The _Treatise of the Pope’s Supremacy_, from the same pen--too long to be described--places the author amongst the chief defenders of Protestantism, and deserves the eulogium of Tillotson,--what “many others have handled before, he hath exhausted.” The student can find arguments against the assumptions of Rome nowhere so fully and powerfully stated as on Barrow’s pages. Those arguments are, perhaps, like Saul’s armour, too cumbrous for the Davids of the present day; but there are in Barrow’s armoury stones from the brook for simple shepherds, as well as spears and shields for veteran warriors. The feeling of Barrow towards the Romish Church is plain from what has now been said, and it is desirable, before we leave the opinions of the Anglicans, to inquire what their feeling generally was upon this subject; and also how they expressed themselves in reference to Protestant communities. [Sidenote: OPINIONS RESPECTING POPERY.] Thorndike calls the Romish a true but corrupt Church, in which salvation may be obtained, although it be clogged with difficulty. It is not Antichrist. It is not formally idolatrous; yet, after referring to its abuses, he says, “to live under them, and to yield conformity to them, is a burden unsufferable for a Christian to undergo: to approve them by being reconciled to the Church that maintains them is a scandal incurable and irreparable.”[436] Bishop Bull observes, referring to certain doctrines held by Romanists, “I look upon it as a wonderful both just and wise providence of God, that He hath suffered the Church of Rome to fall into such gross errors (which otherwise it is scarce imaginable how men in their wits that had not renounced not only the Scriptures, but their reason, yea and their senses too, could be overtaken with), and to determine them for articles of faith.”[437] Heylyn concedes to Rome the character of a true Church; yet after referring to the argument for image worship, he remarks:--“Though perhaps some men of learning may be able to relieve themselves by these distinctions; yet I can see no possibility how the common people, who kneel and make their prayers directly to the image itself, without being able to discern where the difference lieth between their _proprie_ and _improprie_, or _per se_ and _per accidens_, can be excused from palpable and downright _idolatry_.”[438] The same writer, describing the Reformation, and contending for the continuity of the English Church, reflects, by implication, severely upon its previously Romanized state:--“Whereas, the case, if rightly stated, is but like that of a sick and wounded man, that had long lain weltering in his own blood, or languishing under a tedious burden of diseases, and afterwards by God’s great mercy, and the skilful diligence of honest chirurgeons and physicians, is at the last restored to his former health.”[439]