Catalogue Entry: OTHE00048

^[1] F. G. James, North Country Bishop: A Biography of William Nicolson (Yale, 1956), 86, citing Tanner Ms. 24. folio 120.

^[2] See Nicolson's citation of Lucian's model of the unbiased historian: English Historical Library (3 volumes, 1696-9), I, Preface, Sig. Ar-v.

^[3] Ibid., I, Preface, Sig. A5r.

^[4] Ibid., II, 88.

^[5] Ibid., II, 18-20.

^[6] Nicolson noted on the 1684 edition of Foxe that 'the publishers had well nigh prevail'd with King Charles the Second to revive Queen Elizabeth's order and A. B. Parker's canon, for having a set of these volumes in the common halls of every Archbishop, Bishop, Dean, Archdeacon, etc.' (ibid., II, 81-2).

^[7] Ibid., II, 82.

^[8] Ibid., II, 94-7. Nicolson argued that this partiality was displayed in the fact that Heylyn had employed only Laudian transcripts made from the Cottonian Library.

^[9] Ibid., II, 100, 102, 103.

^[10] See G. Holmes and C. Jones (eds.), The London Diaries of William Nicolson 1702-1728 (Oxford, 1985), 216, 225; 'Bishop Nicolson's Diaries' by the Bishop of Barrow-in-Furness, Transactions of the Westmorland and Cumberland Archaeological and Antiquarian Society (1901), 38, 39, 40, 42 and (1902), 113.

^[11] G. Holmes and C. Jones, (eds.), The London Diaries, 12 November 1704, 225.

^[12] M. Sutcliffe, The Subversion of Robert Parsons (1606), Epistle Dedicatory, Sig. A2r-A3v, 4.

^[13] F. Goodwin, A Catalogue of the Bishops of England (1615), 3.

^[14] Ibid., 6, 8.

^[15] J. A. Robliison, The Glastonbury Legends (Cambridge, 1922), 28-50.

^[16] Ibid., 34-7.

^[17] Goodwin, A Catalogue, 34, 35.

^[18] Ibid., 44.

^[19] A second volume of Spelman's work was posthumously published in the early years of the Restoration under the guidance of the High Church scholar William Dugdale; see DNB.

^[20] See H. Spelman, Concilia (1639), 'Apparatus de exordia christianae religionis in Britannis'; the brass plate and criticism are at 7-10; J. Ussher, Britannicarum Ecclesiarum Antiquitates (1687), 1-31. On Ussher, see also R. Buick Knox, James Ussher Archbishop of Armagh (Cardiff, 1967), 98-113; and Ussher's A Discourse of the Religion Anciently Professed by the British and the Irish (1687).

^[21] T. Jones, Of the Heart and Its Right Sovereign (1678), 124-6, and passim.

^[22] Ibid., 128-9, 131.

^[23] Ibid., 143-7, 216, 220. The myth of the continuity of the British Church was fostered by Jones who compared the suffering of the English Church to the persecutions of the early Church, see 236, 238, 295-300, 301, 306-14.

^[24] Ibid., 365, 413-14, 416.

^[25] Stillingfleet, Origines Britannicae, 1.

^[26] Ibid., 6.

^[27] Ibid., 9.

^[28] Ibid., 11-12.

^[29] S. Cressy, The Church History of Brittanny [sic] (1668), II, chapter 8. This work was borrowed largely from Alford's Annales Ecclesiae Britannicae in manuscript. Note also that there was a 'Second Part of the Church History of Brittany' in manuscript deposited at the Benedictine Monastery at Douai; see DNB.

^[30] Stillingfleet, Origines Britannicae, 15-17, 18-23, 26. See on Stillingfleet's epistemological theory R. S. Carroll, The Commonsense Philosophy of Bishop Edward Stillingfleet (The Hague, 1975). It should be noted that this work does not deal with the status of historical knowledge, or the persuasive role of 'probability'.

^[31] Stillingfleet, Origines Britannicae, 28, 35.

^[32] Ibid., 37, 41.

^[33] G. Williams, 'Some Protestant Views of Early British Church History', History 37 (1953). Williams argues that Stillingfleet's Pauline thesis was accepted by scholars until the middle of the nineteenth century.

^[34] Stillingfleet, Origines Britannicae, 58, 65, 67, 69.

^[35] Ibid., 77, 96-7, 101.

^[36] For an earlier use see the works of Archbishop Laud. Note also that Heylyn referred to the latter as 'Cyprianus Anglicanus'.

^[37] Ibid., 356, 358, 360-4. I have argued that Stillingfleet's defence of British independency rested upon his idea of the competence of episcopacy to legislate and create a Church. There were further attacks upon this position not merely from Catholics, but lack of space debars me from exploring these histories. The Presbyterian interest argued against the validity of episcopal government by deploying the historical example of the early Scottish Church. Their point was that originally Christianity in Scotland had been founded upon a system of independent Churches known as Culdees. They argued that popish episcopacy had been imposed upon the Scots by, the advent of the Catholic Palladius. This case was argued in a number of works such as D. Blondel's Apologia (Amsterdam, 1646), John Selden in a preface to R. Twysden's Historia Anglicanae Scriptore Decem (1650), and R. Baxter's Treatise of Episcopacy (1681). The seminal defence of Anglican episcopacy was written by William Lloyd, Bishop of St Asaph, in his An Historical Account of Church Government (1684). Lloyd was a colleague of Stillingfleet, to whom (along with Henry Dodwell) the work was dedicated. Lloyd argued that the Presbyterian case was premised upon false and fictional history (A3r-v, A5v-A8v). In chapter 7 he focused upon the notion of Church government by 'Culdees' (133ff.) His argument was that the term Culdee, or Keldee, had reference to monks rather than the clergy. He showed that the usage of the word was not common until the sixteenth century. The original inspiration for the idea of Church government by Culdess was the self-interest of the monk John of Fordon, who had fabricated such an illustrious past to elevate the prestige of his own order. It is important to note that the idea of Culdees was further deployed against the Church of England for different intents by John Toland in his Nazarenus (1718). See W. Reeves, The Culdees of the British Isles (Dublin, 1864).

^[38] Stillingfleet, Irenicum, 298-9, 385, 386-94, 404.

^[39] Ibid., 3.

^[40] G. D. D'Oyly, The Life of William Sancroft 2 volumes, (1821), II, 346. See also G. Reedy, 'Mystical Politics: The Imagery of Charles II's Coronation' in P. J. Korshin (ed.), Studies in Change and Revolution (Menston, 1972). R. S. Bosher, The Making of the Restoration Settlement (1951); I. M. Green, The Re-Establishment of the Church of England (Oxford, 1978), especially 22-5. See also for an interesting account of the popular reception of the Restoration, T. Harris, London Crowds in the Reign of Charles II (Cambridge, 1987), 36-61. For accounts of the fragmentation of ecclesiastical order in the 1640s and 1650s, see C. Hill, The World Turned Upside Down (1975), and Puritanism and Revolution (1972); A. L. Morton, The World of The Ranters (1975); B. Capp, The Fifth Monarchy Men (1967).

^[41] Bernard, Theologicus Historicus in Heylyn, Ecclesia Restaurata (2 volumes, Cambridge, 1849), I, clxxvi.

^[42] Ibid., cxiv, cxli, cxlvi, clxxxii.

^[43] P. Heylyn, Cyprianus Anglicus (1668), see 'A Necessary Introduction to the Following Work', 19, 39.

^[44] See W. M. Lamont, Richard Baxter and the Millennium, 84, 98, 105, 114-15, 131, 183, 243, 249, 251-2, 302-3. Lamont gives an excellent exegesis of Baxter's fusion of the apocalypse with Protestant imperialism: Baxter's ideas of the Christian magistrate and the national Church are crucially distinct from Heylyn's 'Grotian' schemes.

^[45] M. A. Goldie, 'John Locke and Anglican Royalism', Political Studies 31 (1983) has shown Heylyn's close identification with Filmerite royalism: Algernon Sidney referred to the cleric as the 'master' of Filmer's work. Heylyn has been given credit for arguing for the rights of Convocation to meet in tandem with Parliament in 1661. G. Every in his The High Church Party, 35, suggests that Archbishop Lamplugh of York used Heylyn's arguments in 1689 to prove that 'no Parliament ought to be called without a meeting of the clergy at the same time'.

^[46] Heylyn's High Church prescriptions were also presented in a more simplistic historical form in his A Help to English History; the work was originally published in 1641. It was reprinted three times in the decade following 1671, and finally in 1709. The work was a textbook or handbook of chronological catalogues of the kings, bishops and lords of Church. In this manner the theorizing and detailed narrative of Heylyn's vision of the past was distilled into dates, facts and figures which appeared baldly uncontentious. But as Heylyn wrote, 'these <66> following catalogues will make it evident and apparent' that both regal and episcopal government were legitimate.

^[47] P. Heylyn, Of Liturgies, or set forms of publick worship … in way of an historical narration in The Historical Tracts, 50.

^[48] Heylyn, History of Liturgies, 51.

^[49] Citations of Maimonides at 54, 62, 64, 67, 71. It is interesting to note here that the same work by Maimonides was the foundation of the Dutchman Gerard Vossius' 'Arminianism'. Vossius' translation and commentary on Maimonides, De Origine et Progressu Idololatriae was a central influence on Lord Herbert of Cherbury. The latter's De Religione Gentilium (1663) was translated in 1705 into English. As I argue below, Cherbury's work is essentially anticlerical, and is a formative influence on such thinkers as Charles Blount and John Toland.

^[50] Heylyn, Histories of Liturgies, 65-9.

^[51] Ibid., 79.

^[52] Ibid., 98 and following.

^[53] Heylyn, History of Episcopacy, I, 7-15, 30-2. See N. Malcolm, De Dominis: Venetian, Anglican, Ecumenist and Relapsed Heretic (1984) and J. P. Sommerville, Politics and Ideology in England 1603-1640 (Essex, 1986).

^[54] Heylyn, History of Episcopacy, I, 56-7, 82.

^[55] Ibid., I, 151, 161, 166.

^[56] Ibid., II, 41-68. See Heylyn's citation of Cyprian's De Unitate Ecclesia and Epistles, especially Part II, chapter 3.

^[57] Heylyn, History of Episcopacy, II, 53.

^[58] The pagan temples were converted to Christian Churches, and the hierarchy of bishops and archbishops introduced. Heylyn was not as precise about the number of new bishoprics created from the pagan equivalents, as earlier men such as Francis Goodwin had been, because of the fragmentary nature of the surviving records and the monkish distortions of the Middle Ages. Heylyn History of Episcopacy, II, 62-65.

^[59] Heylyn, History of Episcopacy, II, 68, 27.

^[60] Ibid., II, 403.

^[61] Ibid., II, 87.

^[62] Ibid., II, 470.

^[63] Ibid., II, 81. See, for example, T. Brett, An Account of Church Government and Governors (1701), 1-7, at 7; 'But why should I trouble myself to collect particular proofs and authorities when it is manifest from all Church history, that the Christian Church before it had any supreme magistrate in its communion for above three centuries, was actually governed by its pastors, and has continued to be so ever since in the greatest part of Christendom.'

^[64] Heylyn, Ecclesia Restaurata (3rd edition, 1674- CUL Classmark: Pet. 12.21). Please note that in general I have used the 1674 edition of this work (CUI- classmark Pet. 12.21), although because of missing pages and faulty pagination, where indicated. I have used other versions.

^[65] Heylyn, Ecclesia Restaurata, 123-4., Ecclesia Vindicata, v.

^[66] Heylyn, Ecclesia Vindicata, 1, 2, 3, 5, 18, 12, 20. See also Heylyn, Cyprianus Anglicus, 2.

^[67] On J. Gerson see B. Tierney, The Foundations of Conciliar Theory (Cambridge, 1955), and Religion, Law and the Growth of Constitutional Thought 1150-1650 (Cambridge, 1982); L. B. Pascoe, Jean Gerson: Principles of Church Reform (Leiden, 1973); on Sarpi see D. Wootton, Paolo Sarpi between Renaissance and Enlightenment (Cambridge, 1983).

^[68] Heylyn, Ecclesia Vindicata, 29, 39-40.

^[69] Heylyn, Ecclesia Restaurata, 95, 101, 191.

^[70] Ibid., 234, 230-1.

^[71] He wrote, of the reign of Elizabeth: 'But all this while there was no care taken to suppress the practice of another faction, who secretly did as much endeavour the subversion of the English Liturgy, as the Pope seemed willing to confirm it; for whilst the prelates of the Church, and other learned men before remembered, bent all their forces towards the confuting of some Popish errors, another enemy appeared, which seemed openly not to aim at the Churches doctrine, but quarrelled at some rites and extrinsicals of it. Their purpose was to show themselves so expert in the Arts of War, as to take in the outworks of religion first, before they levelled their artillery at the fort itself' (Ecclesia Restaurata, 13; note this citation is from the 1661 edition (CUL classmark L*.10.23(c)). See also H. Hickman, Historia Quinqu-Articularis Exarticulata (1673), who objected vehemently to Heylyn's false indictment of the Reformation: see especially 'Epistle to the Reader' where Hickman argued that Heylyn had catholicized Luther's theology in order to force a breach between the Lutheran and Zwinglian reformations.

^[72] Heylyn, Aerius Redividus, Preface, Sig. A4r.

^[73] Ibid., 27.

^[74] Heylyn, Historia Quinqu-Articularis, II, 8.

^[75] Ibid., II, 18, 76.

^[76] Heylyn, Examen Historicum, Preface, Sig. A3v-A4r. Heylyn berated Fuller for a paucity of style, for including verses, heraldry and other extraneous material into his history, which was more like a 'Church Romance' than 'a well built ecclesiastical History'. See Heylyn, Examen Historicum, Introduction, Sig. B2r.

^[77] Ibid., 'Introduction', Sig. B5r.

^[78] Fuller, Appeal of Injured Innocence, Dedication: 'to … George Berkeley'.

^[79] Ibid., Part I, 11. In reply to Heylyn's Examen, Fuller dealt with each objection point by point in an attempt to maintain the integrity of his position. The problem was of the reaction of the reader to this assertion and counter-assertion; who should be believed? Fuller identified the problem of radical historical incommensurability when he commented, 'Satis pro imperio, must is for a King; and seeing the Doctor and I are both Kings alike, I return, he must not be so understood; as to any Judicious and indifferent reader will appear', Fuller Appeal of Injured Innocence, Part 1, 50 (note the CUL edition used: P.2.14~2, has a faulty pagination, this refers to the second page 50).

^[80] Hickman, a stern defender of non-conformity, was ejected from his Fellowship at Magdalen Hall, Oxford at the Restoration. He left England and lived in Leiden for most of the remainder of his life, see DNB.

^[81] H. Hickman, Plus Ultra (1661), 'To the Christian Reader', Sig. A2r-v.

^[82] Ibid., 12.

^[83] Ibid., 13.

^[84] Ibid., 14-16, 24-34, 37-40.

^[85] Hickman was to employ history to undermine Heylyn's claims; he wrote that there were two methods of fighting anti-Christ: 'The first apodictical, proving the truth, and retelling the errors opposite to it, by evidence of scriptures, and strength of Reason: the second historical confirming truth by the testimonies and authorities of men renowned for learning and piety' (Historia Quinqu-Articularis Exarticulata, 2).

^[86] There is a paucity of work studying the historical meaning and complex usages of the idea of 'Arminianism', see A. J. Harrisson, Arminianism (1938); N. Tyacke Anti-Calvinists: The Rise of English Arminianism c. 1590-1640 (Oxford, 1987).

^[87] Hickman, Historia Quinqu-Articularis Exarticulata, 21-8. On Pelagianism, see J. Passmore, The Perfectibility of Man (1974), 1-40.

^[88] Hickman, Historia Quinqu-Articularis Exarticulata, please note the mispagination of the CUL edition: references here are to the faulty pagination: 397, 429-32.

^[89] See also Burnet to Fulman, 7 September 1680: 'And I shall tell you freely, Dr Heylin is an author whom I have found in many particulars grossly insincere; for I have seen in the Cotton Library many of the vouchers which he wrote from, in which he has with a sort of spite picked out only what might be a reproach to that time, and has left the most considerable things that might represent matters more honorably. I have not enlarged on these discoveries, because I had no mind to expose him more than was necessary; but I give no sort of credit to <76> this authority' (N. Pocock (ed.), The History of the Reformation (7 volumes, Oxford, 1865), VII, 37).

^[90] See below, pp. 84-6.

^[91] G. Touchet, Historical Collections (1673), Preface, Sig. A2r.

^[92] Ibid., 23-4, 77-83.

^[93] Ibid., 212-36, 337, 489-90. Note R. Baxter, The Second Part of the Non- Conformists' Plea for Peace (1680), Preface, Sig. A4r, complains about the papist tenor of Heylyn's history, and Touchet's use of it. Thanks to J. Marshall for bringing this to my attention.

^[94] Anon., King Edward the VIth, 99.

^[95] Ibid., 101, 105-6, 107.

^[96] H. Foxcroft, A Life of Gilbert Burnet (Cambridge, 1907), 151.

^[97] Ibid., 153-66; N. Pocock (ed.), The History of the Reformation (7 volumes, Oxford, 1865), VII, 1-25; G. Burnet, Reflections upon a Pamphlet Entitled Some Discourses (1696), 80. The most recent account of the History of the Reformation is J. E. Drabble, 'Gilbert Burnet and the History of the English Reformation: the Historian and His Milieu', Journal of Religious History, 12 (1983) - a superficial piece that contains a number of factual errors. See also A. G. Dickens and J. Tonkin, The Reformation in Historical Thought (Oxford, 1985), 108, where Burnet is applauded as a 'major contribution to the emancipation of English history from the annalistic method'.

^[98] G. Burnet, A Letter (1693), 17 and Reflections on a Book (1700), 25.

^[99] Burnet, A Letter (1693), 2.

^[100] Burnet, History of the Reformation, I, Preface, Sig. Bv.

^[101] Ibid., I, Preface, Sig. B2r.

^[102] Ibid., I, 23, 30, 97.

^[103] Ibid., I, 138-42.

^[104] Ibid., I, 141-3.

^[105] Ibid., II, Preface, Sig. B2r.

^[106] Ibid., I, 180-94; II, 189, 302-44.

^[107] Ibid., II, Preface, Sig. Ev, (paginated), 9, 25.

^[108] One of the most crucial reforms was the publication of vernacular homilies; Burnet explained: 'The chief design in them was to acquaint the people with the method of salvation according to the gospel; in which there are two dangerous extremes at that time which divided the world. The greatest part of the ignorant Commons seemed to consider their priests as a sort of people who had such a secret trick of saving souls, as mountebanks pretend in the curing of diseases … the other extreme was of some corrupt gospellers, who thought if they magnified Christ much, and depended upon his merits and intercession, they could not perish, which so ever way they led their lives' (ibid., II, 27, 30).

^[109] Burnet, History of the Reformation, II, 62.

^[110] Note the radicals - Charles Blount, John Toland, and, later still, Conyers Middleton - repeatedly attacked the Catholic and 'popish' religions as new systems of paganism.

^[111] Ibid., II, 104. The connection between the notion of the Eucharist as a sacrifice, and the power of an independent clerical order was to become a contentious issue in the 1690s with the rise of the Unitarian and Arian theologies, which rejected any priestly sacerdos. See next chapter.

^[112] Ibid., II, 164-9, 195-202.

^[113] Ibid., III, Preface, xii.

^[114] Ibid., III, Introduction, viii.

^[115] See 'The Sermon of Doctor Colet, Made to the Convocation at Paulis' in J. H. Lupton, Life of Dean Colet (1909), 296; note also T. Smith (ed.), A Sermon of Conforming and Reforming Made to the Convocation at St Paul's Church in London by John Colet DD (Cambridge, 1661). See also P. I. Kaufman, 'John Colet's Opus de Sacramentis and Clerical Anticlericalism: The Limitation of the "Ordinary Wayes"', Journal of British Studies (1982).

^[116] Burnet, Reflections on the Rights, Powers, and Privileges (1700), 5.

^[117] Burnet, History of the Reformation, III, 219. For More as an anticlericalist 30-3.

^[118] Ibid., III, Introduction, xxii.

^[119] P. Manby, A Reformed Catechism, 'To the Reader'.

^[120] Manby, Considerations, 'To the Reader', Sig. A4v.

^[121] Manby, Reformed Catechism, 7.

^[122] Ibid., 'To the Reader', iii-iv, 3. 'Note, let the reader observe here', 33, 64, 86.

^[123] Ibid., 86, 102.

^[124] W. King, An Answer to the Considerations which Obliged Peter Manby … (Dublin, 1687), 10.

^[125] W. King, A Vindication of the Answer to the Considerations (Dublin, 1688), 8-10, 31; 'I desire therefore the reader to look over the history, and compare those who were for the Reformation with such as opposed it, and let him say in his conscience, which seems of God and religion: and not to take the character from the mangled and broken account Mr. M. gives some of them.'

^[126] Ibid., 33.

^[127] King directed a further assault against Manby's work; in appealing to the individual conscience of the reader Manby undermined the Catholic rule of faith (Ibid., 4, 6-7, 23).

^[128] Le Grand commented: 'Bien plus peut-on douter que cet ouvrage n'ait été entrepris pour préparer les esprits des peuples cet changement que voulaient faire au Angleterre au Duc de Mônmout, au Comte de Shaftesbury, au Comte de Salisbury, au Lord Russel, au rests enfin de cette horrible faction de Cromwel toujours opposée a l'autorité Royale, toujours preste a troubler la tranquillité publique, et à ruiner les loix fondamentale de l'état', Histoire du divorce (Paris, 1688) 181-6.

^[129] J. Bossuet, History of the Variations of the Protestant Churches (2 volumes, Antwerp, 1742), I, 325-8, 339.

^[130] Ibid., I, 298; Le Grand, Histoire du Divorce, 96ff.

^[131] 'Here then we have him all at once. A Lutheran, a married man, a concealer of his marriage, an archbishop according to the Roman Pontifical subject to the Pope, whose power he detested in his heart, saying mass which he did not believe in, and giving power to say it; yet nevertheless, if we believe Mr Burnet, a second Athanasius, a second Cyril, one of the most perfect prelates the Church ever had' (Bossuet, History of the Variations, I, 303).

^[132] Burnet, History of the Reformation, I, Book iii, document xxi, 220, and following.

^[133] Bossuet, History of the Variations, I, 323-5; see also 363-5.

^[134] Burnet, A Letter to Mr Thêvenot, 11-12, 23.

^[135] Manby, Considerations, 'To the Reader', Sig. A4v.

^[136] Manby, Catechism 30-5.

^[137] Stillingfleet, Irenicum, 374.

^[138] Ibid., 386-93.

^[139] Ibid., 390. For a modern edition of the Cranmer manuscript, see G. D. Duffield (ed.), The Work of Thomas Cranmer (Appleyard, 1964) and J. E. Cox (ed.), Miscellaneous Writings and Letters of Thomas Cranmer (Cambridge, 1846). On Cranmer's ecclesiology, see W. D. J. Cargill Thompson, 'The Two Regiments' (unpublished Cambridge PhD., 1960), 247-75; see also J. Marshall, 'The Ecclesiology of the Latitude-Men 1660-1689: Stillingfleet, Tillotson and "Hobbism"', Journal of Ecclesiastical History 36 (1985).

^[140] See Hobbes, Leviathan, III-IV, and below, chapter 6.

^[141] Stillingfleet, Irenicum, 393.

^[142] S. Lowth, Of the Subject of Church Power, (1685), 6.

^[143] Ibid., Preface (unpaginated), 12.

^[144] Ibid., 484-90.

^[145] G. Burnet, A Letter to Mr Simon Lowth (1685), 2.

^[146] Ibid., 3-4, reprinting, Lowth, Of Church Power, 485, and Burnet, History of the Reformation, I, Collection of Records, III, 227.

^[147] G. Burnet, Reflection on the Reformation, 19, 20-1, 25-6.

^[148] See Tindal, Rights of the Christian Church, 257, citing Sarpi's dictum that the Church of England would become priest-ridden because of episcopal pretensions.

^[149] H. Dodwell, Doctrine of the Church of England, (1694), v.

^[150] Ibid., xi-xii, xiii.

^[151] A similar approach was assumed by Jeremy Collier in his Ecclesiastical History (1707-10) who condemned the Cranmerian reforms as 'Erastian tenets' and insisted that God had given the clergy a commission independent of the state (II 89, 93, 198).

^[152] G. Sewell, An Introduction, 62.

^[153] Swift, A Preface, 31; see also Philoclerus, Speculum Salisburianum, 18-19, where the author suggests Burnet's colleagues are Toland and Collins.

^[154] Swift, A Preface, 16-17, 53-4; Philoclerus, Speculum Salisburianum, 17, 33.

^[155] Ibid., 50, 69-70, 72.

^[156] R. Twysden, Historical Vindication (1675), 4-5. On Twysden and Sarpi, see J. L. Lievsay, Venetian Pboenix: Paolo Sarpi and Some of his English Friends 1606-1700 (Kansas, 1973), 45-6, 87-9.

^[157] Twysden, Historical Vindication, 6-26.

^[158] Ibid., 68, 72.

^[159] Ibid., 93. The example of Gallicanism was also deployed. Twysden cited (94-5, 105) Charles Le Faye who displayed many historical precedents which showed that 'la police extérieure sur l'église' was in the control of emperors, kings and princes.

^[160] Ibid., 107, 117.

^[161] Ibid., 142-3, 148-52. There needs to be separate research on both Twysden's relationship with Sarpi's works (see Lievsay, 87-92, who suggests Twysden may have been preparing a critical edition of Sarpi's History of Trent) and the connections between Sarpi's and Hobbes' works on the origin of the Inquisition and the idea of heresy. Interestingly, although Twysden's Historical Vindication is riddled with citations from the 'Wise Venetian', on the specific origins of the Inquisition at the Lateran Council, Twysden cited a rather curious source, Ludovico Paramo's De Origine et Progressu Officii Sanctor Inquisitionis (Matriti, 1598). Paramo was the Sicilian inquisitor who had argued that the Jews should not be persecuted to death because this would compromise the salvation of the world. See E. Burman, The Inquisition (Wellingborough, 1984), 76, 192; H. Kamen, Inquisition and Society in Spain in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries (Indiana, 1985), 48.

^[162] W. Denton, Jus Caesaris et Ecclesia vera Dictae (1681), 'To the Reader' Sig. A2r.

^[163] Ibid., 31, 33, 36, 39.

^[164] Ibid., 10, 11, 12, 15.

^[165] Ibid., 17, 18-19, 20, 21, 23.

^[166] Ibid., 24.

^[167] Ibid., 82-103, citing Sarpi, Treatise of Matters Beneficiary.

^[168] Denton, Jus Caesaris, 24, 26-7. See Hobbes, Leviathan, IV and below, 135n.

^[169] Denton, Jus Caesaris, 31, 39, 48-9, 50.

^[170] Ibid., 62.

^[171] Once again Denton used Sarpi to justify his denial of the notion of two societies of the civil and spiritual. Denton, like Hobbes, attacked the thought of Robert Bellarmine who had strongly argued for the distinction. Denton, Jus Caesaris, 107-11. See Hobbes on monstrous bodies politic, Leviathan, 173-4.

^[172] Denton, Jus Caesaris, 191, 195-206. Denton's thought is a complex mixture of orthodoxy and unorthodoxy. In particular his use of Paolo Sarpi is problematic. D. Wootton, Paolo Sarpi: between Renaissance and Enlightenment (Cambridge, 1983), passim, has argued that Sarpi's approval of the primitive pattern of the Christian Church was a subtle ploy to attack the general foundations of clericism. He also suggests that Sarpi conceived of religion as an instrumental mechanism to create social stability, as a form of Platonic or Averroeistic medicine for the body politic. We can see that Denton is widely appreciative of Sarpi's thought, and that he was explicitly anticlerical. How far this hostility to hierocracy extends is difficult to determine. His later work, Some Remarks Recommended unto Ecclesiasticks (1690), was profoundly anticlerical. It indicted the High Church 'linsey-wolsey Divines' who by perverting Scripture set all 'squinting towards Arbitrary Power'. See Some Remarks, 1, 3, 4-5, 7.

^[173] See Tindal, Rights of the Christian Church, citation of Selden (De Synedriis), 42, 70, 107; of Sarpi (Letters in English, and A Treatise of Benefits) 257, 310-11, 359, 360-1, 362; of Harrington, (The Prerogative of Popular Government) 170, 357; for references to Cranmer see pages 126-8, 144, 178 and passim. See below, chapter 6, 'Civil Theology', for an extended discussion of this issue.