Five disputations of church-government and worship

2. One word to those of you that follow Grotius: I have showed that he professeth himself a Papist, even in that Discussion which M r Pierce so magnifieth as excellent. I hear Mr. Thorndike and others defend him: and some think I injure him by calling him a Papist. Wonderful! what will not be a Controversy among learned men? Are we fallen among such that deny him to be a Papist, that professeth expressly to be satisfied, if evil manners be but corrected, (and school-opinions not imposed) which are contrary to Tradition and all Councils? and that professeth to own the Creed and Council of Trent, and all the Popish Councils whatsoever, and the Mistriship of Rome, and the Catholic Mastership of the Pope governing the Catholic Church according to these Councils? What is a Papist if this be none? I refer you to my Evidence in the Discovery of the Grotian Religion, and the first Chap. of the second Part of my Catholic Key, replying to Mr. Pierce. Confute it rationally if you can. I shall now only desire you when you have read Rivet, to read a Book called Grotius Papizans, and to hearken to the testimony of an honest, learned Senator of Paris, that admired Grotius, and tells you what he is from his own mouth: and that is, Claud. Sarravius, who saith in his Epistol. pag. 52, 53. ad Gronov. [De ejus libro & libello postremis interrogatus, respondit plane Milleterio Consona, Romanam fidem esse veram & sinceram, solosq•e Clericorum mores degeneres schismati dedisse locum; adferebatque plura in hanc sententiam. Quid dicam? Merito quod falso olim Paulo Agrippa [Greek or Hebrew]. — Deploro veris lachrymis tantam jacturam] Here you have a credible witness, that from ⟨p. 32⟩his own mouth reporteth it, that our Reformation was to Grotius a schism, and nothing but the ill manners of the Clergy gave us the opportunity. And pag. 190. Epist. ad Salmas. [Vis ergo me exerte dicere quid sentiam de postremo Grotii libro? & an omnia mihi in eo probentur? Rem rogas non magnam, nec adeo difficilem, quemque expedire promptum est. Tantum abest ut omnia probem, ut vix aliquid in eo reperiam, cui sine conditione calculum apponam meum. Verissime dixit ille qui primus dixit, Grotium Papizare. Vix tamen in isto scripto aliquid legi quod mirarer, quodve [Greek or Hebrew] occurreret.

2. One word to those of you that follow Grotius: I have shewed that he professeth himself a Papist, even in that Discussion which M r Pierce so magnifieth as excellent. I hear Mr. Thorndike and others defend him: and some think I injure him by calling him a Papist. Wonderful! what will not be a Controversie among learned men? Are we faln among such that deny him to be a Papist, that professeth expresly to be satisfied, if evil manners be but corrected, (and school-opinions not imposed) which are contrary to Tradition and all Councils? and that professeth to own the Creed and Council of Trent, and all the Popish Councils whatsoever, and the Mistriship of Rome, and the Catholick Mastership of the Pope governing the Catholick Church according to these Councils? What is a Papist if this be none? I refer you to my Evidence in the Discovery of the Grotian Religion, and the first Chap. of the second Part of my Catholick Key, replying to Mr. Pierce. Confute it rationally if you can. I shall now only desire you when you have read Rivet, to read a Book called Grotius Papizans, and to hearken to the testimony of an honest, learned Senator of Paris, that admired Grotius, and tells you what he is from his own mouth: and that is, Claud. Sarravius, who saith in his Epistol. pag. 52, 53. ad Gronov. [De ejus libro & libello postremis interrogatus, respondit plane Milleterio Consona, Romanam fidem esse veram & sinceram, solosqe Clericorum mores degeneres schismati dedisse locum; adferebatque plura in hanc sententiam. Quid dicam? Merito quod falso olim Paulo Agrippa . — Deploro veris lachrymis tantam jacturam] Here you have a credible witness, that from