we admit them all to be true doth conuince vs to haue disgraded Christ of his offices which are these to appease Gods wrath towards vs to pay the ransome for our sinnes to conquer the Diuell to open the Kingdome of heauen to bee supreme head of both men and Angels and such like He may without any derogation vnto these his soueraigne prerogatiues giue vnto his seruants first power to make lawes to binde in conscience as he hath done to all Princes which the Protestants themselues dare not denie then to determine vnfallibly of the true sense of holy Scripture which the Apostles could doe as all men confesse and yet do not make them Christs fellowes but his humble seruants to whom also hee gaue power properly to pardon sinnes Luc. 24. Ioan. 20. Mar. 16. Matt. 28. Whose sinnes you pardon on earth shall be pardoned in heauen and finally to them he also gaue authoritie ouer the whole earth goe into the vniuersall world Ouer part of hell no Pope hath authoritie and when he doeth good to any soule in Purgatory it is per modum suffragij as a suppliant and entreater not as a commander Whether hee hath any authoritie ouer Princes and their subiects in temporall affaires it is questioned by some yet no man not wilfully blinde can doubt but that Christ might haue giuen him that authority without disgrading himselfe of it as he hath imparted to him and to others also faculties of greater authoritie and vertue reseruing neuerthelesse the same vnto himselfe in a much more excellent maner As a King by substituting a Viceroy or some such like deputie to whom he giues most large commission doth not thereby disgrade himselfe of his Kingly authority as all the world knowes no more did our Sauiour Christ Iesus bereaue himselfe of his power or dignitie when hee bestowed some part thereof vpon his substitutes He goes on multiplying a number of idle words to small purpose as that we for one Christ the onely reall Priest of the new Testament ioyne many secondary Priests vnto him which offer Christ daily in the Masse Wee indeed hold the Apostles to haue beene made by Christ not imputatiue or phantasticall but reall and true Priests And by Christ his owne order and commandement to haue offered his body and bloud daily in the sacrifice of the Masse what of that see that question Furthermore he saith for one Iesus the all-sufficient mediatour of intercession they haue added many fellowes to him to make request for vs namely as many Saints as be in the Popes Kalendar yea and many more too For we hold that any of the faithfull yet liuing may bee also requested to pray for vs neither shall hee in haste bee able to prooue that Christ onely maketh intercession for vs though he be the onely mediatour that hath redeemed vs. R. ABBOT Christ by his office is our Prophet our Priest and our King Christ degraded by the Pope As a Prophet he hath declared fully and finally the whole counsell and way of God for the attainment of eternall life As a Priest he hath offered a sacrifice for our redemption and by vertue of that sacrifice is our Mediatour to intreat mercy for vs. As a King he prescribeth lawes whereby to gouerne vs and hauing a Matt. 28.18 All power giuen to him both in heauen and earth exerciseth the same to safegard and defend vs. In all these offices of which M. Bishop speaketh as if he vnderstood not what they meane the Church of Rome offereth most high indignity to the Son of God To take the points spoken of in order as they are first they are iniurious to the kingdome of Christ in that they giue the Pope authority to make lawes to bind in conscience which Christ only hath authority to doe b See hereof part 2. pag. 17.18 To bind in conscience is to tie the conscience and inward man to an opinion of holinesse and spirituall deuotion in the thing which is done so as to account the same a worship of religion whereby God is truly serued and honoured yea and further according to Romish fancies the means of remission of sinnes and the merit of eternall life This whosoeuer doth sheweth himselfe a deceiuer and an Antichrist and the Pope in so doing is found to be he of whom the Apostle prophecied c 2. Thess 2.4 that he should sit as God in the temple of God domineering in the hearts and consciences of them of whom it is said d 2. Cor. 6.16 Ye are the temple of the liuing God If Princes attempt to make lawes in this sort they are therein vniust and presumptuous against God Otherwise to speake of Princes lawes God himselfe bindeth the conscience to yeeld the outward man in subiection to the Prince when notwithstanding the conscience it selfe remaineth free as touching the thing which the Prince commandeth I know that in outward things it is true which the Apostle saith e 1. Cor. 6.12 10.23 All things are lawfull for mee I may doe all things God hath giuen mee no restraint To eat or not to eat to weare such a garment or not to weare it to doe thus or thus it is all one with God I am no whit the better the one way nor the worse the other way Neuerthelesse if my Prince command mee either way God requireth mee to abbridge my selfe of the outward vse of that liberty which he otherwise hath giuen mee and to performe obedience to my Prince yet still retaining inwardly the same opinion and persuasion of the thing in it selfe that I had before and therefore content to tie my selfe outwardly to do thus because I know inwardly that it is indifferent to God either to doe thus or thus The second presumption of the Pope against Christ is in taking vpon him infallibly to determine the sense of holy Scripture By which pretense he most impudently carieth himselfe bringing all abhominations into the Church and corrupting all religion and seruice of God and yet affirming that he doth nothing contrary to the Scripture because whatsoeuer the words of Scripture are yet the sense must be no other but what he list But well might we be thought to be without sense if so senseles a tale should preuaile with vs a thing which in the ancient Church for so many hundreds of yeeres amidst so many questions and controuersies was neuer dreamed of What needed the fathers so much to busie themselues and out of their owne exercise and experience prescribe rules to others for finding out the true sense of Scripture when as a Pope with a wet finger could haue helped them to the certaine and infallible truth thereof Yea why haue we so many Commentatours of the Church of Rome so various and diuers in their expositions and interpretations of Scripture and why doth not the Pope rather by one commentary of his illuminated vnderstanding reconcile all differences dispatch all doubts and resolue at once
habeant notitiam leprosi vel non leprosi possint discernere qui mundus quiuè immundus fit sic hic alligat vel soluit episcopus Et Presbyter non eos qui insontes sunt vel noxij sed pro officio suo cum peccatorum audierit varietates scit qui ligandus sit qui soluendus as the Priest in Moses law did make the Leper cleane or vncleane not for that he did so properly and indeed but only tooke notice who was a leper and who was not and did discerne betwixt the cleane and the vncleane so heere the Bishop or Priest doth bind or loose not bind them which be innocent or loose the guilty but when according to his office he heareth the variety of sinnes he knoweth who is to be bound and who to be loosed Not so then as that in propriety of speech he either remitteth or retaineth sinnes but only discerneth and notifieth who is to be taken for bound with God and who for loosed whose sinnes must be holden either to be remitted or retained y Idem in Mat. 18. vt sciant qui à talibus condemnantur sententiam humanam diuina sententia roborari Which sentence of man they who are thus condemned as Hierome againe saith must know to be strengthened and made good by the sentence of God himself namely when it proceedeth according to those rules and directions which God hath prescribed in this behalfe for otherwise z Idem in Mat. 16. Cùm apud deum non sententia sacerdotis sed reorum vita quaeratur it is not the sentence of the Priest but the life of the parties that is inquired of with God Here then the Pope is a manifest vsurper first against God in that he taketh vpon him a power properly to forgiue sinnes and thereby seateth himselfe in the throne of Iesus Christ secondly against the Church of God in challenging to himselfe a propriety of that which was spoken a Gregor in 1. Reg. l 6. cap. 3. vniuersali ecclesiae dicitur Quodcunque ligaueris c. to the vniuersall Church and wherein euery one that is a successour of the Apostles hath as great power and authority as he Christ saith he gaue his Apostles authority ouer the whole earth Goe into the vniuersall world But by this Christ gaue no more authority to one of them then he did to another and whatsoeuer he gaue them what is it to the Pope that he should thereby challenge b Deecret Greg. de foro competenti cap. Licet de Appellat ca. vt debitus in glossa Papa vnusomnium hominum ordinarius the whole world to be his diocesse and should define that c Extrau de maior obed c. vnam santam subesse Romano Pontifici omni humanae creaturae pronunciamus omninò esse de necessitate salutis it concerneth euery humane creature vpon perill of damnation to be subiect vnto him And what authority did Christ giue them hereby other then S. Mathew expresseth d Mat. 28.19 Goe teach all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost teaching them to obserue al things whatsoeuer I haue commanded you This was their authority they had no power to command but what Christ had commanded them Let the Pope conforme himselfe to the tenour of this commission and he will then renounce his Popedome and we shall acknowledge him the disciple and seruant of Iesus Christ Ouer a part of hell he saith no Pope hath authority signifying thereby according to their partition the hell of the damned But how then did Clement the sixt not doubt to say in one of his Buls e Bale in Clem. 6. Nolumus quòd paena inferni sibi aliquatenus infligatur we will that the punishment of hell in no sort be laied or inflicted vpon him and how was it that Gregorie deliuered the soule of Traian out hell as f See Bellarm. de purgatorio lib. 2. cap. 8. Damascen hath reported and sundry authours of the Church of Rome as Bellarmine acknowledgeth haue stedfastly beleeued If M. Bishop tell vs that Gregorie did that only by way of intreaty and request he himselfe granteth the Pope to haue no other ouer Purgatory and therefore ouer hell and Purgatory he hath authority both alike When he doth good to any soule in Purgatory it is per modum suffragij as a suppliant and intreater not as a commander saith he But how then did the same Clement the sixt say concerning them who should die by the way as they were comming to his Iubilee at Rome g Bale vt supra Nihilominus prorsus mandamus angelis Paradisi quatenus animam à Purgatorie pentius absolu tam in Paradisi gloriam introducant We command the Angels of Paradise that they bring the soule of such a one into Paradise being fully freed from Purgatorie paines And what is all this power no more now but to supplicate and intreat Haue they mocked the world all this while made men beleeue that the Pope not only hath power to deliuer soules out of Purgatory himselfe but can also impart the same to others and is all come now to supplication and intreaty Why M. Bishop can supplicate and intreat as well as the Pope and what reason haue we but to thinke that God is as readie to heare his praier as the Popes and so by that meanes he shall haue as great power ouer Purgatory as the Pope Such are the mockeries of Poperie such are their doctrines of religion they themselues can not well tell what to make of them Further he saieth Whether the Pope hath any authoritie ouer Princes and their subiects in temporall affaires it is questioned by some The more shame is it M. Bishop for them by whom it is questioned Tertullian reporteth the minde of the ancient Church in this behalfe h Tertul. ad scapul Colimus imâ—eratorem vt hominem à deo secundum quicquid est à deo consecutum solo deo minorem We honour the Emperour as the man next to God and as hauing receiued of God whatsoeuer he is being inferiour to God onely And is it now come to be questioned whether the Pope euen in temporall affaires haue authority ouer Princes who in their kingdomes respectiuely are the same that the Emperour then was But is it questioned onely M. Bishop and not determined Wee may indeed admire their impudency therein that they who so much pretend antiquitie should resolue a matter so contrarie to the doctrine and example of all antiquitie but yet they haue so resolued that either directly or indirectly the Pope hath superioritie ouer Princes euen intemporall affaires i Treatise tending to Mitigation c. in the Preface to the Reader sect 22. The Canonists do commonly defend the first part saith the Mitigatour that is directly but Catholike Diuines for the most part the second that is indirectly and by
seede of Abraham t cap. 9.28 We be Moses disciples u vers 41. We see x Ier. 8 8. We are wise and the law of the Lord is with vs y ca. 18.18 The law shall not perish from the Priest nor counsell from the wise nor the word from the Prophet and yet they persecuted Christ the sonne of God who only is the Truth How then may we now be assured that the Church of Rome is not the same to the church of Christ as they then were to Christ himselfe How may we poore creatures certainely vnderstand that those rich creatures are not subiect to error and mistaking as well as we Well if we will not beleeue it we may chuse but assurance M. Bishop can yeeld none He can tell vs a discourse what Christ said to Peter but that Christ euer spake either of Pope or Cardinall he can shew vs nothing And yet as if this matter were cleere he telleth vs of this church of theirs that whereas we are subiect to mistaking and errour God hath ordained and appointed the same to be a skilfull and faithfull mistresse and interpreter to assure vs both what is his word and what is the true meaning of it But againe we aske him where hath God so ordained and appointed in what Scripture hath he written it or by what words hath he expressed it that the church which he meaneth should bee our mistresse to tell vs what is Gods word what is the true meaning of it If he haue euidence authority for it let him shew it if he haue not what shall we thinke of him that dareth thus to bely the maiesty of God But if he considered the matter aright he would conceiue that those rich creatures of his haue no other or better meanes to assure what is Gods word and what is the meaning of it than other poore creatures haue By what touchstone they can make triall thereof by the same can we also as well as they Which comparison of the gold-smith and the touchstone which he himselfe vseth if it be rightly explicated serueth notably to set foorth the fraud and falshood of that church for which he pleadeth True it is that the church in this behalfe may rightly bee compared to the Goldsmith Now the Gold-smith for the discerning of true and perfect gold doth not take his owne fingers ends but goeth to the touch-stone and no otherwise can hee either make triall himselfe or giue assurance thereof to other men In like sort therefore the church which is the Gold-smith must vse a touch-stone for the assuring of that which it propoundeth to bee receiued and beleeued Now then whereas M. Bishop saith that we must rely vpon the churches declaration to be assured which bookes of Scripture be Canonicall I answer him that we cannot be assured thereof by the churches declaration vnlesse the church declare it and manifest it by the touch-stone The touch-stone whereby we are to take assurance heereof is the constant and perpetuall tradition and testimony of the former church And this testimony we first deriue from the church of the Iewes z Rom. 3.2 to whom the words of God were committed and to whose Scriptures a Luk. 24.44 the law and the Prophets and the Psalmes and to no other b Aug. cont Gaudent lib. 2. cap. 23. quibus dominus testimonium perhibet tanquam testibus suis Christ himselfe hath giuen testimony as witnesses of himselfe reckoning them for c Luk. 24.27 all the Scriptures and wherof the Iewes in their dispersion giue acknowledgment vntill this day God so prouiding that d Aust in Psa 58. Per omnes gentes dispersi sunt ludaei testes iniquitatis suae veritatis nostrae ipsi habent codices de quibus prophetatus est Chrislus in Ps 56. Codicem portat Iudaeus vnde credat Christianus Christian faith should be prooued out of those bookes which are acknowledged for true by them that are enemies thereto This testimony the Christian church receiued of the Apostles and hath continued the same together with the acknowledgment of those other bookes of the new testament which by the Apostles and Euangelists were added to the former What bookes then haue had this generall and vndoubted auerment and witnesse of the church continued from time to time those and no other are to be holden for Canonicall bookes and this is the true touch-stone for trial of certaine and vndoubted scriptures By which touchstone the church of Rome is found to bee not a faithfull Mistresse but a false harlot bringing her bastards into the Church and forcing men to take them for lawfully begotten And whereas it is the tradition and declaration of the former church which hath beene from the beginning by which both they and we are to be instructed as touching the true bookes of Canonicall Scripture they force vpon vs the tradition of their owne church now deliuered vpon their owne word howsoeuer contrary to that which the church formerly hath declared If we follow the declaration of the ancient church then are no other bookes to be taken for Canonicall but what are now accknowledged and approoued in our Church the same onely being testified concerning the old testament by the Church of the Iewes concerning both new and old by the whole Christian church both the Greeke and Latine the Easterne and Westerne churches as e Of Traditions sect 17. before hath been declared But the church of Rome perceiuing the authorising of some other writings to be likely to gaine credit to some broken wares whence her thrift and gaine ariseth hath taken vpon her very presumptuously as a Mistresse or rather a goddesse to giue diuine authority to those bookes reiecting the testimony of that church which in this behalfe should bee mistresse both to her and vs. In a word whatsoeuer is to be attributed to the church in this respect it is idlely by M. Bishop referred to the church of Rome as if all other churches must rely vpon her declaration we our selues being able by the touchstone to make triall of true Scriptures as well as the church of Rome and therefore there being no cause why we should rely vpon them more than they vpon vs. And as vainely doth he apply to his purpose the saying of Saint Austin that he should not beleeue the Gospell except the authority of the church mooued him thereunto there being nothing therein meant but what may bee applied to the church England as well as to the church of Rome Saint Austin speaking generally of the vniuersall church thorowout the world without any maner speciall intendment of the church of Rome But how leudly they abuse those words of Austin wholly against his meaning and purpose I haue f Of Traditions sect 22. before sufficiently declared and neede not heere to repeat againe As for the churches declaration for vnderstanding the Scripture that is also to be tried and made
consequence but both parts fully agree that there is such an authority left by Christ in his Church They agree in deed but it is like Herod and Pilate against Christ Accordingly as they carrie themselues in this point so they deserue to be credited in all the rest But M. Bishop telleth vs that Christ might haue giuen him that authoritie without degrading himselfe And I answer him that the question is not what Christ might haue done but what he hath done Therefore his instance of a King substituting a Viceroy will not serue his turne for hee that without any commission from the King taketh vpon him to be a Viceroy and vnder pretence thereof impugneth his Princes lawes and maketh construction of them at his owne pleasure and to serue his owne turne howsoeuer he seeme to doe all in his Princes name yet is indeed a traitour and a rebell to his Prince This is the Popes case and therefore vnder the name of the Vicar of Christ he is no other but a traitour and a rebell against Iesus Christ As for those faculties of greater authoritie and vertue because wee reade nothing thereof in the Gospell no not in S. Peter himselfe thove faculties which they attribute to the Pope therefore we hold them and that iustly to bee the Popes owne presumptions the flatteries of Parasites the deuises of ill disposed men k Tit. 1.11 who speake things which they ought not for filthy lucers sake The Popish Priesthood is not true and reall but meerely fantasticall for a true and reall Priesthood such as they boast of requireth a true and reall sacrifice for sinne which they haue not For after the sacrifice which purchaseth forgiuenesse of sinnes l Heb. 10.18 there is no more offering for sinne But in the death of Christ is a full purchase of the forgiuenesse of sinnes Therefore after Christs death there is no more offering for sinne We say then of Priesthood as Cyrill hath taught vs to say m Cyril epist. 10 ad Nestor Nec praeter ipsum alteri cuipiam homini siue sacerdotij nomen siue rem ipsam ascribimus We ascribe not the name of Priesthood or the thing it selfe to any other but to Christ only See that question saith M. Bishop But where for hee himselfe hath said nothing of it and whatsoeuer he would say it is already preuented in n Sect. 27. answer of his Epistle to the King To the last obiection that for one Iesus the all-sufficient Mediatour of intercession they haue made as many as be in the Popes Kalendar he answereth yea and many more to What M. Bishop so many Mediatours when the Apostle saith plainly o 1. Tim. 2.5 There is one God and one Mediatour betwixt God and man euen the man Iesus Christ We hold saith hee that any of the faithfull yet liuing may bee also requested to pray for vs. True M. Bishop yet not as Mediatours as if we may plead any thing that they haue done or can do for vs for our owne accesse to God but onely as fellow-members of one body affected in compassion one towards an other pleading for our selues and ech for other that which Christ hath done for all Wherefore as the greater praieth for the lesse so doth the lesse also for the greater not onely S. Paul for the Romans the Ephesians the Collossians but also the p Rom. 15.30 Romans the q Eph. 6.19 Ephesians the r Col. 4.3 Colossians for S. Paul And although we thus request the praiers one of another yet doe we not pray to God that he will heare vs for their sakes whom we request to pray for vs but all expect mercy onely for Christs sake But Popish praiers are of a farre other nature Å¿ The golden Letany By the holy name of Marie haue mercy vpon vs by the intercession and merits of S. Peter S. Paul S. Iohn the Euangelist and other of thine Apostles haue mercy vpon vs by the vertues and merits of the holy fathers S. Augustine S. Hierome S. Chrysostome S. Ambrose and all other haue mercy vpon vs. This is one of the abhominations of Popery that they do not onely idlely intreat the Saints to pray for them but do also alleage to God their merits and intercessions by vertue thereof to obteine mercy at Gods hands But hee saith it shall be hard for vs to prooue that Christ onely maketh intercession for vs. Yea M. Bishop but why then doth S. Austen say that t Aug. in Psal 64. solus ibi ex his qui carnem gustauerunt interpellat pro nobis in heauen of all that haue beene partakers of flesh Christ onely maketh intercession for vs Did hee speake more then hee could prooue Deceiue not your selfe M. Bishop hee could prooue this matter well enough but you cannot prooue that which so iniuriously to Christ the onely Mediatour you affirme and teach that Mediation of intercession belongeth to the Saints it being a thing vnreasonable and absurd to thinke that Mediatours for vs stand in need of a Mediatour for themselues 4. W. BISHOP Lastly saith M. PERKINS for the only merits of Christ in whom alone the Father is well pleased what was he not well pleased with his Apostles they haue deuised a treasury of the Churches containing besides the merits of Christ the ouerplus of the merits of Saints to be dispensed to men at the discretion of the Pope and thus wee see that Christ and his merits be abolished Answer The good man is somewhat mistaken for we hold not any ouerplus of merits in Saints the which we acknowledge to be by God fully rewarded in heauen but we affirme that some Saints and blessed Martyrs haue suffered more paines in this life then the temporall punishment of their own sins deserued Who therefore might truely say with that iust man Iob Iob. 6.1 would to God my sinnes whereby I haue deserued wrath were weighed with the calamitie that I suffer euen as the sands of the sea this should be the heauier Now part of these sufferings of Gods Saints as being needlesse for their owne satisfaction are reserued in the Churches storehouse and may by the high steward of the Church to whom the dispensation of her treasure belongeth be communicated to others as verie reason teacheth vs for who is fitter to dispose of any mans goods then he to whom the charge thereof is giuen by his testament And thus I hope euery reasonable man doth finde vs Catholikes to be farre off from transforming Christ into an Idoll of mans conceit as M. PERKINS dreameth onely we see a misconceited man labouring in vaine to deface Christs benefits towards vs to calumniate his chiefe seruants and to skirmish against his owne phantasies then against any doctrine of â—â—rs R. ABBOT Whether M. Bishop or M. Perkins doe mistake The Popes storehouse merits lately built let the Reader iudge The Pope saith that a Extrauag de poenit remiss cap.
saluationem tametsi erroneam hominem posse mereri per fidem erroneam etsi contingat vt adoret diabolū that the faith of a lay man worshipping an Host that is not consecrated though it be an erroneous faith yet sufficeth to saluation and that a man by an erroneous faith may merit although it fall out that he worship the diuell This speech is strange but yet M. Bishop now by his distinction teacheth vs how it may very wel stand because though a man materially worship the diuell yet by his intention hee doth formally worship God Now what ill happe had Ieroboam that he was not acquainted with these Romish schoole-trickes for he might well haue answered both for himself and for the people that though materially they errēd in the Calues yet their intention was pure and holy to worship the true God and therefore formally they were true worshippers Yea this distinction wil serue to cleere a great part of the idolatries of the Gentiles and Pagans because albeit the diuels did present themselues at their idols and images to receiue the sacrifices deuotions that were there performed as in Popery they haue also done yet this hindred not but that formally they were true worshippers because though they were materially mistaken as before was said in taking the diuell for God yet their formall meaning and intention was to doe seruice to the onely true and immortall God Thus shall they be excused of whom Christ saith d Ioh. 16.2 The time will come that whosoeuer killeth you will thinke that he doth God seruice Which many vndoubtedly thought in the crucifying of Christ being formally e Act. 22.3 zealous towards God but f Luk. 23.34 not knowing materially what they did So S. Austin saith of the Donatists g Aug. epist 48. Arbitrabantur se pro ecclesiae dei facere quicquid inquieta temeritate faciebant Whatsoeuer they did in their turbulent rashnesse and furie they thought they did it in behalfe of the Church of God The same we say of all schismes and heresies that the followers thereof at least many of them are formally true worshippers of Christ because they haue an vnfained intention and purpose to serue the Lord Iesus Christ howsoeuer materially they be mistaken in some things Thus doth M. Bishop make a hotch-potch and mixture of all religions and by his distinction of materialitèr and formalitèr a man may in any religion bee a true worshipper of God because hee may haue a zealous intention to serue God But if his learning and vnderstanding did not faile him he would remember that h Ioh. 4.23 the true worshippers doe worship God not onely formally in spirit but also materially in truth It was the religion of the Samaritanes i Ibid. vers 22. to worship they knew not what but the religion of the true Iewes of whom was saluation was to know what they did worship Our Sauiour would thereby instruct vs that there is no saluation where men worship they know not what God hath reueiled vnto vs the knowledge of himselfe and of his will that thereby we may be directed to serue him In this k Ioh. 17.3 knowledge is eternall life but l Os◠4.6 in the want of knowledge is perdition and destruction Intention zeale is good and in the seruice of God necessarily required but yet our intention and zeale is no other but furie and madnesse and fighting against God if it haue not knowledge to guide it materially in the way of God Now if it be idolatrie to worship that for God which is no God and yet it followeth not that God is heereby stiled an Idoll then surely it is likewise Idolatrie to worship the Sacrament vnder the name of the body of Christ when it is not the bodie of Christ and yet we doe not thereby stile our Sauiour Iesus Christ an idoll as hee fondly obiecteth against vs for blasphemie in the highest degree 19. W. BISHOP His third obiection is out of the fourth Commandement which as he saith giueth a libertie to worke six daies in the ordinarie affaires of our calling which libertie saith be cannot bee repealed by any creature the Church of Rome therefore erreth in that it prescribeth other set and ordinary festiuall daies to be obserued as straightly and with as much solemnitie as the Sabbath of the Lord. Answ Doth not the Church of England also prescribe the Natiuitie of our Sauiour and of S. Iohn Baptist the feasts of the Apostles and many others to be kept holy and command that no man worke in the affaires of their calling those daies doth their owne church also erre therein How say you then to the church of the Israelites which kept the feasts of Easter Whitsontide and of the Tabernacles as straightly and with as much solemnitie as they kept the Lords Sabbath was it also mis-led to the breach of Gods commandements or must we not rather thereby learne that six daies in the weeke were at the first left vs free to labour in but yet so that by the decree and commandement of our spirituall Gouernours any of them might vpon iust occasion be made festiuall and thereupon euery good christian bound to keepe them by their obedience vnto their Gouernours to thinke the contrarie is a high point of Puritanisme R. ABBOT M. Festiuall daies lawfully prescribed by the church Perkins intendeth nothing against the authoritie of the Church for the prescribing of some solemne and festiuall daies but condemneth the church of Rome iustly for prescribing such daies to be obserued as straitly and with as much solemntie he should haue said more straitly and with much more conscience and solemnitie than the Lords Sabbath day Yea it is a thing impious in the Bishop of Rome that hee taketh vpon him to make such daies in themselues a Bellar. de cultu sanct l. 3. ca. 10. Sunt dies festi verè alijs fanctiores sacratiores pars quaedam diuini cultus more sacred and holy than other daies and a part of the very true worship and seruice of God Whereas M. Perkins saith that it is not in the power of any creature to repeale the liberty of working six daies he saith rightly if we vnderstand it of the libertie of conscience for no creature may binde the conscience from the acknowledgement of a lawfulnesse with God to worke all and euery of the six daies in the affaires of our callings but yet in charitie and obedience we yeeld to our gouernours and to our brethren somewhat vpon occasion to refraine our libertie and to forbeare the doing of those things of which notwithstanding we know and are perswaded that in conscience and with God they are free and lawfull to be done 20. W. BISHOP Fourthly saith M. PER. the fift Commandement enioineth children to obey father and mother in all things specially in matters of moment as in their Marriages and choice of their calling
diaconos hypodiaconos At hoc non est inxta Canonem sed iuxta hominum mentem quae per tempus elanguit propter multitudinem quum non inueniretur ministeriuÌ„ But thou wilt say vnto mee that in some places Priests and Deacons and Subdeacons do still beget children He answereth But this is not according to the Canon but according to the minde of men which in time hath fainted and for number sake when there were not found to perform the ministery So then he iustifieth that that I affirmed that Priests and Deacons in some places were married and did beget children this being yeelded to the frailty of mens mindes and for the supplying of the ministery though it were not according to the Canon M. Bishop presseth this that Epiphanius testifieth that the Ecclesiasticall Canons had decreed otherwise but the question is not what was decreed by I know not what Canons but what by practise in some places was done The thing that I affirme is that some places admitted no such Canons but their Priests and Deacons and Subdeacons were married men Albeit it were worth the while to know of M. Bishop what Canons those were whence which Epiphanius speaketh of For there was before that time no generall Councell holden but only the Councel of Nice and the Councel of Nice though some motion were made to bring in d Socr. hist eccles li. 2. cap. 8. Visum erat episcopis legem nouam in ecclesiam introducere vt qui â—ssâ—nt sacris initiati sicut episcopi presbyteri diaconi cum vxoribus quas cùm erant laici in matrimoniuÌ„ duxissent minimè dormirent c. Paphnutius vehementer vociferatus est non graue iuguÌ„ ceruicibus illorum imponenduÌ„ esse qui erant sacris initiati honorabile esse coniugium inter omnes thoruÌ„ immaculatum c. viri cum legitima vxore concubitum castimoniam appellarit a new law as Socrates calleth it to separate Bishops Priests and Deacons from the company of their wiues yet gaue it ouer vpon the aduertisment of Paphnutius earnestly crying out that it was too heauy a yoke to be laid vpon the Clergy that marriage is honorable in all and the bed vndefiled that the company of a man with his owne wife is chastity Yea there was an ancient Canon vnder the name of the Apostles e Canon Apost 6. Episcopus vel presbyter vel diaconus vxorem suam ne eijciat religionis praetextu sin fecerit segregetur si perseueret deponatur Let not any Bishop Priest or Deacon put away his wife vnder colour of religion if he doe so let him be excommunicated if he continue therein let him be deposed Which Canon though abbridged in respect of Bishops yet concerning Priests and Deacons is renued in the sixt Councel in Trullo where those fathers professing f Constantinopol 6. in Trull can 13. Nos antiquum Canonem Apostolicae perfectionis ordinisque seruantes hominum qui sunt in sacris coniugia deinceps ex hoc temporis momento firma stabilia esse volumus nequaquam eorum cum vxoribus coniunctionem dissoluentes vel eos mutua tempore conuenienti consuetudine priuantes Quamobrem siquis dignus inuentus fuerit qui hypodiaconus diaconus vel presbyter ordinetur is ad talem gradum assumi nequaquam prohibeatur si cum legitima vxore cohabitet sed neque ordinationis tempore ab eo postuletur vt profiteatur se à legitima cum vxore consuetudine abstenturum c. siquis ergò praeter Apostolicos Canones incitatus sit aliquem eoruÌ„ qui sunt in sacris presbyterorum vel diaconorum vel hypodiaconorum coniunctione cum legitima vxore consuetudine priuare deponatur similitèr siquis presbyter vel diaconussuam vxorem pietatis praetextu eiecerit segregetur c. to obserue the old Canon of Apostolike perfection and order doe decree that the marriages of Clergy men shall from thenceforth continue firme and good and say that they will not dissolue their coniunction with their wiues or depriue them of their mutuall company in time conuenient Wherefore if any say they be found worthy to be made a Subdeacon or Deacon or Priest let him not be put backe though he dwell with his lawfull wife neither let it be required of him in the time of his ordination to professe that he will abstaine from hauing lawfull company with his wife If therefore any contrary to the Apostolike Canons shall be mooued to depriue any Priest Deacon or Subdeacon of the company of his lawfull wife let him be deposed and if any Priest or Deacon shall put away his wife vnder pretence of religion let him be excommunicated and if he so perseuere let him be deposed Now if these were ancient Canons of Apostolike perfection and order as the Councell telleth vs then it was an errour in Epiphanius to account those Canons sincere and perfect that were contrary to these They were it seemeth some positiue and locall constitutions to which he referreth his speech which as they were in some places accepted so in other were reiected but neither the Apostles nor any generall Councel had prescribed any such Canons to be vsed in the Church Now therefore I haue lost nothing by Epiphanius because he plainly saith that for which I alledged him neither hath M. Bishop gained by him any thing against me because he can giue vs no authority for the Canons which Epiphanius nameth for him and we giue him very good authority for other Canons that are against him 11. But in this matter of falsifications M. Bishop yet meaneth to shew himselfe more false I obiected it g Answer to the Epistle sect 14 p. 122. as a horrible impiety written in their law that they stile the Pope Our Lord God the Pope He saith that heerein is h Reproofe in the Preface pag. 10. a double lie First for that I auouch that to stand in the Law which is onely written in the Glosse But is he so nice and strict in his tearmes that he neuer calleth Law but onely the text of Law Surely we call those Law bookes wherein matters of Law are handled although there be no text of Law And might not I say that was written in their Law which is written in the Glosse that is the exposition of their Law and which by authority amongst them is alwaies printed together with the law Albeit what I meant by the Law I expressed my selfe by setting downe the quotation thus Extrauag Ioan. 22. cap. Cum inter in Glossa Yea but the more shamefull lie is that it standeth not in the glosse neither but I bely both the one and the other Where I confesse to thee gentle Reader that I thought that by their new editions he had had some aduantage against me I had read the words as I cited them long agoe in a faire print of the Canon Law in the library of the Church of Worcester Now
that the Church according to the true members thereof shall be inuisible in the time of Antichrist it is without question Now that the Bishop of Rome hath beene and is that very Antichrist of whom the Scripture hath foretold and the Church of Rome the whoore of Babylon hath beene otherwhere plentifully shewed and in some part hath beene also handled formerly in the second part of this worke The time then hath been already for the Church to bee inuisible by the meanes of the furie of Antichrist maliciously and cruelly persecuting all that came to light that refused to drinke of his poisoned cup. Now hauing thus at large instructed M. Bishop what our doctrine is of the visibility of the Church I will answer him briefly as touching the other point of this cauill The Church subiect to errour that by the ancient monuments of the Church it plainly appeareth that many foule errors entred into the Church soone after the Apostles times that whilest m Matt. 13.25 the watchmen and husbandmen were sometimes sleepie the enemie came and sowed tares amongst the wheat that the builders built much n 1. Cor. 3.12 hay wood and stubble but yet so as that for the most part they reteined the only true foundatiō which is Iesus Christ so as that by the foundation they thēselues are saued but the fire of the Lord shall consume that trash which they haue builded thereon I haue o Answer to the Epistle sect 13. ex Euseb hist. eccles l. 3. c. 29. before shewed out of Eusebius how Egesippus limited the Virginitie of the Church to the age of the Apostles and that generation which with their owne eares heard the preaching of truth from them I haue there shewed how the shifts and subtilties of Satan for corrupting of the truth which he began to practise euen in their daies though they were then checked by their authoritie yet preuailed mightily when they were gone The errours which then were how farre they extended and whether they were in other places the same that we finde them to haue beene in some it is not apparant to vs but manifest it is that so cunningly and effectually Satan conueied that poison into the Church as that it hath neuer since perfectly recouered those wounds that it receiued then Yea Antichrist the man of sinne the master of abominations finding many of those corruptions in the Church hath bound them together as it were in a bundle and by his edicts and lawes hath obtruded and forced them to be receiued as articles of true faith But this saith M. Bishop doth mightily blemish the inestimable price of the most precious bloud of Christ. And why so Forsooth it maketh it not to be of sufficient value to purchase vnto him an euerlasting inheritance free from all errours in matters of faith and abounding in all good works But the effect of Christs purchase is to be determined by the wil of Christ himselfe and not by M. Bishops wilfull and witlesse dreames by which it may as wel be prooued that man is wholly without sinne as that the Church is without errour But I answer him briefly out of his owne words that as the Church which Christ hath purchased doth not so abound in all good works but that it is subiect to many sinnes so neither doth the same Church so abound in knowledge and truth but that it is subiect to many errors Christ intended not by his mediation to bring his Church in this life to full perfection So long as she continueth a pilgrim from her bridegrome and Lord she shall still carie the marks of mortalitie and corruption The Church in this world is like vnto the Moone which is neuer so cleere but that some fret or spot of darknesse is to bee seene in it and howsoeuer it seeme bright in one part yet is obscured in another But it is worth the while to see to what issue M. Bishop wil bring this conceit of his if he be vrged to reueale the secret of it For let vs question with him If the Church cannot erre how is it that the Church of Ephesus hath erred and quite fallen away p Act. 20.28 which God purchased with his owne blood and of which it was immediately that the Apostle said that q 1. Tim. 3.15 it was the pillar and ground of truth Did not the Church of r Gal. 1.6 Galatia erre The Churches of Corinth of Philippi of Thessalonica of Colossa of Pergamus Thyatira and the rest haue they not all gone astray Yes will hee say these particular Churches may erre but the whole Church vniuersall cannot erre But if euery part of the Church may erre then surely the whole Church may erre because all the parts make the whole which can be no other than the parts are We haue heereof example in the r Exod. 32.1 Israelites when the whole Church erred in setting vp the golden calfe and in the Christian Church which was in a maner ſ Vincent Lirinens Arianorū venenum non iam portiunculam quandam sed penè orbem totum contaminauerat wholly corrupted with the heresie of Arius t Hieron adu Lucifer Ingemuit totus orbis se esse Arianum miratus est the whole world groning as Hierome saith and woondering that it was become Arian Well he will say that the Church seuered and sundred in the parts thereof may erre but being assembled together by her Pastors and Bishops in a generall Councell it cannot erre But this the former instances disprooue for the whole Church of the Israelites was gathered together to Aaron the Christian Church was assembled together by her Pastors and Bishops in the Councell of Ariminum to the number of foure hundred who were moe than before had beene in the Councell of Nice and yet decreed for the Arian heresie So was there a second general Councel holden at Ephesus which affirmed approoued the heresie of Eutyches as there were also sundry other of which M. Bishop will not say but that they did erre True saieth he generall Councels may erre if they be not congregated by the authority of the Pope but being the Popes Councels they cannot erre But the Councels of Constance and Basil were both assembled by the Popes call and both these Councels decreed that the Councelis of greater authority than the Pope and the Pope subiect thereto which M. Bishop for the Popes sake will say is an errour and by the Popes procurement the contrary hath beene since determined in other Councels He will answer vs that the Councell though it be assembled by the Pope yet may goe awry if it become diuided from the Pope but being assisted and directed by him it cannot conclude amisse because the Pope cannot erre But we bring examples of diuers Popes that haue erred as Liberius by the herisie of the Arians Honorius by the heresie of the Monothelites and such like Well the Pope then saith he
expresse tearmes teacheth O miracle O goodnesse of God! he that sitteth aboue with his Father at the very same instant is touched with the handes of all men Real presence denied by our beleefe of Christs ascension and giueth himselfe to them that will receiue and embrace him See more of this in the question of the blessed Sacrament where M. PER. citeth the very same authorities which he heere repeateth see my answer to to them there R. ABBOT It is a true argument and very consequent Christ is ascended into heauen and there sitteth at the right hand of God the father therefore hee is not really and locally in the sacrament The connexion is Saint Austins a August in Ioan tract 50. Conuersatus est secundum corporis praesentiam quadraginta diebus cum discipulis suis eis deducentibus videndo non sequendo ascend it in caeluÌ„ non est hîc He is ascended into heauen and is not heere as touching the presence of his body Saint Austin saith that because he is ascended therefore as touching his body he is not heere M. Bishop saith that notwithstanding his ascension he is still heere according to his body Whether now may we thinke is more likely of these two to bee beleeued But M. Bishop to saue himselfe will set Chrysostome and Austin together by the eares Forsooth Chrysostome reporteth it as a miracle that he who sitteth aboue with his father at the very same instant is touched with the hands of all men and giueth himselfe to them that will receiue and embrace him What Chrysostomes minde was in this behalfe appeareth by that which otherwhere he saith that b Chrysost op imperf hom 11. In vasis sanctifacatis non est verum corpus Christi sed mysterium corporis eius continetur in the holy vessels not the true body of Christ but the mystery of his body is contained And by this mystery of his body Saint Austin saith that e August epist 23. Secundum quendam modum sacramentum corporis Christi corpus Christi est after a certaine maner it is the body of Christ and Cyprian saith that d Cyprian de resurrect Christi Quod videtur nonane virtute Christs corpus censetur in name and power it is accounted the body of Christ. As therefore Saint Austin saith that e August in Psal 33. conc 2. Ipse se portabat quodammodo cum diceret Hoc est corpus meum Christ did in some sort beare himselfe in his owne hands when he said This is my body in some sort he saith or after a sort not verily and indeed so Chrysostome intendeth that he who sitteth at the right hand of God is after a sort touched in the Sacrament with the hands of all the partakers thereof not as touching the reality but as touching the mysterie of his body yet so wherein consisteth the miracle which Chrysostome mentioneth as that he indeed giueth himselfe spiritually and by faith to all them that are truely willing to receiue him And in what meaning Chrysostme spake those words we may easily conceiue by other words which he vseth in the very same place f Chrysost de sacerd lib. 3. Dum conspicis dominum immolatum Sacerdotem sacrificio incumbentem ac preces fundentem tum verò turbam circumfusam pretioso illo sanguine intingi ac rubefieri etiamnè te inter mortales versari atque in terra confistere censes annon potiùs evestigiò ad caelum transferris annon omnem ca niâ—câ—gitationem abijcreâ—s mente â—ura circumspieâ—â—quae in ceâ—â— sunt O miraiu um O dâ—â— bemgintatem qâ—â— cum patre sursum sedet in illo ipsotemporis articulo on nium manibus pertractatur aâ— sâ—â—pâ—â— tradit wâ—â—tibus ipsum excipere accâ—mâ—lecti fit autem id nullis praestigijs sed apertis acâ—â—reumspâ—tientibus circumsistentium omnium occutis When thou seest the Lord offered the Priest leaning to the Sacrifice and powring foorth praier and the people round about died and made red with that pretious blood doest thou thinke that thou art amongst mortall men or standing vpon the earth Art thou not foorthwith lift vp to heauen Doest thou not cast away all carnall cogitation and with pure minde behold those things which are in heauen aboue Then vsing the words which M. Bishop hath alleaged he addeth And this is done not by collusion but so as that the standers by with open eies behold all that is done Let M. Bishop now tell vs doe the standers by with open eies see Christ offered Are they made red with the bloud of Christ Must they thinke that they are indeed carried vp to heauen and are not vpon the earth If he cannot deny but that these words are vsed by excesse and vehemencie of speech to drawe the mindes of his hearers to diuine and heauenly meditation of the mysteries then in hand can hee deny but that wee haue iust cause to vnderstand the other words in the very same sort The other testimonies cited by M. PER. out of Vigilius Fulgentius Austin doe make the same good because they shew that Christ according to his manhood is not really vpon the earth M. Bishop biddeth vs see his answeres to those authorities but as yet we doe not see them and if euer we do see them we shall see him as wise or rather as wilfull in them as he hath beene in all the rest 6. W. BISHOP Thirdly he reasoneth thus The Church as it is beleeued is not seene In that we beleeue the Catholike Church it followeth that it is inuisible because things seene are not beleeued We answer that the persons in the Catholike Church are and euer were visible euen to Iewes and Heathens who persecuted them but the inward indowments of those persons that is their faith hope and charity their assistance by Gods spirit and such like Christian qualities are inuisible to be beleeued And euen as a man is truely said to be visible though he consist aswell of an inuisible soule as of a visible body so the Church is visible for the vsible persons visible teaching and administring of Sacraments in it albeit the inward qualities of it be not visible R. ABBOT a Origen in Cant. hom 1. Ecclesiam coetum omnium aduerte sanctoâ—um Et hom 2. Ecclesia ante constitutionem mundi sic enim dicit Paulus sicut elegit nos in Christo c. The holy Chatholike church is the company of Gods saints whom he hath elected in Christ before the foundations of the world and b Gregor in Cantic cap. 3. Secundum praescientiae suae gratiam Christus sanctam ecclesiam de in aeternum permansurissanctis construxit whom he hath by the grace of his foreknowledge appointed to continue with him for euer It is c Ephe. 1.23 the body and d Reuel 21 9. Spouse of Christ e Reuel 5 9. redeemed and f 1. Pet. 1.2 sprinkled with his bloud g
vs so that we shall see that hee had need of one to remember him that a liar must beare a braine See further what hath beene said heereof to the first section of his answer to M. Perkins his Dedicatorie Epistle 28. W. BISHOP 5. The fift Commandement teacheth that no man be killed by priuate authoritie yet Protestantes hold it lawfull to take armes euen against their lawfull Princes for the aduancement of their Gospell and haueâ—n thâ—â— quarrell killed and caused to be killed millions in Gerâ—anie â—rance Flanders and Scotland R. ABBOT This is a meere slander leudly deuised bâ— some Papists to take from themselues the enuie and iust reproch of that sauage and barbarous crueltie which they haue practised in Germany Popish barbaritie coloured by slandering the Protestants France Flanders in shedding the bloud of so many thousands of innocent persons without respect of time place sex age or degree They haue beene in their Churches togither to pray to God and to heare his word suspecting no harm when these Tygers and Wooles haue come armed vpon them and there slaine them without any difference both man woman and childe It were too long to set foorth the tragedie of those but cheries that haue beene committed in such like sort by the meanes of the Guises in France of the duke of Alba and others in Flanders and in Germany by the impetuous headlong tyrannie of Charles the fift The Protestants armes in this case haue beene onely defensiue when as contrary to publike edicts and proclamations contrarie to lawes rights and priuiledges and without legall course of proceeding they haue beene thus barbarously destroied Neither haue they then taken armes by priuate authoritie but by law and by the publicke direction of them to whom the maintenance and defence of those rights and liberties did belong Now that Papists for the aduancement of their idolatries and superstitions doe hold it lawfull and by their Confessours haue beene resolued that it is lawfull not onely to take armes against their Princes but by secret practise to murther them and by gun-powder to blow vp a whole Parliament house to the vtter confusion and subuersion of a whole state our experience from time to time hath sufficiently made knowen to vs. But a See heereof The difference betwixt Christian subiection and vnchristian rebellion part 3. by D. Bilson then Warden of Winche and now Bishop there that Protestants hold it lawfull as he obiecteth to take armes against their lawfull Princes for the aduancement of the Gospell it is a lie and contrary to the doctrine and profession of al our Churches 29. W. BISHOP 6 The sixt forbiddeth adulterie which is allowed of by Protestants in some case For they permit one party after dinorcement to marrie againe the other yet liuing whereas our Sauiour saith Whosoeuer dimisseth his wife and marrieth another committeth adulterie vpon her And if the wife dimisse her husband and marrie another she commiteth adulterie Moreouer incest is also forbidden in this Commandement now by the Canons of the Catholike Church and the authoritie of the ancient Fathers it is incest for one Cosen germaine to marry with another yet is it not seldome practised yea it is generally allowed of in the church of EnglaÌ„d R. ABBOT Protestants allow neither adultery nor incest Papists doe both The limitation of diuorce which our Sauiour Christ hath set down a Mat. 5.32 19.9 except it be for fornication maketh it lawfull for the party innocent to marry againe the delinquent being left to the censure of the Church vntill satisfaction shall be giuen of true repentance for so hainous sinne The Church of England notwithstanding for the preuenting of some mischiefes that by the wickednesse of men doe arise by abusing the liberty of mariage vpon diuorce vseth a restraint of that liberty that the parties diuorced shall put in caution not to marry againe so long as they both liue But the Church of Rome doth openly admit adultery in this behalfe making it free to the Pope to pronounce of a solemne mariage a nullity and to giue liberty to the husband to marry againe the former wife being neither deceased nor diuorced As for incest so determined by the law of God the Pope hath giuen allowance to it in giuing dispensation to the king of Spaine last deceased to marry his own sisters daughter as also to King Henry the eight of England to marry his own brothers wife But that whereof M. Bishop speaketh for one cousin germain to marry with another is no incest by Gods law nor there determined to be vnlawfull Yet thereof we commend that conceit which of old was had of it as S. Austen noteth b August de ciu dâ—i l. 15. c. 16 â—actum etiamâ—â—â—â—um propter vicinitatem horrebatur illiciti that that which was lawfull to be done yet was abhorred for that it is so neere to that that is vnlawfull Therefore albeit by law we prescribe no other bounds than God hath set yet we disswade such mariages rather than approoue them lest men by taking the vttermost of that that is lawfull should thereby the rather presume to that that is altogether vnlawfull As for the Canons of the Church of Rome we little respect them because we know they make no conscience to permit or prohibit as they themselues list who haue brought in a new deuise of spirituall kindred vnknown to ancient times whereby it is vnlawfull for them to marry ech to other who haue been godfathers and god mothers togâ—ther at the baptisme of a child Let them make Canons for themselues but for vs by the grace of God they shall make none 30. W. BISHOP 7. The seuenth Commandement condemneth with theft vsury and all withholding of our neighbours goods which was gotten vnlawfully yet Protestants commonly make no conscience to take ten in the hundreth which is plaine vsury and as for restitution of euill gotten goods it is cleane out of fashion among them R. ABBOT Hypocrite Our lawes allow no vsury at all as though it were not common amongst Papists also to take ten in the hundred Yet our law alloweth not this but punisheth it if it be informed with the losse of the increase If M. Bishop will say that because there is no execution of this punishment therefore it must be taken to be permitted I answer him that it is permitted as Moses permitted the bill of diuorce only a Mat. 19.8 for the hardnesse of mens hearts who cannot be induced to lend to supply the occasions and necessities of their brethren vnlesse they may be suffered to make benefit of their lending As for restitution of euill gotten goods we say that the wanting thereof wittingly is a token of the want of true repentance without which there is no saluation And albeit I doubt not but that I may say hereof that it is more sincerely practised with vs than it is with them yet I will not
modò in Graecum idioma conuersi sunt sed in Romanam quoque linguam Aegyptiam c. semelque vt dicam in linguas â—mnes quibus omnes gentes in hunc diem vtuntur that the bookes of the old Testament were translated noâ— onely into the Greeke tongue but also the Latine Aegyptian Persian Indian Armenian Scythian all tongues which all Nations vsed at that time But of that that Beda saith that the Latine tongue by meditation of the Scriptures became common to the rest M. Bishop maketh a very poore and simple collection that they needed not to haue learned the Latin tongue for the studying of the Scriptures if the Scriptures had beene translated into their owne mother languages As if he should say that because we haue the scriptures now translated into our English tongue therefore we need not for the studying of the Scriptures learne the Latine Greeke and Hebrew tongues The absurdity of which connexion is such as that we may thinke M. Bishop out of his wits that would so much disgrace himselfe as to be the authour of it 14. Another notorious vntruth and most malicious slander he saith I cast out against Austin the Moonke whom he tearmeth our English Apostle of whom I say in my answer that t Answer to the Epistle sect 31. p. 198. he being offended at the bishops of the Britons for that they refused to be subiect to his Romish authority prouoked against them Ethelbert then King of Kent by whose procurement an army of Infidels was sent to slay them who cruelly and vnmercifully performed the slaughter not sparing them who in their shirts came foorth to them to intreat mercy For the iustifying wherof he saith I can produce no ancient authour but am glad to shroud my selfe vnder an old namelesse Chronicle cited by the Arch-liar and late partiall writer Iewel I doe not maruell that Bishop Iewel in his reckoning is a liar because he knoweth that where Bishop Iewel is not taken for a liar there he and his fellowes must be accounted so to be But as touching the story if his eies had serued him he might haue seene that I cited not the old Cronicle onely alleaged by Bishop Iewel but also Galfridus Monumetensis whom in the beginning of that narration I quoted as a witnesse therof who out of the ancient British story reporteth that u Galfrid Monumetens lib. 11. cap. 12. Augustino petenti ab Episcopis Britonibus subiectionem c. Dinoâ—t diuersis argumentationibus ipsos ei nullam subiectionem debere respondit Et. c. 13. Edelbertus rex Cantiorum vt vidit Britones dedignantes subiectionem Augustino facere c. hoc graâ—issime ferens EdelfriduÌ„ regem Northanumbrorum caeteros regulos Saxonum instimulauit vt collecto grandi exercitu in ciuitatem Bangor Abbatem Dinoot caeteros Clericos qui eos spernerent perditum irent c. Edelfridus ciuitate capta cuÌ„ intellexisset causam aduentus MonachoruÌ„ vt pro salute populi sui orarentâ— iussit in eos primum arma verti et sic mille duâ—enti corum in ipsa die martyrio decorati regni caelestis adepti sunt sedem in the city of Bangor there was a most noble Church of 1200. Monks all liuing with the labour of their hands Their Abbot was named Dinoâ—ch a man maruellously well learned who by diuers arguments made it appeare when Austin required the Bishops to be subiect vnto him that they ought him no subiection Edelbert therefore the King of Kent assoone as he saw them refuse to yeeld obedience to Austin and despise his preaching sturred vp Edelfride other princes of the Saxons to gather a great army and to goe to Bangor to destroy Dinoochand his Clergy Who taking the city commanded the swords of his men to be turned first vpon the Monks and so twelue hundred of them the same day decked with Martyrdome entred the kingdome of heauen By which record it is plaine that though that slaughter were not committed by Ethelbert as M. Bishop saith yet by the procurement of Ethelbert as I affirmed it was done Albeit our English Chronicle cited x Defence of the Apology part 5. in the beginning by M. Iewell deliuereth that both the Kings Ethelbert and Edelfride ioyned their power together and so the murther was committed by them both Austin also meeting them at Leicester as they were going to the place where that act was done Moreouer he citeth a Chronicle written in French by one y Ibid. Thomas Gray aboue two hundred yeeres agoe wherein it is said that Austin being so refused of the Bishops and other learned of the Britans made such complaint thereof to Ethelbert King of Kent that foorthwith he leuied his power and marched against them and slew them in most cruell wise hauing no more regard of mercy then a woolfe hath vpon a sheep So then it should seeme that neither Austin nor Ethelbert were free of that bloudy and cruell murther howsoeuer M. Bishop doe his good will to cleere them both Yea by that which Beda reporteth it may be well coniectured that Austins hands were not free of it for that he threatned them when he saw they would not yeeld to him z Beda hist li. 2. cap. 2. fertur minitans praedixisse quòd si pacem cum fratribus accipere nollent bellum ab hostibus forent accepturi that if they would not accept of peace with their brethren they should finde warre of their enemies But it may better be coniectured by the same answer as in two written Cronicles in the Library of Baliol Colledge in Oxford it is expressed where it is not they should finde warre of their enemies but * Polychron magn Polychron Monachi Cistrensis Quòd qui pacem cum fratribus accipere nollent bellum ab eisdem forent accepturi if they would not accept of peace with their brethren they should ab eisdem of them or from them finde warre and reuenge plainely importing that he himselfe would procure the same For whereas M. Bishop alleageth out of Beda that Austin was dead and buried many yeeres before that slaughter happened Bishop Iewel sheweth that therein they haue for Austins credit falsified the Latine story of Beda because by Beda translated by Alfred seuen hundred yeeres agoe into the Saxon tongue the contrary plainely appeareth that Austin after that slaughter was aliue Yea he produceth a Charter of the Church of Canterbury yet extant and to be seene which was granted and confirmed by King Ethelbert and by Austin accepted and subscribed the same yeare that that was done whereby it is without all controuersie manifest and cleere that it is false which M. Bishop saith that Austin was dead many yeares before And for some further coniecture of this matter I wil not omit to note out of Doct. Powell his history of Wales certaine verses of that famous and renowmed Poet Ambrosius Telesinus or Taliessin surnamed in his time
Ben Beirdh the chiefest of the wisemen which seeme in all likely hood to tax Austin as a procurer of that slaughter For although he mention the said Taliessin as hauing beene a writer in the yeare 540. yet because there can be imagined no occasion of those words before Austins comming in I conceiue that either there is some errour in the notation of the time or that liuing perhaps to great yeeres as in those daies was no rare thing he wrot the Ode whence those verses are taken in his last time I will define nothing heereof but leaue it to the iudgement of the Reader to conceiue as he seeth cause The verses then he first setteth downe in the Welch tongue as they were written by him that made them a History of Wales by Doct. Powel Gwae'r offeriad byd Nys angreifftia gwyd Ac ny phregetha Gwae ny cheidw ye gail Ac efyn vigail Ac nys areilia Gwaeny theidw ei dheuaid Rhae bleidhi Rhufeniaid A'iffon gnwppa These he repeateth in English thus Wo be to that Priest yborne That will not cleanly weede his corne And preach his charge among Wo be to that shepheard I say That will not watch his fold alway As to his office doth belong Wo be to him that doth not keepe From Romish woolues his sheepe With staffe and weapon strong Where when he nameth Romishwolues we cannot doubt but that he alludeth to some cruelty caused or practised by some that came from Rome which because it can haue no application in those times but only to the slaughter of the Monkes aforesaid therefore I doubt not but that it hath reference to Austin the Monke who came then from Rome as the cause of that slaughter Now because we are in hand with falsifications and misconstructions I hold it not amisse to reduce hither two other taxations of his of the same nature as most properly belonging to this place The first by order of my booke is a place of Mathew Paris by whom I say it appeareth that a Answer to the epistle sect 3. pag. 20. for the space of twelue hundred yeeres after Christ the Popes authoritie could gaine no acknowledgement in Scotland for that in the time of King Henry the third the one and twentith of his raigne when the Popes Legate would haue entred into Scotland to visit the Churches there the King of Scots Alexander the second forbad him so to do alleaging that none of his predecessours had admitted any such neither would hee suffer it and therefore willed him at his owne perill to forbeare Concerning this allegation M. Bishop setteth downe a postscript in the end of his booke when all the rest was finished in this curteous maner Curteous Reader I must needs acquaint thee with a notable legerdemaine which by perusing the authour I found out after the rest was printed Now gentle Reader I know thou lookest for some speciall great matter which he was thus carefull to adde after all the rest was printed but what is it I pray M. Abbot saith he to prooue that the Pope had no authoritie in Scotland twelue hundred yeeres after Christ auerreth that Alexander the second vtterly forbad the Popes Legate to enter within his kingdome which is not true No is Surely then M. Abbot dealt very vndutifully with his Prince to delude him with a false tale But I pray you M. Bishop tell vs what the truth is For his authour Mathew Paris declareth saith hee that the King indeed 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 authoritie in those ecclesiasticall 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 And is this all M. Bishop that you could finde perusing the authour so diligently as you haue done But I pray you put on your spectacles once more and turne ouer your booke againe Thou shalt vnderstand gentle Reader that the impression of Mathew Paris which I follow is that b Tiguri in officina Froschoviana 1589. at Tigure in officina Froschouiana anno 1589. There in the one and twentieth yeere of Henrie the third being the yeere of our Lord 1237. pag. 431. which in the edition cited by M. Bishop I take by some notes of mine to be pag. 597. thou shalt finde Mathew Paris set downe this matter in these words c Math. Paris in Henrico 3. anno 1237. pa. 431. Volenti autem domino Legato intrare reguum Scotiae vt ibi de negotijs ecclesiasticis tractaret sicut in Anglia respondit rex Scotiae Non me memini Legatum in terra mea vidisse nec opus esse aliquē esse vocandum deo gratias nec adhuc opus est omnia benè se habent Nec etiā tempore patris mei vel alicuius antecessorū meorum visus est aliquis Legatus introitū habuisse nec ego dum mei compos fuero tolerabo Veruntamen quia fama te sanctum virum praedicat moneo te vt si fortè terram meam ingrediaris cau tè progrediaris nequid sinistri tibi contingat c. The Lord Legate being desirous to enter into the kingdome of Scotland there to deale in Ecclesiasticall matters as he had done in England the King of Scotland answered him I remember not that I haue seene any Legate in my countrey nor that there hath beene any need thanks be to God that any should be called neither is there yet any need all things are well No nor in the time of my Father or of any of my predecessours hath any Legate beene seene to haue had any entrance there neither wil I suffer any so long as I am in my right wits Notwithstāding because by report you are a holy man I warne you that if yee doe goe into my countrey yee goe warily lest any thing befall amisse to you For vnruly and sauage men are there dwelling which thirst after mens bloud whom I my selfe cannot tame nor hold them backe from me if they fall vpon you These are the words of Mathew Paris now aske M. Bishop I pray thee wherein standeth that notable legerdemaine which he would acquaint thee with Aske him what it is wherein I haue varied from my authour I said that the king forbad the Legate to enter so saieth the storie I said that the King alleaged that neuer any Legate in the time of any of his predecessours had beene admitted there the storie saith the same I said that this was twelue hundred yeeres after the time of Christ the story noteth it to haue beene in the yeere 1237. Wish him now to tell thee where the legerdemaine is or whether it be rather some policie of his thus to talke of legerdemaine But this place he would not see yet the latter place he saw he quoteth the page 667. iustly agreeing with the