( to say no worse ) a gross mistake ; for it was not Ethelbert King of Kent , but Edilfred King of Northumbers that committed this horrid Massacre of the Monks , as Beda doth testify . l. 2. c. 2. in these ensuing words .

It happened afterwards that the most mighty King of the English men Edilfred gathering a great Army , made a foul slaughter of this unfaithful and naughty people , ( to wit ) the Monkes of Bangor ; for being now ready to give the onset of the fight , when he espied the Priests , which came together to pray for their Souldiers Warring , stand a part from the rest in a sure and safe place , he demanded what they were , and to what end they came thither , &c. The cause of their coming thither , when King Edilfred had understood , he said , If these men cry and call upon their God against us ; truly , although they have no Armour , yet they fight against us , &c. therefore he commanded his Souldiers first to assault them , &c. So you see , that it was not for rejecting Austin's Traditions , that these men were slain ( as you would fain perswade the Ignorant ) but for coming to pray for their Army , whereby the Heathen King was mightily exasperated , fearing lest their Prayers might obtain of Almighty God the victory against him ; your own writers , Speed and Fox acknowledge the same .

Moreover , it is no less gross mistake in you so peremptorily to affirm , that St. Austin himself was present at this slaughter . For Fox , your great Writer , doth confess that both Huntington and other Authors affirm , that St. Austin was dead when this slaughter happened ; and venerable Beda . l. 2. c. 2. doth testifie the same in these words , The Holy Bishop St. Austin was himself long before taken out of this Life unto the Kingdom of Heaven . True it is Austin did Prophecy ( as Beda doth testifie in the same Book and Chapter ) that the Britains , because they were refractory , refusing to submit unto his wholsom counsel , and Preach the Word of God unto English men , should suffer the temporal punishment of death from the English ; which Prophesie was fulfilled in this battle , long after St. Austins death ; In this manner ( saith Venerable Beda having described the slaughter ) was fulfilled the Prophesie of the Holy Bishop Austin , who was himself , long before that , taken out of this Life into the Kingdom of Heaven . And thus these ungracious and false People , suffered the punishment of temporal Death ; because they had refused and despised , the wholesom Counsel of perpetual Life and Salvation offered unto them : Beda . l. 2. c. 2. So you see , that this very slaughter of the Monks , which you unadvisedly brought against us , maketh clearly against you ; for they were slain , it is true , but by whom ? by Ethelbert King of Kent ? no , but by Edilfred King of Northumbers , as your own Writers do tell you : Was it done by the Instigation of St. Austin then present ? no , for long before that , he was taken , out of this Life unto the Kingdom of Heaven ; but why did Almighty God permit this great slaughter of these Monks ? because ( saith venerable Beda ) they refused and despised the wholesom counsel of perpetual Life and Salvation , offered to them by the Holy Bishop St. Austin ; which makes me to say with your learned Whittaker , Fateor veritatem etiam e suis inimicis testimonium extorquere ; and withal , leave it to the serious Consideration of the Impartial Reader , whether or no , you have not dealt most Disingeniously , in so peremptorily affirming these two gross Mistakes , quite contrary , not only to your own Authors , but even to venerable Beda himself , a Witness in this point without Exception : For living near the time of St. Austin , and withal being a Man so eminent , both for Vertue and Learning , that he is known by the name of Venerable ; he cannot choose but be a substantial Proof , to convince a Non-prejudging Understanding , that you were either wilfully or ignorantly mistaken ; either whereof argueth no less then an indelible Stain to the Reputation of your calling .

Sir , I do not question , but these specious Pretexts of your fallacious Arguments , may easily induce the illitterate Rabble , to believe what you please ; for they looking upon you as their Oracle , placed in the Chaire of Moses , to dictate nothing but Verities , acquiesce without further inquiry , to what you say ; because ( forsooth ) ipse dixit : But the learneder sort , which have the least Scantling in the knowledge of Antiquity , cannot choose but smile in their Sleeves , to see one of your Profession , so peremptorily affirm two such gross Mistakes ; and without bringing any one Authority , either modern or antient , save only your naked Affirmation in your own Cause ; which I suppose , you will not presume should be looked upon , as a substantial Proof , to convince a Non-prejudging Understanding ; especially meeting with such undeniable Testimony to the contrary , not only of your own Authors , but also of Venerable Beda ; the Authority of whom , is of more force , to convince a Non-prejudging Understanding , then any one you can bring to the contrary .

Your fourth Answer to this Question , whether the Religion professed by the Britains , when Austin came into England , &c. is this : That neither You nor I , can determine certainely on either side , unless we do ( as the man did , that writ of the World in the Moon ) take upon us , to write of things of so great Distance from us , as cannot come within the compass of our Cognizance .

Sir , I can scarce perswade my self , the World is so Lunatick in the affairs of Antiquity , as you pretend : If you please to peruse the begining of the aforesaid Book , intituled The Protestants Apology for the Roman Catholick Church ; you shall see , that these things came within the Cognizance of the Author thereof ; and withal find substantial Proof , for the Affirmative ▪ of the said Question , which may convince a Non-prejudging Understanding ; and lastly be forced to confess , that to prove the Affirmative of the aforesaid Questions , there is not a longer time required , then the Elephant is in bringing forth her young .

After these your aforesaid Answers , which have not so much as the Shadow of a substantial Proof , to convince a Non-prejudging Understanding , you propose unto me three Queries ; the Affirmative whereof ( say you ) if granted ; you make no question , but to improve them to be powerful Engines , to batter down the greatest part , of the Fabrick of our Religion .

Your first Query is this , Whether God be to have the whole glory of the Work of mans Salvation ? To which I answer Affirmatively ; but deny the sinistrous Consequence , which you usually hence infer , Therefore no merit of good works ; for though there be no Insufficiency in the Actions or passions of Christ the Head ; yet his Wisdom , Will and Justice requireth and ordaineth , that his Body and Members , should be Fellowes of his Passions , as they look to be Fellows of his Glory ; that so suffering with him and by his Example , they may apply unto themselves and to others , the general Medicine of Christs merits and satisfactions , as it is also effectually applyed unto us by Sacraments ; the one sort being no more injurious unto Christs death , nor consequently hindring him of the whole Glory of the work of mans Salvation , then the other ; notwithstanding your vain clamours , that would upon the Pretence of Christ passions take away the Value of good Works : if you please to peruse St. Pauls Epistle to the Colossians ( c. 1. v. 24. ) you may see how the Apostle taught and practised this Doctrine . Neither do I see , what pretence you can have , to affirm , that the Merit of good Works , hindreth God of the whole Glory of the Work of mans Salvation , seeing the said Merit is a pure Gift of God , and no less his than his own ; for not only those passions , which Christ suffered in himself , which were fully ended at his death , and were in themselves abundantly sufficient for the Redemption of the World , and of all sins ; but also those , which his body and members suffer , are Christs also , because of him they receive the Condition , Quality , and Force to be meritorious and satisfactory .