Animadversions on a treatise entitled Fiat lux, or, A guide in differences of religion,…Animadversions on a treatise intituled Fiat lux, or, A guide in differences of religion,…

And, if because no men are absolutely perfect, and some are very perverse and froward, we should throw away our Rule, the blessed Word of God, and run to the Pope for rule and guidance; it is all one, as if at noonday, ⟨p. 221⟩because some are blind and miss their way, and some are drunk and stagger out of it, and others are variously enticed to leave it, we should all conspire to wish the Sun out of the Firmament, that we might follow a Will with a Wisp.

And, if because no men are absolutely perfect, and some are very perverse and froward, we should throw away our Rule, the blessed Word of God, and run to the Pope for rule and guidance; it is all one, as if at noonday, ⟨p. 221⟩because some are blind and miss their way, and some are drunk and stagger out of it, and others are variously entised to leave it, we should all conspire to wish the Sun out of the Firmament, that we might follow a Will with a Wisp.

I know not what, in general, needs to be added further to this Section. The mistake of it is palpable; some particular passages may be remarked in it before we proceed: pag. 173. he Pronounceth an heavy doom on the Prelate Protestants; making them Prevaricators, Impostors, Reprobates; an hard sentence, but that it is hoped it will prove like the flying Bird, and Curse causeless! But what is the matter? Why, in dealing with the Presbyterians, They are forced to make use of those Popish Principles which themselves at first rejected, and so building them up again, by the Apostles rule deserve no better terms; But, what I pray are they? why, the difference betwixt Clergy and Laity, the efficacy of Episcopal Ordination, and the Authority of a visible Church, unto which all men are to obey. There are but two things our ⟨p. 222⟩Author needs to prove to make good his charge. First, that these are Popish Principles. Secondly, That as such they were at any time cast down and destroyed by Prelate-Protestants. I fear his mind was gone a little astray, or that he had been lately among the Quakers, when he hammered this charge against Prelate Protestants. For as these have been their constant Principles ever since the beginning of the Reformation, so they have as constantly maintained, that in their true and proper sense they are not Popish. Nor is the difference about these things, between any Protestants what-ever, any more then verbal. For those terms of Clergy and Laity, because they had been abused in the Papacy, though anciently used, some have objected against them; but for the things signified by them, namely, that in the Church there are some Teachers, some to be taught, Bishops and Flocks, Pastors and People, no Protestant ever questioned. Our Author then doth but cut out work for himself, without order from any Protestant; when he sets up an excuse for this change in them by a