any greater cause arise and diuers such other plaine and cleare markes of superiority that euen M. Abbots badde eies may easily serue him to discerne them Seing then S. Leo thought himselfe and his predecessours to haue ful authority and that by the holy Canons made by diuine inspiration to delegate ouer the Churches of the East vvhere was most doubt of his authority such power vnto others Can it be doubted but that he vvas most certainly perswaded that the Bishop of Rome hath and alwaies had supreme command in Ecclesiastical causes al the world ouer And that you may see that S. Leo vvas not only of that opinion but that the best most learned of the East Church of that time were also as fully perswaded of the Church of Romes authority ouer al the world I wil adjoine hereunto the sentence of Theodoretus one of the soundest Catholikes and one of the most learned and famous authours of those daies He being Bishop of Cyrus in Asia doth write vnto Renatus a Priest of Rome thus Theodoret. Epistola 2. The Heretikes haue spoiled me of my Priestly function and seate they haue cast me out of the citties hauing no respect vnto my gray haires nor regard of my time spent in religion wherefore I pray you that you wil perswade the most holy Archbishop Leo that he wil vse his Apostolike authority and command vs to come to your Councel for that holy See doth hold the sterne of gouernement ouer al the Churches in the world Another Epistle this holy Father did write vnto Leo himselfe wherein he saith I doe expect the sentence of your Apostolike See and doe humbly beseech your Holinesse to succour me appealing to your just judgement c. And that you may yet further perceiue that S. Leo his sentence was of force to restore him being a Bishop in Asia to his former dignity and seate these few vvordes out of the Councel of Chalcedon wil sufficiently proue thus speaketh the Councel Actione 1. Let the most reuerend Bishop Theodoret enter in that he may be partner of the Councel because the most holy Archbishop Leo hath restored him to his Bishopricke Now I come to answere M. Abbots goodly proofes and vvise glosses to the contrary S. Leo saith he would not take vpon him to cal general Councels That is false for he did cal a general Councel in the West witnesse these his wordes vnto Tuilius the Bishop of Asturicensis Epistola 91. numer 17. I haue sent letters to our bretheren and fellow Bishops of Carthage in Afrike Tarragone in Spaine Portugal and France Eisque concilium Synodi generalis indiximus And haue summoned them to meete at a general Councel And that could not escape S. Leo his knowledge vvho vvas most skilful in al Antiquity which by tradition descended vnto one of his successors Pelagius the second who was S. Gregory the great his predecessor to wit Epistola 1 ad Orientales that the authority of calling general Councels was through the priuiledge of S. Peter giuen vnto the See Apostolike But he made request saith M. Abbot vnto Theodosius first and after vnto Martianus the Emperors that they would command a general Councel to be holden in Italy which they would not doe but chose rather another place Be it so for sometimes such mighty Monarkes take more state vpon them then Christian dutie doth permit And as for Theodosius the younger though he were a good Emperour at the first yet afterward it is euident that he assisted the Heretike Eutiches his Patron Dioscorus too farre in that wicked assembly at Ephesus See Actionem primam Concil Chalced. Liberatus cap. 12. the place by him assigned for that general Councel The reason that moued S. Leo to request those Emperours to cal a Councel was not for that he doubted of his owne authority therein but for diuers other good respects First because as I before signified the Bishops to be assembled vvere for the most part the Emperours subjects in temporal affaires and therefore were not vvithout his priuity to be called so farre from their residences And for this cause the Kinges of euery country being aduertised by the Popes Holinesse of a general Councel doe to this day as it appeared in the last general Councel of Trent summon the Bishops of their Realmes to the said general Councel and command them to make choise of some to send thither vvhich doth nothing derogate to the Popes general summoning Besides the Heretikes of those times vvould not obey the Pope nor their lawful Pastours command no more then these of our time wherefore the Emperours power vvhich they dreadded and stoode in more awe off vvas to be joined with the Popes authority wherefore he had good cause to request it Yet that the vnderstanding reader may perceiue how S. Leo euen then did fore-see that some inconuenience might happe to follow of his condescending so farre vnto the Emperours pleasure about the place and time of that Councel he as it were to preuent it doth yeeld his consent in such sort that no great aduantage can be taken of it Epist 41. ad Martian thus he vvriteth to the Emperour Martian I required indeede of your most gratious clemency that the Synode which you thought necessary to be assembled as we also required for the restoring of vnity in the East Church might be for a time deferred that the mindes of men being more settled those Bishops which for feare of enemies are staied at home might also meete but for that you doe zealously preferre Gods cause before the affaires of men and are wisely and Godly perswaded that it wil further the wealth of your Empire to haue the Priests of God in vnity and the Gospel preached without dissention Ego etiam vestris dispositionibus non renitor I doe not withstand or striue against this your ordinance Here you may see that he did not yeeld vpon obedience vnto the Emperours order but moued vpon good consideration would not contend against it his very wordes yet giuing that he might haue withstoode him if he had thought it more expedient for the common good Againe in his letters to the same Councel of Chalcedon he putteth in a caueat by vvhich they might vnderstand that this his condescending to the Emperour should not be taken for a prejudice against the authority of the See of Rome for calling of Councels these be his wordes Epistola 45. ad Synod Chalced. I had wished indeed most dearely beloued that al the Priests of God did agree in one profession of the Catholike faith c. but because many thinges are done of which we often repent c. the religious aduise of our most gratious Emperour is to be embraced mouing your holy brother-hood to assemble your selues together for the ouerthrowing of Sathans sleights and for the restoring of vnity in the Church Beatissimi Apostoli Petri sedis jure atque honore seruato the right
Israelites d Genes 48. vers 16. God c. and the Angel that hath deliuered me from al euil blesse these children The example of so religious a person is our sufficient vvarrant to pray to Angels and Saints for e Luc. 22. Saints in heauen are equal to Angels as our Sauiour himselfe assureth vs and Iob was counsailed to pray and cal for aide vnto some of the Saints f Iob. 5. vers 1. Ad aliquem Sanctorum conuerte Thirdly they of the old Testament knew good vvorkes to merit life euerlasting and had by Gods grace free-wil to doe them which I adde because by the same sentences I wil proue both togither God said vnto Cain Genes 4. vers 7. If thou doe wel shalt thou not receiue if euil thy sinne wil be at the dore but the appetite or pange of it shal be vnder thee and thou shalt haue dominion ouer it see both power giuen to the wicked to doe wel if they wil and recompence promised therefore Againe in the law Moises hauing propounded to the Israelites Gods commandements exhorting them thereunto saith Deuter. 30. vers 15. Consider that I set before you life and good and contrariwise death and euil if you loue God and wil walke in his commandements life or else death c. Vers 19. choose therefore life c. Must they not be very dul that hence cannot gather the keeping of Gods commandements to deserue and merit life euerlasting and that man hath by the aide of Gods grace free-wil to performe them Fourthly they that were skilful in the law of Moises could not be ignorant of vvorkes of supererogation that is that there vvere many good workes which men were not bound to doe yet if they did them they might thereby aduance themselues in Gods fauour because there is Numer 6. special order taken for the sanctification of any man or woman that would be a Nazarite that is any one that of deuotion would withdraw himselfe from secular affaires and for some certaine time serue God more religiously yet no man was bound therevnto Further they were allowed and encouraged to make vowes which is also a worke of supererogation against M. Abbot fift instance For not only Dauid saith Psalm 75. vers 12. Vow and render it to our Lord but in the law it is written * Deuter. 23. vers 21. When thou doest vow a vow vnto the Lord thy God slacke not to performe it because the Lord thy God doth require it c. but if thou wilt not promise thou shalt be without sinne And to leaue the word Monkery as fitter for a Monkey then for an Abbot Iosephus a graue authour among the Iewes vvitnesseth That there liued in the time of the law many thousandes called Esseni Antiquitat Iudaic. lib. 18. cap. 2. who were contemners of riches liued in common hauing neither wiues nor seruants What other thing doe Monkes professe then such pouerty and chastity sauing obedience vvhich must needes also in some degree be among the others who liued no doubt in orderly society Sixtly neither they nor vve either buy or sel pardons yet had great mercy and pardon shewed them for their fore-fathers sake as God test fieth in the first commandement And that they were on the other side to endure temporal punishment for sinne after the guilt of the sinne the eternal paine was forgiuen them is most clearely recorded both of al the people of Israel Numer 14. Whose murmuration against God was at the earnest intercession of Moises pardoned and yet were they therefore depriued of entring into the land of promise Yea Numer 20. vers 24. Moises and Aaron themselues were in like manner both pardoned for their diffidence that they did not glorifie God at the waters of contradiction and yet neuerthelesse Deuter. 32. vers 51. debarred from entring into the land of promise for the same offence so that after the mortal guilt of sinne is remitted there remaineth either some temporal satisfaction to be made on our parties or else to be forgiuen and pardoned vs by God and his Ministers Seauenthly that they made praiers and offered sacrifice for the soules in Purgatory is manifest by the fact of 2. Mach. 12. Iudas Machabeus who was a most noble vertuous and faithful Israelite as al Christians doe confesse Neither is there any neede for this purpose to auerre and proue the bookes of the Machabees to be Canonical Scripture when it serueth this turne that they be taken for a graue History and that the Protestants allow them to be of sufficient authority for instruction of manners Further al the Iewes euen to this day doe pray for the soules in Purgatory Titulo 1. Sect. 4. see the Catholike Apology out of Protestant Authours Eightly the Iewes of the male-kinde by their law vvere bound to goe as it were in pilgrimage at three solemne feasts in the yeare vnto one special place that God should choose for his seruice And King Salomon encouraged al strangers to goe on pilgrimage to the Temple builded by him vvhen he praied Deuter. 16. vers 16 that what stranger soeuer should come thither to pray he might obtaine his sute And the ¶ * 3. Reg. 8. vers 21. bones of the Prophet Elizeus giuing life by their touch vnto a dead man doth sufficiently instruct al true beleeuers that it is very profitable to goe on pilgrimage vnto the sacred bones and holy Relikes of Gods faithful seruants departed Lastly they were not wholy vnacquainted with a kinde of shrift and absolution for 4. Reg. 13. vers 21. Numer 5. Leuit. 5. they were charged to confesse the sinnes they had committed and to bring with them vnto the Priest a prescribed sacrifice to be offered by them for their pardon and absolution And as the lepers by that law were bound to present themselues to the Priests and were by them declared such or purged from that imputation so in the law of grace men infected with the soules leprosie that is mortal sinne are either to be bound and declared obstinate by the Priests if they vvil not repent or repenting and confessing the same are to be cleansed there-from by the Priests absolution Chrisost li. 3. de Sacerdot Hieron in ca. 16. Math. as both S. Chrisostome and S. Hierome doe argue This in briefe wil suffice I hope for answere vnto M. Abbots particulars I might easily adde how the sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christ vnder the formes of bread and wine were both prefigured by Melchisedechs Host in bread and vvine and foretold by the Genes 14. Malach. 10. Prophet Malachy and vvhat a liuely type Manna that Angelical and delicate foode was of Christs body in the Sacrament And how the supreme authority of one head ouer al the whole Church and that to belong to a Bishop not to the lay Magistrate was not obscurely shadowed but liuely represented by the
be referred vnto the See Apostolike Because the Apostles by the commandement of our Sauiour haue ordained that questions of greater difficulty shal alwaies be referred vnto the Apostolike See vpon which Christ built the whole Church saying vnto blessed Peter the Prince of the Apostles thou art Peter vpon this rocke wil I build my Church c. Anacletus his immediate successor Euaristus Pope Martir writing vnto the Bishops of Africke Epistola 1. ad Eccles Africanam speaketh thus Truly your charity following the rule of the wise hath chosen rather to referre vnto the See Apostolike as to the head what ought to be obserued in doubtful matters then to presume your selues by vsurpation and writing to the brethren in Aegipt Epistola 2. doth command certaine Bishops whom he resembleth to adulterers because they had intruded into other Bishops Citties to be cast out of those places and to be made infamous and depriued of al Ecclesiastical honours adjoining That if after these thinges so dispatched they should haue further complaint against them that matter were to be enquired out and to be determined by the authority of this holy See Note how these holy Popes that vvere so nigh vnto the Apostles taught it to belong vnto the See of Rome to determine of the causes of the Bishops of Afrike and Aegipt most remote from them And because the Apostle S. Paul willeth 2. Cor. 13. vers 2. euery word to stand in the mouth of two or three witnesses I vvil take for the third Alexander the first Pope and Martir who succeeded vnto Euaristus he is as plaine and formal in this cause as any of the rest these be his wordes Epist 1. omnibus orthodoxis It is related vnto the primacy of this holy and Apâ—stolike See vnto which the disposition of the highest cases and the affaires of al Churches are by our Lord committed as to the head c. and a little after Our Lord here appointed this holy See the head of the whole Church I omit here the verdict of al others herein because this very matter must be spoken off hereafter againe and againe these three most ancient graue and Godly Martirs al successours of S. Peter and S. Paul vpon whose authority M. Abbot here only insisteth vvil suffice to certifie the indifferent reader that euen from the Apostles daies the Bishop of Rome hath beene taken for supreme judge in al Ecclesiastical causes aswel in the East as West Church To finish this passage thou maist gentle reader by this little see what shamelesse shifts M. Abbot is forced to vse to make any coulourable shew out of antiquity for the lay Magistrates superiority in spiritual causes He is first driuen to cite an vnlearned an vnlikely and an Apocriphal letter of 1400. yeares old vpon the credit of men of our owne age and those most partial too on his owne side the letter bearing date also many yeares after the death of him that is supposed to be the authour of it and when al is done in the same vvorshipful letter there is not one pregnant proofe for any part of their doctrine lastly that his owne chosen witnesses doe deliuer vp most cleare euidence against himselfe he therefore that vvil giue judgement on his side must needes shew himselfe exceeding partial ROBERT ABBOT ANACLETVS Bishop of Rome Dist 1. Episcopus 2. peracta and after him Calixtus ordained that consecration being done al should communicate or else be excommunicated For so say they the Apostles did set downe and the holy Church of Rome obserueth But the Church of Rome that now is maketh it lawful for the Priest to receiue alone the people in the meane time standing gazing and looking on and the fight only must suffice them WILLIAM BISHOP HERE is nothing in manner worth the answering only the cosening deceitfulnesse of the man is to be displaied First Anacletus hath only De consecrat dist 1. Can. Episcopus that Deacons Subdeacons and other Ministers that in solemne feasts attend in holy vestiments vpon the Bishop whiles he doth sacrifice vnto God should in the same solemne feasts communicate or else be debarred of their Ecclesiastical places where is not one word of the lay peoples communicating And therefore that Canon is wholy besides the purpose sauing that it doth teach that then Bishops vsed to offer sacrifice vnto God and that the Clarkes did in holy vestiments serue them at Masse See the Canon and vvonder at the folly of the man In like manner doth the second Canon of Calixtus speake of Ecclesiastical persons that serue at Masse for so saith the Collector De consecrat dist 2. Can. peracta Ecclesiasticis liminibus careat Minister Let the Minister or he that serueth want Ecclesiastical place With which agreeth the glosse vpon the same Canon vvhich also is euident by the very Text for the punishment set downe is Ecclesiasticis carere liminibus To be shut out of the Ecclesiastical mens seates and places vvhich vvere no punishment to a lay man that was not before admitted into any such roome And as it may be seene in the said distinction Cap. Etsi non frequentius De consecrat dist 1. and Cap. Secularis Lay men were commanded about those times to communicate but thrife in the yeare at Easter Whitsontide and Christmasse Briefly here is nothing against the moderne practise of the Church of Rome for both they that solemnely serue at Masse on festiual daies doe receiue and no lay man is denied to communicate on any day either on those feasts or at any time else vvhen he vvil prepare himselfe thereto But to debarre Priests from seruing God in that most high degree be their deuotion and preparation neuer so good vntil they can get some company of the laity to communicate with them is without just cause to robbe God of his soueraigne honour to extinguish the working of his holy spirit in deuout soules and to defraude the whole flocke of the benefit of many most holy and effectual praiers not only of the Priests but also of the people vvho doe not with vs stand gazing on at the time of communion as M. Abbot prophanely conceiteth but humbly kneeling doe then pray most deuoutly and doe in spirit and desire communicate also Briefly there is not one sillable in those Canons sounding to the Protestant sence that Priests should not coÌ„municate if the Clarke or people joine not vvith them but only that the indeuout and slugglish Clarkes should be depriued of their places if vpon high feasts they did neglect to communicate with the Bishop or Pastor ROBERT ABBOT IVLIVS the Bishop of Rome disallowed intinctam Eucharistiam De consecrat 2. cum omne the dipping of the Eucharist the Sacrament of Christs body in the cuppe Because no witnesse thereof was brought out of the Gospel but there is mentioned the commending of the bread by it selfe and the cuppe by it selfe but
sute of diuers Bishops of the East he did solemnely summon S. Athanasius that most learned and valiant Patriarke of Alexandria to appeare at Rome before him there to answere vnto such crimes as were indeede most vvrongfully objected against him Lib. 4. hist Tripart c. 6. Nicephor lib. 9. cap. 6. thus saith the holy History The Pope following the law of the Church commanded them also to come vnto Rome and according to the rule of the Canons cited the venerable Athanasius to judgement Athanasius obediently appeared but his aduersaries knowing that their lies in that place vvould soone be discouered durst not appeare vvhereupon Athanasius was purged of those imputations Ibid. cap. 12. and restored to his Bishoprick Vnto the same Iulius not long after Athanasius being pittifully abused by the Arrians repaired the second time for aide vvhere he found diuers other Bishops of the East namely Paulus Bishop of Constantinople Marcellus Bishop of Ancony Asclopas Bishop of Gaya and Lucianus Bishop of Adrianople al Easterne Bishops and yet appealing to Iulius Pope of Rome for remedy of the wrongs done them by the Arrian Heretikes which doth most manifestly testifie that in the primitiue Church al other Bishops acknowledged the Bishop of Rome for the supreme Pastour of Christes Church vvhich also Zozomenus doth confirme shewing how Iulius restored them al Tanquam omnium curam gerens Zozom l. 3. hist. cap. 8. propter propriae sedis dignitatem As one that had care ouer them al for the dignity of his owne See And Iulius his owne wordes recorded by no meaner a man then S. Athanasius doe declare the same for blaming the Bishops of the East he saith Athanas in Apolog. 2. Why did you not write vnto vs especially you of Alexandria are you ignorant that the custome is that we should first be written vnto that from hence it might be defined what was right therefore if you haue any quarrel against any Bishop you ought to haue referred it hither to our Church c. And shortly after I signifie to you such thinges as were receiued from the blessed Apostle S. Peter c. vvhere M. Abbot may see that one of S. Peters successours of great worth and authority doth tel the Bishops of the East Church that by order set downe by S. Peter himselfe Bishops causes of al countries ought to be referred vnto the definition of the Bishop of Rome he therefore is their superiour I adde hereunto because it belongeth both vnto Pope Iulius and this present purpose of their supremacy in Ecclesiastical causes this sentence taken out of the Ecclesiastical history The Councel holden at Antioch was not good Hist Tripart lib. 4. cap. 9. for that Iulius Bishop of Rome was not there present nor sent any Legate in his place because the Ecclesiastical Canons doe command that Councels ought not to be celebrated without the sentence of the Bishop of Rome ROBERT ABBOT GELASIVS Bishop of Rome saith as we say Gelas cont Eutich Nestor That in the Saâ—rament is celebrated the Image or resemblance of the body and bloud of Christ and that there ceasseâ—h not to be the substance or nature of bread and wine But now the Romish religion maketh them Heretikes that say the Sacrament is the Image or resemblance of the body bloud of Christ and not the body and bloud of Christ it selfe or wil not beleeue that the bread and wine are substantially and really turned into the same body and bloud Albeit they beleeue with the same Gelasius that the Sacrament is a diuine thing and that thereby we are made partakers of the diuine nature euen of Christ himselfe really and substantially but yet spiritually vvith al his riches becomming ours and being eaten of vs not by our teeth into our bellies but by faith into our harts vnto life euerlasting WILLIAM BISHOP FIRST I say that M. Abbot hauing his eie-sight sore troubled with a grosse defluxion of salt rhewme taketh a Rowland for an Oliuer that is one Gelasius an vnknowne Grecian for Gelasius an African borne yet Bishop of Rome That he was not Gelasius the Bishop of Rome appeareth plainly out of that very treatise cited by M. Abbot for that Gelasius professeth to alleage the testimony of al the learned Fathers who wrote before him yet he maketh no mention of the most renowmed authours in the Latin Church as of S. Hillary S. Augustine S. Hierome and of Pope Leo al vvhich wrote before Gelasius the Bishop of Rome and were had in very great estimation by him as may be seene by his declaration of the Canonical Scriptures of the most approued fathers workes Dist 15. SaÌ„cta Romana Ecclesia Ibidem Againe that Gelasius citeth often and relieth much vpon the authority of Eusebius Bishop of Caesarea vvhereas Gelasius the Pope hath noted his vvorkes for little better then Apocryphal so that nothing is more like then that the good man hath mistaken his marke and is fallen from the successours of S. Peter and S. Paul vpon I cannot tel whom yet because he is an old writer though of what credit it be vncertaine I wil not refuse him And to the former part of his sentence that in the Sacrament there is an Image or resemblance of Christes body I answere that vve Catholikes doe say as much in effect for euery Sacrament is a visible signe of an inuisible and holy thing and so Christs body vnder the forme of bread and wine is a resemblance of his body parted from his bloud on the Crosse and the body of Christ vnder the formes of bread and vvine as it is in the Sacrament is a picture also or resemblance of the vnion of his mistical body in faith and charity euen as the bread is made of many graines of corne and the vvine pressed out of many clusters of grapes The later part of his sentence may also haue a good meaning and stand wel with our doctrine for the nature of bread doth not wholy ceasse to be in the blessed Sacrament because the forme sauour and tast of bread which be natural qualities thereof doe stil remaine though the whole inward substance be turned into the body of Christ which that Gelasius doth in the same place signifie when he there saith The same bread to be changed into the diuine substance that is into the substance of Christ by the operation of the holy Ghost whereby the receiuers are made partakers of the diuine nature And M. Abbots glosse vpon these later wordes is very extrauagant for we cannot in property of speech be said to be partakers of Christs nature really by being made partakers of his riches for it is one thing to be partaker of a mans nature really another farre different to be partaker of his goodes and benefits And as for the receiuing of Christ spiritually by faith that may be done vvithout receiuing any Sacrament at al but Gelasius either speaketh of receiuing Christ in the
and honour of the See of the most blessed Apostle Peter being preserued inuiting vs also by his letters to assist in person at this reuerend Councel which neither the necessity of the time nor any custome could permit howbeit in our bretheren Paschasius and Lucentius Bishops Bonifacius and Basilius Priests your brother-hood hath me President in your Synode c. these wordes of S. Leo ouerthrow at once al M. Abbots vveake forces for the Emperours supremacy First he declareth that he liked of the Emperours not commandement but counsel and aduise of calling of a Councel marry so to that it be not taken to derogate aught from the right honor of the See of Rome vvithout vvhose sentence according to the ancient Canons no Councel could be celebrated then that the Emperour had no power to command him to come to that Councel and lastly that he in his Legates and not the Emperour was President in that general Councel But to stay yet a while in this matter of calling the Councel for further assurance that the Popes letters and authority did principally moue al Catholike Bishops to meete in general Councels take first their owne declaration therof in formal tearmes thus spake the Fathers assembled in the second general Councel which vvas the first holden at Constantinople in their letters to Pope Damasus Theodoret. hist l. 5. c. 9. By the commandement of letters sent the last yeare by your reuerence vnto the most royal Emperour Theodosius we vndertooke the journey euen to Constantinople And in the Councel of Chalcedon the Bishops of Maesia vvriting vnto the Emperour Leo doe say That many holy Bishops met together in the Citty of Chalcedon Habetur inter Epistolas pertineÌ„tes ad Concil Chal. Per jussionem Leonis Romani Pontificis qui verè caput est Episcoporum By the commandement of Leo Bishop of Rome who is truly the head of Bishops Ioyne hereto the testification of the Emperour Martianus himselfe being one of M. Abbots owne witnesses thus writeth that Godly Emperour In Epist eius praefixa Concil Chalced. ad Leon. PoÌ„t Being called by the prouidence of God to the Empire c. we for the venerable Catholike religion of the Christian faith c. haue thought good in the beginning thereof to speake by our letters to your Holinesse who hold the principality in the Bishoply function of the same Godly faith requesting your Holinesse to remember in your praiers the good estate of our Empire and that also for the extirpation of al wicked errour we may fully purpose to restore vnity and concord among al Catholike Bishops in celebrating of a Councel Te authore by your authority or you being the Authour thereof What can be more manifest then that this most Godly Emperour did agnize and confesse the principal authority of calling general Councels to appertaine vnto the Bishop of Rome whom he professed also to be the supreme Pastour of the vniuersal Church to whom afterward he sent the same Councel when it was ended to haue his confirmation of it as you shal heare anone Socrat. lib. 2. cap. 13. Zozâ—m l. 3. cap. 9. Tripart l. 4. cap. 9. Niceph. l. 9. cap. 5. Al which is exceedingly fortified by an ancient Canon of the Church vrged by Pope Iulius vvho liued an hundred yeares before S. Leo and is recorded by al the approued Ecclesiâ—stical Historiographers for a most ancient and inuiolable rule in Christian religion to wit that no general Councel be holden Praeter sententiam Romani Pontificis besides or without the consent and sentence of the Bishop of Rome thus farre about the authority of calling general Councels Now to that which followeth in M. Abbot Who was President in those general Councels M. Abbot affirmeth the Emperor to haue the Presidency thereof and for proofe alleageth only the example of Constantius the fourth Who saith he was President of the sixt Synode holden in Trullo To which I answere that the penurious man sheweth himselfe very naked and needy of some proofes that is compelled to ouer-leape fiue of the first general Councels and to fal to the yeare 675. after Christ before he can finde out one Emperour that did obtaine the name of President in a Councel To vvhich also I picke an answere out of the Epistle of the Chalcedon Councel vvhich vvas more then two hundred yeares ancienter then the other vnto Pope Leo thus it is there Quibus tu quidem vt caput praeeras in his qui tuum tenebant ordinem Imperatores verò decentissimi ad ornandum praesidebant c. Ouer which Bishops there assembled thou ô Leo wast by them that held thy ranke President as the head is to the rest of the members c. but the Emperours were Presidents most comely to adorne that assembly Where you see two kinde of Presidents in the Councel the Pope in his Legates as the head is ouer the members the Emperour to honour and grace the Assembly And therefore to the Popes Legates it did appertaine principally to propose argue determine and define the questions there debated discussed to vvhich also they did set their handes in the first place To the Emperor it did belong to see due order kept in the Councel vvhere vvere many vvily and vnruly Heretikes that al thinges might be examined quietly and without perturbation or tumult determined who also in the end subscribed after al the Bishops and their Substitutes consentiens consenting imbracing and approuing the same not determining or defining as may be seene in the 18. Action of the said sixt general Councel cited by M. Abbot To make this distinction more perspicuous and certaine let vs heare some Emperours of those daies declare themselues vvhat they did at those general Councels Theodosius the younger sent for his Legate vnto the third general councel holden at Ephesus the Earle Candidianus vvhat to be President there in his place nothing lesse no not so much as to entermeddle in any Ecclesiastical matters but only ad Synodi defensionem to defend the Councel Ex eius Epist ad Synod Ephes In oratione sua ad Synodum The Emperour Martianus was present in his owne person at the fourth Councel kept at Chalcedon where he sheweth what is the proper office of a good Emperour Our endeauour must be saith he to apply the people to the one right Church being first perswaded the true and holy doctrine And therefore let your reuerences expound and declare the true and Catholike faith according to the doctrine of the Fathers in al vnity and concord c. Valentinian the elder being requested to be present at a Councel holden betweene the Catholikes and the Arrians answered Hist 1. Tripart lib. 7. cap. 12. That it was not lawful for him being but a lay person to examine Ecclesiastical matters but the Priests to whom they did belong might meete together among themselues when they pleased and determine of them Of Constantine the great I
beene supreme gouernour of Christes Church To vvhich fallacy it is most easie to answere First that albeit the Patriarke of Constantinople could not so cal himselfe in a lawful good meaning but proudly and wickedly because he had his jurisdiction limited vvithin the boundes of his owne Patriarkship had nothing to doe with any other churches that vvere vvithout it so that his power was in no sence vniuersal that is spred ouer al the world yet this name might in some good sence notwithstāding haue beene giuen vnto the Bishop of Rome as S. Gregory himselfe in one of the same Epistles vvhich M. Abbot citeth doth intimate For vvriting to the Patriarke of Alexandria he saith Lib. 4. Epist 36. Your Holinesse knoweth that by the Councel of Chalcedon vvhich vvas one of the foure first general Councels most highly esteemed off by S. Gregory this name of vniuersallity was offered to me as Bishop of the Apostolike See for as he testifieth Epist 32. of the same booke that name was in honour of S. Peter Prince of the Apostles attributed by many in that Councel vnto the Bishop of Rome yet saith he none of my Predecessours consented to vse it because verily if one Patriarke be called vniuersal the other are made no Patriarkes at al. Briefly then to dispatch this great matter that name vniuersal as it was challenged by Iohn Patriarke of Constantinople who had no right to it in any good sence was presumptuous peruerse and prophane in vvhich consideration S. Gregory so tearmed it Neither vvould he nor any of his predecessours vse that name though in that sence that they had charge and command ouer the vniuersal Church it might haue beene attributed to them yet because it was subject to another construction to wit that the Bishop of Rome was the only truly proper Bishop of euery Diocesse and other named Bishops were not true and proper Bishops there of but the vniuersal Bishops Vicars Suffraganes and Substitutes therefore they vtterly auoided that name as matter of jealousie and scandal choosing the humble stile of seruus seruorum Dei The seruant of Gods seruants For the further satisfaction of the learned reader I wil proue out of S. Gregory in the very same place quoted by M. Abbot both that he wrote against the name of vniuersal Bishop in the later sence And that notwithstanding he refused that name yet that he acknowledged and taught the Bishop of Rome to haue supreme authority ouer al the Church of Christ Touching the first the wordes before alleaged out of his 36. Epistle Lib. 4. Epist 36. doe demonstrate so much to wit If one Patriarke be called vniuersal the other are made no Patriarkes at al vvhich can haue no other sence then that the calling of one Patriarke or Bishop Vniuersal doth signifie him so to be a Bishop in euery place that no other besides him can be truly and properly called Bishop but must be his Vicar and Subdelegate The like saith he in his 34. Epistle to the Emperesse Lib. 4. Epist 34. That his brother and fellow Bishop Iohn striued to be called Bishop alone And in the 7. booke and 69. Epistle to Eusebius he saith Si vniuersalis est restat vt vos Episcopi non sitis If one Bishop be vniuersal it remaineth that you be no Bishops This then is most certaine that S. Gregory spake against the name of Vniuersal Bishop taken in this sence that he was so a Bishop as no other but he could be Bishop in any place Marry if we vnderstand by it one man to haue the general charge of al the Churches in the vvorld yet so as there be also Bishops and Archbishops his brothers who haue the particular and proper gouernement of their seueral Diocesse then S. Gregory telleth vs plainely that S. Peter and his Successours the Bishops of Rome were such these be his wordes Lib. 4. Epist 76. It is manifest to al that know the Gospel that the charge of the whole Church was by our Lordes owne mouth committed to S. Peter Prince of al the Apostles And againe in the same Epistle Behold Peter receiued the keies of the Kingdome of heauen the power of binding and loosing is giuen to him the charge and principality of the whole Church is committed to him vvhich is also repeated in one of the Epistles cited by M. Abbot Lib. 4. Epist 32. And that by S. Peter this vniuersal charge and authority was left vnto the Bishops and See of Rome no man can vvitnesse it more manifestly then S. Gregory hath done First hauing proued out of the word of God S. Peters supremacy he adjoyneth Lib. 6. Epist 201. Therefore though there were many Apostles yet for the principality it selfe the only seate of the Prince of the Apostles hath preuailed in authority As farre as the See Apostolike is euidently knowne to be set ouer al Churches by the authority of God So farre amongst other manifold cares that doth greatly occupy vs when for the consecration of a Bishop our sentence is expected Againe Lib. 2. Epist 69. Lib. 7. Epist 64. For whereas he the Patriarke of Constantinople acknowledgeth himselfe to be subject vnto the Apostolike See of Rome I know not what Bishop is not subject vnto it Moreouer What thing soeuer shal be done in that Councel without the authority and consent of the See Apostolike it is of no strength and vertue Whereas on the other side he saith Those thinges that are once ratified Lib. 7. Epist 69. by the authority of the See Apostolike neede no further strength or confirmation If any man desire to see how S. Gregory himselfe practised that soueraigne authority ouer al the parts of the Christian world let him but reade his Epistles and he shal finde it most perspicuously Magdeburg Centur. 6. In Indice verbo Gregorius euen as their owne great writers of the Centuries doe testifie directing them to the places in his workes where they shal finde the same How devoide then was M. Abbot of al good conscience and honest dealing that vvould vnder the colour of his writing against the name of vniuersal in that sence perswade the simple that S. Gregory vtterly misliked of the supremacy of the Bishop of Rome Now because that S. Gregory hath beene alwaies highly esteemed and greatly respected of both Latin and Greeke Church for his singular holynes and learning and was besides the principal cause vnder God of the conuersion of vs English-men vnto the Christian faith I wil note out of his workes summarily what was his opinion of many of the questioned points of faith betweene the Protestants and vs because M. Abbot citeth him against vs that euery one may see vvhat religion was first planted amongst vs English-men and continued for a thousand yeares Of the Supremacy and Merit of good workes hath beene spoken already Concerning the sacrifice of the Masse it was daily offered vp to God in his age
not a word out of him that wil greatly helpe their cause For what saith he that we say not we hold with him that the want of knowledge of the Scriptures is the cause of heresie for he that knoweth and vnderstandeth wel the holy Scriptures can neuer fal into errour or heresie Besides vve denie not but that it is expedient for al men either to reade the Scriptures or to heare them to reade them themselues if they be men of judgement and indued with a lowly spirit carrying with them this rule of S. Peter 2. Pet. 1. vers 19. That the Scriptures as they were not written by a priuate spirit so they must not be vnderstood by a priuate interpretation vvherefore in al darke and doubtful places they must not trust to their owne wit but make their recourse vnto the Catholike Church Ioh 14. v. 26. Ioh. 16. v. 13. 1. Tim. 3. vers 15. Which is directed by the spirit of God into al truth and therefore called the pillar and ground of truth for the true sence and meaning of them Al the rest both Men Women and Children we would haue to heare the holy Scriptures read vnto them and expounded by their lawful Pastours and approued Preachers who are chosen and sent to feede their soules with that heauenly foode of the word of God So that Gregory the ninth differeth nothing from Paul the fift the present Pope of Rome who is fully of the same opinion And M. Abbots audatious assertions to the contrary are but meere slanders For we hold it not pernitious for al sortes of people to reade the Scriptures vnlesse it be in such false translations as the Protestants haue made but haue our selues translated them into the vulgar tongue that al Godly wel minded people of any reasonable capacity may diligently and deuoutly reade them at their good oportunity M. Abbot vvas wont heretofore to alleage some authour or other to giue the better countenance to his lies but now he is faine to face them out himselfe without the helpe of any other and hauing put his special confidence in lying as they did of vvhom the Prophet speaketh Esai 28. Posuimus mendacium spem nostram We haue put our hope in lying he thrusteth them out lightly by huddles False then it is first that we teach the people to be secluded from the reading of Scripture as dogges are from holy thinges for vve would haue none other debarred from reading of them but wauering wilful and peruerse fellowes 2. Pet. 3. vers 16. Who as S. Peter teacheth abuse the holy Scriptures to their owne destruction and to the seducing of others Secondly it is a lie in graine to auouch that we teach the knowledge of the Scriptures to breede errour and heresie vnlesse he meane the corrupt and peruerse knowledge of them which is rather to be tearmed the ignorance of them for the true knowledge of them deliuereth vs from al errour and heresie and settleth vs in the sound doctrine of the Catholike Roman Church True it is that many now a-daies vvho haue some smattering in the vvordes and verses of the text hauing itching eares and wauering minds are the sooner lead away through their little skil in the Scriptures and ouer-great presumption of their owne wits for hearing Heretikes cite for proofe of their heresie some texts of Scripture which they know to be Gods vvord and hauing neither sufficient learning to answere them nor grace to aske counsel therein of the true Pastors of Christs Church vvho would rightly informe them become a pray to the rauening vvolues Againe the very experience of this age doth sufficiently informe an vnderstanding man that the ouer common reading of Gods word by the more rude and vnruly sort hath rather ingendred a corruption of manners then bredde any amendment thereof for euery peeuish scripturist puffed vp with the opinion of his owne learning wil rather take vpon him to be a teacher of others then a practiser of them himselfe And often very preposterously Women wil teach Men Children their Fathers Sheepe their Pastours in a word many wil be jangling about matter of religion and very few studious to liue religiously These disorders I graunt doe not spring directly out of Gods word but out of our corrupt nature too too prone to presumption on our owne skil And there fore let any reasonable man judge vvhether they did not more vvisely who vsed to bridle this itching appetite of reading in the curious and thought it better to binde them to follow the aduise of their spiritual guides which haue charge of their soules then our new bretheren who allow euery Man Woman and Child to read vvhat bookes of Scripture they list and to wrangle about them so commonly S. Paul insinuateth that al places of Scripture are not fit for al sortes of men but in some parts 1. Cor. cap. 3. vers 2. There is milke for sucklings and in others Strong meate for the more perfect And our Sauiour Christ IESVS spake much in parables vvhich are not for euery ones capacity A sword is a good weapon but put it into the hand of a madde man it wil doe more harme then good so if some men get a smattering in holy Scriptures they wil vse it ful madly Wherefore the Catholike Church though shee wish euery child of hers to know so much of the Scriptures as vvil doe them any way good yet shee knowes it to be holesome and very necessary that a moderation be vsed therein according to the discreet aduise and judgement of Godly and prudent Ghostly Fathers ROBERT ABBOT HIEROME and RVFFINVS by the doctrine of the Church of Rome Hier. in Prolog Galiat in Praefat. lib. Salomonis Ruffin in expositione Simboli excluded from Canonical Scripture the same bookes that we doe the bookes of Iudith Tobias Wisdome Ecclesiasticus Baruch and the rest they say plainly Non sunt in Canone non sunt Canonici They are not Canonical nor in the Canon The Church readeth them for instruction of manners not to giue any authority to any Ecclesiastical doctrine But now the Church of Rome wil haue them to be receiued and beleeued for Canonical Scriptures and of equal and like authority withal the other bookes WILLIAM BISHOP I Obserue first that M. Abbot forgetting himselfe vvhich is a foule fault in a liar and leauing his owne prescript order is now fallen cleane from S. Peter and S. Pauls successours the Bishops of Rome Secondly that he neuerthelesse holds his old custome in lying I winke at that petty lie that he thrusteth in Baruch among the rest vvhich his Authors doe not but may not dissemble this greater for whereas he saith Hierome and Ruffinus by the doctrine of the Church of Rome exclude from Canonical Scripture the same bookes that we doe therein he fableth for though they so did yet did they it not by the doctrine of the Church of Rome For Innocentius the first Pope of Rome
in the same place Doth not this to omit much more of the same kinde conuince and demonstrate vnto al vnpassionate Christians of any vnderstanding that the poore miserable Protestants be exceeding blindly bent vnto the defence of their errors who seing them most plainly condemned by the best and most learned of the primitiue Church and pure antiquity to which they would sometime in great confidence seeme to appeale had notwithstanding rather consort themselues and follow very base vnlearned and wretched Heretikes and with them to band against the inuincible troupes of the ancient holy Fathers and most renowmed Doctors wil it any whit auaile them to say that those men of condemned memory did in their opinions better agree with the word of God and therefore are to be preferred before the rest though otherwise better schollers then they surely nothing at al with the juditious because this is but a scar-crow to amate the simple For whether were more like to vnderstand better the sacred word of God either Augustine Hierome Epiphanius Chrysostome and such others who indued with excellent wits and wel furnished with al other kinde of learning had most diligently studied both the old and new Testament as by their translations and most learned Commentaries and explications they haue testified to the â—orld or Aërius Vigilantius or Iouinian who haue not left any one monument of learning wit or honesty behinde them and Iouinian reputed of those three the most sufficient was so insufficient and vnlettered that he could not so much as indite in the Latin tongue congruously and so as he might be vnderstood Hieron lib. 1. cont Iouin in initio as S. Hierome proueth To finish this point seing that M. Abbot doth not only misapply the auncient Doctors sentences but doth also misconster corrupt and falsifie them yea doth plainly and roundly deny their graue and sacred authority preferring the confessed and condemned errours of notorious reproued Heretikes before their vniforme and approued doctrine they must needes confesse themselues to haue beene a little deceiued who tooke him to haue beaten the Papists with their owne weapons that is to haue brought better testimony out of pure antiquity in fauour of the Protestants opinions then the Catholikes doe for theirs whereas in truth he handleth those sacred Fathers euen as Caluin reporteth the Libertine to deale with the holy Scriptures In instruct aduers Libert cap. 9. These loose men saith he vvhen vve presse them with the Scriptures doe not much dissemble that they esteeme no better of them then of fables notwithstanding they in the meane season doe not let to vse them if they finde any place that they can wrest vnto their owne meaning not that they themselues doe giue any credit to it but only that they may thereby trouble the vnlearned and so daunt and stagger them that they may at length the more easily draw them to like of their errors thus farre Caluin Euen so plaieth M. Abbot with the glorious Doctors of the Church whom how little he regardeth doth appeare by his often abusing their wordes by his resisting their authority and setting lesse by them then by ignorant obscure and abject persons yet knowing that al sober Christians doe highly esteeme and make great account of their graue authority as of the principal lights of Christs Church since the Apostles times they doe greedily catch hold of any broken sentence of theirs that doth any way sound in fauour of their heresie not that they themselues giue any credit thereunto but to astonish and deceiue the simple reader and thereby to perswade him to like the better of their errours Thus much in general of the abuses which M. Abbot offereth vnto the ancient Fathers But doth be behaue himselfe more reuerently towardes the holy Scriptures and sacred word of God one example I wil giue here by which you may take a scantling of the rest and not to seeke farre it shal be the very first in his booke these be his wordes Page 6. This is the thing that M. Bishop labours for seeking vvith Act. 13. v. 8. Elimas the Sorcerer to peruert the straight vvaies of the Lord and vvhereas his Majesty hath made profession to aduance the honour of Christ he vvould in steede thereof drawe him to aduance the Idol Dan. 11. vers 38. 2. Mauzzin the God of Antichrist and to establish damnable heresies by him priuily brought in vvhereby his agents and factors through Pet. 2. vers 1. 3. couetousnesse with fained wordes doe make marchandize of the soules of men speaking thinges which they ought not for filthy Tit. 1. vers 11. lucres sake Here you see his text enriched and his margent garnished with a gay shew of Gods word and yet here is not one whole sentence of holy Scripture to any purpose but diuers wordes picked out of sundry places and by the new Euangelist M. Abbot made a new peece of vn-holy scripture which prety deuise if it should passe for currant any hadde matter might be graced with the glosse of Scripture so that the first fault committed by M. Abbot herein is the dismembring of Gods word and renting of it in peeces at his pleasure with which peeces afterwardes odly and idly patched together he maketh vp as it were a poore beggers cloke rather then any testimony of Scripture Secondly the wordes hang togither very vntowardly one of them not agreing with the other for if his Majesty should be perswaded to aduance the Idol Mauzzin the God of Antichrist he could not establish heresies priuily brought in for that false God wil wholy oppose himselfe against Christ and not suffer any other God besides himselfe to be adored so that he wil not establish heresies which are errours defended by them which professe Christ and doe adore the true God neither wil be priuily bring in beâ—esies but openly professe Idolatry and compel al others to doe the same Thirdly these wordes are most falsly and fondly applied to vs Roman Catholike Priests for first that false God of Antichrist shal not be aduanced by the Romans but fought against and foiled by them as it is cleare in the very text Dan. 11. vers 30. The Gallies and Romans shal come vpon him and he shal be strooken and turned backe And lastly how il aduised was M. Abbot to charge poore seminary Priests with couetousnesse and speaking of thinges which they ought not for filthy lucres sake whereas it is manifest vnto al men women and children almost that they who become such Priests are so farre off from seeking after any temporal gaine thereby that they doe willingly forgoe al hope of benefices and al other whatsoeuer commodities and dignities in their country which they might perhaps aswel attaine vnto as some others if they would follow the current of the time Yea they doe also debarre themselues of landes legacies annuities and al other profits and commodities whatsoeuer which might accrew vnto them
wit to take special order that God almighty be truly and sincerely serued for Kinges may and ought to doe that though they be not supreme gouernours in causes Ecclesiastical For albeit it belong not to them to declare the true sence of al questioned places of holy Scriptures nor to determine al doubts rising in diuinity nor briefly to performe such other functions as are proper to the supreme Gouernour of Christes Church yet his Majesty might haue called together the most learned of his subjects of al sides and haue heard vvhich of them could best haue proued their doctrine to haue beene most conformable to the sacred word of God to Apostolical traditions to most ancient general Councels to the vniforme consent of the most holy and best learned Doctors of the primitiue Church and accordingly to haue embraced the same himselfe and by his Princely authority to haue established the same throughout al his Dominions It remaineth then euident That his Majesty might haue taken special order for the true seruice of God notwithstaÌ„ding he haue not supreme authority in Ecclesiastical causes And most false is this assertion of M. Abbots that any law of the Pope doth inhibite him to deale so farre-forth in matters of religion that Canon which he citeth doth only forbidde lay-Magistrates Distinct 96. Si Imperator to meddle with the ordering and judging of Priests and Clarkes and such other Ecclesiastical officers as doe properly belong to Bishops But that Kinges ought to meddle in matters of religion and how farre-forth they ought S. Leo the first a most famous Pope doth in these memorable vvordes declare You must ô Emperour without doubt know Epist 75. ad Leo. August that Kingly power is giuen to you not only for the rule of the world but is principally bestowed vpon you for the defence and aide of the Church that by suppressing wicked attempts you may both defend that which is established and also pacifie those thinges which are troubled But of this point I shal haue occasion presently to speake more at large It followeth ROBERT ABBOT AS touching the reason also vvhich he alleageth why Princes should take special order that God be rightly serued Because of his meere bounty and grace they receiue and hold their Diademes and Princely Scepters The Pope denieth that they hold the same immediately from God but are to receiue them by his mediation and approbation and no longer to hold them then they conforme themselues to his lawes Bulla Pij 5. Ecce nos constituti sumus super gentes regna c. Behold saith the Pope we are set ouer nations and kingdomes to build vp and to plant to pul vp and to destroy c. And therefore what the wisdome of God saith as M. Bishop alleageth by me Kings raigne the same the Pope blasphemously applieth to himselfe Prouerb 8. vers 15. Per me Râ—ges regnant By me Kings doe raigne thus the Pope would haue Princes as very beasts as Nabuchodonoser was not to know of whom they hold their crownes and kingdomes but to thinke that al dependeth vpon him But M. Bishop acknowledgeth here the truth that of God they hold the same and therefore should make it their special care that the same God be honoured accordingly And here vnawares he justifieth our doctrine as touching the Princes supreme authority for the gouernement of our Church the effect whereof we teach to be this to prouide by lawes and to take special order that God be purely and vprightly serued that Idolatry and superstition be remoued that the vvord of God be truly and sincerely taught that the sacraments be duly administred and the Bishops and Pastors diligently performe the seruice and duty that doth appertaine vnto them that the commandements of God be not publikely and scandalously broken for these things we acknowledge the King to be vnder Christ the supreme gouernour of the church within his Dominions and this duty M. Bishop confesseth to appertaine vnto him And thus did the good Kinges of Iudah Dauid Ezechias Iosias c. thus haue Christian Emperours and Princes done thus and no otherwise did Queene Elizabeth and yet for the doing hereof shee was proscribed by the Pope and so much as in him lay depriued of her Crowne and Scepter but the hand of God was with her and shee prospered thereby and died in peace c. WILLIAM BISHOP I Doe many times much muse how men of any sort and fashion specially how professors of Gods truth such as M. Abbot would be esteemed dare put into light such odde paltry shifts and poure out together such heapes of grosse lies A lie it was that I denied to his Majesty such authority as would serue for the taking order how God might be rightly serued in his realme Another lie it is that the Popes lawes doe inbibite Kinges to meddle with matters of religion A third that I affirmed Kinges to hold their crownes immediately from God vvhich though it be true in that sence he taketh it yet is it false that I so said in that place for I meddle not with those tearmes of immediately or mediately The fourth is that the Pope denieth Princes to hold their Diademes and Princely authority immediately from God but are to receiue them by his mediation for euen in the very Canon cited last before by himselfe the Pope acknowledgeth Distinct. 96. Si Imperator That Emperours and Kinges receiue from God the prerogatiue of their power vvhereupon the Glosse plainly noteth that they did not receiue their soueraigne authority from the Pope Which was also obserued in the Canon next before EadeÌ„ distiÌ„ct out of Pope Gelasius wordes And it is further the common opinion of al our Diuines vvherefore vnlesse this counterfait Diuine did meane here to lie for the whetstone I know not what he meant to huddle vp lies so thicke together euery one lowder then the other But saith he Pius Quintus writeth Eccenos constituti sumus super gentes regna Behold saith the Pope we are set ouer nations and kingdomes to build and to plant to plucke downe and to destroy c. therefore they apply to themselues that which the wisdome of God giueth to Kinges By me Kinges doe raigne This is the fift lie that he makes within the compasse of lesse then halfe a side for albeit the Pope vse the wordes spoken to the Prophet Hieremy Ecce nos constituti sumus c. yet doth he not those by King Salomon vttered in the person of Gods vvisdome vvhich M. Abbot deceitfully shuffleth in the place of the other Now the authority committed to the Prophet Hieremy did not make the King of Iuda to hold his crowne of him as al Diuines both Catholikes and Protestants doe grant wherefore though the same be yet remaining in the Church of God as it is not only granted by al Catholike Doctors but euen by the verdict of Caluin himselfe In cap. 10. Cor. vers
6. who to proue it doth cite euen the very same vvordes out of Hieremy And so 1200 yeares before him that famous Father S. Chrysostome did alleage the like out of the same chapter of the Prophet to the same purpose saying Homil. 55. in Mathaeum The Father said to Hieremy I haue put thee as a pillar of yron and wal of brasse c. yet the Father placed him but ouer one nation to vvit that of the Iewes but Christ hath placed Peter ouer the vniuersal world Briefly we granting the like power to be in the Bishop of Rome that was in Hieremy the Prophet whose wordes he vseth it can be no more deduced thence that Kings hold their Princely diademes of him then that the King of Iuda did his of Hieremy vvhich was neither mediately nor immediately for only a certaine spiritual power to roote out Idolatry errour and iniquity and to plant religion and vertue vvas by those vvordes giuen to men of the Church Which if it doe in some certaine case extend to the deposition of a Prince as I reade it hath beene practised by most juditious learned and holy Personages though I doe not reade vvhere it is by the Church defined to be any article of our faith yet no man is so simple as not to deeme it more holsome and expedient for the vniforme and peacible estate of Christendome that such supereminent power should rather rest in the supreme Pastor of Christs Church then be left vnto the discretion of the Ministers and Clergie of euery country according to the Protestants opinion and practise It being I say granted that the Bishop of Rome may in some case depose any temporal Magistrate yet can it not there hence be gathered that Kinges doe hold their Kingdomes of the Popes Holinesse For vvhen one King vvil not let his neighbour Prince liue in peace by him but doth extremely wast his Dominions kil his subjects and make hauocke of his country the Prince so molested if he cannot otherwise haue remedy may most lawfully by force of armes proceede euen to the deposition of that injurious King And yet the inuader did not hold his Kingdome of the other any more then the other did depend vpon him but was an absolute King himselfe as the other vvas notwithstanding by his intollerable outrages offered to his neighbour Prince he made himselfe punishable and subject to the other against whom he so grieuously trespassed In like manner if a Prince by most extreme persecution of Christs flocke doe become subject to the correction of the chiefe Pastor thereof yet thence it followeth not that that Pastor had power to dispose of his Kingdome at his pleasure or that the King did hold his Diademe of him either mediately or immediately howbeit the Prince through his owne exorbitant and otherwise remedilesse fault doe justly fal into the Pastors handes to be punished Here I doe by the way most humbly craue of them to whom it doth appertaine that it may without passion be duly considered whether we Catholikes doe not his Majesty more faithful seruice and shew our selues much more careful of the quiet continuance of his glorious happy estate when by al humble and faire meanes we doe labour most diligently to entreat his most excellent Majesty to deale more gratiously and mildly with his poore Catholike subjects then those hot-spurre Ministers vvho labour tooth and naile to cast their louing Soueraigne into such a brake of briars by incensing his Highnesse to hold so extreme a course against them For if his Majesty may be vvonne to follow the gentle and sweet inclination of his owne nature and to qualifie the rigour of the lawes against recusants in such temperate manner that the said recusant Catholikes may not be oppressed thereby the Popes holinesse without al doubt wil neuer goe about to depriue his Majesty of his regal dignity how forward soeuer he be otherwise to imbrace and aduance his owne religion for not so much for fauouring the Protestants as for extreame persecution of the Catholikes as the former example of neighbour Kinges doth shew that most seuere censure of the supreme Pastor of the Church is inflicted Wherefore vvhen it shal please his Highnesse to condescend gratiously vnto our humble and daily supplication for more moderation and mercy then shal his Majesty vvithout al doubt as euery man may easily perceiue take away al jealousie of those buzzes which seeme so greatly to disquiet the whole state Now to that point wherein the Kinges supremacy lieth according to M. Abbots declaration If it were only by lawes to prouide and to take special order that God be wel serued his word truly taught his Sacraments duly administred and that al Bishops and Pastors performe their duties then I should thinke him a badde Christian that would not acknowledge that his supremacy And I most willingly admit that the good Kinges of Israel did so but the man is so shallow shuttle-witted and vncertaine that there is no trust to be giuen to his declaration M. Perkins goeth more substantially to worke and affirmeth the Supremacy to consist not in the points aboue mentioned Reformed Catholike page 285. but in authority to declare which bookes of Scripture be Canonical which not and to determine finally of al controuersies and doubtes rising thereupon to cal general Councels and to ratifie their decrees to make Ecclesiastical lawes that binde al the Church and to excommunicate whosoeuer shal obstinately resist or breake them to consecrate and institute Patriarkes Metropolitanes and many such like vvhich when M. Abbot shal proue to appertaine justly to Kinges and Princes whether they be men women or children then we vvil allow the supreme temporal Magistrate to be also supreme gouernour in causes Ecclesiastical In the meane season we vvil pray that God wil vouchsafe to make them good and dutiful children of the one holy Cacholike and Apostolike Church and that they may humbly learne those high misteries of religion vvhereof most Princes as al the world seeth vvould be very vnmeete judges and also very euil dispensours What variety of religions hath growne by that kinde of supremacy what dissolution of Church discipline vvhat corruption of ciuil justice vvhat iniquity and deceit in contracts and bargaines vvhat oppression of the poore and generally what loosenesse and leudnesse of conuersation euery true Christian man doth see and lament and daily pray to almighty God our most merciful Father for amendment That vvorldly peace and temporal prosperity be no assured markes of Gods fauour nor of his true religion King Dauid is a sufficient witnesse Psal 72. Whose feete as he writeth were almost moued and beganne to slippe through his zeale against the wicked because he saw them suffered to liue in such prosperity and to die in so great peace And our Sauiour in expresse tearmes teacheth Math. 5. vers 45. That our Father in heauen maketh his Sunne to rise vpon good and hadde and raineth
al one to say the vniuersal particular Church here is a vvel shapen argument and worthy the maker it consists of al particular propositions which euery smatterer in logicke knowes to be most vitious besides not one of them is good but al are sophistical and ful of deceit First concerning the forme if it were currant one might proue by it that no one Church in the vvorld vvere Catholike take for example the English congregation vvhich they hold to be most Catholike and apply M. Abbots argument to it thus The Catholike Church is the vniuersal Church but the Church of England is a particular Church wherefore to say the English Church is Catholike is to say a particular Church is an vniuersal His first fault then is in the very forme of reasoning which alone is sufficient to argue him to be a sophister and one that meaneth to beguile them that vvil trust him now to the particulars His first proposition the Catholike Church is the vniuersal Church is both absurd because the same thing is affirmed of himselfe for vniuersal is no distinct thing but the very interpretation of the vvord Catholike and also captious as hauing a double signification For the Catholike Church doth signifie both the vvhole body of the Church compacted of al the particular members vnited and joyned together in one in which sence no one particular Church can be called the Catholike Church because it is not the vvhole body spread ouer al the world for it is totum integrale to vse the schoole tearmes and not totum vniuersale quod dicitur de multis Secondly the Catholike Church doth also designe and note very properly euery particular Church that embraceth the same true Christian faith which hath continued euer since Christs time and beene receiued in al countries not only because it is totum similare as M. Abbot speaketh vvherefore euery true member of the Catholike Church may be called Catholike but also because each of the said particular Churches hath the same Faith the same Sacraments and the same order of gouernement al vvhich are as it vvere the soule and forme of the Catholike Church vvhich M. Abbot acknowledgeth and further also confesseth out of S. Augustine that Christians were called Catholikes Ex communicatione totius orbis Epistola 48. By hauing communion of faith with the whole world If then by his owne confession euery particular Church yea euery particular Christian that embraceth and professeth that faith which is dilated al the vvorld ouer be truly called Catholike how fondly then did he goe about to proue the Church of Rome not to be Catholike and Papists not to be Catholikes because forsooth they were particulars Yet that he may be thought not to doate outright but rather to dreame he addeth That at least the Church of Rome hath no reason to assume to her selfe the prerogatiue of that title because that euery Church where the true faith is taught is truly called Catholike and no one more then another I note first that this man is as constant and stable as the weather-cocke on the toppe of a steeple before he proued stoutly as you haue heard that no particular Church could be called Catholike now he wil haue euery particular Church that receiueth the true faith to be called Catholike Neither doe vve say that any one Orthodoxe Church is more Catholike then another if the word Catholike be taken precisely though we hold that among al the particular Catholikes the Roman holdeth the greatest priuiledges both of superiority in gouernement and of continuance and stability in the same true Catholike faith which is deduced out of the word of God because that Church Math. 16. vers 18. Is the Rocke according to the exposition of the ancient Fathers vpon which the whole Church was built and against which the gates of hel should neuer preuaile Againe the Bishop of Rome succeedeth lineally vnto S. Peter Luc. 22. vers 23. Whose faith through the vertue of Christs praier shal neuer faile wherefore S. Ireneus a most learned Archbishop of Lions in France and a glorious Martir of great antiquity saith That al Churches ought to agree with the Church of Rome Lib. 3. cap. 3. for her more mighty principality S. Cyprian Archbishop of Carthage in Africke affirmeth Li. 1. epist 3. That perfidiousnesse and falshood in matters of faith can haue no accesse vnto the See of Rome S. Ambrose taketh it to be al one to say the Catholike and the Roman Church in these vvordes If he shal agree with the Catholike that is De ob Satyri Hieron in Apolog 1. cont Ruffi cap. 1. with the Roman Church So doth S. Hierome when he saith of Ruffinus What faith doth he say his to be if the Roman faith we are then Catholikes affirming men to become Catholikes by holding the Roman faith a De Praescript Tertullian b Epiphan Haeres 27. Epiphanius c Lib. 2. cōt Parmeni Optatus d August Epist 165. S. Augustine doe proue their Churches to be Catholike and themselues to be Catholikes by declaring that they doe communicate vvith the Church of Rome in society of faith and doe condemne their aduersaries to be Schismatikes and Heretikes because they did not communicate vvith the same Roman Church And vvhich is greatly to be noted no general Councel of sound authority vvherein the Christian truth hath beene expounded and determined but is confirmed by the Bishop of Rome And on the other side no heresie or errour in faith hath sprong vp since the Apostles daies that did not oppose it selfe against the Roman See and was not by the same finally ouerthrowne Whereupon S. Augustine had good reason to say That that chaire obtained the toppe of authority De vtil cred cap. 17. Heretikes in vaine barking round about it This little I hope vvil suffice for this place to declare that there is great cause vvhy vve should attribute much more to the Roman Church then to any other particular Church whatsoeuer and yeeld to it the prerogatiue of al singular titles in a more excellent manner Here comes in M. Abbots second proposition but the Church of Rome is a particular Church in which is as great doubling and deceit as in the former for albeit the Church of Rome doe in rigour of speech only comprehend the Christians dwelling in Rome yet is it vsually taken by men of both parties to signifie al Churches of vvhatsoeuer other Country that doe agree vvith the Church of Rome in faith and confesse the Pastour thereof to be the chiefe Pastour vnder Christ of the whole Church Like as in times past the Roman Empire did signifie not the territory of Rome alone or dominion of Italy but also any nation that vvas subject to the Roman Emperour Euen so the whole Catholike Church or any true member thereof may be called the Roman Church à parte principaliore because the Bishop of Rome is the supreme head
faith of Christ and hauing now the old and new Testament he should by a Councel of his realme take lawes from thence to gouerne them by that he was the Vicar of God in his Kingdome that the people and nations of the Kingdome of Britany were his euen his children that such as were deuided he should gather them together vnto the law of Christ his holy Church to peace and concord and should cherish and maintaine protect gouerne and defend them c. But now the religion of Rome hath altered that stile and telleth vs Sext. proem in glossa That not the King but the Pope is Gods Vicar vpon earth his Vicar general for al Kingdomes And as for the Church the matters and gouernement thereof belong not to the King vvho if he make any lawes concerning religion He challengeth to him selfe anothers right that is Distinct 96. Si Imperator the Popes because God would not haue the worke of Christian religion to be ordered by publike lawes or by the secular power but by Popes and Bishops WILLIAM BISHOP TRVE M. Abbot you had neede to leaue Peter and Paul for heretikes who so plainely plentifully confute your doctrine and establish ours or else you and your fellowes must needes be taken for heretikes And if you hope to finde any of their Successors more friendly vnto you you wil proue in the end as fouly if not more grosly deceiued then you were before But how chanceth it that you lept from Peter Paul vnto one that was the thirtenth Pope after S. Peter why did you ouer-skip al the rest Was there not one of the other twelue that vvould afford you some peece of a darke broken sentence out of vvhich you might picke some colour of cauil against vs If they vvould haue yeelded him any comfort they should not haue beene forgotten as we may see by Anacletus who is afterwardes haled in by the way and yoked with another for want of some cleare sentence of his owne Wel let vs come to Eleutherius the man of whom you haue made choise First you relate such a wise tale of so vvorthy a Bishop so impertinent il hanging together and so weakly verified that no considerate person standing vpright can giue you any credit therein To beginne with the Authors that report it they be both professed Protestants and come more then a thousand yeares to late for the relation of so auncient a matter vnlesse they had alleaged other authentike Authours in confirmation of it But Hollinhead reportes himselfe to M. Fox a crafty deceitful lying Minister of his owne time Stow to some moth-eaten monument lying in the Guild hal Now what credit is to be giuen to thinges so sillily confirmed specially vvhere there is farre greater probabilitie against it for Eleutherius was Bishop of Rome whose epistles and letters vvere registred there and most diligently preserued in their treasury among other monuments of antiquity where one only epistle of his to the prouince of France is to be found And if he had vvritten another to a King of great Britany no question but it vvould haue beene as carefully preserued there as the other Againe what likelihood is there that any old writing of or to Lucius King of great Britany should be preserued in the citty of London vvhen al the Britons vvere driuen thence by their enemies the Saxons vvho vvere most like to make smal store of such letters specially which concerned the Christian religion to vvhich they were then enemies And if they had reserued any such should not venerable Bede our most learned and industrious country-man vvho made most diligent enquiry after al such vvhen our Ancestours were conuerted to the faith haue heard some newes of this famous letter vvho heard and writ as much of Pope Eleutherius King Lucius and the realmes conuersion as he could discouer and finde any ground for out of any part of antiquity the like may be said of al the rest of our ancient Historiographers whether English or Britons among whom there is not one to be found that made any mention of this vvorthy letter how then is it possible that there should be any such besides if you marke but the Kings demand and the Bishops answere both being persons of great wisdome and grauity such simplicity and incongruity appeares that any man of vnderstanding wil take it to be ridiculous and counterfait The King forsooth writeth to the Pope for a copy of the Roman constitutions and Imperial lawes for the gouernement of his realme the Pope writeth backe ad correctionem Regis to the correction and amendment of the King vvhich is an answere as just as Germans lips goodly stuffe surely and fit to lie hidde in dusty corners Those vvordes for the Roman constitutions to gouerne the Church are deceitfully shuffled in besides the purpose as may appeare by the answere And the King sent before and receiued by the Popes messengers ful instruction of al points concerning the Christian religion wherefore he then wrote only for the Imperial lawes to direct him how to gouerne his temporal estate To vvhich the letter maketh the Bishop to answere very childishly that he had the old and new Testament and willeth him to fish out thence the ciuil gouernement of his realme vvhich neuer any Christian King either before or sithens euer did Adde finally that the letter beareth date in those authours cited by M. Abbot 169. yeares after the passion of Christ vvhich is at least twise seauen yeares after the death of Pope Eleutherius But al these impertinences and improbabilities being set aside for the while let it be graunted that the letter vvere true and not fained vvhat hold can the Protestants take on it to serue their purpose surely very weake and such as may be most easily shaken out off their handes The letter hath That the nations and people of his Kingdome were euen his children Be it so a good King is Parens Patriae Pastor populi The Parent of his country and foster-father of his people followeth it of this that he is their chiefe head in spiritual causes then were the Heathen Roman Emperors supreme head of the Church for they were parents of their country that is nourishers defenders and rulers of the common weale this then wil help the Protestants nothing Neither wil that which followeth in the letter that they are Gods Vicars in his Kingdome and should gather his people vnto the law of Christ for the Roman Catholikes doe allow Kinges to be Gods Vicars not only in al the temporal affaires of their realmes but also that they should by counsel countenance example and authority draw al their subjects to the true faith of Christ and seeke to cal home al them that are gone astray and diuided from the Catholike Church and to establish peace and concord among them and finally to gouerne them so happily vnited in al such thinges as appertaine vnto their Kingly vocation
Sacrament or else M. Abbot doth fondly alleage his wordes against the real presence wherefore his later paraphrase is a meere trifle and a vaine shift See more of this man and matter in the question of the real presence Let vs proceede ROBERT ABBOT De consecrat dist 2. comperimus THE same Gelasius when he vnderstood that some receiuing only the portion of the sacred body of Christ did forbeare the cuppe of his sacred bloud did forbidde that superstition and willed that either they should receiue the Sacrament whole or be kept from the whole because the diuiding of one and the same mistery cannot come without great sacriledge But now the Church of Rome is so farre off from acknowledging the diuiding of that mistery to be sacriledge as that shee pretendeth to be moued with just causes reasons Concil Trid. Sess 5. Can. 2. such as Christ and his Apostles and the primitiue Church had neuer the vvit to consider off to administer the Sacrament to the people only in one kinde and pronounceth them accursed that say shee erreth in so doing WILLIAM BISHOP NOW we come to Gelasius the Pope indeede and by his very phrase related by M. Abbot you may plainely perceiue that he beleeued firmely the sacred body of Christ and his pretious bloud to be really present in the blessed Sacrament for thus he speaketh We haue found that certaine men hauing receiued the portion of the sacred body doe abstaine from the Chalice of the sacred bloud Neither doe his wordes fit M. Abbots turne for the peoples receiuing vnder one kinde for he speaketh of Priests that doe consecrate both together vvho therefore must receiue both together that he may be partaker of the sacrifice which he himselfe hath offered For as it is said in the Canon next before De consecrat dist 2. relatum est Quale erit illud sacrificium cui nec ipse sacrificans particeps esse dignoscitur what kinde of sacrifice is that whereof he that sacrificeth doth not participate Wherefore it is by al meanes to be obserued that how often the Priest doth sacrifice the body and bloud of our Lord IESVS Christ vpon the Altar so often he exhibite himselfe a partaker of the body bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ. These wordes taken out of the Councel of Toledo goe immediately before those wordes which M. Abbot citeth and doe euidently shew that they are to be vnderstood of the Priest only that consecrateth the Sacrament as also the very title would haue told M. Abbot if he had beene disposed to take them right It is that the Priest ought not to receiue the body of Christ without his bloud So that here is not a vvord against the giuing the blessed body of Christ alone to the people But M. Abbot is forced like an euil Apothecary to take quid pro quo as they say one thing for another or else he should not be able to furnish his poore erring customers vvith any sort of pleasing drugges to feede their corrupt tast and grosse humours He doth by a parenthesis enterlace That Christ nor his Apostles nor the primitiue Church had euer the wit to consider any just cause of giuing the Sacrament in one kinde to the people vvhich is spoken too too like a blasphemer to touch our Sauiour Christ Iesus with lacke of vvit skil or due consideration who as diuers ancient Doctors doe testifie ministred the blessed Sacrament himselfe to two of his Disciples at Emaus vnder one only kinde of bread Luc. 24. vers 30. He tooke bread and blessed and brake and did reach it to them and their eies were opened and they knew him and he vanished out of their sight vvhere the circumstances August lib. 3. De consensu Euang. c. 25. Epist 59. ad Paul q. 8. Hier. in Epitaph Paulae of blessing breaking and giuing bread as he did at his last supper and the maruailous operation of it doe very probably proue it to haue beene the blessed Sacrament after which giuen in one kinde IESVS vanished out of their sight * Isichius lib. 2. in cap. 9. Beda in Theophil in eâ—m locum Lucae Opus imperfectuÌ„ in Mat. homil 17. In the Apostles time also very vsually the Sacrament vvas administred in one kinde They were perseuering in the doctrine of the Apostles and in communication of the breaking of bread and praiers vvhere breaking of bread being joined with preaching and praier doth conuince it to be spoken of the blessed SacrameÌ„t Againe saith S. Luke In the first of Sabaoth when we were assembled to breake bread Paul disputed with them c. This assembly vpon a Sonday furnished with S. Paules sermon must needes be to be made for the receiuing of the blessed Sacrament as a August Epist 86. Beda in illum locum S. Augustine and venerable Bede doe testifie In al which places following the expresse letter of the Scripture and the interpretation of many holy Fathers we haue warrant for the administration of the Sacrament to the people vnder one only kinde they then I hope vvanted not wit to know a cause of giuing the Sacrament in one kinde Lastly that in the primitiue Church the Sacrament was receiued vnder one kinde is most manifest by the testimony of b Tertull. lib. 2. ad Vxorâ—m Cyprian sermone de lapsis Ambros de obitu Satyri Tertullian S. Cyprian S. Ambrose and many others who declare how the Christians in those times of persecution carried to the sicke and reserued in their owne houses the blessed Sacrament viz. vnder the forme of bread to receiue it when they were in danger of torments or death for their more comfort and strengthning against those assaults Thus much by the way of administring the Sacrament vnder one kinde vnto the laity out of the practise of the primitiue Church the Apostles and our Sauiour himselfe in answere vnto M. Abbots parenthesis Now ere I take my leaue of this holy and most reuerend Pope Gelasius I vvil note briefly some branches of the Catholike faith which he doth formally deliuer to counterpoise those friuoulous objections vvhich M. Abbot haleth in obtorto collo as the Latin phrase is by the heeles out of his writinges First I haue declared out of him already Epist. ad Anast Imperat. In Epist ad Episcopos Daâ—daniae how that Bishops haue power and authority ouer Kinges and Emperours in Ecclesiastical causes so farre forth as to excommunicate them when vrgent cause so requireth He saith further That the Canons of the Church doe ordaine that from any part of the world appeale may be made to the See of Rome and that from it no man is suffered to appeale Againe That euery Church in the world doth know that the See of blessed Peter the Apostle hath right and power to loose and vnbinde that which is bound by the sentences of what Bishop soeuer as that See which hath lawful authority to judge
the hope of eternal life is recouered that they who had lost the gift of regeneration condemning themselues by their owne judgement might attaine vnto remission of their sinnes the aide of Gods goodnesse being so disposed that pardon from God cannot be obtained but by the supplication of Priests For the Mediatour of God and Man the man IESVS Christ hath giuen this power vnto the Prelates of the Church that they may both enjoine satisfaction to the penitent and that they may also admit them being by the same holesome satisfaction purged through the gate of reconciliation vnto the communion of the Sacraments Where he further teacheth That they who die without this gift of pardon shal neuer be saued and doth also greatly blame them who deferre their confession til toward the point of death when saith he there is scarce space either for the confession of the penitent or for the reconciliation of the Priest It vvas not then vndoubtedly treason in S. Leos daies to be reconciled by a Priest seing he so often and so much recommended it to al Christian people and held it the only gate to re-enter into Gods fauor for al such Christians as were fallen from the grace they had before receiued in the Sacrament of Baptisme That Bishops Priests Deacons yea and Subdeacons should not marry and if any married man vvere chosen a Subdeacon that he should refraine from the company of his wife S. Leo is very plaine thus he decreeth Epist. 82. ad Anastasium Thes num 4. It is free for men that be not of the Clergie to marry but to shew the purity of perfect continency carnal copulation is not graunted so much as to Subdeacons that they who haue wiues be as though they had them not and they who haue them not doe continue single And if in this order which is the fourth from the head with the Protestants it is no order at al it is meete that chastity be kept how much more is it to be obserued in the first second and third that no man be esteemed worthy either of the place of a Deacon or honour of a Priest or excellency of a Bishop who is discouered not to haue yet bridled himselfe from the pleasure of wiuing This of the continency of Priests Wil you heare S. Leos opinion of the Vowes of religious men and women which the false Father Abbot scornefully tearmeth Monkish Epist 90. ad Rusti Norb. cap. 12. The profession of a Monke saith he vndertaken by a mans owne free choise and desire cannot be forsaken without sinne because that must be performed which we haue vowed to God Wherefore he that forsaking the profession of a single or solitary life is turned souldier or fallen to marriage is to be purged publikely by the satisfaction of penance for albeit warre-fare may be harmelesse and marriage honest yet is it a transgression and offence to haue forsaken the better choise It followeth in the next number Ibid. ca. 13.8 Maidens who not constrained by their parents command but of their owne accord haue made profession of Virginity and receiued the habit if afterwardes they desire to marry they doe sinne though they were not yet consecrated Ibidem 14. but if after both profession and consecration they should fal to marry it cannot be doubted but that they should commit a very hainous crime For if mans decrees cannot be infringed without punishment what shal light vpon them who haue broken the couenants of the diuine mistery How forcibly doth this chast doctrine of S. Leo batter and beate flat to the earth the voluptuous loosenesse of runnegate votaries and giues checkmate to the Protestants for vpholding the same as wel done That you may yet further perceiue what an euil Protestant and a perfect Papist S. Leo was he commendeth highly the Emperour Martianus his vertue and Godlinesse for receiuing with worthy honour the holy Relikes of blessed Flamianus departed who a little before was Patriarke of Constantinople And for praying to Saints you haue heard before Serm. 5. de Epiphania how he encouraged al men Eorum ambire suffragia earnestly and as it were ambitiously to sue for the aide of their praiers Againe he exhorteth his auditours to celebrate vvith him the Saturday following the Vigils of the most happy Apostle S. Peter Ser. 8. de Iejunio decim Who saith he with his praiers wil vouchsafe to helpe our praiers fastings and almes-deedes Behold he made no question but that S. Peter both knew their desires and deserts and would also further them vvith the aide of his effectual praiers In briefe then we haue that the most learned and holy Pope S. Leo the first taught praying to Saints and worshipping of their Relikes the vowes of Monkes and professed Virgins that Priests and al in holy orders should not marry but liue continently that Priests haue power to reconcile and to forgiue sinnes and that euery man who hopeth for any pardon of his sinnes at Gods handes must particularly confesse them in priuate to a Priest and by due satisfaction purge himselfe from them that in the Sacrament there is the same true flesh of Christ which was crucified and did arise from death that Masse is to be said euery holy day wherein the sacrifice of Christs body is offered that S. Peter was the supreme Pastour of Christes Church and that the Bishop of Rome is his lawful successour therein hauing supreme authority ouer both East and West Church These with such like points which may by diligent perusing his most eloquent and diuine workes be gathered doe most perspicuously demonstrate the Church of Rome in his time vvhich vvas neare 1200. yeares agoe to haue held the selfe same language concerning matters of faith vvhich the same Church of Rome at this day speaketh And that M. Abbot in seeking to proue the contrary did but shew himselfe either very ignorant in his workes or ouer studious not to take his Author right as his manner is but to picke some matter of cauil out of him thereby to blinde and deceiue the simple reader Now to the next ROBERT ABBOT PELAGIVS the Bishop of Rome the first of that name admitted a married man to be Bishop of Syracusa only putting in a caution that he should not dilapidare the Church goodes and transferre the same to his wife and children Dist. 28. de Syracusana The danger whereof he signifieth was the cause of that constitution which did forbidde a man hauing a wife and children to be preferred to a Bishopricke otherwise a man is not repelled for hauing wife children saith the Glosse because the Apostles permitted the same But now the Church of Rome Glossa ibidē wil by no meanes admit men to be Bishops or Priests not for that they would auoide the dilapidating of the Church goodes for that is a thing common with the Popes themselues Platina in vita Iohan. 16. To apply al to satisfie the
crowne In eo enim sibi justitiae consortem coronae statuit promeritorem cum operum quibus erat illa repromissa corona habere dignatus est coadjutorem For therein did God appoint man to be copartner of his justice and meritour of the crowne when be vouchsafed to haue him coadjutour of those workes vnto which that crowne of glory was againe and againe promised So that God is the Authour of merits both by giuing man grace to doe them and by ordaining them to such a reward Otherwise saith S. Bernard those which we cal merits might be more properly called the way to the Kingdome not the cause of raigning Obserue that he saith vnlesse you take them otherwise then he had before spoken of them But we must beare with M. Abbot for snatching here and there a sentence out of the Fathers so abruptly otherwise he could make no shew for his part out of them because they vvere so ful and wholy Roman Catholikes Besides the misconstruing of S. Gregories wordes and the corrupting of S. Bernards M. Abbot falsifieth both the Councel of Trent and the Annotations of the Rhemes Testament for the Councel of Trent hath not simply that good workes doe fully satisfie the law of God but with this qualification Pro huius vitae statu As farre forth as the state of this life doth permit And whereas M. Abbot fableth that in those Annotations the justice of God is charged not in respect of his owne promise but in respect of the merit and desert of the workes it is a palpable vntruth as euery man may see that wil but turne to the place for there are these expresse wordes Annot. in 2. Tim. cap. 4. vers 8. Heauen is the goale the marke the price the hire of al striuing running labouring due both by promise and by couenant and right debt vvhere you see as wel Gods promise and couenant as the worth of the workes to be mentioned Which is also set downe distinctly in that very Chapter of the Councel of Trent vvhich M. Abbot cited in these vvordes Eternal life is to be propounded to them that worke wel Concil Trid. sess 6. c. 16. and trust in God both as a merciful grace promised to the sonnes of God through Christ and as a reward or hire by the promise of God to be rendred to their good workes and merits Thus you see how roundly and familiarly M. Abbot is wont to auouch vntruthes and that which testifieth a good conscience in the man euen clearely contrary to his owne knowledge for in the very same both Chapter of the Councel and Annotation vpon the Testament which he alleageth there is to be seene the plaine affirmation of that which he denieth vvhich doth conuince him to be one of the most carelesse men of his credit that euer set pen to paper ROBERT ABBOT Citat in Orthodoxo consensu de sacra Eucharistia cap. 1. ex Lyturg Georgij Cassandri THE same Gregory affirmeth that Missa the Masse was so called for that they were to be dismissed or sent away by the Deacon that did not receiue the holy communion for that they that should not be present at the celebration of the Sacrament were commanded to goe forth therefore saith he vnlesse at the voice of the Deacon after the manner of our Ancestors they that doe not communicate be willed to goe forth the seruice which is called the Masse is not rightly performed But now the Romish Masse is thought to be rightly performed albeit no man communicate but the Priest and vvithout any dismissing of them that doe not adde themselues to the communion the people as was said before being only the spectatours and lookers on WILLIAM BISHOP M. ABBOT is very penurious and wants matter that comes forth with such idle stuffe as this not taken out of S. Gregories owne vvorkes neither for no such fond and vnlearned thing is there to be seene but on the report of one George Cassander a man of smal credit and therefore deserueth no answere Besides these wordes Ite Missa est are not pronounced in the Masse by the Deacon or Priest vntil the communion be wholy past euen at the very end of the Masse when the people are licensed to depart as may be seene in al Masse bookes and the ancient expositours of the Masse vvherefore they could not serue to dismisse any before the holy communion Lastly why on Gods name must they al be sent away that wil not communicate themselues shal they receiue any harme by their beholding either the blessed Sacrament or others receiuing of it deuoutly vvere it not better they assisted the communicants there continuing in praier then to walke abroade idly or is there any reason vvhy the communicants should be offended vvith their presence that no way seeke to disquiet them but rather honour them for their greater feruour in deuotion and assist them with their praiers Idle and irreuerent gazers on we allow not off nor like of their presence at any time of the Masse but I see no cause at al why other orderly and deuout people should be driuen out of the Church at the time of communion ROBERT ABBOT THE same Gregory affirmed That whosoeuer called himselfe Gregor lib. 6. Epist 30. Item lib. 4. Epistola 32.36.38 or desired to be called the vniuersal Bishop was the fore-runner of Antichrist and did propose to himselfe to follow him who despising the legion of Angels that were placed in society with him did endeauour to grow vp to the toppe of singularity that so he might seeme to be vnder none and himselfe alone to be aboue al. He calleth it a new name a name of errour a fond name proude peruerse rash wicked prophane which saith he none of my Predecessours consented to vse by which no man hath presumed to be called that was in truth a holy man Decret Gregorij de foro comp c. Licet But soone after the time of Gregory the Bishop of Rome tooke vpon him that hateful name and hath since continued the same challenging the whole vvorld to be his Dyocesse and is growne to that height of pride as that he doubteth not to proclaime Extrauag de Maio. Obed ca. Vnam Sanctam That it standeth vpon the necessity of saluation for euery soule to be subject to the Bishop of Rome WILLIAM BISHOP THIS is a pretious argument with the Protestants and though it hath beene an hundred times I weene sufficiently answered by ours yet they doe as freshly propose it and as eagerly follow it as if it were not to be satisfied whereas in truth it is but a meere sophistication A vocibus ad res as the learned tearme it from the word vniuersal vnto the supreme authority of gouernement thus The Patriarke of Constantinople cannot be called an vniuersal Bishop nor any Bishop of Rome hath consented to take that name of vniuersal Bishop vpon him ergo no Bishop of Rome hath
other countries or vvas there euer such a shamelesse writer as M. Abbot that blusheth not to set out in print such monstrous and notorious lies that in falshood exceede al fictions of Poets and Painters and in malice doe match vvith any deuilish deuise whatsoeuer Oh into what lamentable calamity is our poore Country fallen that must haue such cosening Companions such false Hypocrites and most impudent Liars for the guides of their soules to saluation and for the only teachers of al spiritual doctrine Can any man that injoyeth the right vse of his senses giue credit and trust vnto them vvho make no conscience but a cōmon custome to lie al manner of lies nay such a one if they be wise they should not beleeue when he telleth them a truth which they doe otherwise know For Demetrius Phaleius being asked what euil did follow a liar Marry saith he that no man afterward beleeue him when he telleth truth And good reason for how knoweth he vvhether he doe not lie then as he was accustomed to doe before He therefore that wil be sure not to be deceiued must neither giue credit vnto M. Abbot vvho is plainely conuicted to haue told very many grosse and palpable lies Any plaine honest man must needes much maruaile to behold or heare that he who maketh profession of Gods pure word and the truth of the Gospel should take such a special delight in lying but he must remember that al is not gold that glisters Al be not true Pastors of Christes flocke that come in sheepe-skinnes Al be not sincere teachers of Gods word that take vpon them to be Preachers And no one more assured touch of counterfaite coyne no plainer proofe of a rauening vvolfe and false teacher then such often and euident lying For as God is the truth it selfe and al his doctrine most true so are they vvith truth alone to be vpholden and defended Iob. 13. v. 7. What saith holy Iob hath God neede of our lies or that we should speake deceitfully in his cause no verily for the truth is strong enough of it selfe to confound falshood Fortis est veritas praeualet But the Deuils cause it is that needeth to be bolstered out and vnder-propped with lies Iohan. 8. vers 44. For he is a liar and the Father of lies And without lying no falshood can be deceitfully coloured and made to appeare and seeme truth He then that wil be fedde vvith lies let him take the Deuil to his Father and M. Abbot or some other such like of his lying Ministers for his Master A certaine Minister being told that M. Abbot was reputed much to blame and very hardly censured by many discreet persons for that he had vsed so much deceit and leasinges in his writinges answered forsooth in his defence that he could not bely the Papists and their cause too much What can be said vnto such shamelesse persons surely nothing else but that the new light of their Gospel is now growne to his perfection vvhen as the brochers of it doe not only vnder-hand colourably paint it out with lies but are not ashamed openly to maintaine that they cannot lie to much in that cause O holy cause that needeth the helpe of lies But good master Minister be better aduised I pray you and rather hearken vnto the graue counsaile of the auncient Preacher Eccles 4. vers 26. Ne accipias faciem aduersus faciem tuam aduersus animam tuam mendacium take not falshood that is the face of the Deuil against truth vvhich is the true face of euery reasonable creature made after the Image of God and doe not admit lying against thine owne soule Sapient 1. vers 11. For the tongue that lieth killeth the soule Yea it doth not only kil his owne soule that lieth but the others also that beleeueth his lies blinding him with errors and so leading him blindfold into hel fire Math. 15. vers 14. For when the blinde guideth the blinde they both fal into the ditch Wherefore good Sir if you wil not yet a while make open profession to cast away your owne soule vvilfully and to leade al your followers after you to eternal damnation doe not for very shame vphold and maintaine open lying But if it be Gods good pleasure that you your selues shal make kowne to the vvorld that yee doe not only vse lying but also defend it as lawful necessary to vnder-proppe your badde cause then my trust in Gods infinite goodnesse and mercies is that the Moone-shine of your obscure Gospel waneth a-pace and the daies of your deceit draw towardes an end For howsoeuer you like iniquity and allow of leasinges Psal 5. v 6. God as the Prophet Dauid teacheth doth hate al them that worke iniquity and wil destroy al them that speake lies by bestowing vpon his faithful and prudent seruants such heauenly light and grace as they may easily discerne the juggling and false trickes of Protestant teachers 2. Tim 3. vers 9. For not their folly only as the Apostle speaketh but their falshood also and trechery are now sufficiently discouered and made manifest vnto al men of any reasonable capacity and study Wherefore al that haue tasted of the true gifts of Christes spirit vvil follow them no longer in their most dangerous and damnable courses but fly as fast and as farre from such false Prophets as poore sheepe doe from the jawes of rauening wolues and with speede returne happily vnto the only true fold of Christes flocke the holy Catholike Apostolike and Roman Church there to learne and imbrace that sincere auncient faith and pure religion vvhich only can saue their soules and which being planted by Christ and his Apostles hath euer since continued and brought forth aboundance of diuine fruit al the world ouer Which God almighty of his incomprehensible bounty graunt through the inestimable merits of IESVS CHRIST our most gratious Lord and Sauiour to whom vvith the Father and the holy Ghost be al honour prayse and glory for now and euer AMEN PRINTED ANNO DOMINI M. D.C.VIII A BRIEFE ADVERTISEMENT TO THE READER I Haue hitherto set downe M. Abbots owne text word by word that the juditious reader comparing it with my answere may truly discerne vvhat substance is in his writing And how farre forth he is to credit him in the rest that hath in the first and best part of his booke behaued himselfe so insufficiently in matter of learning and dealt so dishonestly in the manner of handling of it There remaines behinde in this answere vnto my Epistle some light skirmishes and vaine friuolous brauadoes vpon those points of controuersie which I in one sentence only touched in the same Epistle excepting much foule speech and many slanderous lies which he plentiful powreth out by the way in both vvhich masteries I willingly leaue to him the bucklers Now because those his discourses are as it vvere scopae dissolutae not arguments soundly knit togither and set in any good aray but a feeble loose idle and disordered kinde of wrangling besides also the very same questions be afterwardes handled againe distinctly and particularly I haue judged it farre better to handle throughly euery controuersie in his due place then first lightly to skimme them ouer in hast as he hath done and afterward like vnto one that had either forgotten or ouer-shotten himselfe to recoile and turne backe againe to treate of the same matter more orderly and substantially vvhich course I hope wil not be misliked of the wise Take courteous Reader this that is already finished in good part If thou finde any thing in it to thy liking giue the glory to God And if thou be Catholike helpe me vvith thy good praiers that he who hath giuen me grace to beginne may increase his blessings vpon me to bring it to a good and perfect end The end of the first Part. FINIS COVRTEOVS READER I must needes acquaint thee with a notable legerdemaine which by perusing the Authour I found out after the rest was printed M. Abbot to proue that the Pope had no authority in Scotland 1200. yeares after Christ auerreth Page 117. that Alexander the second vtterly for-badde the Popes Legate to enter within his Kingdome which is not true For his Authour Mathew Paris declareth In Hērico 30 page 667. that the King indeede did at the first oppose himselfe against that visitation of his Kingdome to be made by the said Legate not for that he did not acknowledge the Popes supreme authority in those Ecclesiastical causes but because it was needlesse the matters of the Church being as he said in good order and for feare of ouer-great charges Nay further the said King did write a large letter vnto the Pope himselfe as the very same Authour recordeth where he first acknowledgeth In Hērico 30 page 873. that very person to be his Holinesse Legate as wel in Scotland as in England and Ireland Moreouer the King confesseth that he himselfe his heires and subjects were and would be obedient vnto the Popes jurisdiction and censures with much more to the same purpose Which alone is sufficient to conuince M. Abbot to be so perfidious and without al conscience in alleaging auncient Authours that no man who wil not willingly be blindly ledde by him can repose any trust in his allegations Good Reader beare with faultes in printing which besides false pointing be not many The principal that I remember are these Page 169 line 21 For Constantius the fourth reade Constantine the fourth and so in al that matter following treating of Pope Agatho his obedience to the said Emperour Page 170 line 32 though Emperour reade although an Emperour Page 186 line 21 for Concilij Praesidijs reade Concilij Praesidibus page 198 line 8 in the allegation of S. Leo there wants in the margent the quotation of his 23. Epistle to Martianus Augustus for the vvorship of Relikes Pag. 213 lin 27 for passed reade possessed pag. 261 line 25 for and ego reade an ego page 272 line 16 for Vndoubtly reade Vndoubtedly
of al Churches Item In decreto de libris sacris Ecclesiasticis tom 2. Concil Distinct 15. Sancta Romana c. That the See Apostolike takes great heede that it be not stained with any touch of peruersity or any kinde of contagion Finally Gelasius assisted with seauenty other B shops doth declare the bookes of Wisdome Ecclesiasticus Tobias and of the Machabees to be Canonical Scripture and the Epistles Decretals of the ancient Bishops of Rome to be of sacred and sound authority and to be receiued vvith reuerence al vvhich the Protestants deny ROBERT ABBOT LEO Bishop of Rome speaking of the Martirs saith Epistola 81. That although the death of many Saints hath beene pretious in the Lordes sight yet the death of no innocent person hath beene the propitiation of the world that the righteous receiued crownes but gaue none and that the fortitude of the faithful haue growne examples of patience not gifts of righteousnesse that their deaths as they were seueral persons were seueral to euery of themselues and that none of them by his death paide the debt of any other man because it is only our Lord Iesus Christ in whom al were crucified al dead al buried al raised againe from the dead But now the Church of Rome hath changed that language and telleth vs that there are superabounding passions and satisfactions of the Saints Bellar. de Indulg l. 1. c. 2. Rhem. Annot. in col 1. v. 24 wherein they haue suffered more then is due for their owne sinnes vvhich doe serue to supply the necessity and want of others and that they doe thereby pay the debt of other men that hereof is growne a treasure in the Church of Rome which is to be dispensed and disposed by the Pope and that hence his Indulgences and pardons haue their ground WILLIAM BISHOP HERE are many vvordes of a right reuerend Father cited to smal purpose for the Church of Rome hath not yet changed one sillable of the same her old language Shee doth maintaine with S. Leo That no man how holy soeuer he were hath by his death or otherwise paid the ransome of any other mans sinnes or satisfied God for any one mortal sinne either of his owne or of any other mans but that it is Christ alone who with the price of his pretious bloud hath fully satisfied his Fathers justice for al and euery such deadly offence and for the eternal punishment which was due to the same and this is al that S. Leo teacheth Neuerthelesse we hold and that vvith S. Leo that after the guilt of such sinnes is through Christ released vs yet are we on our owne partes to endure some temporal punishment for the same offences by Christes order and appointment both to apply vnto vs the vertue of his owne sufferinges as also to make vs that are members of his body like vnto him our head Whereupon the Apostle saith Rom. 8. v. 17. That we be the sonnes of God and coheires with Christ Si tamen compatimur vt conglorificemur If yet we suffer with him that we may be glorified with him of this matter see more in the question of satisfaction This to be our doctrine M. Abbot could not be ignorant Page 118. because it is word by word deliuered euen by M. Perkins himselfe in that place Now that S. Leo vvas wel acquainted with such satisfactions as we on our partes are bound to make his learned workes doe yeeld plentiful testimony I wil cite but a place or two thus he answereth vnto Nicetus vvho did write vnto him to know how he should deale with some Christians vvho being taken prisoners of the Infidels had there among them polluted them selues with eating of meates offered vp to Idols Epist 77. c. 5. Let them saith Leo be purged with satisfaction of penance which is not so much to be weighed by length of time as by compunction of the hart And againe speaking of certaine Priests that were doing of penance he saith Wherefore such men as these who haue fallen Epist 99. ad Rusti cap. 2. must relieue themselues in priuate Ad promerendam misericordiam Dei To deserue the mercy of God Vt illis satisfactio si fuerit digna sit etiam fructuosa That the satisfaction may be fruitful to them if it be worthy that is if it be correspondent to their faults alluding to that of S. Iohn Baptist Math. 3. Doe fruites worthy of penance so that by the judgement of S Leo and the ancient practise of his time men that truly repented them of their sinnes vvhereby the guilt and eternal punishment was abolished were afterwardes put to penance and to doe worthy satisfaction and that not only to satisfie the cōgregation or other men as the Protestants fable vvho haue a greater care to please men then God but to be purged of their fault and to deserue mercy at Gods hand as S. Leo doth plainly teach Now that this temporal punishment which is due to euery Christian after the eternal is through Christ forgiuen him may be released and pardoned by the gouernours of the Chuch and principally by the Pope as chiefe Pastor thereof vnder Christ and that through the superaboundant sufferings of some others is a matter so wel knowne to Antiquity that he must needs confesse himselfe a very puny therein that thinketh it to be a new deuise of the late Church of Rome For that S. Gregory the great who liued aboue a thousand yeares past D. Tho. alij in 4. sent dist 20. instituted Stations to diuers Churches in Rome and granted great Indulgences and Pardons vnto al that with due preparation visited the same is so wel knowne that few learned Protestants doe doubt of it or dare deny it S. Leo himselfe vvho vvas S. Gregories Ancestor more then an hundred yeares in the said Epistle to Nicetus doth plainely signifie as much for he leaueth that enjoined penance of the conuerted party Epistola 77. numer 6. to the discreet moderation of the Bishop to be shortned and released as he shal see cause which is properly a Pardon or Indulgence Moreouer Pope Siluester vvho vvas S. Leo his Predecessour by more then an hundred yeares Antiodor l. 4. summae cap. de relaps at the request of S. Helen Constantine the great his mother consecrated a Chappel in Rome called Sancta Croce in Hierusalem the vvhich he did both beautifie and enrich with diuers Relikes of Saints and granted large Indulgences to al that should with deuotion visit the same as the ancient Records of the same place doe testifie And that the Pastours of other Countries yet more ancient then the former were very wel acquainted with this language of this superaboundant passions and satisfactions of some Saints let that most learned Archbishop of Carthage in Afrike glorious Martir S. Cyprian beare witnesse He instructing the Christian prisoners and most noble Confessours for vvhose triumphant sufferinges the vse
censure and touch of reproach vpon the same his worke called Bibliotheca Patrum Lastly concerning the doctrine of Predestination I reade not that the Pelagians were called in question about it nor yet for Satisfaction vvherefore M. Abbot must first out of some good Authors shew their errours therein before he goe about to slander vs vvith the imitation of them but as I am vvel assured of the later so I thinke he wil not in hast performe the former ROBERT ABBOT I Omit many other matters that might here be added perswading my selfe that I said enough to trouble M. Bishop in the prouing of that that he hath so propounded that the principal pillars of the Church of Rome in her most flourishing estate taught in al points of religion the same doctrine that now shee holdeth c. only for conclusion let me aske him what Bishop of Rome there was for the space of a thousand yeares that practised or taught that concerning Pardons which is now practised and taught in the Church of Rome that the Bishop of Rome hath any authority to giue such libels of pardon or that it is in him to giue faculties and authority to others to graunt the like vvith reseruation of special causes to himselfe or that he can for saying such and such praiers or for doing this or that release a man from Purgatory for so many hundred or thousand yeares vvhat Bishop of Rome was there that did proclaime a Iubilee vvith promise that al that would come to Rome to visit the Churches that yeare should haue ful and perfect forgiuenesse of al their sinnes or that did charge the Angels as did Clement the sixt that vvhosoeuer should die in his journey thitherward they should bring his soule into the glory of Paradise Balaeus in Clem. sexto which of them did take vpon him to Canonize a Saint vvho euer beleeued or taught as it is now receiued in the Church of Rome that the Bishops blessing is the forgiuenesse of venial sinnes Sextus in proem in glossa Rhem. Test in Math. 10. vers 12. Other innouations I wil passe ouer to further occasion but concerning these matters in this place I would pray M. Bishop to let vs be satisfied how the principal pillars of the Church of Rome haue in al points taught the same that the Church of Rome teacheth now The truth is that as the name of Theseus shippe continued a long time vvhen as it was so altered by putting in of new plankes and boordes as that it had nothing left of that that was in it when it was first built by Theseus so the Church of Rome stil continueth her name and would be taken to be the same albeit by chopping and changing shee is come to that passe that shee hath in a manner nothing left of that doctrine for vvhich shee vvas first called the Church of Rome But M. Bishop taketh vpon him to proue the contrary let vs now examine what his proofes are WILLIAM BISHOP YOV doe wisely to omit many other matters that you might haue added if they be like vnto these vvhich you haue already put downe for they are proued to be nothing else in manner but falsifications of the ancient Fathers vvritinges or fond illations of your owne bolstered out with a huge and shamelesse troupe of vntruthes the more one omitteth of such baggage and paultry stuffe the more it maketh for his credit Wherefore if M. Abbot had let al this alone no doubt but he should haue saued much of his reputation which by such vnchristian like and vnhonest dealing he is like to leese with the indifferent juditious reader If he perswade himselfe that he hath put me to some paines and trouble to trace out the vntruth of his allegations he is not deceiued for he produceth them so corruptly with such additions substractions misconstructions and euil applications that euery place he cites must needes be turned vnto in the Authours owne workes before a man can repose any trust in him or shal know what answere to make I pray you good Sir if there be any sparke of Christian sincerity left in you let this admonition serue to intreate you not to put your aduersary or reader to such trouble any more Either for loue of the truth or for feare of Gods judgements and rebuke of honest men forbeare to misreport your Authours If it be a shame to bely the Deuil vvhat impudency and impiety is it to bely most reuerend holy and learned Doctors and which much increaseth that hainous crime thereby to blinde Christian people and to draw them along with him to the bottomelesse pit of hel It hath I willingly confesse more troubled me to spend my spare time in discouering vntruthes and dishonest shifts trickes then it should haue done to haue bestowed it in substantial arguing and in round debating of questions in controuersie with short and sound arguments But I hope by this the vpright reader hath seene that M. Abbot was so farre off from troubling me to proue The principal pillars of the Roman Church in her most flourishing estate to haue taught the same doctrine that the present Church of Rome no teacheth that he hath rather furthered it by ministring vnto me so fit an occasion yea omitting others which I could choose my self for my better aduantage I haue not refused to verifie and make good the present doctrine of that Church euen by the testimony of those very authours of vvhich M. Abbot himselfe made choise as of men that spake most against it If then by their verdict who are thought by our aduersaries to be most estranged from vs our cause is confirmed and proued to be most just and veritable vvho is so carelesse of his owne saluation that had rather follow a lying Master leading to perdition then to imbrace so manifest a truth drawing towardes saluation May I not here justly exclaime with the holy King and Prophet and say Psalm 4. O yee Sonnes of men how long wil you be so heauy harted why are you so farre in loue with vanity and seeke after leasing he that is the true light Iohan. 1. who doth illuminate euery man that commeth into this world of his infinite goodnesse and mercy lighten your vnderstanding and incline your harts that you may perceiue and receiue that ingrafted word that truth of Christ preached by his Apostles approued by the most honourable Senate of the ancient Fathers beleeued al the world ouer that hath also continued euer since inuiolably vvhich only and none other can saue your soules Now for a conclusion and vpshot of this matter M. Abbot would faine know What Bishop of Rome for a thousand yeares after Christ had authority to giue any such libel of pardons as are now giuen or that could graunt to others any such faculty with reseruation of special causes to himselfe c. I answere if these be the greatest difficulties that with-hold him from approuing the doctrine
of the present Roman Church he may vpon very smal consideration be reclaimed and brought to reforme his errours For to S. Peter himselfe who was afterwards Bishop of Rome was giuen euen by our Sauiour Christ IESVS ful power and authority to pardon whatsoeuer he saw fit to be pardoned Math. 16. vers 19. To thee I giue saith he the keies of the Kingdome of heauen whatsoeuer thou loosest or doest pardon vpon earth shal be pardoned in heauen And if S. Peter might loose any sinne how hainous soeuer much more might he release some part of the temporal paine which was due to sinne vvhich is properly to giue a libel of pardon the like power had S. Paul who did in the person of Christ 2. Cor. 2. vers 10. Cyprian l. 3. Epist 15. Pardon the incestuous Corinthian by cutting off some part of his penance vvhich otherwise he had beene to suffer for his former sinnes vvhich were then forgiuen S. Cyprian and the Bishops and Clergy in those auncient daies of the primitiue Church did vse to pardon and release the penance injoyned to grieuous offendours after their repentance at the intercession and request of the Confessors and designed Martirs as hath beene before declared The most authentike Councel of Nice doth declare Cōcil Nicen. cap. 12. that it is lawful for Bishops to deale more mildly and fauourably vvith them vvhom they saw to performe their injoyned penance seriously vvhich was to graunt them a pardon Leo. Epist 77 ad Nicetum num 6. The very same doth Leo the great vvho was Bishop of Rome aboue 1100. yeares past teach most plainly willing the Bishop to release of the due penance injoined what he thought good which is properly to giue indulgence or pardon I omit here Pope Siluester his predecessour and S. Gregory the great one of his successours because I haue before alleaged them not doubting but that these few so auncient so graue so learned vvil suffice to satisfie and instruct him that is willing to learne And as for communicating the same authority to others vvho can reasonably doubt of it considering that the power of absoluing from sinne which is farre greater then the other is imparted to al both Bishops and Parish Priests I haue also before proued most manifestly Leo. Epist 82 ad Anastat Gregor lib. 4. Epist 6. ad Episcop Arelat that both S. Leo and S. Gregory most worthy Bishops did as delegate their authority vnto other Bishops so reserue vnto their owne hearing and judgement the causes of greatest difficulty vvherefore M. Abbot if he wil hearken vnto reason cannot choose but hold himselfe therein fully satisfied He recuiles backe to Indulgences and multiplieth his demands about one and the same matter like to a Cooke that hauing but one sort of meate to serue in doth mince it into many mammocks and then make thereof sundry dishes Can the Pope saith he for saying such or such praiers or for doing this or that release a man from Purgatory for an hundreth or a thousand yeares What a question is this if the Pope can distribute indulgences as hath beene before proued no doubt but he can the rather doe it by injoyning the party that receiueth them to say vvithal some praiers or to doe some other good vvorkes for thereby the party doth the better deserue to be made partaker of the other grace But can he release a soule out of Purgatory for a thousand yeares Yes marry can he and that too not for some certaine number of yeares but for euer and euer The reason is for that the soules there are members of the same body that we are and there capable of the same graces of pardon vvhereof also they stand in very great neede according to the truth of Christian doctrine howsoeuer the Protestants doe erroneously thinke the contrary reade the Question of Purgatory And touching the present purpose among many other pardons graunted by S. Gregory the great there is to be seene vntil this day one Altar by him erected in the Monastery of S. Andrewes in Rome where he was himselfe first Nouice and afterwardes Abbot where at vvhosoeuer said Masse for a soule in Purgatory shal deliuer one there-hence Concerning the Iubilee which is free and ful pardon graunted once in fiue and twenty yeares vnto euery one that shal visit seauen Churches in Rome that yeare some fifteene times or thereabouts what new difficulty can there be about that yea it is as the most renowmed pardon that is graunted so the most reasonable for it can be obtained but once in fiue and twenty yeares and then exceeding hardly by vnder going a long costly and painful journey to the citty of Rome and by exercising there al the workes of piety and mercy as fasting praying and giuing of almes making general confession and receiuing the blessed Sacrament and often visiting of many Churches and Altars Those most godly meanes of training men to true repentance and satisfaction for their former faults and amendmēt of their liues if the Protestant religion were acquainted withal there would be among them some checke and stoppe of their vvicked courses But if they vvil needes sinne on themselues and neuer giue ouer nor amend vntil Gods judgments fal vpon them yet let them not be offended at vs that doe aduise al men to labour in time for such indulgences that they may escape the due punishment of their sinnes either in this vvorld or in the next Is it not also most probable and likely if those good soules vvho to doe some satisfaction for their former euil liues and to serue God more deuoutly in those holy places where some of the holy Apostles and an innumerable company of valiant Martirs and holy Confessors liued and died doe die by the way in that Godly purpose that they are carried by Angels to heauen as Lazarus was into Paradise we pray to God to command such by his holy Angels to be brought into Abrahams bosome as may be seene in the Masse for the dead But Balaeus in Latin and Bale the Irish Apostata in English M. Abbots worthy authour reporteth that Clement the sixt himselfe did command the Angels to carry them into Paradise No great regard is to be had vvhat such a lying lewd fellow relates and so I thinke him vnworthy any other answere Touching Canonization of Saints we hold that the Bishops of the prouinces vvhere their vertuous liues and most godly deathes cōfirmed by miracles are best knowne did alwaies from the beginning of christian religion declare and testifie to the Church that they were to be esteemed of al men for Saints Since it hath beene found most expedient that the vvhole course of the life and death of such being by most diligent inquisition tried out and taken in the places of their aboade be afterwardes sent to Rome there to be also throughly examined first and then accordingly to be declared Saints by the highest Pastor of the Church that