purposely declined therfrom. For which lie gives the following reason. Because he would not intricate and entangle the matter with two questions at once. For he wist very well that the church being proved this common known catholike congregation of all christen nations abiding together in one faith, neither fain off nor cut off, there might be peradventure made a second question after that, Whether over all that Catholike Church the Pope must needes he head and chief governour or chiefe spirituall shepherd? Or else that, the union of faith standing among them all, every province might have their own chief spiritual governour over it self; without any recourse unto the Pope, or any superioritie recognised to any other outward person. But now these could be no questions, if the Pope's primacy, or his being head, and chief governor, or chief spiritual shepherd of the Catholike church was provided by God, or begun by his institution.
However, we here see the ground of this excellent person's opposition to the King's primacy or supremacy. By head or chief governour he understood the being chief spiritual shepherd, as if the King was enacted to have power to administer the sacraments, and particularly to ordain bishops and priests, &c. And therfore he scrupled owning the King to be supreme head of the church of England, as not thinking him qualified to be the chief spiritual shepherd because he was a lay-man. Thus has the regal supremacy been since misrepresented, in spite of all that has been said or done by that prince, his parliaments, and his clergy to the contrary, who all declared that by supreme head they did not mean a
