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
of their Church Wherevpon if you demand of a French Catholike of what Church he is his answere wil be that he is of the Catholike Roman Church where he addeth Roman to distinguish himselfe from al Sectaries vvho doe cal themselues somtimes Catholikes though most absurdly and to specifie that he is such a Catholike as doth wholy joine with the Roman Church in faith and religion Euen as the vvord Catholike was linked at first vvith Christian to distinguish a true Christian beleeuer from an Heretike according to that of Pacianus an ancient Authour Epistola ad Simphorian Christian is my name Catholike is my surname so now a daies the Epitheton Roman is added vnto Catholike to separate those Catholikes that joine with the Church of Rome in faith from other sectaries who doe sometimes cal themselues also Catholikes though very ridiculously because they be diuided in faith from the greatest part of the vniuersal world Out of the premises may be gathered that the Roman Church may wel signifie any Church that holdeth and maintaineth the same faith which the Roman doth whence it followeth that M. Abbot either dealt doubly vvhen he said the Roman Church to be a particular Church or else he must confesse himselfe to be one of those Doctors vvhom the Apostle noteth 1. Tim. 1. vers 7. For not vnderstanding what they speake nor of what they affirme Now to this his second sophistication The Roman Church by our rule is the head and al other Churches are members to it but the Catholike comprehendeth al ergo to say the Roman Church is the Catholike is to say the head is the whole body Here is first a mishapen argument by vvhich one may proue or disproue any thing for example I wil proue by the like that the Church of England is not Catholike thus The Church of England by their crooked rule is a member of the Catholike Church but the Catholike Church comprehendeth al where fore to say the English Church is the Catholike Church is to say a member is the whole body Besides the counterfait fashion of the argument there is a great fallacy in it for to omit Fallacia accidentis that vve say not the Church of Rome but the Bishop of Rome to be the head of the Church it is a foule fault in arguing as al Logitians doe vnderstand when one thing is said to be another by a metaphore to attribute al the properties of the metaphore to the other thing For example Christ our Sauiour is metaphorically said to be a Lion Apocal. 5. vers 5. Vicit Leo de tribu Iuda now if there hence any man would inferre that a Lion hath foure legges and is no reasonable creature ergo Christ hath as many or is not indued with reason he might himselfe therefore be wel taken for an vnreasonable and blasphemous creature Euen so must M. Abbot be vvho shifteth from that propriety of the metaphore bead which was to purpose vnto others that are cleane besides the purpose For as Christ vvas called a Lion for his inuincible fortitude so the Bishop of Rome is called the head of the Church for his authority to direct and gouerne the same but to take any other propriety of either Lion or Head when they be vsed metaphorically and to argue out of that is plainly to play the sophister Wherefore to conclude this passage M. Abbot hath greatly discouered his insufficiency in arguing by propounding argumēts that offend and be very vitious both in matter and forme and that so palpably that if young Logitians should stand vpon such in the paruies they would be hissed out of the schooles it must needes be then an exceeding great shame for a Diuine to vse them to deceiue good Christian people in matter of saluation And if after so great vaunts of giuing ful satisfaction to the reader and of stopping his aduersaries mouth that he should not haue a word to reply he be not ashamed to put such bables as these into print he cannot choose but make himselfe a mocking-stocke to the world surely his writinges are more meete to stoppe mustard-pots if I mistake not much then like to stoppe any meane schollers mouth ROBERT ABBOT IT is therefore a meere vsurpation whereby the Papists cal the Roman Church the Catholike and the very same that the Donatists of old did vse Aug. Ep. 48. They held the Catholike Church to beat Cartenna in Africa and the Papists hold it to be at Rome in Italy they would haue the Church to be called Catholike Ibid. breu collat 2. cap. dici 3. not by reason of the communion and society thereof through the whole world but by reason of the perfection of doctrine and sacraments which they falsly challenged to themselues the same perfection the Church of Rome now arrogateth to it selfe and wil therefore be called the Catholike Church Cōt Crescon grammat lib. 2. cap. 37. Epist 48. From Cartenna the Donatists ordained Bishops to other countries euen to Rome it selfe And from Rome by the Papists order must Bishops be authorised to al other churches They vvould be taken to be Catholikes for keeping communion with the Church of Cartenna and so the Papists vvil be counted Catholikes for keeping communion with the Church of Rome They held Ibidem that howsoeuer a man beleeued he could not be saued vnlesse he did communicate with the Church of Cartenna And the Papists hold that there is no saluation likewise but in communicating vvith the Church of Rome The Donatists vvere not so absurd in the one but the Papists are as absurd and ridiculous in the other WILLIAM BISHOP IN the former passage M. Abbot bestowed an argument or two raked out of the rotten rubbish of those walles to vse some of his owne wordes vvhich vvere before broken downe by men of our side Now he commeth to his owne fresh inuention as I take it for it is a fardle of such beggarly base stuffe and so ful of falshood and childish follies that any other man I vveene vvould not for very shame haue let it passe to the print It consisteth in a comparison and great resemblance that is betweene the old doating Donatists and the new presumptuous Papists if M. Abbot dreame not The Donatists saith he held the Catholike Church to be at Cartenna and the Papists doe hold it to be at Rome in Italy False on both sides because we doe not hold it to be so at Rome as they did at Cartenna for we hold it to be so at Rome as it is besides also dispersed al the world ouer they that it vvas wholy included vvithin the straight boundes of Cartenna in Mauritania and her confines so that whosoeuer was conuerted in any other country must goe thither to be purged from their sinnes as S. Augustine testifieth in expresse tearmes Epistola 48. in the very place by M. Abbot alleaged False also in the principal point that the
Donatists held the Catholike Church to be at Cartenna for there dwelt only the Rogatists who were as S. Augustine there speaketh Breuissimum frustrum de frustro maiore A most smal gobbet or fragment broken out of a greater peece that is to say a few schismatical fellowes fallen from the Donatists as the Puritans are from the Protestants or the Anabaptists from the Sacramentaries so that although men of that sect held the Catholike Church to be at Cartenna yet the maine body of the Donatists maintained it not to be there at al but held that congregation of Cartenna to be vvholy schismatical and no true member of the Catholike Church This first part then of the comparison is most vgly and monstrously false The second is not vnlike The Donatists would haue the Church to be called Catholike not by reason of the communion and society thereof through the whole world but by reason of the perfection of doctrine and sacraments which they falsly challenged to themselues the same perfection the Church of Rome now arrogateth to her selfe Here are many faults the first is a grosse lie in the chiefe branch for the Donatists did not cal the Church Catholike for the perfection of doctrine and sacraments see S. Augustine in both places who expresly deliuereth Breui collat cap. 2. diei 3. Epist. 48. that it was for the fulnesse of sacraments Ex plenitudine sacramentorum or for the obseruation of al Gods commandements Ex obseruatione omnium diuinorum praeceptorum of perfection of doctrine they said not one word they were more sharpe-vvitted as S. Augustine obserueth then to goe about to proue vniuersality by perfection which is not vniuersal But seing wel that they could not defend their congregation to be Catholike that is vniuersal but by some kinde of vniuersality they defended it to be so called for the vniuersality fulnesse of sacraments and coÌ„mandements that is because their Church retained al the sacraments that the Catholikes did and professed to keepe al Gods commandements as fully as they M. Abbots former fault then in this second point of resemblance and that a foule one is in that he belieth the Donatists And more palpably should he haue belied the Roman Church if he had justly brought in the resemblance to wit if he had said as due proportion required that vve hold our Church to be Catholike as the Donatists did theirs for the perfection of doctrine and sacraments vvhich is so manifestly vntrue and so cleerely against the doctrine of al Catholike writers that he that was wont to blush at nothing seemeth yet ashamed to auouch it openly and yet doth at last traile it in deceitfully As for perfection of doctrine and sacraments though it be only in the Catholike Church yet it is so farre wide from the signification and vse of the vvord Catholike that none except such wise men as M. Abbot is doe thinke any thing to be Catholike because it is perfect The third particle of the resemblance is That from Cartennathe the Donatists ordained Bishops to other countries euen to Rome it selfe And from Rome by the Papists order Bishops be authorised to al other Churches I am not so copious as to afford to euery leasing of M. Abbot a new phrase vvherefore the reader I hope wil beare with my rudenesse if I cal sometimes a lie by the name of a lie It is an vntrue tale that the Donatists ordained Bishops from Cartenna for they could not abide that place but esteemed it to be Schismatical as you haue heard before He doth misreport S. Augustine vvho saith Lib. 2. cont Crescon c. 37 Quò ex Africa ordinare paucis vestris soletis Episcopum you Donatists are wont to order and send a Bishop thither to your few companions out of Africa not from Cartenna in Mauritania Neither doth the Catholike Church appoint that euery Bishop should goe to Rome to take holy orders and from thence to be sent to other Catholike countries but in euery other region where be three Catholike Bishops they may be lawfully consecrated albeit for vnities sake and to preserue due order they be confirmed by the Bishop of Rome the supreme head vnder Christ of the Catholike Church The fourth point of the comparison is most absurd for the Donatists were so farre from thinking them Catholikes that kept communion with the Church of Cartenna that they detested and abhorred their company as Schismatikes Neither doe we cal any men Catholikes for keeping coÌ„munion with the Church of Rome if it be taken for that particular Church which is contained within the vvalles of Rome but because that communicating with that Church in faith and religion they doe communicate with al other of the same faith which are spread al the world ouer Finally the fift is as false as the fourth and in the same sort to be confuted True it is that the Donatists thought that none could be saued out of their congregation which is almost a common position of euery sect and heresie but most sure it is that there is no saluation out of the true Church of Christ no more then was out of the Arke of Noë in the general deluge vvherefore whosoeuer doth not communicate with the Church of Rome vvhich is the chiefe member thereof in society of faith and sacraments is out of the state of grace and saluation according to that of S. Hierome to Pope Damasus I following no chiefe but Christ Epistola 7. tit 2. joine my selfe to the communion of Peters chaire vpon that Rocke I know the Church to be built whosoeuer doth eate the Paschal lambe out of this house he is prophane he that is not found within the Arke of Noë shal perish c. vvhere there is much more to this purpose To conclude this passage seing that M. Abbot went about to proue the Church of Rome to be like that of the Donatists by no one sound argument but by meere fabling lying he must looke vnlesse he repent Apocal. 21. vers 8. to haue his part with al liars in the poole burning with fire and brimstone And if it please the reader to heare at what great square the Donatists vvere vvith the Church of Rome to which M. Abbot doth so often resemble them I wil briefly shew it out of the best records of that time S. Augustine speaketh thus to the Donatist Petilian Lib. 2. cont Petili c. 51. What hath the Church or See of Rome done to thee in which Peter did sit and now sitteth Anastatius why doest thou cal the Apostolical chaire the chaire of pestilence See how friendly the Donatists saluted the Church of Rome stiling it the chaire of pestilence Lib. 2. cont Parmeni Optatus Bishop of Mileuitan saith thus Whence is it that you Donatists contend to vsurp vnto you the keies of the Kingdome and that you wage battaile against the chaire of Peter presumptuously and with sacrilâ—gious audacity If they vvaged battaile against
the Church of Rome so cruelly surely there was no agreement betweene them Wherefore as the Catholikes of Africa then so they that were taken into the communion of the Church of Rome cared little for the Donatists as witnesseth S. Augustine saying of Cecilianus Bishop of Carthage August Epistola 162. He neede not to care for the multitude of his conspiring enemies the Donatists when he saw himselfe by communicatory letters joined with the Roman Church in which alwaies the principality of the Apostolical chaire flourished c. So we at this time neede as little to care for the bitter reproches and deceitful arguments of the Protestants so we stand stable and firme in the like society of faith and religion with the same Church of Rome ROBERT ABBOT Cont. Epist. Fund cap. 4. THERE vvas reason why Augustine should be moued with the name of Catholike vvhen they that were called Catholikes had testimony of their faith from the communion society of the Church throughout the vvhole vvorld and were therefore so called Breui collat diti 3. cap. 2. Quia communicant Ecclesiae toto orbe diffusae Because saith S. Augustine they communicate with the Church spread ouer al the whole world But most sottishly it is alleaged for a motiue to vs being now Donatistically applied to one particular Church of Rome and to men bearing the name of Catholikes only for communicating vvith that Church Surely as the name of Iewes was of old a name of honour and the proper title of the people of God but afterwardes by their Apostacy who bare it was left for Esai 65. vers 15. a name of curse and reproch so the name of Catholike was an honourable name and the peculiar title of the true children of the Church but now by their abuse who haue vnjustly taken that name vnto themselues it is become a name of curse and shame vvith the people of God and the proper badge of Apostataes and Heretikes And as the Apostle Rom. 2. v. 28. denieth the name of Iewes to them vvho yet according to the letter were so called because of the circumcision of the flesh and applieth the truth of the nam◠to them vvho vvere so according to the spirit albeit according to the letter they were not so named so the name of Catholikes in deede belongeth not to the Romish faction who according to the letter take vpon them to be so called but the true meaning thereof belongeth to them vvho although they joy not in the litteral name c. yet doe follow the same faith vvhich they followed vvho first were called by the name of Catholikes Let them haue the shel so that we haue the kernel c. the name in his true vse importeth them that imbrace the faith of the Catholike that is the vniuersal Church that hath beene from the beginning of the world that is through the vvhole vvorld and shal be to the worldes end WILLIAM BISHOP S. AVGVSTINE indeede was so much moued with the name of Catholike that he alleageth it to haue beene one principal cause Cont. Epist Fund cap. 4. De vera relig cap. 7. which kept him in the lappe of the Church And else where very often exhorteth al Christians To hold the communion of that Church which both is Catholike and knowne also by that very name not only to her owne followers but also to others And the self◠same reason alleaged by M. Abbot himselfe vvhich caused that most holy vvise and learned Father to esteeme so highly of that title Catholike is now of great force to perswade al reasonable men to make themselues members of the Roman Church for by joining in society of faith with the Church of Rome they shal cōmunicate with the Church spred ouer the whole vvorld because the faith and religion of the Church of Rome hath beene generally receiued al the world ouer as our aduersaries themselues doe confesse The name Catholike is by the Protestants Donatistically applied to their Schismatical congregation that neither are nor euer were scattered al the world ouer but be inclosed and confined vvithin certaine countries of Europe as the Donatists were within the boundes of Afrike Most sottishly then to vse his owne wordes doth M. Abbot affirme the name Catholike to be applied by vs of the Roman religion vnto the particular Church of Rome when as we cal al other Churches of what country soeuer that with the Church of Rome keepe intirely the same faith Catholike And men of al other nations doe we cal Catholikes as vvel as those vvho are Romans borne because they al beleeue and confesse the same one Catholke faith that is extended ouer al the world Secondly M. Abbot is much mistaken in his comparison of the name of Iewe with the name Catholike for to omit first that such examples proue nothing but doe only serue for shew or explication and moreouer that it can hardly be shewed that the name of Iewe was a name of such honour at any time for that peoples honourable name vvas Israelites and vvere not called Iewes til towardes the declination and wane of their estate Neither was it euer any peculiar and proper title of the people of God for God had many good seruants that were neuer called Iewes as may be gathered by Iob the Husite Naaman the Sirian the widow of Luc. 4. vers 26. Sarepta a Sidonian and by a great number of Prosilites and finally by that which the Apostle teacheth Rom. 2. vers 14. Many Gentils were saued without the law Lastly most vncertaine it is of what name the Prophet Isay speaketh when he saith Cap. 65. vers 13. It shal be left for a name of curse Al these impertinencies of his example being too too many I doe remit him but cannot pardon his grosse fault in the maine point of the comparison for the name Iewe according to the vsual signification of the word being the name of a certaine people of one race and kindred and hauing a law giuen them by Moises which should continue only for a prescript time and end at the comming of Christ is not like the name of Catholike which is no special name of the people of any one country but is attributed and doth agree to al sortes of men of what country or nation soeuer that doe embrace the true Christian faith And is inseparably linked and so fast joined and riueted with the Christian profession and religion that it shal neuer faile fal or be separated from it so long as Christs faith standeth nor euer be contemned of the faithful whiles Christs true religion flourisheth vvhich is proued inuincibly out of the very Etimology of the name Catholike and that according to M. Abbots owne interpretation in the same place who doth expound it to signifie that Church which is through the whole world and shal be to the worldes end If the name Catholike shal continue to the worldes end the true title of
then was to grant Indulgence and release of penance vnto other penitent persons that had fallen aduiseth them to be very circumspect Lib. 3. epist 15. quaest 11. apud Pamelium before they graunted the participation of their passions vnto others and to weigh wel the measure of their offences that sued vnto them for such pardon and to commend vnto their Bishop and Clergie such only and that by their proper names Quorum poenitentiam satisfactioni proximam conspicitis Whose penance you see almost ended and very neere to due satisfaction vvhence an vnderstanding man may fully gather our vvhole doctrine of satisfaction and indulgences First that due penance is to be enjoined by the Ghostly father after humble and harty sorrow and acknowledgment of the fault Secondly that the same penance may be abridged and released by the Pastours of the Church Lastly that such fauour indulgence and release is made at the contemplation of other mens superaboundant passions And he addeth further in the same booke That without doubt Epistola 18. those penitents are mâ—ch holpen towardes the release of their sinnes with God and not only with the congregation by that communication of the Martirs sufferings to them And to mount yet higher this doctrine of Satisfaction and Indulgence is confirmed by that glorious Doctor of the Gentils S. Paul who first adjudged the incestuous Corinthian to a most grieuous penaÌ„ce for his sinnes afterward strooke off some part thereof by a special pardon saying 2. Cor. 2. vers 10. And whom yee haue pardoned any thing I also in the person of Christ And else where he declareth plainely that he himselfe had a part of those superaboundant passions which might be communicated to others saying 2. Tim. 2. vers 10. I suffer or sustaine al thinges for the elect that they also may obtaine the saluation which is in Christ IESV with heauenly glory And yet more that Colloss 1. vers 24. he did fulfil in his flesh those thinges that wanted of the passions of Christ for his body the Church Seing the blessed Apostle S. Paul doth so plainely teach that his owne sufferings were auailable to other mens saluation and that he fulfilled in his owne flesh that vvhich was wanting vnto other Christians must he not be a ranke Infidel that wil not beleeue any mans sufferinges sauing Christs to be able to helpe another or to supply the want or necessity of others And if it needed I could yet ascend to the old ancient daies of that blessed man Iob who had good store of those superaboundant passions as the holy Ghost speaking by his mouth doth testifie for he saith Iob 6. Would to God my sinnes by which I deserued wrath were weighed and the calamitie which I suffer in a balance this calamity of mine would euen like the sandes of the Sea appeare the heauier and more waighty Now good reader judge whether it be such strange newes to heare of superaboundant passions and satisfactions in the treasury of Gods Church and whether it be vnfit or vnlikely that the Bishop of Rome chief gouernour thereof should carry a special hand in the disposition of the same It is not then the Church of Rome that hath changed her ancient language but I could hartily wish that M. Abbot would learne once to change his vsual language and euil custome of calumniating her and of misconstruing the holy Fathers vvordes vvhich by the grace of God he may the sooner be perswaded to doe if he wil weigh wel that Apocal. 12. vers 9. DIABOLOS calumniator the great Dragon and old Serpent cast out of heauen is called Sathan and the Deuil for calumniating and misreporting of others vvherefore if he wil not be taken for one of the Deuils disciples he must needes giue ouer this shameful practise of falsifying the ancient Doctors sentences and of cauilling against that doctrine which they taught vnder colour of some of their darke speeches ROBERT ABBOT THE same Leo did not take vpon him to cal general Councels but when occasion of the heresie of Eutiches so required Leo Epist 9.23.24.31.42 47.48.49 Made request to the Emperour Theodosius that he would command a Councel and after intreated that he would appoint the same in some place of Italy which notwithstanding the Emperour would not but commanded it to be holden at Ephesus and Martianus after that at Chalcedon And that vvhen Leo againe would haue had it deferred to a better opportunity As in deede the affaires of the Church Socrat. lib. 5. hist in proem after that the Emperours were Christians seemed to depend vpon their wil and at their liking the greatest Councels were assembled as Socrates witnesseth Secundum sanctionem Imperialem per Imperialem sanctionem Synod 6. CoÌ„stant art 1. 4. 6. as the sixt Councel in Trullo often repeateth yea and so as the Emperour at his pleasure was President of the Councel as in that sixt Synode was Constantius the fourth But now the calling and presidency and confirmation of Councels is defended to belong wholy to the Pope as for Christian Emperors and Princes they haue nothing to doe but to send vvhen he calleth and to receiue vvhat he confirmeth The same Leo professed a Leo Epist 16. 17. his obedience to the Emperours appointment and wil to Theodosius and Martianus And Agatho the Bishop of Rome b Agath Epist ad Const Syno 6. ar 4. his due obedience to Constantius the fourth and what your Majesties clemency hath commanded saith he our seruice hath obediently performed the Emperor being honoured according to the ancient doctrine of the Church c Tertull. ad scop Apolog cap. 30. as next to God and inferiour to God only But since that time the Romish doctrine is that d Decr. Greg. de maiorit obed c. solite looke how much the Moone is lesse then the Sunne so much is the Emperour inferiour to the Pope and therefore they haue vvritten him e Catol test ver the Popes man and made him to hold his stiroppe and appoint him to hold the basin to him and to doe sundry other offices of seruice And to make al sure the Pope hath made him to sweare fidelity and alleageance to him f Clement de appellat cap. Pastoralis There is no doubt saith the Pope but we haue superiority ouer the Empire who doubteth but that Priests are the Fathers and Masters of Kinges and Princes Distinct 95. quis dubitet Distinct 96. Si Imperator Is it not miserable madnesse for the children to goe about to subject their fathers or schollers their masters and therefore Christian Emperours must subject their executions to the Ecclesiastical Prelate and not preferre them WILLIAM BISHOP LET it first be considered vvhat blunt and weake tooles the poore Protestants are forced to vse for want of better vveapons to vvound simple soules withal This and it please you is one of their mightiest
care of prouiding for wife children doth wholy extinguish or greatly diminish their good house-keeping and prouiding for the poore as the lamentable experience of our very time doth sufficiently instruct vs. What if some Popes or other Clergy-men haue beene too forward to satisfie the greedy couetousnesse of their carnal friends that is their owne fault contrary to the prouident order and law of the Church and if the corrupt nature of man be so inclinable to fauor them that be next in bloud to them was it not right vvisely ordained by our Church that Clergy-men should haue no wiues and children for that men naturally doe loue them most dearely and vse al meanes to prouide for them But how carelesly herein doe the Protestants carry themselues vvho doe encourage and as it were push their Clergy-men forward to haue wiues and children vvho being thereby clogged with the cares of this world bidde adieu to al courteous and plentiful hospitality and leaue the poore to shift as they can for themselues for they haue more then enough to doe to prouide for their owne wiues and children The second lie is shuffled into the parenthesis taken out of Platina to vvit That vnder the name of nephewes commonly goe their bastards vvhich is not in his authour but a most malitious slander deuised of his owne head and auouched without any testimony and therefore to be contemned The third is in that he maketh Platina to affirme it to be a common thing with the Popes which he only noteth for a special fault in some few Is this man worthy thinke you the sacred title of a Diuine or of the common name of an honest man vvho doth in manner nothing else but sow lies together and that sometimes so thicke that for euery line neere hand there is onelie or other vvas his meaning trow you to giue instruction to the ignorant and satisfaction to the learned as often he vaunteth or rather to blinde the simple and to feede the vaine folly of the ouer credulous Protestant Prouerb 10. Qui nititur mendacijs saith the vvise man hic pascit ventos Idem insequitur aues volantes He that relieth on lies doth feede the windes that is may please vaine and light heades He doth also follow birdes flying in the aire that is doth feede the humour of hawty wauering and vnsettled spirits but can neuer giue contentment or satisfaction to any graue modest and discreet man who doth flie from a crafty and subtle liar as from the very off-spring of that Serpent which with lying deceiued our first mother Eue. But goe on vvith your lies seing it wil be no otherwise ROBERT ABBOT THE Emperours of Rome Theodosius and Valens according vnto the doctrine of the ancient Church of Rome Petri Crinit de honest disciplina lib. 9. cap. 9. Vpon care of preseruing the religion of the high God did forbidde the making grauing or painting of the Crucifix and commanded it vpon penalty to be abolished wheresoeuer it was found But now not the making â—nly but also the vvorshipping of the Crucifix is a matter of high religion in the same Church of Rome WILLIAM BISHOP VERITAS non quaerit latebras Truth is not ashamed of her selfe nor coueteth to hide her head in corners vvhen shee may with safety be suffered to shew her face publikely That decree of the Christian Emperour Theodosius is extant and to be seene in the very corps of the ciuil law vvhat needed then M. Abbot to runne vnto a late obscure authour called Petrus Crinitus Peter with the long haire to seeke that which is of so good record in so famous a volume thinke you that it is without some mistery that he being thirsty would leaue the fresh fountaine and runne to drinke of the dirty puddle Latet anguis in herbae There is a padde in the straw A strange longing he had to finde out some cauil against any part of the doctrine of the Church of Rome and because that could not be by the true and ful report of the Catholike Emperours decrees he would needs fly to some broken relation of he cared not whom to blinde his vnwary reader vvithal The decree then as it vvas made by the Emperour and standeth Authentikely in the Code maketh much for the honour of the Crosse for he commanded That the signe of the Crosse should not be ingrauen Lib. 1. Codi tit leg Cùm sit nobis or painted on the pauement Ne sacrum signum pedibus calcaretur that the holy signe of the Crosse might not be trodden vnder feete Which said decree of Theodosius the elder the Emperour Tyberius the second one of his Godly successours vnderstanding wel vvhen he espied a Crosse cut in marble lying on the ground he commanded it to be lifted vp saying Paul Diaconus lib. 18. Rerum Romanarum We ought to blesse our fore-head and breast with the Crosse of our Lord and we treade it vnder our feete In what high estimation the signe of the Crosse was vvith that most bright mirrour of Emperors Constantine the great and how gloriously it was placed in their Diademes Pallaces and publike places no man can be ignorant that is acquainted with their Hystories And somwhat I haue said thereof already in the question of Images therefore I doe here omit to speake any more of a matter so euident I might here by the way blame M. Abbot not only for his deceitful dealing but also because he forgetteth vvhereabout he goes for his drift here is to teach that S. Peter and S. Paules successours the Bishops of Rome did of old teach another doctrine then these of later yeares doe now of vvhich number of Bishops Theodosius the Emperour was none but many such faults as this I let passe vvittingly or else I should neuer make an end And vvhereas he addeth That these Emperours did forbidde the making of the Crosse according vnto the doctrine of the ancient Church of Rome Obserue first that it is so said only without any proof and besides it is auouched very impudently as being flat repugnant vnto the knowne and notorious practise of Constantine the great their late and most famous predecessour Now to the next ROBERT ABBOT Greg. lib. 9. Moral ca. 1. 14. GREGORY Bishop of Rome taught That al the merit of our vertue al our righteousnesse is but vice and vnrighteousnesse if it be stricktly examined it needeth therefore praier after righteousnesse saith he that whereas being sifted it would quaile it may by the only mercy of the Iudge stand for good Bernard in Annot. 1. De lib. Arbit Grat. In fine Trident. sess 6 cap. 16. Yea and Bernard by the same doctrine of the Church of Rome saith That mens merits are not such as that eternal life is due vnto them of right or that God should doe wrong if he did not giue the same they are the way to the Kingdome saith he but not the cause of obtaining the
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
vvhom S. Augustine alleageth stiling him a Saint and ranking him with S. Ireneus S. Cyprian and S. Ambrose in these wordes August lib. 1. cont IulianuÌ„ cap. 4. Cùm hijs etiam ipse considet etsi posterior tempore prior loco In time somewhat after some of them but in dignity of place before them This holy and learned Bishop of Rome I say vvho flourished in S. Hieromes daies or else S. Augustine vvho was in manner his equal Epist. 3. ad Exuper cap. vltimo could not haue cited his testimony doth expresly declare those very bookes to be Canonical Scripture I trust his declaration that ruled that See of Rome wil rather be taken for the doctrine of the Church of Rome then any other mans besides Againe Pope Gelasius the first who liued not long after him which also is one of M. Abbots chosen patrons did in publike assembly In Decret de Libris sacris in 2. tomo CoÌ„ciliorum assisted also vvith 80. other Bishops define the same bookes to be Canonical Scripture who can then doubt but that the Church of Rome in S. Hieromes and Ruffinus daies tooke those bookes to be Canonical Scripture wherefore it was but M. Abbots addition to the text to affirme that Hierome and Ruffinus according to the doctrine of the Church of Rome did so say Besides the third Councel of Carthage holden at the felfe-same time CoÌ„cil 3. Carthag cap. 47. doth declare the said bookes of Tobias Ecclesiasticus c. to be Canonical Scripture affirming also that therein they followed the sound judgement of their Ancestours Lib. 2. de Doctrina Christ cap. 8. Lib. 18. de Ciuitat cap. 36. S. Augustine in sundry places of his workes doth by name declare the bookes of Wisdome Ecclesiasticus Tobias Iudith and the two bookes of the Machabees to be Canonical Scripture and seemeth to expound S. Hieromes sentence in these wordes The bookes of the Machabees the Iewes indeede doe not receiue but the Church of God taketh them for Canonical Scriptures Whence we after the auncient Lib. 7. Etimolog cap. â— learned and holy Bishop Isidorus doe collect this distinction The Canon of the Scriptures is twofold the one of the Hebrewes the other of the Christians that of the Hebrewes vvas compounded long before Christes daies in which these bookes of Wisdome Ecclesiasticus c. are not comprehended because they vvere written in later times and not in the Hebrew tongue Prolog Galiator Of this Hebrew Canon speaketh S. Hierome in that Prologue as it wil be manifest to al that shal but reade it for he saith first That the Hebrewes haue but 22. letters and according to the same number but 22. bookes in their Canon then reckoning them vp by name inferreth therefore the booke of Wisdome c. be not in the Canon to wit that Canon of the Hebrewes whereof he there spake vvhich also appeareth more euidently by his answere to Ruffinus vvho objected against him as a shameful reproach that he rejected certaine Chapters of Daniël because they were not in the Hebrew though they were in the Septuaginta S. Hierome excuseth himselfe saying Lib. 2. cont RuffinuÌ„ versus finem That therein be shewed the opinion of the Hebrewes but did not deliuer his owne sentence And as he there saith That he who would calumniate that his doing should shew himselfe a sycophant so he doth thereby giue al others to vnderstand that he vvho would after that faire warning build any Catholike conclusion vpon his relation of the Hebrewes opinion should proue him selfe a foole in trusting to so sandy and slippery a foundation And yet further in his Preface vpon the booke of Iudith he teacheth That the Hebrewes did not take that booke of Iudith for Canonical yet the first Nicene Councel vvhich is the most authentike of al general Councels did account it in the number of holy Scripture so that in S. Hieromes opinion also though these bookes were not in the Canon of the Hebrewes yet they may be very sincere Canonical Scripture with the Christians vvho haue the spirit of discerning and judging of such Canonical bookes as wel as the ancient Hebrewes had But S. Hierome saith in the later place That the Church doth not vse them to establish Ecclesiastical doctrine I answere that the Churches of Afrike did vse them euen in his owne time and the Church of Rome which is the principal of al Europe at the least as hath beene proued before so that his vvordes must needes be restrained vnto some Churches in Asia where he liued for the most part or it may be said that the Church had not then when S. Hierome so wrote generally declared them to be Canonical though very shortly after euen before his dying day they were in the most principal places of the Church both declared and receiued for Canonical That the Church had sufficient authorâ—ty by declaration to make bookes of Scripture Canonical that before were not generally taken for such the Protestants themselues must needes confesse because they take for Canonical the Epistle to the Hebrewes and diuers others with the Reuelation of S. Iohn which vvere doubted off by many of the learned Christians in the primitiue Church Lib. 3. Hist. Eccles c. 10. 19. as witnesseth Eusebius ROBERT ABBOT VIGILIVS borne at Rome and Bishop of Trent according to the doctrine of the Church of Rome that then was affirmeth That the body of Christ when it was vpon the earth Vigil coÌ„t Eutich lib. 4. was not in heauen and that now because it is in heauen it is not vpon the earth But now the Councel of Trent and Church of Rome perswade vs that the very body of Christ though it be in heauen yet is really and substantially here vpon earth also vpon the Altar and in the Pix and in the Priests belly and in the bellies of as many as are partakers of the Sacrament WILLIAM BISHOP In vita S. Sisinnij THIS large amplification is shortly answered Vigilius though a holy Catholike Bishop as his praying to Saints doth demonstrate yet was none of S. Peters successours neither doth he speake any thing against Christs real substantial presence in the Bles SacrameÌ„t if his wordes be taken in his owne meaning to wit that Christ since his ascention is not here in that maÌ„ner and fashion as he did conuerse vpon the earth with his Disciples that is in the forme of man Which I gather out of Vigilius his owne wordes for he saith that Christ is departed from vs in the forme of a seruant and so according vnto that forme of a seruant in the habit and likenesse of a man he is not present with vs but the very same body vnder the forme of bread is in as many places as the blessed Sacrament is consecrated See for this more in the question of the Real presence ROBERT ABBOT Hier. in Catalogo TERTVLLIAN being for enuy of
the Clergy of Rome fallen into the heresie of Montanus and thereupon oppugning the same Church declareth what the said Church then taught concerning fasting Tertul. de Iejun aduersus Psythicos of purpose to dispute against it They say saith he that men are to fast indifferently at their discretion not by commandement euery one according to his owne time and occasion that the Apostles did so obserue imposing no yoke of standing fasts and such as should in common be kept of al c. WILLIAM BISHOP FROM the Pastours of the See of Rome M. Abbot is declined to the enemies of the same Church doth he not fairely obserue his owne order and promise But vvel M. Abbot if Tertullian for enuy of the Clergy of Rome fel into heresie let your charity towards the Roman Clergy helpe to draw your selfe out of the same sinke of heresie But where was your judgement to cite an author vvriting out of the corrupt humour of enuy as you confesse your selfe for an vpright indifferent reporter of his aduersaries cause Did euer enuy yet learne to speake vvel Why did you not rather alleage some sound Catholike Authour for the reporter of Catholikes opinions What is it because as Vultures and Rauens doe rather flie to rotten carrion and dead stinking carcases then to any sound bodies so they that seeke to deuour poore sinful soules doe make choise of tainted and corrupt authors out of their contagion to infect and destroy others Simile simili gaudet Like wil to like Nay vvhat if M. Abbot be not satisfied with the badde vvordes of Tertullian vvhich proceeded out of enuy and malice but doth yet by chopping and changing of them make them farre worse then they be in the authour is he not then to be esteemed as a most corrupt mangler of antiquity Tertullian to make his owne error seeme the lesse proposeth odde trifling arguments against it which he could answere with more ease and that after an odious manner as the aduerse party is wont to doe that he might make the Catholikes out of loue with them yet doth M. Abbot relate the same in great grauity as the most sincere substantial proofes of the contrary party sauing that now and then after his old fashion he falsifieth his authour too Now to the vvordes of Tertullian the first are craftily cropped off by him for Catholikes neuer said so absolutely That they were to fast at their owne discretion and not by commandement for Tertullian confesseth there that Catholikes held themselues bound to fast the Lent and on Wednesdaies and Fridaies therefore they could not say that they were to fast only at their owne discretion True it is that they answered him and the Montanists that they vvere not bound to keepe any of their new deuised fasting-daies nor to fast after the manner that they prescribed and that by the commandement as they said and lied of the Paraclete or holy Ghost from such fasts they proclaimed themselues free vvhereupon he malitiously reported that they said they might fast when they list and were not bound to fast by any cōmandement Secondly whereas Tertullian saith in the name of Catholikes That the Apostles imposed no yoke of standing fasts and such as should be commonly kept of al Nisi eo tempore quo oblatus est sponsus by which he meaneth specially the Lent wherein the memory of Christes death is celebrated and afterward mentioneth the Catholikes halfe-fasts as he tearmeth them of Wednesdaies and Fridaies M. Abbot to make them speake like good Protestants dasheth al that cleane out of the text leauing them to say that the Apostles appointed no fasting daies at al neither Lent nor Fridaies So what by Tertullians odious relation and M. Abbots false addition or substraction there is a pretty peece of cosenage to gul the simple and vnwary reader The wordes then of Tertullian being first such as proceeded from enuy and then also much mangled afterward and peeced togither at M. Abbots pleasure I hold it not necessary to stand vpon them but doe come vnto M. Abbots inferences and goodly buildinges vpon such a deceitful foundation ROBERT ABBOT SEE M. Bishop how like a Protestant the Church of Rome spake in those daies would you not thinke that Luther or Caluin or Beza were the Authour of these wordes How lightly doe you regard these arguments from vs which the Church of Rome 1400. yeres agoe vsed to the very same purpose that we now doe But the Church of Rome hath learned now to sing another songe shee condemned the heresie of Montanus then but now shee maintaineth it I auouch it M. Bishop that concerning fasting neither you nor al your fellowes are able to acquite the Church of Rome of the heresie of Montanus WILLIAM BISHOP I See M. Abbot how like the Protestant humour is vnto the distempered spirits of old time I thinke verily that Luther Caluin Beza and such late plagues of Christendome doe yet more deceitfully and falsly report Catholikes opinions and arguments then euer Tertullian did How lightly these arguments which you afterward enforce are to be regarded shal shortly appeare The Church of Rome hath not changed one note of her old songe concerning fasting neither shal you with the helpe of al your companions proue vs to be Montanists in this point of fasting I being the simplest of a thousand amongst the learned on our side vvil quickly cleare our party from that imputation And contrariwise I doubt not but to proue you and yours to be the disciples of louinian and Aërius old condemned Heretikes in this point of fasting Let vs lay vvordes a-side and come to arguments ROBERT ABBOT THE Montanists appointed certaine and standing daies for fasting and for the forbearing of certaine meates so doe the Papists The Montanists did not take any creature or meate to be vncleane but did only by way of deuotion as they pretended forbeare at certaine times and the Papists also doe the same The Montanists being vrged vvith that place of S. Paul to Timothy of them that cōmanded to abstaine from meates answered that that place touched Marcion and Tatianus such others vvho condemned the creatures as euil and vncleane not them vvho did not reject the creatures but only forbeare the vse of them at sometimes the same answere giue the Papists The Montanists tooke that their fasting to be a seruice worship of God so doe the Papists The Montanists thought that their fasting did merit at gods hands that it was a satisfaction for sinne that emptines of belly did much auaile vvith God and made God to dwel with man the same effects doe the Papists teach of their superstitious fasts Looke what arguments the Papists vse for their fasting the same Tertullian vsed for the Montanists Looke what cauils and calumniations the Papists vse against vs of feasting in steed of fasting of Epicurisme and pampering the belly the same Tertullian being a Montanist vsed against the doctrine of the Church of
hundreths al his Majesties Ancestors both English and Britans embraced and maintained the same Catholike Roman faith which we now doe The same might as easily be proued of the Churches of Scotland vvho acknowledge Palladius and Patritius for two of the chiefe founders of the Christian faith in that country vvho both were brought vp at Rome and sent into Scotland by Celestinus Bishop of Rome to instruct the Scots in the doctrine of the church of Rome euen as Augustine vvas from S. Gregory into England From which the Scots Church neuer swarued vntil of late yeares Knoxe Buchanan and such like giddy-headed and fiery spirited fellowes seduced them And M. Abbot most ignorantly or impudently affirmeth it to haue beene 1200 yeares after the incarnation of Christ ere the Popes authority could get any acknowledgment there for in the very same hundreth yeare by him named they vvere so farre off from denying the Popes authority ouer them in causes Ecclesiastical that they did acknowledge him to be also their Protectour in temporal affaires For when King Edward the third would haue giuen them Iohn Balial for their King they answered him Walsingham in vita Edw. Anno 1292. That they would not accept of him for such without the Popes consent who had their country in protection as they then pleaded And M. Abbots argument to the contrary is most friuoulous Alexander the King bade the Popes Legate to enter his country at his peril ergo he did not acknowledge the Popes authority By the like argument one might proue that King Philippe and Queene Mary did not acknowledge the Popes authority for they commanded a Legate of his to stay at Calis and to forbeare entrance into this Realme at his peril The Popes Legates then when they be sent about affaires that doe seeme to the Prince and his Councel prejuditious to the temporal state may be refused without disparagement to the Popes supreme authority in causes Ecclesiastical And the King of Scots had reason to refuse that Cardinal Legate whose special arrand was to collect mony to maintaine the warres of the holy Land vvhich was not to be spared in his country Besides the very entertainement of such a great State so accompanied was reputed as needlesse so ouer costly for that poore country If M. Abbot haue no better stuffe then this to vphold his badde cause he that best knew his owne meaning and designement hath to the life painted out himselfe where he saith They care not indeede what they say or write so that it may carry a magnifical and braue shew to dazel the eies of them that are not wel acquainted with their lewde and naughty dealing ROBERT ABBOT BVT M. Bishop being out of doubt that he should not preuaile in this first part of his sute therefore addeth the second Or if you cannot be wonne so soone to alter that religion in which it hath beene your misfortune to haue beene bredde and brought vp that then in the meane season you wil not so heauily persecute the sincere professours of the other Where you see the presumption of a base and beggerly vassal I forget here that he is a Doctor of diuinity I consider him as a subject thus to vpbraide his Prince vvith misfortune in his breeding and bringing vp whereas his Majesties bringing vp by the singular prouidence of almighty God hath serued to make him high admirable among other Princes and he hath learned thereby to be indeede a King by casting off the yoke of bondage vvhereby sundry other Princes are enthralled to a beast Yea and by his bringing vp is so wel able to defend the religion he professeth that M. Bishop must stand before him like a dumbe Asse able to say nothing but only to repeate their old cuckowes song The Church the Church The Fathers the Fathers albeit he can make nothing good neither by Church nor Fathers But his sute is that his Majesty vvil leaue off so heauily to persecute them complaining before he haue cause and intreating his Majesty to leaue off before he hath begunne And doth he like a dissembling hypocrite talke of heauy persecution only for an easie imprisonmēt and amersement of goodes vvhen they in most barbarous and cruel sort by infinite vexations and torments by rackes and strappadoes by fire and sword haue spilt and destroied the bloud and liues of so many thousandes of ours only for the profession of the Gospel of Christ but no otherwise doe they complaine of persecution then did of old the Donatists and runnegate Circumcellions And vve say of them as S. Augustine did of the others They suffer persecution Sed pro fatuitate pro vanitate but it is for their foolery Prouerb 22. vers 25. it is for vanity Foolishnesse is bound in the hart of a child saith Salomon but the rodde of correction shal driue it away from him Indeede they doe for the most part play the children it is but their wil or rather vvilfulnesse for which they suffer they can giue no reason why they doe so but what ignorance affordeth them They must follow the Church they wil doe as their fathers and fore-fathers haue done it is fit that a childes stomacke be subdued vvith a rodde and necessary that some course be taken for the subduing and reforming of their wil. WILLIAM BISHOP M. ABBOT concludeth this his clowdy and vvindy Section with a storme of railing calling me in it dumbe Asse dissembling Hipocrite base and beggarly Vassal This last name he giueth me because I shewe my selfe sorry for that it vvas his Majesties misfortune to be bredde and brought vp in the Protestants religion great cause you see vvas giuen him to burst out into so rude and bitter wordes But to qualify this clownish tricke he addeth the excuse of a country Coridon rather indeede accusing then excusing himselfe for why did he forget that I was a Doctor in diuinity or how did he forget it that euen then so wel remembred it He would not forsooth respect it here but by a metaphysical abstraction consider me only as a subject wherein he discouereth a double folly for first who seeth not that any man of neuer so great vvorship or honour may in like sort be called a base vassal if his dignity and degree be excepted Might not M. Abbot himselfe if one should forget his calling and learning be stiled in like manner a base beggarly vassal vvherefore this figure of his may rather be tearmed rustical then rethorical And had he not also forgotten himselfe to be a Doctor in diuinity yea a man of ordinary ciuility he would not haue plaied the part of a furnish and foule-mouthed butterwench by falling into such rude tearmes of scurrillity His second ouer-sight is more queasie and dangerous for if I be a base vassal in that I am a subject then is my Soueraignes honour called in question for none be base in that they are subjects vnlesse their Soueraignes be so meane and obscure
that their roial estate cannot giue lustre and dignity to those that serue and obey them for Soueraigne and Subjects be correlatiues and the splendour of the one doth dignifie and ennoble the other And to derogate from the subject in that he is a subject is to disparage and to blemish greatly the Soueraignes Majesty M. Abbot then shewed himselfe a jolly wise-man and very acute when he would remoue the cause of basenesse from my degree and cast it vpon the respect of my subjection vvhich is common to me with al other his Majesties subjects euen of the highest dignity and most honourable calling I doe not here forget that there is incomparable difference betweene one subject and another both in degree and quality yet am I bold to say that he vvho debaseth any one subject considered as a subject as M. Abbot speaketh doth jointly offer great wrong and disgrace not only to al the rest of the subjects but euen to the Soueraigne himselfe Here I hope the courteous Reader vvil giue me leaue to say some-thing of the birth and degree of some Roman Priests being by M. Abbot so often vpbraided with beggarly basenesse neither vvil I report aught else then that vvhich by some honest men of great intelligence is recorded for very true to wit that since these times of persecution more Gentlemen borne haue beene made Roman Priests then are to be found in al the English Ministery though for euery one Priest there be more then an hundreth Ministers And touching M. Abbot himselfe I am credibly informed that he is by birth but a meane Tanners Sonne of Gilford in Surrey and was at his first comming to Oxford but a poore Scholler gladde to sweepe and dresse vp chambers and to play the drudge for a slender pittance Which I doe not vvrite as in contempt of such base beginnings from vvhich many haue proued profound Clarkes and growne to great promotion but only to admonish M. Abbot out of the remembrance of his owne condition not to carry himselfe so contemptuously towardes others vvho vvere borne his betters farre and not brought vp so beggarly but that they had as good maintainance in the Vniuersity as those vvhose shoes he was gladde to wipe and to sweepe their chambers other wise that graue sentence of the wise Poët must needes be verified in him Nil est asperius humili cum surgit in altum None carry themselues more rough currish and hawty Then these base companions once raised to dignity But setting aside both right of birth and degree of study the very sacred order of Priest-hood vnto which albeit most vnworthy vve are by the meere goodnesse of God called doth by the stile of holy Canons exempt vs from the vulgar sort and by vertue of that sacred calling adorne and dignifie vs Distinct. 5. Can. denâ—que Deniue Sacerdotes c. quos dignitas Ecclesiastici gradus exornat Againe the most ancient and reuerend Fathers haue alwaies had the holy vocation of Priest-hood in so high and singular estimation that they haue not feared to paraleel and compare it vvith the greatest temporal Majesty on earth The ground of their reason is this Priests receiue power from IESVS Christ ouer the soules of men and that in supernatural courses teÌ„ding to the most high end of euerlasting blisse and glory vvhereas the Princes of this world how puisant soeuer they be haue dominion only ouer our goodes and bodies in ciuil causes to the quiet peacible gouernement of the affaires of this life Priests then honoured vvith such high gifts vvhich were neuer bestowed vpon Angels to vse S. Chrysostomes wordes that is that had * Lib. 3. de Sacerdot fâ—om Christ authority and power to a Ioh. 20. forgiue sinnes to consecrate his blessed b Math. 26. body that are briefly c 1. Cor. 4. the dispensours of Gods holy word and Sacraments d Hebr. 5. veâ—s 1. 2. taken from among men and appointed for men in those thinges that appertaine vnto God that they may offer gifts and sacrifices as for their owne so for the sinnes of the rest of Gods people to vse the Apostles wordes if these mens heauenly function be base beggarly and contemptible it is in the conceit only of blinded worldlings e 1. Cor. 2. vers 14. That perceiue not the thinges which are of the spirit of God nor can judge of them because they be spiritually to be examined And M. Abbot the best floure of whose garland is his Ecclesiastical calling should haue left the vilifying of the order of Priest-hood to some other of the laity And so no doubt he would haue done had he beene a true Clergy-man in deede and not so called by meere vsurpation for as you know it is the part of an vncleane bird to defile her owne nest But the wel-nurtured man would perhaps out of his little good manners haue made exception of this also as he did of my degree if he had remembred it Now to that vvhich followeth to shew that he had some cause to burst out into those bigge wordes he saies That I did vpbraide my Prince with misfortune in his bringing vp which is false for I mentioned it with compassion as King Priamus calamities are by many remembred vvith sorrow yet with great affection to his person I did not write a sillable that sounded to his Majesties disgrace but did rather excuse his failing in religion laying the fault of it vpon them who in his tender yeares vvhen he was not able to judge misinstructed him signifying that if it had beene his blessed hap to haue escaped their seducing speeches til he had come to riper age he would rather haue controled and corrected them then haue giuen eare to their errours and follies I vvillingly acknowledge a most rare readinesse of wit in his Majesty and firmenesse of memory both to attaine to high litterature and to deliuer it most eloquently so much the more sorry I am that these goodly and faire gifts of nature wanted such supernatural aides and ornameÌ„ts as education in the Catholike Church and among the best sort of Catholikes might and would most willingly haue afforded him for then no doubt he would haue farre out-gone himself in al good litterature and proued most singular Let the considerate reader to judge the better of our spirits compare my speeches to my Soueraigne vvith M. Abbots of the supreme Pastour of the Church as we beleeue vvhom the Protestants doe not denie to be one of the chiefest Patriarkes of the Christian world I meane the Bishop of Rome vvhom M. Abbot doth coÌ„monly raile vpon in most vile and reprochful tearmes stiling him ordinarily nothing else but The man of sinne and perdition the whoore of Babilon Antichrist himselfe and such like betweene whose supereminent dignity and M. Abbots meane place there is no lesse difference then betweene a temporal Prince and his subject of any good sort If I then be rightly
censured a base and beggarly vassal for shewing my selfe sorrowful for my Princes misfortune what stile deserues he for such outragious reproches bealched forth against the highest Bishop of Christes Church Now whereas M. Abbot boldly auerreth That thereby his Majesty hath learned to cast off the yoke of bondage by which other Princes are enthralled to a beast sauing his reuerence I answere that other Kinges nourished in countries accounted as ciuil to say the least as Scotland vvil not change that their bondage vvith his Majesties supposed liberty and freedome because they hold it farre better to enjoy the direction and assistance of the Bishop of Rome for the vniforme and peacible gouernement of their Clergy according vnto the ancient Canons of the Church then either to take it into their owne handes or to cōmit it to the discretion of Consistory Ministers or to any other sort of late deuised Ecclesiastical plat-formes Godly wise and vnderstanding Kings vvil no doubt consider that some who perswade them to cast off such yokes are very false Parasites no sound and true harted subjects because it is said of Kinges out of il counsel in the second Psalme Let vs breake their bandes and let vs cast from vs their yoke vvhereas contrariwise in the same place the spirit of God speakes thus to Princes Apprehendite disciplinam Receiue discipline that is obserue al good orders and take correction least that our Lord waxe angry with you and then you perish from the right way And if they themselues should so much forget their duty to God and respect to his holy Church as to seeke the vtter ruine and subuersion of it yet very reason teacheth them that it is farre more safe orderly and expedient that there should be one only supreme Pastour assisted with the graue counsel of some of the wiser sort of euery Christian country as the Popes holinesse is with the counsel of his most graue wise and learned Cardinals to controule and correct them then to be left to the mercy of the Ministers of euery country and to the tumultuous reformation of the rash and giddy multitude who by the cōmon consent of the best learned Protestants must take their Prince in hand and belabour him if he goe about to oppresse the Gospel as hath beene before proued To proceede is it not a rare pranke of a parasite to auouch that an ancient student in diuinity must needes stand dumbe like an Asse before his Majesty and not be able to answere him one word in his owne profession but the Church the Church the Fathers the Fathers I vvish hartily that his excellent Majesty would match me with no meaner a man then Doctor Abbot he that professeth himselfe able to stoppe al mens mouthes to alleage not only the Church and the Fathers but the Scripture the Scripture and by his Highnesse authentike judgement approue him to haue the better cause that can pertinently cite most plaine texts of Scripture for their religion I make no doubt but the Protestant part notwithstāding their common craking of the vvord of God should goe to the ground Marry vvhen vve auouch holy Scripture for vs in as expresse tearmes as can be deuised they wil not yeeld but deuise most extrauagant glosses to fly from the euident testimony of Gods most holy word whereupon we are compelled to make recourse vnto the definition of the Church of God Iob. 16. v. 13. Which is guided by the spirit of God vnto al truth and vnto the learned commentaries of the most ancient holy and juditious Fathers vvho vvere for their times appointed by the holy Ghost to rule and instruct the same his Church that seing how they vnderstood the holy Scriptures vve may by their euen and vnpartial line and square direct our judgement in the true sence of holy Scripture vvhich is the principal cause why we rely so much vpon the Church and Fathers and for vvhich he so scornefully vpbraideth vs vvith the Church the Church the Fathers the Fathers And here to returne one of M. Abbots sharpe wordes vpon himselfe vvhat a dissembling hipocrite was he to say that when al was done we could not make any thing good by either Church or Fathers Sect. 9. 10. when as he himself doth plainly confesse that S. Augustine S. Hierome Epiphanius and diuers other Fathers be flat for vs and is driuen roundly to deny their authority and to preferre the opinions of condemned Heretikes Iouinian Vigilantius and Aërius before these most renowmed Doctors and Pastors As grosse and palpable an vntruth is that vvhich followeth That the Catholikes be not heauily persecuted by the state whereas al their goodes and chattels be vvholy confiscate and two partes of their landes their bodies at pleasure subject to prison there to lie without baile or mainprise their persons daily in danger of death for receiuing or any vvay maintaining their Pastours to omit al other their oppressions which be almost innumerable but belike because al Catholikes be not by most cruel death suddainly made away this Minister of bloud accounteth their persecution light and easie And vvhereas he so enlargeth the short and smal persecution of their bretheren I doe offer to joine with him in this issue that more Catholike Priests Religious men and others haue beene tormented murthered and most despitefully slaine by men of their religion within the compasse of two Realmes France and England during the only time of Queene Elizabeth her raigne then were of Protestants and men of al other Sects for a thousand yeares before in those countries yea take to them also al Spaine and Italy The Donatists and al other sectaries doe suffer persecution as S. Augustine truly saith for their obstinate folly vvhat of that ergo whosoeuer suffereth persecution for his religion is a foole what a foolish reason in this then were the Apostles and al the best Christians fooles But M. Abbot saith We be children and can yeeld no reason for that we suffer but what ignorance affordeth vs to wit we must cleaue to the Church and follow our fore-fathers Surely that were a foule fault that we as children should obey our Mother the holy Church and follow the faith and religion of our fore-fathers But first it is most palpably false that we can yeeld no other reason for our religion as our bookes euidently doe conuince Then if we had no other reason but that one it alone were sufficient for it is an article of our Creede to beleeue the Church and S. Paul assureth vs 1. Tim. 3. vers 15. That the Church is the pillar and ground of truth vvhereupon this is receiued as a principle of faith among the ancient Fathers allowed euen by Protestants themselues That he that hath not the Church to his Mother shal neuer haue God to his Father he therefore that cleaueth fast vnto the firme pillar of the Church and followeth her precepts as of a most faithful Mother can neuer goe astray
Finally he doth absurdly apply S. Augustines wordes spoken against the Donatists to vs they vvil much better fit the Protestants vvho imitate their errours in most points as I haue proued already who also may be more aptly resembled to children that stand in neede of a rodde because their religion is euery vvay childish as being young and of late borne phantastical and without any sound ground of mature judgement as changeable also as children according to the diuers humour of the state and time SECT 4. W. BISHOP VERY many vrgent and forcible reasons might be produced in fauour and defence of the Catholike Roman religion whereof diuers haue beene already in most learned Treatises tendered to your Majesty wherefore I wil only touch three two chosen out of the subject of this booke the third selected from a sentence of your Majesty recorded in the aforesaid conference And because that argument is as most sensible so best assured which proceedeth from a principle either euident in it selfe or else granted and confessed to be true my first proofe shal be grounded vpon that your Highnesse resolute and constant opinion recorded in the said conference Page 75. to wit That no Church ought to separate it selfe further from the Church of Rome either in doctrine or ceremony then shee hath departed from her selfe when shee was in her most flourishing and best estate from whence I deduce this reason The principal pillars of the Roman Church in her most flourishing estate taught in al points of religion the same doctrine that shee nâ—w holdeth and teacheth and in expresse tearmes condemneth for errour and heresie most of the articles which the Protestants esteeme as chiefe partes of their reformed Gospel therefore if your Majesty wil resolutely embrace and constantly defend that doctrine which the Roman Church maintained in her most flourishing estate you must forsake the Protestant and take the Catholike into your Princely and Roial protection ROBERT ABBOT YOV talke M. Bishop of many vrgent and forcible reasons but you talke as your fellowes doe like mount-bankes and juglers You haue much prating and many wordes but your reasons vvhen they are duly examined are as light as feathers before the vvinde neither vvould they seeme other to your owne followers but that you bewitch them with this principle that they must read nothing written on our part for answere to them we see your vrgent and forcible reasons in this booke vvhich you tel vs is the marrow and pith of many volumes I doubt not but by that time I haue examined the same your owne pupils and schollers if they reade the answere wil account you a meere seducer a cosener and abuser of them and wil detest you accordingly But to beginne withal you offer three reasons to his Majesty in this your Epistle for the justifying of your Romish religion for the impeaching of ours Two chosen out of the subject of this booke the third selected from a sentence of his Majesty Now if these reasons proue reasonlesse then your reason M. Bishop should haue taught you more manners and duty then thus to trouble his Majesty vvith your reasonlesse reasons To examine them in order the first reason is grounded vpon a principle most judiciously soundly affirmed by his Majesty That no Church ought further to seperate it selfe from the Church of Rome in doctrine or ceremony then shee hath departed from her selfe when shee was in her flourishing best estate and which is subtilly left out by M. Bishop from Christ her Lord and head For seeing it cannot be denied that the Church of Rome vvas once sound and vpright in faith the Apostle bearing witnesse Rom. 1. That their faith was published throughout the world it must needes follow that vvhat shee hath not since that time altered is stil vpright and sound and therefore to be embraced Now from thence M. Bishop argueth thus The principal pillars of the Church of Rome in her most flourishing estate taught in al points the same doctrine that shee now teacheth and in expresse tearmes did condemne of heresie most of the articles of our religion ergo c. but soft and faire M. Bishop there is no hast c. WILLIAM BISHOP TRVE there is no hast indeede for M. Abbot comes faire and soft to the matter What a number of idle vaunting wordes and vaine repetitions be here as though any juditious man vvere to be perswaded by bare wordes and voluntary supposals before he see any proofe S ir I doubt not but the indifferent reader vvil suspend his judgement and deeme nere the worse of my vvriting for your empty censure til he see good reason to the contrary Sure I am that some Catholikes hauing read your booke doe like much the better of mine and esteeme yours a very fond peece of worke ful of babble lies and foule wordes void of found proofes and farre from common ciuility Who are more circumspect then you your selues to keepe your followers from reading our bookes vvho first imprison any that wil helpe to print them then set fines on al their heades that shal keepe them and make very diligent search after them so that al these common wordes may most truly be returned vpon your selfe Mutato nomine de te narratur fabula You note that I subtilly left out of his Majesties speech from Christ her Lord and head but shew no cause why and no maruaile for none indeede can be shewed they are needlesse wordes as being comprehended in the former For if the Church of Rome departed not from her selfe vvhen shee was in her most flourishing and best estate shee cannot depart from Christ her Lord and head vvherefore to note this for a subtle tricke giueth the reader cause to note you for a wrangler and one that is very captious where no cause is offered M. Abbot comes at length to my first reason and goeth about to disproue it thus ROBERT ABBOT WE hope you wil not deny but the Apostle S. Paul was one principal pillar of the Church of Rome vvho there shed his bloud He vvrote an Epistle to that Church vvhen the faith thereof was most renowmed throughout the world He vvrote at large comprehending therein as * Theodor. in praefat epist Pat. li. Theodoret saith doctrine of al sortes or al kinde of doctrine Et accuratam copiosamue dogmatum pertractationem An exact and plentiful handling of al points thereof Now in al that Epistle what doth he say either for you or against vs nay what doth he not say for vs against you he condemneth the Rom. 1. v. 23. changing the glory of the incorruptible God into the similitude of the Image of a corruptible man and worshipping the creature in steede of the creatour It is for vs against you for you by your schoole-trickes doubt not to teach men by the Image of a man to worship God and by religious deuotion of praiers and offerings to worship Saints and Saints Images
v. 8. Rom. 16. vers 19. Your obedience is published into euery place But no maruaile to the vvise though he did not then make mention of her Supremacy for that did not belong to the Church or people of Rome but to S. Peter vvho vvhen S. Paul wrote that Epistle vvas scarse vvel setled there neither did that appertaine to the matter he created of Of pardons S. Paul teacheth in formal tearmes which both the Church of Corinth and he himselfe gaue vnto the incestuous Corinthian that then repented these be his wordes 2. Cor. 2. vers 10. And whom you haue pardoned any thing I also for my selfe also that which I haue pardoned if I haue pardoned any thing for you in the person of Christ that we be not circumuented of Sathan What can be more manifest then that the Apostle did release some part of the penance of that incestuous Corinthian at other mens request vvhich is properly to giue pardon and indulgence And if S. Paul in the person of Christ could so doe no doubt but S. Peter could doe as much and consequently other principal Pastours of Christes Church haue the same power and authority The last of M. Abbots instances is That S. Paul saith nothing of traditions wherein he sheweth himselfe not the least impudent for the Apostle speaketh of them very often He desireth the Romans to Rom. 16. vers 17. marke them that make dissentions and scandals contrary to the doctrine which you haue learned and to auoide them but the doctrine that they had then learned before S. Paul sent them this Epistle vvas by vvord of mouth and tradition for little or none of the new Testament was then written vvherefore the Apostle teacheth al men to be auoided that dissent from doctrine deliuered by tradition And in the Actes of the Apostles it is of record how S. Paul vvalking through Siria and Silicia confirming the Churches Act. 15. v. 41 Commanded them to keepe the precepts of the Apostles and of the Ancients Item vvhen they passed through the citties they Act. 16. v. 4. deliuered vnto them to keepe the decrees that were decreed by the Apostles and Ancients which were at Hierusalem and the Churches were confirmed in faith c. Where it also appeareth that those decrees vvere made matter of faith and necessary to be beleeued to saluation before they vvere written He doth also charge his best beloued disciple Timothy 1. Tim. 6. vers 20. To keepe the depositum that is the vvhole Christian doctrine deliuered vnto him by word of mouth as the best Authours take it auoiding the prophane nouelty of voices and oppositions of falsly called knowledge Againe he commandeth 2. Tim. 2. vers 2. him to commend to faithful men the thinges which thou hast heard of me by many witnesses Was not this to preach such doctrine as he had receiued by Apostolike tradition without writing And further vvhich suppresseth al the vaine cauils of the sectaries he saith 2. Thessal 2. vers 15. Therefore bretheren stand and hold the traditions which you haue learned whether it be by word or by our Epistle where you see that some traditions went by word of mouth from hand to hand aswel as some others were vvritten and vvere as wel to be holden and stood too as the written proceeding from the same fountaine of truth Gods spirit Thus much in answere vnto the instances proposed by M. Abbot vvhich he very ignorantly and insolently auoucheth to haue no proofe or sound of proofe out of S. Paul I could vvere it not to auoide tediousnesse adde the like confirmation of most controuersies out of the same blessed Apostle as that 1. Tim. 3. vers 15. the Church is the pillar and ground of truth vvherefore any man may most assuredly repose his faith vpon her declaration That Christ gaue Ephes 4. v. 11. 13. Pastors and Doctors to the edifying of that his mistical body vntil we meete al in the vnity of faith c. Therefore the Church shal not faile in faith vntil the day of judgement nor be inuisible that hath visible Pastors and teachers Also Hebr. 5. vers 1. that Priests are chosen from among men and appointed for men in those thinges that appertaine to God that they may offer gifts and sacrifices for sinne That Preachers and 1. Cor. 3. v. 9. Priests are Gods coadjutors and helpers and not only idle instruments That S. Paul and Timothy 1. Cor. 9. vers 23. 1. did saue other men and therefore no blasphemy to pray to Saints to helpe and saue vs. That S. Paul did Tim. 4. vers 16. accomplish those thinges that want to the passions of Christ in his flesh for Christes body which is the Church therefore Christes passion doth not take away our owne satisfaction That he a Colloss 1. vers 24. 1. Cor. 9. vers 16. gloried in preaching the Gospel of free cost which was a worke of supererogation That b Ephes 5. vers 32. Marriage is a great Sacrament That c 1. Tim. 4. vers 23. grace was giuen to Timothy by the imposition of the handes of Priest-hood vvhence it followeth that Matrimony and holy Orders be true and perfect Sacraments But vvhat doe I I should be too long if I would prosecute al that which the Apostle hath left in vvriting in fauour defence of the Roman faith This I doubt not wil suffice to confront his shamelesse impudency that blushed not to affirme there vvas not a vvord in S. Paul that sounded for the Catholike but al in shew at least for the Protestant As for S. Peter I vvil wholy omit him because the Protestants haue smal confidence in him Here I may be bold I hope to turne vpon M. Abbot this dilemma and forked argument vvhich S. Augustine framed against the Manichean Adimantus Lib. 1. cont Adimant Hoc si imprudens fecit nihil caecius si autem sciens nihil sceleratius If M. Abbot did ignorantly affirme S. Paul to haue said nothing for the Roman Catholikes what could be more blind then not to be able to discerne any thing in such cleare light if he said it vvittingly knowing the contrary then did he it most vvickedly so to lie against his owne conscience to draw after him selfe other men into errour and perdition ROBERT ABBOT WEL M. Bishop let vs leaue Peter and Paul for heretikes let vs see vvhether those that succeeded did al teach the same doctrine that the Church of Rome now teacheth Hollinshead descript of Britan. ca. 7. Eleutherius the bishop of Rome being sent vnto by Lucius king of this realme for a copy of the Roman constitutions for the gouernement of this new conuerted Church and of the imperial lawes for the better ordering of his common wealth about 150. yeares after the death of Christ for answere writeth vnto him Annals of England by Iohn Stow. That hauing receiued in his Kingdome the law and
and to the publike tranquillity of the common vveale Now let the indifferent reader consider vvhether there be any one word in this supposed letter that carrieth meate in mouth as they say to feede the Protestants faith so that here is an ancient and reuerend Fathers letter cited to no purpose But M. Abbot saith that now a-daies not the King but the Pope is Gods Vicar and his Vicar general for al Kingdomes True it is the Pope is Gods Vicar in al Christian Kingdomes Sext. proem in glossa though there be not one vvord of any such matter in the glosse cited by him but that is in Ecclesiastical matters vvhich nothing hindereth but that the King is also Gods Vicar in temporal affaires for he may be called a Vicar that doth Vicem gerere alterius that is another mans Deputy Lieutenant or Substitute One King may haue many Vicars that is substitutes or deputies to whom he committeth some principal charge King Henry the eight for example hauing giuen him by the Parliament supreme power in both Ecclesiastical and Temporal causes had one Vicar for spiritual causes and many other for the temporal so God hath the Bishop of Rome for Christes Vicar general in causes of the Church and Kinges in the administration of the common vveale And the very Canon cited by M. Abbot would haue taught him so much if he had read it vvith a minde to learne the truth rather then to sucke out some matter of cauil out of it Distinct 96. Si Imperator for therein be these wordes The Emperour hath the priuiledges of his power which he obtained of God for the administration of publike lawes Marke here the Pope acknowledgeth the Emperour to be Gods Deputy and Vicar in the administration of the common lawes vvhich in the Canon that goeth next before is confirmed for there Gelasius an ancient Pope speaketh thus to Anastatius the Emperour Ibidem duo sunt There be two thinges ô Sacred Emperour wherewith this world is principally gouerned to wit the holy authority of Bishops and the power of Princes These two then be both Gods Substitutes and Vicars the one for spiritual causes the other for temporal wherefore M. Abbot reasoneth very childishly vvhen he goeth about to proue that we deny the King to be Gods Vicar because we teach the Pope to be Gods Vicar for vve hold that they both be Gods Vicars though in distinct and different matters Neither lastly can he take any aduantage of the word gouerne if it be in that letter for King Lucius demand was for the Imperial lawes to gouerne the temporal state of his realme vvherefore it is euident that he spake there of temporal gouernement and not of spiritual Now because the maine question is whether Kings haue authority ouer Bishops in Ecclesiastical causes or Bishops ouer Kinges let vs heare some two or three of S. Peter and S. Paules Successours M. Abbots owne vvitnesses deliuer their knowledge thereof The first shal be the same learned and holy Pope Gelasius last named he affirmeth in the same Epistle vvhich vvas written to the Emperour himselfe that the authority of Bishops in spiritual causes doth extend it selfe ouer Kinges and Emperours these be his vvordes Distinct 96. Duo sunt Thou knowest ô Emperour thy selfe to depend on their judgements and that they cannot be reduced to thy wil and pleasure therefore many Bishops fortified with these ordinances and with this authority supported haue excommunicated some Kinges others Emperours And if a particular example be demanded of the persons of Princes blessed Innocentius the Pope did excommunicate the Emperour Archadius for consenting vnto the deposition of S. Iohn Chrisostome And blessed S. Ambrose though a holy Bishop yet not Bishop of the vniuersal Church for a fault that to others did not seeme so grieuous excommunicating Theodosius the great did shut him out of the Church c. Is not this plaine enough and directly to the purpose that Bishops haue power ouer Princes in Ecclesiastical causes and the authority of Gelasius is of such vvaight with M. Abbot shortly after that here he cannot gaine-say it vvith any honesty I vvil joine to him Anacletus vvhom M. Abbot also noteth the next who succeeded immediately after Clement S. Peters Scholler he saith expresly Epistola 1. prope finem That the Church of Rome receiued by our Sauiour Christes order the primacy and preeminence of power ouer al Churches and ouer the whole flocke of Christian people If then M. Abbot vvil allow that Kinges be any of Christes people the Pope hath authority ouer them S. Clement himselfe one of S. Paules Philip. 4. v. 3. coadjutors and whose name is in the booke of life hath left this vvritten among the constitutions of the Apostles Lib. 2. c. 11. Wherefore ô Bishop endeauour to excel in sanctity of workes knowing thy place and dignity thou art Gods Lieutenant and placed ouer al Lordes Priests Kinges and Princes Fathers Sonnes Masters and al Subjects joined together Ibid. cap. 33. And in the same booke touching by the vvay the dignity of Bishops repeateth these memorable wordes out of holy Scripture spoken to Moyses as a King Bishop Exod. 7. v. 1. Ecce constitui to Deum Pharaonis Behold I haue created thee the God of Pharao vvho was King of the land of Aegipt vvhere both Moyses and al the children of Israel then liued see the dignity of a Bishop aboue his owne King And the 38. chapter of the same booke of Clement is formally intituled That Priests are more excellent then Kinges and Princes And finally that the gouernement of the whole Church was committed to Bishops that vessel of election S. Paul is a sufficient witnesse vvho saith Act. 20. v. 28. Take heede to your selues and to the whole flocke wherein the holy Ghost hath placed you Bishops to rule the Church of God which he hath purchased with his owne bloud If then M. Abbot wil allow that Kinges be any of Christs flocke and that he purchased them with his bloud they are to be ruled by Bishops who are placed by the holy Ghost to rule the whol◠flocke of Gods Church Hitherto comparing the Bishop of Rome with temporal Princes I haue proued the prerogatiue of Ecclesiastical gouernement to appertaine to the Bishops Now a word or two of the preeminence of the Church and See of Rome ouer al other Churches vvhich shal be briefly verified euen by the testimony of some of the most ancient and most holy successours of S. Peter and S. Paul to whom M. Abbot attributes so much The afore named Anacletus who succeeded next after their owne Disciple S. Clement hauing shewed that al Ecclesiastical causes belong to Bishops euen as temporal causes doe to the temporal Magistrate Epistola 1. ad omnes Ecclesias addeth that if more difficult questions shal arise as the judgements of Bishops and greater causes let them if any appeale be made
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
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
proofes for the Princes supremacy the Emperours some times called general Councels ergo they were supreme gouernors in causes Ecclesiastical a doubty argument as you may perceiue by the like A Lord calleth for his tenants being carpenters to build him a house ergo that Lord is the chiefest carpenter in the country If that Lord be not taken for supreme judge in the carpenters occupation though he had ful power to assemble the carpenters together vvhy shal the Emperour be esteemed chiefe gouernour in Ecclesiastical causes for that he hath authority to cal Ecclesiastical persons together Againe al men know that Ecclesiastical persons are in al temporal causes subject vnto temporal Princes who therefore may command them to meete together to compose contentions risen about spiritual causes vvhereby the temporal peace of his country is also much hindred and this may be wel done vvithout any pretence vnto soueraignity ouer them in spiritual matters so that if it were graunted that the Emperour had authority to cal general Councels yet it vvould not follow thereof that he were supreme head in Ecclesiastical causes much lesse can he be taken for supreme gouernour because the Popes gaue vnto the Emperours the cōmon and vsual wordes of courtesie as M. Abbot afterward very childishly reasoneth But let vs come to the ground-worke of the question I affirme then that though Emperour or King for the temporal command he hath ouer his spiritual subjects may cal them together vvhen there is just cause yet the soueraigne summoning of al Bishops Ecclesiastical persons to a general Councel doth not properly or principally belong to the Emperours but vnto the chiefe Pastour among them for very reason teacheth euery judicious man by induction through al societies it is most manifest that the chiefest member of any corporation or assotiation hath by instinct of nature that priuiledge of calling together the rest of that cōpany and corporation wherefore the lay Magistrate that is no proper member of the Ecclesiastical congregation cannot in natural reason and equity haue that power of assembling the Clergy together Besides no Christian Emperor had euer yet so much as temporal dominion ouer al Christendome those Christians then that were not his subjects at al could not be called together by his authority That their Empire vvhen it was at the largest vvas not so large as the bounds and limits of Christian religion S. Leo himselfe is witnesse in these wordes Sermon 1. in Natiuit SS Apost Petri Pauli Rome being made head of the world by the Chaire of S. Peter doth rule ouer more Countries by heauenly religion then by earthly dominion Againe since the Emperours became Christian not one hundred yeares together scarse did one Emperour command ouer al the Empire but lightly one gouerned in the East another ouer the West I would then gladly know to whether of them it belonged to cal general Councels or whether the Church of God must be destitute of such Councels vntil that matter were agreed vpon Further the calling of national prouincial Councels doth according vnto S. Augustine and Antiquity Aug. Ep. 217. Cal. lib. 4. Instit c. 7. n. 8. allowed therein by M. Caluin and the great hundred of * Centur. 4. c. 7. col 534. Magdeburge appertaine vnto the Primates and Metrapolitans of the same nation and prouince therefore by the like proportion it doth not appertaine to the Emperors but vnto the chief Patriarke of the Church to cal a general Councel That S. Leo on vvhose authority M. Abbot here doth stand tooke S. Peter first and after him the Bishops of Rome to be such I wil briefly proue thus he vvriteth Out of the whole world one Peter is chosen Serm. tert de Assumptione sua to haue chiefe charge of the vocation of the Gentils and is placed ouer the other Apostles and al the Fathers of the Church so that albeit there be among the people of God many Priests and many Pastours yet doth Peter peculiarly gouerne them ouer whom Christ doth principally raigne so that al temporal Princes who vvil not deny Christ to raigne ouer them must by S. Leos verdict acknowledge themselues subject in spiritual cases to S. Peter and his successours The same he doth confirme at large in an Epistle to the Bishops of the prouince of Vienna where he concludeth in these wordes To which S. Peter whosoeuer doth deny the primacy Epistola 87. he cannot in any sort diminish his dignity but puffed vp with the spirit of pride he doth drowne himselfe in the gulfe of hel Now least any man should take exceptions against S. Peters successours the Bishops of Rome though he vvould graunt the supremacy vnto S. Peter I adde that S. Leo in that second place doth rather speake of his owne authority vnder the name of S. Peter impugned then by Hilarius Bishop of Vienna then of S. Peters owne time Yet for more cleare demonstration of it Sermon 2. de anniuersario Assumptionis suae take these his wordes The disposition and order of truth doth continue and blessed Peter perseuering in the fortitude of a rocke hath not forsaken the gouernement of the Church which he vndertooke Peter I say doth to this day hold on and continue stil and liueth in his successours which he confirmeth in an hundreth places of his Epistles by me for breuities sake omitted contenting my selfe vvith that which he vvriteth in one letter vnto Anastasius Bishop of the Thessalonians to whom you shal see what authority he giues Epist 82. ad Anastasium Like as saith he my predecessours haue giuen to your predecessours euen so doe I following their example delegate vnto your charity the roome or charge of my gouernement that you imitating our mildenesse may helpe vs in the care which we owe vnto al Churches by the institution of God principally and that you may in a sort represent the presence of our visitation vnto prouinces farre distant from the Apostolical See of Rome For by reason of your nearenesse to them you may more readily see what matters and in what manner either you your selfe may by your diligence compose or else reserue vnto our judgement vvhere going on according to the Canons of the holy Fathers made by the spirit of God to vse his owne wordes he giues to that Bishop of Thessalonia dignity and authority ouer many Metrapolitanes of diuers prouinces That none be chosen without his priuity but al confirmed by his authority Canon 6. Item That if among the Prelates there happen to be question of greater affaires which God forbidde that cannot be ended by the prouincial Synode the Metrapolitan shal then prouide to instruct your brother-hood of the state of the whole businesse and if the parties being present it cannot be appeased by your judgement let it whatsoeuer it be be referred to our knowledge Canon 7. vvhere he giueth him Authority to cal Bishops before him and a Councel also if
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
was the true Apostolike faith about the questions then handled But forsooth because he did belike vse these curteous vvordes of obedience M. Aâ—bot that lieth at the catch and wants better stuffe is constrained to lay hold on them by which manner of arguing he might proue euery Pope to professe due obedience to euery priuate seruant of God because his ordinary stile is Seruus seruorum Dei The seruant of Gods seruants Now if one had so little wit as hence to argue and gather that the Pope professed obedience or were inferiour to al other seruants of God for if he be their seruant he is bound to obey them would not al the vvorld wonder at his folly And yet this admirable combatant and champion of the host of Ismael is faine to fly to the like miserable shifts and to imploy perforce vvordes that are vttered of custome and curtesie in al Countries for sound proofes If al Italians and French men that vvil say they are your seruants Seruitore di vostre Signoria Monsieur je suis vostre treshumble seruiteur should be taken short at his word and thereby be pressed to your obedience seruice you might soone become a great Signiour ouer many stately seruants that vvould doe what they list But that you may see how M. Abbot can scarsly borrow one weapon out of the true armory of Antiquiry vvhich vvil not serue to wound himselfe I wil here acquaint you vvith some wordes out of the very same Epistle of Pope Agatho to the Emperour Constantius the fourth vvhich doe demonstrate the Church of Rome neuer to faile in matter of faith Did you marke before in those few wordes how he esteemed Apostolike tradition and the definitions of Councels and of the See Apostolike to be the firme foundation of the Church of Christ which alone is sufficient to batter and beate flat to the earth that chiefe fortresse of the Protestants of the al-sufficiency of the vvritten word then hauing deliuered the true faith of the blessed Trinity he annexeth these wordes This is the Apostolical and Euangelical Tradition which the Apostolike Church of God the Mother of your most happy Empire doth hold this is the pure confession of piety this is the rule of the true faith holden aswel in prosperity as in aduersity by the Apostolike Church of Christ which is proued by Gods grace neuer to haue straied from the path of Apostolical Tradition nor euer was corrupted with Heretical nouelties because it was said to Peter I haue praied for thee that thy faith faile not and thou being conuerted confirme thy brethren Here our Lord promised that the faith of Peter should not faile and willed him to confirme his brethren which the Bishops my predecessours as is wel knowne to al men haue alwaies done confidently and I though much inferiour to them yet for the person that by Gods goodnesse I sustaine doe desire to follow them at the heeles this out of Pope Agatho by the way in fauour of our cause because M. Abbot would haue gladly begged an almesse of him to relieue his miserable want Now that which followeth in him out of Tertullian That the Emperor is honoured according to the ancient doctrine of the Church as next vnto God inferiour vnto God only If the good man would haue bethought himselfe a little vvhat kinde of men the Emperours were in Tertullians time and before he vvould not I thinke for very shame haue once offered to proue those Emperours supreme authority in causes Ecclesiastical for they were al of them Heathen Idolaters and professed enemies to the Christian religion If then they vvere next vnder God supreme gouernours of Ecclesiastical causes it would follow thereof see the good effect of M. Abbots argument that the Christian religion vvas to be forsaken of al men and Idolatry to haue beene imbraced for that was these Emperors supreme judgement in spiritual matters What meant M. Abbots a Gods name to perswade Christians that Heathen and Idolatrous Emperours such as those were in Tertullians time vvere to be honoured followed in matter of religion before Bishops and Archbishops and next vnto God If those be Tertullians wordes euery man can apply them better then M. Abbot doth to wit that Emperours in temporal causes and in the ciuil gouernement of the common weale are vnder no man but next vnto God but in Ecclesiastical causes those Emperours had nothing at al to doe Now to those wordes which he proposeth as very odious That how much the Moone is lesse then the Sunne so much is the Emperour inferior to the Pope They be not precisely the wordes of the Canon but these That how much difference there is betweene the Sunne and the Moone so much is there betweene Bishops and Kinges The sence he doth not much alter but only sets it out more disdainfully vve allow of the sence being rightly taken to wit that the authority of Bishops is properly to be compared to the brightnesse of the Sunne because it is wholy conuersant in spiritual causes vvhich depend vpon the brightnesse and light of faith and doe formally appertaine to the heauenly Kingdome of the Sunne Christ Iesus Now who sees not that the Emperours power being properly to gouerne the temporal state by the light of natural reason which is very dimme and obscure if it be conferred vnto the light of grace may aptly be resembled to the Moone light the light of heauenly affaires as farre passing in clearenesse the light of vvorldly businesses as doth the brightnesse of the Sunne at noone daies passe the Moone-shine at mid-night Now if vve would search higher towards the most pure Antiquity we shal finde farre greater comparisons betweene the spiritual power of Bishops and the temporal of Emperours I vvil for a tast cite only the sentences of two most authentike Doctors S. Ambrose an ancient and most graue Father saith Bretheren the honour and sublimity of a Bishop Ambros initio sui Pastor citatur dist 96. cap. Si duo Greg. Oratio ad populum perturb cannot be equalled with any comparison The Majesty of Kinges and Diademes of Princes if they be compared to it are farre more inferiour then if the mettal of leade should be compered with gold And S. Gregory Nazianzene maketh no lesse difference betweene them two then there is betweene the soule the body the spiritual power of Bishops as much in his judgement excelling that of Princes as the soule in dignity doth surmount the body so that the Popes comparison alleaged by M. Abbot is very temperate in respect of these of the auncient Fathers vvhich notwithstanding vvere made vpon great judgement The lies and toies that ensue in M. Abbots text are not worth the answering First Catal. TestiuÌ„ he that reportes the Emperour to be the Popes man is an heretical and lying companion and therefore no sufficient vvitnesse Secondly if any Emperour or King out of his owne profound humility or aboundance of zeale towardes
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
greedinesse and couetousnesse of their familiars their bretheren their nephewes vnder which name commonly goe their bastards but because they asscribe to marriage as the old Heretikes did Bellarm. de Cler. lib. 1. cap. 19. pollution and vncleanenesse which cannot stand with the sanctity and holinesse of the Priestly function WILLIAM BISHOP IF M. Abbot did not euery vvhere almost shew himselfe to be a shamelesse man and one that careth not how corruptly so he may somewhat colourably cite the ancient Fathers sentences this passage were alone more then sufficient to proue him to be no better then a cosening counterfeit In these few lines there are foure euident vntruthes vttered by him The first is that a man is not repelled from being a Bishop for hauing wife children but only for feare of dilapidation of the Church goods This is most euidently false for though the feare of spending the Church goods vpon prophane vses be one cause vvhy it is not expedient that a Bishop or Priest should be maried yet the more principal reason thereof is the purity of the single life and the freenesse of it from al such vvorldly affaires and temporal troubles as are necessarily linked vvith the care of prouision for wife children This you heard before out of S. Leo who was predecessor to Pope Pelagius the first by more then an hundred yeares These be also the reasons of S. Augustine and S. Hierome vvho vvrote thereof vvhole volumes against the Heretike Iouinian and were giuen first by S. Paul himselfe when he teacheth that 1. Cor. 7. vers 31. he who is without a wife is careful for the thinges that pertaine to our Lord how he may please God but he that is with a wife is careful for the thinges that appertaine to the world how he may please his wife and is diuided And Vers 32. Vers 34. the woman vnmaried and virgin thinkes on the thinges that pertaine to our Lord that shee may be holy both in body and spirit See the more special groundes of the single life of clergy-men wherevpon euen by the confession of M. Abbot himselfe Page 42. A law was made in the Church of Rome by Pope Siritius who was 150. yeares before Pelagius that al Priests and Deacons should either be chosen single men or else promise to abstaine wholy from the company of their wiues which is also decreed in the second Councel of Carthage holden about the same time where the holy Bishops there assembled doe say Canon 2. That we may keepe that which the Apostles did teach and Antiquity herselfe obserued giuing al men to vnderstand that the single and chast life of the Clergy vvas taught by the Apostles and obserued in most pure Antiquity It being then so notorious and wel knowne a thing that whosoeuer would be a Bishop must needs refraine from the company of his wife no caution was required for that by Pope Pelagius because there was no question or doubt of it And M. Abbot dealeth deceitfully to argue out of the not mentioning of that vvhich was vnderstood of al men as necessary to be presupposed and is in most of the Canons of the very same distinction Distinct 28. expresly deliuered and also in two other vvhole distinctions going next before His second false tricke is in the citation of the glosse and that a very foule one for he chops it off in the middest leauing out that which wil marre al his market The glosse saith vpon that caution against dilapidations that it is to be vnderstood when be that is chosen to be a Bishop doth loue his wife and children so tenderly that it is to be presumed he would for their sakes dilapidare the Church goods c. otherwise a man is not repelled for wife and children to wit for that point of dilapidations whereof the glosse there speaketh This to be the sence any vnderstanding man vvould easily perceiue if the glosse had gone no further But it addeth as it were to meete with M. Abbots cauil Dum tamen longa continentia praecesserit A man that hath a wife may be admitted to be a Bishop putting in good surety that he wil not dilapidare the Church goods yet with this prouiso That he hath long before liued continently that is refrained wholy from the company of his wife as it is before said in the Canon Priusquam of the same distinction See how expresly the glosse excepts that which M. Abbot auoucheth it to affirme His third false tale is That the Church of Rome now wil by no means admit maried men to be bishops priests which is not true for in those very cases vvherein they vvere at any time admitted before they vvould be admitted now that is If there were want of other able men and some such eminent learning and vertue in a maried man as were not to be found in a single then he might be made both Priest Bishop so that he and his wife would liu◠continently for there is no Canon of the Church to the contrary His fourth lie is a luculent and bright one That we forsooth asscribe pollution and vncleanenesse to marriage as the old Heretikes did for neither Cardinal Bellarmine vvhom he quoteth nor any other Catholike doth teach the act of matrimony to be the worke of the Deuil or damnable sinne as the Manichees and some other Heretikes did Nay he declareth there plainly that it may be without any sinne at al though most commonly concupiscence beare to great a sway in it both preuenting the rule of reason and somewhat exceeding the measure of it as a Lib. 14. de Ciuitat c. 17. Item lib. 5. cont Iulian. cap. 8. 10. S. Augustine testifieth and doth make a man more dul and heauy to spiritual exercises and not so pure holy as the office of a Priest doth require as b Hier. lib. 1. cōt Iouinian S. Hierome and c Chrysost l. 6 de Sacerdot S. Chrysostome doe witnesse And that a man thereby is made lesse holy and pure both in body and spirit S. Paules owne vvordes doe intimate ¶ 1. Cor. 7. vers 34. The woman vnmarried thinketh how shee may be holy both in body and spirit so that within the compasse of not many lines M. Abbot le ts flie two cast of lies and yet as it were not content vvith so few he interlaceth three other lies to furbish and smooth vp the rest The first is that now a daies married men are not repelled from Bishopricks to auoide dilapidations which is false For that is one cause as I shewed before and is also touched euen by that most renowmed Father Bellarmine euen in the same place cited by M. Abbot De Clericis lib. 1. cap. 19. in his fifth reason vvhere he teacheth That the marriage of Bishops and Priests doth hinder much that hospitality and tender care of the poore which men of the Church ought to haue for the
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
they seeke to deuour before they be aware of them But as S. Augustine aduiseth very prudently The sheepe must not therefore cast off his owne skinne because the wolfe doth sometime put it on no more must Catholikes forsake any branch or good circumstance of fasting because the Montanists vsed them If any man be desirous to know the true founders of the Protestant doctrine against fasting they are of record in right good authours but noted by them for very vvicked Heretikes Aërius saith both Epiphanius and S. Augustine vnto the Arrian heresie added some other errours of his owne to wit That we ought not to pray and offer sacrifice for the dead and that certaine standing fastes were not to be commanded but that men might fast when they pleased least otherwise they should be vnder the law Is not this the first part of the Protestant plea and opinion that there must be no standing and ordinary fastes Ioyne hereunto one branch of Iouinians heresie Hieron lib. 1. cont Iouin cap. 2. That there is no difference betweene abstaining from meate and receiuing of the same with thanks-giuing that is al is one before God and no more merit or satisfaction in fasting then in eating and then you haue the ful doctrine of the Protestants patched vp out of the rotten reproued ragges of two old condemned Heretikes Aërius and Iouinian The old Roman faith vvhich to this day doth remaine inuiolable walketh in the middest of these two extremities shee leaueth it not to euery mans discretion to fast when and how he pleaseth as Aërius vvould haue had it for then there vvould be little fasting with many as daily experience teacheth vs but cōmandeth certaine standing times of fasting prescribing also one vniforme manner to be obserued of al who be of age and in health which is done according to the tradition of the Apostles with that moderation of both time and diet that shee is as farre on the other side from the presumptuous and vndiscreet prescription of the Montanists as may be We can better defend our selues from Montanus errours then M. Abbot can doe the Protestants from one principal point of them vvhich was as S. Hierome reporteth that they at euery sinne almost Epist. 49. ad Marcellum de dogmate Montani did shut vp the Church dores that is did deny that there was in the Pastours of the Church power to absolue them from those sinnes And were so sterne and rough as S. Hierome saith not that they themselues did not commit more grieuous offences but because there is this difference betwixt the Montanists vs that they are ashamed to confesse their sinnes as men but we whiles we doe penance doe more easily merit and deserue pardon vvhere you see that the ancient Roman Church of which S. Hierome was an eminent Doctor did dissent from the Montanists about the Sacrament of confession The Montanists then as the Protestants now did not beleeue that Priests had power to forgiue many sortes of sinne and therefore vvould not goe to confession Contrariwise the Catholikes then beleeued as we doe now that Priests could pardon al sortes of sinne and therefore went to confession and did such penance as vvas injoyned them thereby to deserue pardon of their sinnes ROBERT ABBOT TO this heresie of Montanus the Church of Rome hath added the practise and defence of sundry other heresies which were condemned of old by the same Church Epiphan Haeres 78. Antid Idem Haeres 79. Collyrid The Collyridians were adjudged Heretikes for worshipping the Virgin Mary and offering vnto her Epiphanius calling it a wicked and blasphemous act a Deuilish worke and the doctrine of the vncleane spirit affirming that shee vvas not giuen vs to be worshipped that because men should not admire or thinke to highly of her therefore he spake to her in that sort in the Gospel Woman what haue I to doe with thee that if God vvould not haue the Angels to be worshipped much lesse a vvoman that the Sonne of God tooke flesh of the holy Virgin but not that shee should therefore be worshipped nor to make her a God nor that we should offer in her name That shee should be in honour but yet let no man worship her saith he let them not say we doe honour to the Queene of heauen Yet the Church of Rome that now is worshippeth the Virgin Mary praieth and offereth to her vnder the name of the Queene of heauen WILLIAM BISHOP Hierem. 13. WHEN the Aethiopian doth change his tanned skinne and the Leopard his speckled case as the Prophet speaketh then and not before I vveene vvil the Aethiopian blacke soule of this Tanners sonne leaue off to abuse the holy Fathers writinges and to deceiue his credulous readers Epiphanius a most holy man and a very learned Bishop in recounting confuting the heresies that vvere sprong vp in and before his time commeth at length vnto the erronious opinions which some held of the most blessed Virgin Mary the glorious mother of God which were in two extremities For some named Antidicomarianitae that is enemies to the sacred Virgin because they spake against her perpetual virginity whose blasphemy he checketh in the 78. heresie which is the first chapter cited by M. Abbot Wherein that holy Father doth most highly commend her stiling her an immaculate Virgin worthy to be made the pallace of the Sonne of God A holy pretious most excellent and admirable vessel comprehending him that is incomprehensible The Princesse of Virginity The Mother of the liuing and the cause of life preferring her before S. Iohn the Euangelist S. Iohn Baptist and Helias Adding finally That though shee were a woman and not in nature changed yet for her sence vnderstanding and other graces Honore honorata which according to the phrase of Scripture signifieth To be honoured with singular honour yea With as great as the bodies of the Saints or what else he could name more to her glory That it was affected madnesse in lieu of worshipping that holy Virgin and honourable vessel with Hymnes and glory to inueigh and raile against her Where you see that the reuerend Bishop Epiphanius doth intimate that it is the part of euery sober Christian to worship the holy Virgin Mary vsing these formal words Virginem sanctam vas honoratum colere To worship the holy Virgin and honourable vessel If M. Abbot then had not beene starke blinde with malice and madly bent to delude and beguile his vnwary reader he vvould neuer haue presumed to alleage Epiphanius vvordes against his owne declaration and meaning But what then meant he when he said that the blessed Virgin was not to be adored vvhich M. Abbot Englisheth alwaies vvas not to be worshipped marry you shal heare out of his owne discourse Euen as some Heretikes saith he declining on the left hand blasphemed the Sonne of God saying that he was not equal to his Father in nature Other walking too much on the right hand
the place doe conuince And then yet more sottishly doth he ground al his objections vpon his owne corrupt translation of the same word for if he had englished the word adoratio sincerely for diuine honour as in that place it signifieth he had not had any colour of this slander for then he must haue said thus The Collyridians were adjudged Heretikes for adoring or worshipping with diuine honour the Virgin MARY and so of the rest But we Catholikes doe not giue to her any diuine honour neither doe we offer sacrifice vnto her or vnto any Saint as M. Abbot fableth but to God alone see more of this in the Question of the Sacrifice True it is that we cal that blessed Virgin Queene of heauen treading therein in the steps of the most ancient learned and Godly Fathers S. Athanasius S. Gregory Nazianzene S. Bazil S. Chrysostome and others vvhose wordes I haue cited in the Question of worshipping of Saints And the reasons why shee may be called Queene of heauen be diuers first shee is Mother to the King of heauen IESVS Christ and the Kinges Mother is ordinarily saluted Queene Secondly euery true Christian indued with the spirit of God Rom. 8. Is Sonne and heire to God and coheire of Christ dying then in that happy estate no doubt but they shal enter into possession of the Kingdome of heauen and consequently be Kinges or Queenes thereof Thirdly the Spouse of the King of heauen may in good sence be called Queene of heauen but euery good soule much more the most sacred Virgin of Virgins is the Spouse of Christ vvhich is confirmed by the Royal Prophet where he describeth as it were the blessed Virgin MARY standing at the right hand of her Sonne in his Kingdome and intituleth her Queene Psalm 44. Astitu Regina à dextris tuis The Queene did stand at thy right hand Lastly the principal and chiefest person of any honourable society may according to the vsual phrase of al men be stiled Prince or if it be a vvoman Princesse or Queene vvherefore the most holy and glorious Mother of God holding the highest place in heauen of any pure creature both according vnto the auncient Fathers judgement and in very reason the dignity of a mother being to be preferred before any subject or seruant may very rightly obtaine the name of the Queene of heauen And thereupon also doe vve more specially reuerence and respect her and repose greater confidence in her burning charity and in the help of her most gratious praiers knowing also right wel and most willingly confessing that as the Queene of any country receiueth al her grace riches and preferment from the King so the blessed Mother of God Queene of heauen hath receiued through the merits of her best beloued Sonne from the bounty of his heauenly Father al her most singular priuiledges and is therefore of al other pure creatures most bound and beholding vnto both Father and Sonne With that Queene of heauen Hierem. 44. of which the Prophet Hieremy cited by Epiphanius doth make mention the blessed Virgin hath no affinity or resemblance besides the name for with the Prophet it signifieth no liuing creature but either the Moone or some eminent Starre in the firmament vnto vvhich certaine doating Idolatrous vvomen did offer sacrifice in the Prophet Hieremies daies See how faringly M. Abbots peeces of comparisons match the one vvith the other ROBERT ABBOT CARPOCRATES and his minion Marcellina Irenae lib. 1. cap. 24. Aug. ad Quod vult 39. Theodâ—r in 2. ad Collossen were condemned for Heretikes for worshipping as other Images so namely the Image of Iesus Christ yet now the Papists doe the same and notwithstanding vvil be accounted Catholikes The Councel of Laodicea approued by the old Church of Rome did forbidde to pray to Angels or to vvorship them and they that did so were accounted Heretikes But worship and praier to Angels is a part of the Catholike doctrine with the Church of Rome that now is WILLIAM BISHOP M. ABBOT is such a trusty marchant that nothing can be taken vp vpon his credit therefore euery wiseman had need to looke to his fingers Nay he seldome dares put downe the Fathers sentences as they lie in their owne workes but culs certaine vvordes out of them and patcheth them together after his owne fancy to collogue and deceiue his trusty reader These be S. Augustines owne wordes in the place cited by him Marcellina not Carpocrates did worship the Images of Iesus of Paul of Homer and of Pythagoras And that you may certainly know of what kinde of worship he meant he addeth Adorando incensum ponendo by adoring and offering incense to them that is by giuing them diuine honour so that double vvas her foule fault and folly For shee both adored together the holy Images of IESVS and S. Paul vvith the prophane statues of heathen Poëts and againe gaue to them godly honour both vvhich points vve Roman Catholikes doe condemne As also that third coÌ„demned in the Councel of Laodicea concerning Angels which was of leauing our Sauiour Christ Iesus to commit Idolatry to the Angels preferring the Angels before him Canon 35. See the Canon and you shal finde M. Abbots legerdemaine ROBERT ABBOT Concil Gang. cap. 4. THE Councel of Gangra approued likewise condemned the Eustachians for Heretikes for taking exceptions against maried Priests and to that purpose set downe this Canon If any man except against a Priest that is maried as by reason of his mariage that he ought not to minister and doe therefore forbeare from his oblation or celebration accursed be he But the later Church of Rome excepteth vvholy against married Priests and namely Gregory the seauenth forbadde al lay men to be present at the celebration of any such Priest as were married Math. Paris in Willelm 1. An example very strange saith Mathew of Paris and very vnaduised as many thought WILLIAM BISHOP HATH not M. Abbot a prodigious strange eie-soare that can neuer see the principal point of the matter vvhich he alleageth Concil Gang. cap. 4. these be the vvordes of the Canon by him cited Quicunque discernita Presbitero qui vxorem habuit quod non oporteat eo ministrante de oblatione percipere Anathema sit Whosoeuer shal except against a Priest who hath had a wife holding that one ought not to receiue of the oblation or sacrifice when such a one celebrateth accursed be he First note how he mangleth the vvordes thrusting in by reason of his marriage and darkning the matter of the sacrifice by adding to it celebration which is signified in the other wordes eo ministrante but the principal verbe vpon vvhich al dependeth is egregiously peruerted by his translation For the state of the controuersie betwixt vs is vvhether a Priest maried and keeping company vvith his wife is to be admitted to celebrate minister the Sacraments We say no they say yea and for confirmation of
their saying doe alleage this Canon which maketh nothing at al for them because it speaketh only of a Priest that had a wife in times past Qui vxorem habuit that had a wife not that hath a wife Such men that vvere once married after their vviues death we doe admit to be Priests and to offer sacrifice condemning the Eustachians or vvhosoeuer else vnder pretence of their former mariages doth seeke to debarre them from that sacred function Marry such sensual or weake men that cannot or wil not refraine from marriage or company of their wiues vve doe wholy exclude from the celebration of the holy misteries And verily ignorantly and sawcily doth Mathew of Paris or any other late writer reprehend Gregory the seauenth for forbidding al men to be present at their Masses For it argueth great and grosse ignorance in al learned antiquity to account it a strange thing that Priests keeping company with their wiues should be repelled from the Altar vvhen not only Gregory the great Leo the great and Epiphanius vvhose sentences I haue before recited but also euen by M. Abbots owne confession Pope Stritius with the Clergy of Rome and S. Hierome did teach the very same little lesse then a thousand yeares before Mathew of Paris daies to omit sundry other ancient Fathers and decrees of approued Councels so that it was no strange example or vnaduised act to forbidde such fleshly fellowes to celebrate Masse neither could any but loose libertines be offended at it ROBERT ABBOT THE Valentinian Heretikes and Heracleonites Irenae lib. 2. cap. 18. Epiph. Haeres 36. August de Haeres 16. were condemned by the old Church of Rome for vsing expiations and redemptions by anointing men vvhen they were about to die yet thereof hath the Church of Rome now framed to themselues their Sacrament of Extreme vnction WILLIAM BISHOP HERE are but a few lines and yet not free from some lies The Church of Rome hath her Sacrament of Extreme vnction registred in the holy Scriptures as M. Abbot knoweth wel enough in these wordes Iacob 5. vers 14. Is any man sicke among you let him bring in the Priests of the Church and let them pray ouer them anoiling them with oile in the name of our Lord and the praier of faith shal saue the sicke and our Lord lift him vp and if he be in sinnes they shal be remitted him Where we see a set holy ceremony which was instituted by Christ and published by his Apostle S. Iames to be vsed ordinarily by the Priests for remission of sinnes which doth conuince it to be a true and proper Sacrament A fond fiction then was it to say that it was after the Apostles time inuented by Heretikes and that the Church of Rome hath borrowed it of them vvith which foolish deuise of theirs it hath also very smal affinity for their dreame was that by the pronouncing of certaine vnknowne Hebrew vvordes ouer the head of the sicke their soule was made inuisible and incomprehensible Epiph. Haeres 36. euen vnto the infernal spirits as M. Abbots owne authour witnesseth Briefly they differed in forme of wordes in substance of matter and in the state and intention of the Minister They vsed certaine Hebrew vvordes Messia Vphared and such like vvhich are set downe by Epiphanius We these God of his most pittiful mercy and by this holy anointing forgiue thee thy sinnes They vsed oile or some other ointment mixed with vvater We oile alone blessed by a Bishop Any lay person of their brother-hood might minister their drugs Our Sacrament is to be administred by a Priest only Their intention was to make the soule inuisible to the infernal spirits But ours is according to the doctrine of the Apostle to purge the sicke from the relikes of sinne and to giue him comfort and strength to resist the assaults of the ghostly enemy There being so great difference in al the essential points of these two anoilinges judge what a wonderful inginer M. Abbot did take himselfe to be when he conceited that he could by his fine pen shal I say or brazen fore-head make them seeme al one to the simple ROBERT ABBOT IT vvas heresie in the Pelagians with the old Church of Rome to affirme in this life a possibility perfectly to fulfil the law of God and S. Hierome as touching this point L. 1 2. 3. aduers Pelag. expresly disputeth against them but now it is heresie with the Church of Rome to affirme and teach the same that Hierome did as M. Bishop afterwardes giueth vs to vnderstand The same Pelagians were accounted Heretikes for saying that a man in this life might be anamarticos without sinne and that by baptisme he becommeth so but now the Church of Rome teacheth the same And M. Bishop in plaine tearmes telleth vs Page 32. That there is no more sinne left in the new baptized man then was in Adam in the state of innocency to vvhich state of baptisme they also equal a man vvhen he is shriuen to the Priest and of him hath receiued absolution from his sinnes I reserue the Pelagian doctrine of Free-wil and Satisfaction to their due place vvhere God-vvilling it shal appeare that therein also the now Church of Rome approueth those points as Catholike and true for which the ancient Church of Rome condemned them Yea so farre is the Pelagian heresie in request vvith the Papists as that Faustus a Bishop of France at that time a maintainer thereof Bignae Bibliot sacrae Tom. 2. Osor de Inst lib. 9. is by some of them recorded for a Saint and his booke vvhich he hath vvritten in behalfe thereof is called Opus insigne A notable worke And by some other the doctrine of S. Augustine against the Pelagians concerning Predestination is repugned which of old vvas acknowledged by the Church of Rome to be the Catholike doctrine of the Church WILLIAM BISHOP M. ABBOT comes now to make an end of his slanders and false imputations against the present Catholike Roman Church after the same sort as he hath heretofore vsed to wit with wrested and vntrue reportes of the old Heretikes opinions and the ancient Fathers refutations of them The Pelagians did teach indeed that it was possible to keepe Gods Cōmandements but therefore they were not accounted Heretikes for the same doth both S. Augustine and S. Hierome that writ against them approue and confirme in many places I wil touch some of each of them S. Augustine hauing alleaged certaine texts of holy Scripture to proue the same doth conclude thus By these and innumerable other testimonies De Peccatis Meritis Remissione lib. 2. cap. 6. I cannot doubt either that God hath commanded man any thing that is impossible for him to doe or that it is impossible for God to helpe man to fulfil whatsoeuer he hath commanded him and therefore a man holpen by God may if he wil be without sinne De Grat. l. Arbit ca. 16. And
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
no man of any other country might afterwards doubt of their so approued sanctity To M. Abbots question I then answere that euen by the order of S. Peter and S. Paul Clemens l. 8. Constit c. 39. S. Stephen was Canonized for a Martir and a festiual day kept in remembrance of his glorious death The like order was obserued for the Apostles and other Martirs And from that time downe to this time I could proue if neede were Canonization of Saints not only by the Bishops of Rome but by the testimony and practise of the best Bishops and Doctors of the Christian religion vvhat ignorance then in al antiquity doth this man bewray by this impertinent demand More impudent yet is this his next Who euer beleeued or taught as it is now in the Roman Church that the Bishops blessing is the forgiuenesse of venial sinnes He citeth in the Margent the Annotations in the Rhemes Testament vpon the 10. of S. Mathew and 12. verse vvhich being looked into doth conuince M. Abbot of vnspeakable impudency Lib. 9. in Lucam L. 22. de Ciuit Dei c. 8. He saw there S. Ambrose alleaged formally to confirme that the Bishops blessing doth remit venial sinnes He could not choose also but see S. Augustine and others quoted in the Margent in commendation of the Bishops blessing vvho else where vvith the Councel of Carthage reproueth the Pelagian Heretikes Epistola 90. for holding that the Bishops blessing was giuen to the people in vaine Seing then that both S. Ambrose and S. Augustine with other more auncient Fathers and Doctors of the Church did grounding themselues vpon Christes owne word and promise teach that the Bishops blessing vvas of great vertue and that it doth namely forgiue venial sinnes by the verdict at least of S. Ambrose that most holy and learned Bishop whose antiquity grauity and sanctity is more to be respected then a thousand of such light prophane Abbots was it not I say incredible and most shameful audacity to demand who euer beleeued or taught that when he saw before his eies such worthy Authours alleaged for it this passeth so farre al ordinary audatious impudency that I know not how to stile it Other innouations he wil of courtesie passe ouer to further occasion but for these jolly points whereof the greatest is scarce worth a pinne he requireth satisfaction vvhich being so readily and easily giuen him he wil belike become a new man if he could once be perswaded to giue ouer lying and trusting to his artificial colouring of lies In the meane season this which I haue said wil I hope serue to satisfie the indifferent reader that the principal pillars of the Church of Rome in her most flourishing estate haue in al points taught the same doctrine that the present Church of Rome doth now teach And it is one of M. Abbots truthes that is to say a most bright glistering vntruth that as Theseus shippe was in continuance of time by putting in of new plankes wholy altered so is now the doctrine of the Church of Rome For I haue before most euidently proued out of authentike recordes of the ancient Bishops of Rome that they beleeued and taught the Real presence and sacrifice of the Masse Praying to Saints Worshipping of their Relikes and Images Purgatory and praier for the dead Auricular confession Workes of satisfaction and supererogation Merit of good workes the Vowes of religious persons the Popes supremacy Briefly al the points in controuersie betweene the Protestants and vs as may more at large be seene in the reformation of M. Perkins Deformed Catholike vvherefore the similitude of Theseus shippe which M. Abbot borrowed of a Catholike treating of another subject vvil not serue his turne but may be more aptly returned vpon themselues vvho bragge and beare the world in hand that they haue reformed al the errours of the Church and brought it vnto the purity of the Apostles times vvhereas in truth they haue plucked vp most of the plankes and boordes of Christes shippe by oppugning most of the articles of the Christian faith and doe what in them lieth to build vp a rotten Thesean shippe of old condemned errours to steale away the golden fleece of Christes true shippe that is to pil and poul the true Catholike Christian of that white fleece of innocency which he receiued in baptisme or recouered by reconciliation to saile after Theseus towardes Paganisme and the infernal gulfe of hel Now because M. Abbot hath here indeauoured to staine the pure and cleane sanctity of our religion with the spots and yron-mooles of errors and heresie I wil to requite his paines giue a touch vnto some special points of erronious doctrine noted by the best Authours for such in expresse tearmes vvhich the Protestants haue as it were raked out of the dunghil of rascal and reprobate miscreants and doe now a-fresh deliuer the same nothing in manner disguised vnto their miserable followers for the purity of the Gospel Yea some of the same are so euident and cleare that they are constrained to defend the authours of them for learned and godly men though by al antiquity they vvere condemned for ignorant and infamous Heretikes and to note the most holy and best vnderstanding and juditious Fathers as lesse skilful then these other erring companions For example Aërius both a knowne and professed Arrian Heretike and also vnknowne to the world for any monument of learning or vertue and therefore likened by Epiphanius to a Beetle and Horse-flie only notorious for these his errours taught first That we ought not to offer sacrifice or to pray for the soules departed Secondly That we ought not to keepe any set times or appointed daies of fasting but when any man wil then let him fast that we may not seeme to be vnder the law For these two points specially that Arrian Aërius vvas Cronicled for a notorious Heretike both by Epiphanius a most holy learned and auncient Grecian Bishop and by S. Augustine one of the most famous lights of the Latin Church the later of whom liued 1200. yeares past Neuerthelesse the Protestants preferre the odde inuentions of that contemptible obscure and blinde Arrian before the judgement of these most renowmed Doctors of Christs Church Must he not then be a very simple or rather sencelesse creature that vnderstanding so much vvil notwithstanding follow them Againe Iouinian was so meane a scholler that he was not able to write his owne minde in good and congruous latin wherefore S. Hierome vvas faine to helpe him out with it and doth as he tearmeth it out of his darke vvorkes cast serpents as it vvere out of their holes into the light Lib. 1. cont Iouin cap. 1. that they may be seene and slaine What vvere these venimous blinde-wormes trow you you shal heare in that most zealous and learned Doctors owne words Iouinian saith first Lib. 1. cont Iouin cap. 2. That Virgins Widowes and married Women baptized if they differ not
in other workes be of the same merit and therefore Priests and religious persons might aswel marry as liue continently Secondly He laboureth to proue that the Deuil cannot ouer-come them that be regenerated in ful faith Thirdly He putteth no difference betweene abstinence from meate and eating of the same with thanks-giuing Fourthly That al who haue kept their baptisme shal haue the same reward in heauen and not any one a greater then another These saith S. Hierome be the hissings of the old serpent by these sleights the Dragon cast man out of Paradise And doe our Protestants by hearkning vnto these serpentine voices thinke to recouer Paradise againe doe they not beleeue just with Iouinian that it is of no greater merit to liue a professed Virgin then to liue maried sauing that they are so much worse then Iouinian vvas as to deny the best Christian to haue any merit at al by any state or vvorke soeuer Be they not secondly wel assured in their owne opinion that the Deuil cannot subuert them and put them by their places in heauen doe they not thirdly in proper tearmes teach with Iouinian that fasting is no more acceptable to God then eating And they that hold one simple justification common to al without any kinde of merit must needes consequently hold that al in heauen haue the same reward vvhich was the fourth point of Iouinians heresie They then be so formal Iouinians that they cannot deny it but are driuen to maintaine M. Abbots Page 56. that Iouinian vvas a right honest man and vnderstood Paul better then any of them al Hierome with al his Hebrew Greeke and Latin was no body in comparison of him But what say they then to Augustine Lib. 2. Retract cap. 22. another professed aduersary of that Iouinian who stileth him for his ignorance joined with impudency and for the lewdnesse of his doctrine a very monster And further telleth vs that the old holy Church of Rome did most faithfully and most valiantly resist him and his errours So did also that most graue and holy Bishop S. Ambrose Ambros lib. 3. Epist 81. vvith many other worthy Prelates his neighbours condemning Iouinian and his complices for false teachers Besides he is yet further ranked in the rew of damnable Heretikes by the ancient learned and Godly Authour Vicentius Lyrinensis In Cōmonit cap. 15. neither can the Protestants name any one approued authour for a thousand yeares after his daies that held him for any better And yet such goslinges doe they make of their followers that they must rather follow Iouinian then Hierome Augustine Ambrose and the old Church of Rome and vvhatsoeuer else He that wil take no warning but longeth to be gulled let him hardly hearken vnto them In like manner doe they vphold the Heretike Vigilantius Hieron cont Vigilant Who denied the Relikes of Martirs to be worshipped and waxe candels to be lighted before them at noone day and said That whiles we liued we might one pray for another but no mans praier after his death wil helpe any other Out of vvhich it followeth euidently that it is in vaine to pray to Saints that can doe vs no good Thirdly he taught That they did better who vse their owne goodes and doe of their reuennues giue peece-meale some-thing to the poore then they that sel al away and giue it al at once to them and become Monkes and Religious Fourthly That Clergie men should marry For these points expresly Vigilantius was reproued by S. Hierome as an vnpure and an vngodly Heretike and in one nights worke vvas so taken downe and as it were crushed in the head that he neuer after durst once quack or reply one word S. Hierome is therein also seconded by Gennadius a famous Authour of a thousand yeares standing and by S. Thomas of Aquine with others without any contradiction at al vntil Luthers vnhappy daies And yet the Protestants his disciples hauing put on their brazen faces M. Abbots Page 68. doe not only paraleel and equal him but also preferre him before S. Hierome one of the best learned among the Christians that liued since the Apostles daies M. Abbot very shamefully saith Page 67. that Hierome himselfe commended this Vigilantius for a holy Priest And to make his lie the more luculent he puts it in the superlatiue degree sanctissimum S. Hierome doth indeede commend one Vigilantius for a holy Priest but were there no more of that name besides that wicked Heretike whom he calleth rather Dormitantius then Vigilantius Are there no more Abbots but one any man that hath but halfe an eie may see if he wil view that Epistle that S. Hierome spake there off a farre honester man then the other was whom he calleth neither sanctissimum nor sanctum but a man replenished with an vncleane spirit Hieron cont Vigilant very vnlearned and more fit to keepe an Ale-house then to serue in the Church To returne then to my purpose vvhereas he can be no true Catholike according to S. Augustines rule and the common opinion that beleeueth any one point of heresie Ad Quodvult In fine The Protestants doe hold nine points of heresie condemned in three notable Heretikes Aërius Iouinian and Vigilantius And that so openly without any kinde of cloaking or colouring that they are compelled to defend the authors themselues for honest men who notwithstanding by the verdict of al approued Antiquity lay condemned as vvicked Heretikes for more then a thousand yeares togither Now I wil proceede to some of the rest of their erronious opinions which though they imbrace yet they dare not defend the authours of them for godly men but with vs doe condemne their authours though they vphold some of their errours It is noted by the blessed Martir Ireneus that one of Simon Magus errours was That men were saued by grace Lib. 1. cont Haeres c. 20. and not for good and just workes the Protestants agree with him in this that saluation and heauen are not giuen for good workes For though they teach that good vvorkes be necessary as signes and fruites of our faith yet they wil not in any case admit them to be any cause of saluation but make their justifying faith the only and whole cause thereof by which they fal also into the heresie of Eunomius related by S. Augustine in these vvordes Eunomius is reported to haue beene an enemy to good workes August ad Quodvult Haeres 54. so farre forth that he auouched the committing of what sinne soeuer and the continuance in the same to hinder no man so that he were a partaker of that faith which he taught Doth not the new deuised faith of Protestants giue them the like assurance of saluation though they be no lesse sure to commit and to continue in mortal sinne euen vntil their dying day The Nouatians were branded for Heretikes Euseb 6. Histor cap. 35. Socrat. 1. Histor cap. 7. Zozom 1. Histor
vpon just and vnjust that is bestoweth out of his owne bounty many temporal commodities vpon them that doe ful litle deserue them at his handes Wherefore M. Abbot was ouer-seene to bring in the Princes prosperity for proofe of the goodnesse of their religion Let vs proceede WILLIAM BISHOP BVT sithence there be in this our miserable age great diuersities of religions and yet but one only wherewith God is wel pleased and truly serued as saith the Apostle Ephes 4. One body one spirit as you are called into one hope of your vocation one Lord one faith one baptisme my most humble sute and supplication to your high Majesty is that to your eternal good you wil embrace maintaine and set forth that only true Catholike and Apostolike faith wherein your most roial Progenitours liued and died or if you cannot be wonne so soone to alter that religion in which it hath beene your Highnesse misfortune to haue beene bredde and brought vp that then in the meane season of your tender goodnesse you would not suffer the sincere Professours of the other to be so heauily persecuted R. ABBOT SECT 3. Page 14. HERE M. Bishop propoundeth briefly to his Majesty the summe of his petition the foundation whereof he laieth in a principle which we acknowledge to be a truth that whereas there be diuersities of religions in the world there is but one only where vvith God is truly serued Hereupon he frameth his humble sute that his Majesty wil embrace and maintaine that only true Catholike and Apostolike faith but that needeth no sute of his for his Majesty already doth that For what is the Catholike faith but the faith of the Catholike Church and which then shal we take to be the Catholike Church surely the Catholike Church by the very signification of the word is the vniuersal Church so called Quia per totum est August de vnit Eccles Athanas Q 81. Because it is ouer al or through al the world and is not tied to any country place person or condition of men not this Church or that Church as S. Augustine speaketh * August in psal 56. But the Church dispersed throughout the world and not that which consisteth iâ— men now presently liuing but so as there belong to it both those that haue beene before vs and that shal be after vs to the worldes end whereby we see how absurdly the Church of Rome taketh vnto it the name of the Catholike Church and how absurdly the Papists take vnto them the name of Catholikes The Catholike Church is the vniuersal Church the Church of Rome a particular Church there fore to say the Catholike Roman Church is al one as to say the vniuersal particular Church To speake by their rule the Roman Church is the head and al other Churches are members to it but the Catholike Church comprehendeth al therefore to say the Roman Church is the Catholike Church is as much to say the head is the vvhole body Neither doth it helpe them that of old particular Churches vvere called by the name of Catholike Church it being no otherwise done but as in toto similari in a body vvhere al the parts are of the same nature vvhere euery part hath the name of the vvhole and no one part can challenge the same more then another as in the elements euery part of the fire is fire euery part of the vvater vvater and so of the like for so euery Church where true faith was taught August coÌ„t Epist Fund cap. 4. was called to distinguish it from heretical assemblies the Catholike Church and euery Bishop of such a Church vvas called a Bishop of the Catholike Church and no one Church more then another assumed vnto it any prerogatiue of that title Therefore they called the Catholike faith the faith that vvas receiued by the Church throughout the vvorld and the true Christians vvere called Catholikes August Epist 48. Ex communicatione totius orbis by hauing communion and fellowship of faith vvith the Church of the whole world it is therefore a meere vsurpation whereby the Papists cal the Roman Church the Catholike Church WILLIAM BISHOP M. ABBOT is now at length come from his extrauagant roâ—ing narrations vnto some kinde of argumentation Here he wil giue a proofe of his valour here we shal soone try whether he come so wel furnished into the field that he neede not to doubt of the victory as in the beginning he vaunted of himselfe or vvhether his special skil and force doe not rather lie in railing at vs and in cosening of his reader then in any sound kinde of reasoning That doctrine vvhich he learned out of S. Augustine concerning the signification of the vvord Catholike vve vvillingly admit off to wit That religion is Catholike that faith is Catholike which is spread ouer al the world and hath beene alwaies imbraced and practised euen from the Apostles time to our daies and such is the religion vvhich I vvould haue perswaded his Majesty to receiue in to his Princely protection To this vvhat saith M. Abbot marry that his Majesty hath already receiued it How doth he proue that not by any one plaine and round argument directly to the purpose but from the Catholike religion falleth to the Catholike Church and so spendeth the time in most friuolous arguing against the Roman Church of vvhich I made no mention at al. Doth he not deserue a lawrel garland for the vvorshipful ranging of his battle and is he not like to fight it out valiantly that thus in the beginning flieth from the point of the question Proue good Sir that his Majesty embraceth and maintaineth that religion vvhich is spread ouer al the vvorld and that hath continued euer since the Apostles time and then you may justly say that he vpholdeth the Catholike religion according to your owne explication out of the ancient Fathers But because M. Abbot saw this to be impossible he gaue it the slippe and turneth himselfe to proue the Roman religion not to be the Catholike and perceiuing that also as hard to performe as the other he shuffles from the religion and faith of vvhich the question vvas vnto the Roman Church that is from the faith professed at Rome to the persons inhabiting the citty of Rome whom he wil proue not to be Catholikes and the Roman Church not to be the Catholike Church Doe you marke vvhat winding and turning and what doubling this simple Minister is driuen vnto ere he can come to make any shew of a silly argument But let vs giue him leaue to vvander vvhither his fancy leadeth him that vve may at length heare vvhat he would say It is forsooth That the Church of Rome doth absurdly cal her selfe the Catholike Church and that Papists doe absurdly take to themselues the name of Catholikes because the Catholike Church is the vniuersal Church but the Church of Rome is a particular Church therefore to say the Roman Catholike Church is
the Church who then but miscreants and Heretikes can take it for a name of curse reproch and shame Is it not vntil this day set downe in the Apostles creed as the honourable title and epithite of the true Church I beleeue the holy Catholike Church Must he then not be rather an Apostata then a scholler of the Apostles â—hat blusheth not to auouch the very name Catholike to be the proper badge of Apostataes and Heretikes which the Apostles asscribe and appropriate vnto true Christianity If any proude and false fellowes doe vsurpe that name and challenge it to themselues wrongfully as many did euen in S. Augustines time when M. Abbot confesseth it to haue beene in greatest estimation let such vsurping companions be rebuked sharply and conuicted of their insolent and audatious folly but the name Catholike which the Apostles thought vvorthy and fit to be placed in the articles of our creede and principles of our religion must alwaies remaine and be among true Christians a name very glorious and desireable We therefore say with S. Augustine We receiue the holy Ghost if we loue the Church Tract 32. in Iohannem Lib. 1. cont GaudeÌ„t c. 33. if we be joined together by charity if we rejoice in the Catholike name and faith And they that doe not joy in that name but mocke at it doe blaspheme as the same most holy Authour intimateth The name Iewe being taken in the Apostles sence for one of what nation soeuer that fulfilleth the justice of the law neuer was nor neuer shal be a name of reproch so that M. Abbot is driuen to hoppe from one sence of that name to another to make it appliable to his purpose But and it please you the Protestants haue the kernel of the name Catholike and we but the shel Why doe they then so bitterly inueigh against it vvhy are they not more willing to extol and magnifie that renowmed title being of such ancient Nobility twenty pound to a peny that vvhat face soeuer he set on it yet in his hart he maruailously feareth the contrary himselfe If that faith and religion only be Catholike vniuersal as he acknowledgeth that hath euer beene and is also spread ouer al the world and shal continue to the worldes end then surely their religion cannot be Catholike euen by the vniforme confession of themselues vvho generally acknowledge that for nine hundred yeares together the Papacy did so domineer al the world ouer that not a man of their religion vvas to be found in any corner of the vvorld that durst peepe out his head to contradict it Could there be any Church of theirs then when there was not one Pastour and flocke of their religion though neuer so smal in any one country and euen now vvhen their Gospel is at the hottest hath it spread it selfe al the world ouer is it receiued in Italy Spaine Greece Afrike or Asia or carried into the Indians nothing lesse They cannot then cal themselues Catholikes after the sincere and ancient acceptation of that name which is as himselfe hath often repeted out of S. Augustine Quia communicant Ecclesiae toto orbe diffusae Because they communicate in fellowship of faith with the Church spread ouer al the world They must therefore notwithstanding M. Abbots vaine bragges be content with the shel and leaue the kernel to vs who doe embrace the same faith that is dilated al countries ouer yea they must be contented to walke in the foote-steps of their fore-fathers the Donatists euen according to M. Abbots explication and flie from the vniuersality of faith and communion of the Church spread al the world ouer vnto the perfection of their doctrine which is neuerthelesse more absurd and further from the true signification of the word Catholike then the Donatists shift was of fulnesse of sacraments and obseruation of al Gods commandements as hath beene already declared But let vs heare how clearely and substantially he wil at length proue their Church to be Catholike ROBERT ABBOT NOw as of this Catholike Church from the beginning to the end there is as appeareth in the vvordes cited by M. Bishop but Ephes 4. vers 4. One body euen as one Lord one God and Father of al so is there also but one spirit one hope one faith one baptisme one spiritual meate and drinke one religion Let vs then looke out those that haue beene before vs and consider Abel Noë Abraham Isaac Iacob and the rest of the Patriarkes and Fathers Let vs looke to Moises and the Prophets and the whole generation of the righteous and faithful of the old Testament and see what their faith was what was their religion and seruice of God vndoubtedly we find not a Papist among them we finde no shadow of that which they now obtrude and thrust vpon vs vnder the name of Catholike religion They did not worship Idols and Images they did not coÌ„ming after pray to Saints that were dead before them they vsed no inuocation of Angels they knew no Merits nor vvorkes of supererogation They vowed no vowes of Monkery they made no pilgrimage to Reliques and dead mens bones they knew no shrift nor absolution or any of that riffe-raffe-stuffe vvherein the substance of Catholike religion is now imagined to consist But what they did the same doe we as they worshipped God so sauing ceremonial obseruances vve also worship him as they beleeued so by the same spirit of faith vve also beleeue as they praied so vvith the same vvordes we also pray according to the approued example of their life we also teach men to liue therefore no Popery but our religion is the Catholike religion because it is that vvhich the Catholike Church hath practised from the beginning of the world and Popish religion not so The same faith and religion which they followed and no other our Sauiour Christ at his coÌ„ming further confirmed and only stripping it of those tipes and shadowes vvherewith it pleased God for the time to cloth it commending the same to his Apostles simply and nakedly to be preached to the nations They did so They added nothing of their owne they preached only the Gospel promised before by the Tertul. de Praescript Rom. 1. Prophets in the holy Scriptures saying no other thinges Act. 26. v. 12. Lib. 3. cap. 1. then those which the Prophets and Moises did say should come The Gospel which they first preached afterwardes by the wil God as Ireneus saith they deliuered to vs in writing to be the pillar and foundation of our faith Thus then vvhat Christ deliuered the Apostles preached vvhat the Apostles preached they wrote vvhat they vvrote we receiue and beleeue De praescript and beleeuing this as Tertullian saith we desire to beleeue no more because we first beleeue that there is nothing else for vs to beleeue And therefore as S. Augustine saith if any man August cont literas Petili lib. 3. cap. 6. nay if an Angel from
or Predecessours erred he leaueth them to the counsaile of God but by the vvord of God learneth himselfe to be one of them Vers 16. that shal hate the whoore and make her desolate and shal eate her flesh and burne her with fire Albeit it is vtterly false vvhich he affirmeth that al his Majesties Progenitours Kinges of these Realmes of England and Scotland liued and died in the Romish faith that now our Romish factours labour so much to set vp Indeede he and his fellowes are vvont to be very lauish in their speeches of this matter as if from King Lucius of Britanny and Donaldus of Scotland the only religion that had beene professed had beene that vvhich now is practised by them vvhere as it shal afterwardes plainly appeare that at the comming in of Augustine the Italian Monke 400. yeares after the receiuing of the faith in this Iland the Bishops and Churches of Scotland joined with the Britanes against those new obseruations which the same Augustine brought from Rome and vvould by no meanes admit thereof for the space of an hundred yeares at least refused to communicate with the English that had receiued the same Yea in the time of King Henry the third 1200. Math. Paris in Hērico 111. Anno 1238. 1239. yeares after the incarnation of Christ when the Popes Legate vvould haue entred into Scotland to visit the Churches there the King of Scots Alexander the second forbadde him so to doe alleaging that none of his Predecessours had admitted any such neither would he suffer it and therefore willed him at his owne peril to forbeare so long vvas it before the Popes authority could gaine acknowledgment in that Kingdome which his agents would make vs beleeue hath beene in al ages vniuersally and vnquestionably receiued But they care not indeede vvhat they say or write so that it may carry a magnifical and braue shew to dazel the eies of them that are not wel acquainted with their leude and naughty dealing WILLIAM BISHOP PAGANS and Heretikes doe now and then like Apes counterfait true Christians And no maruaile for their great master Sathan 2. Cor. 11. vers 14. doth transfigure himselfe sometimes into an Angel of light and did alwaies and yet doth labour ¶ * Esai 14. vers 14. to be like vnto the Highest but it is easie to espy their apish trickes and to returne their fond subtleties vpon their owne heades Simmachus plaied but the part of a foolish sophister when he pleaded so with the Emperour Valentinian we are to follow our Fathers for the Emperours Father and neerest Predecessors were no Pagan Idolaters but professed Christians as al men know vvho are conuersant in those ancient histories To the point of the proofe I answere in briefe that it is a most sound inducement among vs Christians and to be dearely regarded of al To follow the foot-steppes of our fore-fathers in beleeuing if they before haue not degenerated from their Ancestors The base and ground of it is this As God is more ancient then the Deuil and Christ IESVS then al Heretikes so vvas the true seruice of God and the right faith of Christ planted sowne and tooke fast roote before Heresie and Idolatry sprong vp vvhich hath firme testimony from our Sauiour who teacheth Math. c. 13. vers 24. That the good seede was first sowne by the Father of the houshold and the cockle after and ouersowne by the enemy VVhence it followeth perspiculously that they who doe hold the same doctrine inuiolably vvhich was embraced by them of that stock who were first cōuerted to the Christian faith are true and sincere Christians Those children then vvho follow the holy steps of their Catholike Progenitors ascending from Sonne to Father successiuely til they ariue at the first Christians in that country are true Christians and they that doe not succeede their Predecessors in their faith and religion but either are fallen themselues or doe follow others vvho before fel from the faith of their fore-fathers are vndoubtedly slipt into errour and infidelity By vvhich discourse it is euident that I tendered a most reasonable request vnto his Majesty that he would imbrace and countenance that religion which al his Progenitors euen to the first Christian among them had liued and died in because they vvere al Catholike and not one of them can be named vvho changed the religion of his fore-fathers yet this notwithstanding Simmachus the Pagan vsing the like argument in shew vvas not to be heard the difference is because his fore-fathers for vvhose Idolatry he pleaded had before forsaken the true and sincere vvorship of the one liuing God and therefore their children vvere not to continue in their Idolatry but to returne vnto their former Ancestors true piety So vvere the Donatists children of whom S. Augustine cited by M. Abbot speaketh not to follow their Fathers in that sect and heresie but to leaue their late corrupted parents in their new doctrine and to looke back vnto their grandfathers ancient faith and religion from vvhose integrity their Fathers were degenerated Euen as now a-daies we exhort men that had or haue Parents turned Protestants not to be led away vvith their erring Parents opinions but happily to receiue their forefathers ancient faith from vvhich their Fathers reuolted vnaduisedly And so shal they returne vnto the roote and original of our Lordes tradition as S. Cyprian speaketh because they shal returne to that faith vvhich was receiued from hand to hand euen from the Apostles our Lordes most trusty and sacred messengers and cleauing fast to that shal not neede to regard what any man hath thought fit to be dine or said against it Now to that point vvhich followeth in M. Abbot Apocal. 17. There shal be a time when the Kinges of the earth shal giue their power to the beast and bend themselues to fight against the Lambe vvhich I doe willingly admit but vvhen that time shal be or vvhat Kinges it is very vncertaine for there shal be also a time Esai 60. Psalm 70. When the Kinges of the earth shal be as nurses to the true Church and shal most humbly both obey it and also enrich and defend it to the vttermost of their power Now by the very insinuation of the Text and the vniforme consent of ancient writers the good Kinges shal cherish exalt and magnifie the Church before those euil Kinges shal arise who falling away from their fathers faith and from the Catholike Church vvil lend their aide to her professed enemies to vvorke her ouerthrowe vvhich is a shrewd presumption that the Kinges of former ages stood farre better affected to the true Church of God then some of later times Wel this I leaue to vnderstanding mens judgement But I may not slippe M. Abbots exceeding grosse ouer-sight or rather hainous crime in ranking his Majesty among those Kinges mentioned in the Apocalipse for albeit Cap. 17. they shal hate the whoore and make her
desolate and naked and eate her flesh c. yet they shal be most vvicked and impious Kinges and shal adore the monstruous beast there described and fight against Christ IESVS These be the very vvordes of the Text And the tenne hornes c. be tenne Kinges c. these haue one Councel and force and their power they shal deliuer to the beast these shal fight with the Lambe and the Lambe shal ouerthrow them c. Vers 16. And the tenne bornes which thou sawest in the beast these shal hate the harlot and make her desolate and naked c. so that the very same tenne Kinges signified there by tenne hornes that did giue al their power to the beast did hate the harlot But how can it be saith one that they vvho hate the vvicked harlot should joine with the beast who was as wicked as shee Yes that may wel be for it is no newes that vvicked men fal out among themselues so that one vngodly and wicked Prince doth sometimes with al his might aide another more vvicked then himselfe and at the same instant perhaps or shortly after fight against a third the most wicked of al they doe fight against both good and euil as their owne rage passions or occasions carry them Which I say to stoppe a starting hole of the Protestants who to auoide this inconuenience say that first these ten Kings were bent to al mischief◠and then helped the beast against the Lambe but afterward repented them of their former iniquity then loe they hated the harlot and persecuted her which they would not haue done if they had beene hadde Princes this is a prety shift Wel say first that this sence could stand vvith the vvordes of the text yet they cannot be applied to his Majesty who was not in his former time any aider of our religion and now is fallen off from that to the Protestants wherefore this deuise if it could stand with the text wil not serue their turne But the spirit of God hath preuented and wholy cut off this vaine imagination for it saith in the next verse That the tenne Kinges who hated the harlot euen then and after too gaue their Kingdomes to the beast til the word of God be consummate that is til the end of al. Wherefore most manifest it is euen by the warrant of Gods sacred word that those Kinges mentioned in the Apocalipse were reprobates such did they liue and such shal they die Let then his most excellent Majesty censure what reward they are worthy off who feare not to thrust his Highnesse into that list of condemned cast-a-waies and that too after they had such faire warning as in my answere to M. Perkins I gaue them to beware how they did his Majesty that shame and despite If it please his Highnesse to take notice of it I doubt not but that he wil conne them little thanke for this their commendation of him M. Abbot hauing acquited himselfe so Clarke-like in the precedent part of his answere That we are not to imitate our fore-fathers descendeth to the subsequent to wit That his Majesties Progenitours Kinges of England and Scotland were not of our Roman faith which he wil proue hereafter at more leisure that is to say neuer For he doth not deny but that the religious and holy man Augustine sent into our country by Gregory the great Bishop of Rome to conuert our Ancestours the Saxons and English to the Christian faith did then teach the same Roman faith vvhich vve now professe so that aboue this thousand yeares by his owne confession his Majesties Progenitours haue beene of our Catholike Roman faith and religion and very few Kings now liuing I weene can deriue their pedegree much further Afterward he doth rake out of the chanels of Bale Page 198. Iewel Hollinshead and such like late partial vvriters which any man not past al care of his reputation would be ashamed to cite for sufficient witnesses in matters of controuersy where in they themselues were parties that there was great disagreemēt betweene Augustine the Italian Monke as he speaketh and the Churches of England and Scotland vvhereas venerable Bede a most approued authour and neare vnto those times vvho did as most diligently trace out those matters so record them most faithfully he I say whose authority is sufficient to put downe an hundreth late writers interessed in the cause affirmeth that there vvas no variance betwixt them in any one article of faith but only in some few points of ceremony namely in these two Beda lib. 2. histor cap. 2. Vpon what day the feast of Easter was to be kept and about the rites of Baptisme For S. Augustine offered them to beare vvith al other their different rites if they would yeeld vnto him in these two points Vt Pascha suo tempore celebretis That yee would keepe Easter-day at the due time appointed by the Councel of Nice and minister the Sacrament of Baptisme after the manner of the Roman and Apostolike Church And concerning these two points vvho can thinke but that the Sacrament of Baptisme vvas like to be administred in those daies in the most renowmed citty of Rome after a more decent and deuout manner Euseb in vita Const l. 3. 17. Epiphan l. 3. Haeres 70. then among the Britans that liued in a corner of the world now for the other of keeping the feast of Easter the 14. day of the first Moone with the Iewes It was many yeares before condemned in the first most famous general Councel of Nice and therefore it cannot be denied but that those Britans vvere either very ignorant in the Canons of the Church if they knew not so solemne a decree or else too too contentious and vvilful in refusing to yeeld vnto it A third clause was added by S. Augustine that the Britans vvould joine with him and his fellowes Beda ibidem in preaching the word of God vnto the English nation which also argueth yet more strongly that they agreed together in al articles of faith or else they vvould not haue required their helpe in instructing others in matters of faith And this is not only registred by S. Bede that holy Historiographer but also reported by their owne late vvriters Hollinshead Volum 1. page 103. and * Page 6. M. Godwine in his Catologue of the Bishops of England S. Bede also witnesseth further in the place aboue-said that the same Britan Christians euen then confessed that they did perceiue that to be the true way of justice which Augustine did preach Furthermore the principal Preachers and most Godly men that liued not long before S. Augustines arriual among the Britans as namely S. Dulcitius and S. Dauid vvere brought vp at Rome and one of them the Popes Legate too Iohn Baal in their liues as the aduersaries themselues confesse Wherevpon it followeth clearely that not only for these later thousand yeares but also in the former
in steede of God WILLIAM BISHOP WHAT a worthy graue Preface he vseth to assure men that vve wil not deny S. Paul nor his Epistle to the Romans vvhich neuer were called in doubt by any man But good S ir vvhiles you muse and busie your head so much vpon bables you forget or wilfully mistake the very point of the question Was the Church of Rome at her most flourishing estate when S. Paul wrote that Epistle to the Romans was her faith then most renowmed ouer al the world as you write nothing lesse for not the tenne thousand part of that most populous Citty was then conuerted to the faith and they that had receiued the Christian faith were very nouices in it and stoode in great neede of the Apostles diuine instructions Any reasonable man would rather judge that the Church of Rome then came first to her most flourishing estate when Idolatry and al kind of superstition was put to silence and banished out of her vvhen the Christian religion was publikly preached countenanced by the Emperours authority which was not before the raigne of Constantine the great our most glorious country-man vvherefore M. Abbots first fault is that he shooteth farre vvide from the marke vvhich he should haue aimed at principally The second is more nice yet in one that would seeme so acute not to be excused It is that he taketh an Epistle written to the Romans for their instruction and correction as if it were a declaration and profession of their faith vvhen as al men know such a letter might containe many thinges vvhich they had not heard off before Further yet that you may see how nothing can passe his fingers vvithout some legerdemaine marke how he englisheth Theodorets wordes Dogmatum pertractationem The handling of opinions is by him translated al points of doctrine vvhereas it rather signifieth some then al opinions or lessons But I wil let these ouer-sights passe as flea-bitings and follow him whither he pleaseth to wāder that euery man may see when he is permitted to say what he liketh best that in truth he can alleage out of S. Paul nothing of moment against the Catholike faith S. Paul saith he is wholy against you and for vs. Quickly said but wil not be so soone proued First he condemneth the worshipping of Saints and Saints Images in that he reproueth the Heathens for changing the glory of the incorruptible God into the similitude of the Image of a corruptible man O noble disputer and wel worthy the whippe because we may not make false Gods or giue the glory of God vnto Idols may vve not therefore yeeld vnto Saints their due vvorship might not S. Paul whiles he liued as al other most Godly men be reuerenced and vvorshipped for their most excellent spiritual and religions vertues with a kinde of holy and religious respect euen as Knights and Lordes and other worldly men are vvorshipped and honoured for their temporal callings and endowments with temporal worship vvithout robbing God of his honour Is the Lord or Master dishonoured and spoiled of his due reuerence and respect if his seruants for his sake be much made off and respected yet with such due regard only as is meete for their degree This is so childish and palpable that if the Protestants were not resolued to sticke obstinately to their errours how grosse soeuer they be they vvould for very shame not once more name it To the next ROBERT ABBOT PAVL saith and we say the same that Ibid. vers 17. the righteousnesse of God is from faith to faith you say otherwise that it is from faith to workes that faith is but the entrance to workes and that in workes the righteousnesse of God doth properly consist WILLIAM BISHOP THE sentence of S. Paul is mangled his wordes are for the justice or righteousnesse of God is reuealed therein in the Gospel by faith into faith which are obscure and subject to diuers expositions The most common is that Christ the justice of God is reuealed in the Gospel by conferring the faith of them that liued before the Gospel vvith their faith that liued vnder it the faith of them who liue in the Gospel giuing great light for the cleerer vnderstanding of such thinges as were taught of Christmore darkely in the law and Prophets This being the literal sence of this place what is here for mans justification by only faith where only mention is made of Gods justice and not one vvord of the imputation of it to man but of the reuelation of it in the Gospel What a foule mistaking is this alas his pouerty of spirit and want of good armour compelleth him to lay hand on any vveapons how simple and weake soeuer In the next verse it is plainly shewed that God did grieuously punish al them vvho liued wickedly notwithstanding they held the right faith for saith S. Paul Rom. 1. v. 18. the wrath of God from heauen is reuealed vpon al impiety and vnrighteousnesse of those men that retaine or hold the truth of God in injustice Whence it followeth first that men may haue a true faith without good workes for they held the truth of God being themselues wicked Secondly that the same faith would not auaile them aught nor saue them from the just wrath of God if it were not quickned by good workes ROBERT ABBOT THE Apostle in expresse termes affirmeth Rom. 4. v. 6. imputation of righteousnesse vvithout vvorkes We doe the same but you professedly dispute against it WILLIAM BISHOP WE hold with the Apostle that vvorkes be not the cause of the first justification whereof he there treateth nor to deserue it though inspired with Gods grace they doe prepare vs and make vs fit to receiue the gift of justification neither doe the Protestants wholy exclude workes from this justification vvhen they doe require true repentance which consisteth of many good workes as necessary thereto We hold that justice is increased by good workes which we cal the second justification against which the Apostle speaketh not a vvord but doth confirme it vvhen he saith in the same Epistle Rom. 2. v. 13. Not the hearers of the law are just with God but the doers of the law shal be justified Marke how by doing of the law which is by doing good workes men are justified with God and not only declared just before men as the Protestants glose the matter Now touching See the place Rom. 4. v. 6. imputation of righteousnesse the Apostle speaketh not like a Protestant of the outward imputation of Christs justice to vs but of inherent justice to wit of faith vvhich worketh by charity which are qualities Rom. 6. powred into our harts by the holy Ghost so that there is only a bare sound of wordes for the Protestants the true substance of the Text making wholy for the Catholikes ROBERT ABBOT PAVL teacheth that Rom. 6. v. 23. Page 98. eternal life is the gift of God through IESVS
ABBOT PAVL saith the Rom. 8 v. 18. sufferinges of this time are not worthy of the glory that shal be reuealed vnto vs but you say they are vvorthy WILLIAM BISHOP I Say that M. Abbot hath gotten such a custome of abusing Gods word that he scarce alleageth one sentence of it vvithout one paltry shift or other The wordes of S. Paul truly translated are Our sufferinges are not worthy to the glory or as our English phrase is are not to be compared to the glory of c. that is our labours or paines are not either so great and waighty or of so long endurance as be the joies of heauen yet through the dignity which we receiue by being made members of Christ and by the vertue of Gods grace wherewith those workes be wrought and by the promise of God both we are accounted vvorthy of heauen according to S. Pauls owne phrase 2. Thessal 1. vers 5. Which persecutions you sustaine that you may be counted worthy the Kingdome of God and our sufferinges meritorious of life euerlasting vvhich S. Paul doth very precisely teach vvhere he saith that 2. Cor. 4. vers 17. our tribulation which for the present is momentary and light yet worketh aboue measure exceedinglie an eternal waight of glory in vs we not considering the thinges that are seene but that are not seene and else vvhere is bold to say 2. Tim. 4. vers 8. That God had laid vp for him a crowne of justice which our Lord wil render to me in that day a just Iudge and not only to me but to them also that loue his comming If God as a just Iudge render the joies of heauen as a crowne of justice then were they before justly deserued and the sufferinges of them that deserued them vvere in just proportion worthy of them Thus briefly any indiffereÌ„t reader may perceiue how farre S. Paul being rightly taken is from affording any reliefe vnto the Protestant cause They doe now as many vnlearned and vnstable men did euen in his owne time witnesse S. Peter 2. Pet. 3. vers 16. depraue and misvse certaine sentences of his hard to be vnderstood to their owne perdition and to the deceiuing and vndoing of their followers for in al his Epistles being vnderstood as he meant them there is not one word or sillable that maketh for the Protestants or any other sectaries and plenty there are of plaine texts for the most points of the Catholike faith A tast vvhereof I wil giue you as soone as I shal haue made an end of answering vnto this his idle discourse ROBERT ABBOT PAVL saith nothing for those points for the denial vvhereof M. Bishop condemneth vs. Nothing for the justification before God by vvorkes nothing for free-wil nothing for Relikes nothing for the merit of single life nothing for praier for the dead nothing for traditions nothing for any of the rest Now in this case M. Bishop it had beene fit that you should by very good reason haue satisfied his Majesty how it should be probable or possible that the Apostle writing at large to the church of Rome should not once mention any of those maine points wherein the religion of the Church of Rome now vvholy consisteth if the Church of Rome vvere then the same that now it is That he should say nothing of the prerogatiue of that Church nothing of the Pope of his pardons of the Masse of transubstantiation of Monkish vowes of Images of pilgrimages of praier to Saints of al the rest of your baggage stuffe in a word that he should be a Papist yet should write nothing Rhem. Test. argum of the Epist in general but that in shew at least serueth the Protestants turne only we must be perswaded forsooth that where anything soundeth contrary to the Râ—mish faith we faile of the right sence But vndoubtedly M. Bishop either S. Paul vvas a Protestant or else he dealt very negligently in your behalfe S. Peter was another principal pillar of that Church the founder and head thereof as you perswade vs vvhat would he also forget his triple crowne vvould he say nothing for al these thinges not a word there is nothing hindreth in either of his Epistles but that he also must be taken for a ProtestaÌ„t Me thinkes here you should fare Erasmus de ratione as in another case Robertuâ— Liciensis did before the Pope you should spit and cry out fie vpon Peter fie vpon Paul would they not thinke these trash and trinkets of ours so much worth as to speake of them Ah these Protestants these Heretikes they say al for them and nothing at al for vs. But alas Peter and Paul had not heard any of these thinges and therefore no maruaile that they wrote nothing of them They reade Moyses and the Prophets they preached as Christ did according to the Scriptures the Catholike religion that had beene from the beginning of the world they continued betwixt the old and the new Testament vve see a vvonderful agreement but concerning Popery we see nothing WILLIAM BISHOP WE haue here a dainty dish of M. Abbots cookery a large rhetorical conclusion deducted out of leane thinne and weake premises He assaied to make a shew out of the Apostle that there was not a little which would serue the Protestants turne and cited to that purpose certaine sentences out of him but so properly that some of them indeed seemed to sound for him though they had in truth a farre different sence others had neither sence nor sound nor sillable for him Neuerthelesse as though he had gotten a great conquest he singeth a triumph and striketh vp a braue victory that al in Peter and Paul is for the Protestant nothing for the Papist Afterward as it were correcting himselfe he addes nothing but in shew at least serueth the Protestants turne vvhich is one of the truest wordes he there deliuereth The Protestants indeed be jolly nimble witted fellowes that can make any thing serue at least for a shew of their cause and when al other thinges faile thâ—m 2. Tim. 4. vers 4. Aâ— fabulas conuertuntur they turne their eares away from truth as the Apostle speaketh and fal to fables and one Robin good-fellow I vveene for lacke of a better is brought vpon the stage to spit and cry out Fie vpon Peter fie vpon Paul that had not remembred to say one word for Popery but al for the Protestant Fie I say vpon such a cause that must be vnder-propt vvith such rotten baggage stuffe What shadow of likely-hood is there that one should tel the Pope such a tale to his face or that Erasmus vvho vvas in most points a Catholike should report it or could there be any poore Robin excepting M. Abbots himselfe so simple and poore-blinde that in al the writings of those blessed Apostles he could not finde one vvord that gaue any sound or shew for the Catholike cause you haue heard already that I
fiercely bent to deceiue others that he cared not vvhat vntruth he vttered The Apostle maketh honourable mention of Hebr. 9. vers 4. 5. the Images of the Cherubins placed gloriously in the vppermost part of the Israelites Tabernacle which for the holinesse thereof was called Sancta sanctorum Further that within the Arke of the testament standing in the same place vvere reserued pretious Relikes as the rodde of Aaron that blossomed a golden pot ful of that Angelical foode Manna which God rained from heauen and the Tables of the Testament to vvhich if you joine the sentence of the same Apostle 1. Cor. 10. vers 11. That al hapned to them in figure and were written for our instruction may not vve then gather thereby that Images are to be placed in Churches and holy Relikes in golden shrines And the same Apostle in the same Epistle declaring Hebr. 11. vers 21. that Iacob by faith adored the toppe of Iosephs â—odde vvhich was a signe of his power doth he not giue al juditious men to vnderstand that the Images of Saints for their holy representation ought to be respected and worshipped With as great facility and no lesse perspicuity we doe collect out of S. Paul that the Saints in heauen are to be praied vnto for he doth Rom. 15 30. 2. hartily craue the Romans to helpe him in their praiers and hopeth by the helpe of Cor. 1. vers 11. the Corinthians praiers to be deliuered from great dangers Whence we reason thus If such a holy man as S. Paul was stood in neede of other mens praiers much more neede haue we poore vvretches of the praiers of Saints S. Paul was not ignorant how ready God is to heare vs nor of the only mediation of Christ IESVS and yet as high as he was in Gods fauour and as wel informed of the office of Christs mediation he held it needful to request other farre meaner then himselfe to pray for him Al this is good saith a good Protestant for to instruct vs to request the helpe of other mens praiers that are liuing with vs but not of Saints who are departed this world Yes say we because the Saints in heauen are more charitable and desirous of Gods honour and of our spiritual good then any friend we haue liuing and therefore more forward to assist vs vvith their praiers They are also more gratious in the sight of God and thereby better able to obtaine our requests Al vvhich may easily be gathred out of S. Paul vvho saith that 1. Cor. 13.8 charity neuer faileth but is maruailously encreased in that heauenly country Also that Ephes 2. vers 19. we are not strangers and forraigners to the Saints but their fellow cittizens and the houshold seruants of God with them yea we are members of the same body wherefore they cannot choose but tender most dearely al our sutes that appertaine vnto the glory of God our owne saluation They therefore haue finally no other shift to auoide praying to Saints but to say that though al other circumstances doe greatly moue vs thereto yet considering that they cannot heare vs it is labour lost to pray to them To vvhich we reply and that out of S. Paul that the Saints can heare vs and doe perfectly know our praiers made vnto them For the Apostle comparing the knowledge of this life vvith that of the life to come saith 1. Cor. 13. vers 9.10 12. De Ciuitat Dei lib. 22. cap. 29. In part we know and in part we prophecy but when that shal come which is perfect that shal be made voide which is in part And a little after We see now by a glasse in a darke sort but then face to face Whence not I but that Eagle-eied Doctor S. Augustine doth deduce that the knowledge of the heauenly cittizens is without comparison farre more perfect and clearer then euer any mortal mans vvas of thinges absent and to come yea that the Prophets vvho vvere indued with surpassing and extraordinary light did not reach any thing neare vnto the ordinary knowledge of the Saints in heauen grounding himselfe vpon these expresse wordes of the Apostle We prophecy in part that is imperfectly in this life which shal be perfect in heauen If then saith he the Prophets being mortal men had particular vnderstanding of thinges farre distant from them and done in other countries much more doe those immortal soules replenished with the glorious light of heauen perfectly know that which is done on earth though neuer so farre from them thus much of praying to Saints Now to the Masse The same profound diuine S. Augustine with other holy Fathers vvho were not wont so lightly to skimme ouer the Scriptures as our late new Masters doe but seriously searched them and most deepely pearced into them did also finde al the partes of the Masse touched by the Apostle S. Paul in these vvordes Aug. epist 59 ad PaulinuÌ„ Ambros Chrisost in hunc locum 1. Tim. 2. v. 1. I desire that obsecrations praiers postulations thanks-giuings be made for al men c. declaring how by these foure wordes of the Apostles are expressed the foure different sort of praiers vsed in the celebration of the holy Misteries By obsecrations those praiers that the Priest saith before consecration By praiers such as be said at and after the coÌ„secration vnto the end of the Pater noster By postulations those that are said at the communion vnto the blessing of the people Finally By thanks-giuing such as are said after by both Priest and people to giue God thankes for so great a gift receiued He that knowes what the Masse is may by these wordes of the Apostle see al the partes of it very liuely painted out in this discourse of S. Augustine vvho though he calleth not that celebration of the Sacrament by the name of Masse yet doth he giue it a name equiualent Epistola 59. Sacri Altaris oblatio the oblation or sacrifice of the holy Altar in the solution of the fift question at the exposition of these vvordes Orationes As for the principal part of the Masse vvhich is the Real presence of Christes body in the blessed Sacrament S. Paul deliuereth it in as expresse tearmes as may be euen as he had receiued it from our Lord 1. Cor. 11. vers 23. This is my body which shal be deliuered for you c. and addeth that he that eateth and drinketh it vnworthily eateth and drinketh judgement to himselfe not discerning the body of our Lord. And in the chapter before makes this demande The Chalice or cup of benediction which we blesse is it not the communication of the bloud of Christ and the bread which we breake is it not the participation of the body of our Lord Moreouer he speaketh of the Church of Rome being then but in her cradle most honourably saying Your faith is renowmed in the whole world and after Rom. 1.
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
now by the Canon of the Masse the Priest must dippe the third part of the consecrated host into the Sacrament of the bloud and there praieth that this mixture may be heathful to himselfe and al the receiuers vnto euerlasting life WILLIAM BISHOP I Cannot easily judge whether this man were more fiercely bent to deceiue others or more foolishly set to shame himselfe vvith lying that durst aduenture vpon this Canon of the auncient and most learned Pope Iulius for besides that it hath nothing for the Protestants purpose it doth in sundry points notably confirme the Roman doctrine thus beginneth the Canon When euery crime and sinne is purged and blotted out by sacrifices offered vnto God what shal hereafter be giuen to God for the purgation of our sinnes when errour is committed in the oblation of the sacrifice it selfe note how often he repeateth and recommendeth the diuine sacrifice of the Masse For we haue heard of some men possessed with schismatical ambition who contrary to diuine order and the institution of the Apostles doe in the diuine sacrifice offer milke in steede of wine others also for a complement of communion doe giue the dipped Sacrament to the people c. Then confuting these opinions he saith When the Master of truth did commend to his Disciples the true sacrifice of our saluation he gaue to none of them milke c. let therefore milke be no more offered when we sacrifice Then come in the broken vvordes of M. Abbot thus But for that of the dipped Eucharist which for a complement of communion they deliuer to the people they haue not receiued any testimony brought out of the Gospel where our Lord commended to the Apostles his body and bloud for there the bread is mentioned apart and the commendation of the Chalice apart where M. Abbot first left out the commending of Christs body and bloud to his Disciples because those vvordes vvould haue scalded his tongue Secondly this Canon hath nothing against that vvhich is now done by the Priest in the Masse for the Priest doth not dippe any part of the Host into the Chalice to be afterwardes taken out and giuen to the people vvhich is that which Pope Iulius doth disproue Neither doe our Priests to speake properly dippe any part of the Sacrament into the Chalice for dipping in importeth as much as the putting in and taking foorth againe which we doe not but only for a holy signification we doe put into the Chalice one litle parâ—â— of the Host there to lie and not to be taken out againe but to be receiued by the Priest together with the bloud and therefore we cal it not the dipping in but the mixture or mingling together of the body and bloud of Christ wherefore M. Abbot erreth in the maine point of his reprehension For Pope Iulius reproued only the giuing of the dipped Host vnto the people vvhich we doe not nor hold it any way necessary because vve teach them that the holy Host of Christs body containes in it selfe being a liuing body as wel Christes bloud as his flesh now vve doe only put a little peece of the sacred Host into the Chalice there to be receiued with the pretious bloud not of the people but by the Priest alone That this is no new deuise of the Church of Rome may be wel gathered out of the same distinction and in the very next leafe to that of Pope Iulius cited by M. Abbot in the Canon Triforme De consecrat distinct 2. vvhere Pope Sergius of more then 800. yeares standing doth expound this very ceremony of putting one part of the host into the Chalice It was then a knowne vsed ceremony of the Masse in his daies and no late inuention as M. Abbot dreameth I may not here forget that in the very Canon of Pope Iulius vvhich M. Abbot alleageth there is most expresse and very earnest coÌ„mandement of mingling water with the vvine that is to be consecrated Because saith that blessed Pope our Lordes Chalice according vnto the precepts of the Canons must be offered the wine being first mingled with water Finally we haue in this Canon alleaged by M. Abbot a confirmation of a propitiatory sacrifice of the real presence of Christs body and bloud two principal points of our doctrine and of mingling water with wine in the offertory and not one direct word for the Protestants And because this resolution of Iulius seemeth to be taken almost vvord for word out of Pope Alexanders first letter vvho was but the fift Pope from S. Peter I wil acquaint the reader vvith his wordes these they be Alexand. in epist omnibus orthodoxis De consecrat dist 2. Can. 1. In the oblations of Sacraments which are offered vnto our Lord at the solemne time of Masse the passion of our Lord is to be blended that his passion may be celebrated whose body and bloud is made and consecrated so that superstitious opinions being banished bread alone and wine mingled with water be offered in the sacrifice For as we haue receiued from the Fathers and very reason doth teach in the cuppe of our Lord only water or only wine ought not to be offered but both of them mixed togither And a little after Crimes and sinnes are blotted out when these sacrifices are offered therefore the passion of our Lord whereby we were redeemed is to be remembred with such sacrifices our Lord is delighted and shal be appeased and wil pardon huge offences For among sacrifices nothing can be greater then the body and bloud of Christ Neither is there any oblation better then this but this surpasseth them al c. Where you see the present Roman religion deliuered in as formal tearmes as may be There is also much more to the same purpose but I am the briefer in these authorities and doe alleage them more sparingly because Protestants seing them to be beyond al other exceptions doe flatly deny almost al the Epistles and Decretals of the most ancient Popes neuerthelesse they must needes be effectual and haue good place against M. Abbot that doth take vpon him to establish their doctrine put downe ours by the testimony of these the lawful heires and successours vnto the Apostles S. Peter and S. Paul alleaging many testimonies out of the very same Epistles Wherefore seing he hath appealed to them he must needes stand to them for this sentence of the President Festus hath his ground in very reason it selfe Act. 25. v. 12. Hast thou appealed to Caesar to Caesar shalt thou goe M. Abbot judged those Popes sentences of sound authority for confirmation of their religion he may not therefore deny them being brought in against him The same Pope Iulius to omit many other cleare testimonies taken out of his owne letters because the Protestants doe cauil at them doth most euidently confirme the soueraigne power of the See of Rome ouer al the East Church euen by the vvitnesse of most approued authours For vpon the
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
his spiritual Pastour would of himselfe doe any such lowly seruice as to hold the basin c. that is not to be imputed to him that suffereth it against his wil as a marke of pride To say that any Emperour or King contrary to his wil was enforced to doe it is a very fitten as euery child may perceiue for who either would or could force so mighty a Monarke to so base a seruice vnlesse he himselfe desired it As for that oath of fidelity vvhich the Emperour maketh to the Popes Holinesse I finde it not either in the 69. or 96. Distinction but in the 63 and it is only that the Emperour shal not doe any harme vnto the Popes temporal state in Italy and if he chance to come to Rome that be then shal carry to him and the Church of Rome such respect as is meete I vvould gladly be informed what alleageance may be picked out of this and whether it be not expedient the Emperor being to be confirmed by the Pope that he should take such an oath of him for his owne safety The next text cited out of the Clementine De appellatione is a meere fiction Can. Pastor for there is no such chapter nor matter That Priests be spiritual Fathers and Masters in matters of religion to Kinges and Princes vvho can doubt vnlesse they vvould haue Kinges neither baptized nor instructed in Christian religion by Priests And let the Protestants paint it out al they can a monstrous thing it must needes appeare vnto al men of vpright judgement and the Christian world to be there turned topsy and turuy where children shal take vpon them to rule their fathers and schollers to teach their masters Thus much in answere vnto al that is objected out of S. Leo to vvhich I wil joine that vvhich M. Abbot in another place pleadeth for the same matter out of the example of Constantine the great because it doth principally appertaine thereunto I hauing in my Epistle to his Majesty said that he being at the Councel of Nice would not sit downe before the Bishops beckned to him so to doe and that he there did professe that it did not belong to him to judge of Bishops but vvas rather to be judged of them M. Abbot answereth cleane contrary to the Emperours open confession that he was judge ouer the same Bishops Page 191. Whether wil you beleeue sooner either the Emperour speaking for himself or M. Abbot speaking he knowes not vvhat of his secret thoughts and intentions specially when that which I affirmed of the Emperour hath plaine testimony out of the best approued Authors nearest to that time and M. Abbots proofes to the contrary doe consist meerely vpon his owne surmises and collections Ruffi lib. 1. hist cap. 2. Socrat. lib. 1. hist cap. 5. Ruffinus and Socrates I then cited who in expresse tearmes deliuered so much as I said to whom I adde for further cōfirmation first the irrefragable record of the most famous Doctors that were present at the same Councel Hosius Bishop of Corduba in Spaine the Popes principal Legate in that Councel of Nice affirmeth as is afore rehearsed that one may worthily cal that Emperour the abhomination of desolation fore-told by Daniël who presumeth to make himselfe Prince of Bishops and President ouer Ecclesiastical causes vvhich he would not haue done if he had beene perswaded that the Emperour Constantine vvhom he tooke to be a most vertuous Prince had beene judge ouer Bishops their spiritual causes in that very Councel where he vvas there also present Secondly Athanasius who was a principal agent in the same Councel auoucheth that it cannot be called a Synode and Councel Apolog. 2. Where not a Bishop but some temporal Magistrate is President He then tooke not Constantine for President of the Nicene Councel which he esteemed so highly off and vvas indeede the patterne of al other Councels Thirdly S. Ambrose vvho liued shortly after in formal tearmes doth say that Constantine the great was not judge in the Councel of Nice but left the judgement free to Bishops And writing vnto the Emperour Valentinian addeth When haue you heard most gratious Emperour Ambros l. 5. Epist 32. that lay men did judge ouer Bishops in cases of faith surely if your Majesty please to pervse the course of holy Scriptures or of former times you shal find none that deny but in matters of faith in matters I say of faith Bishops were wont to judge ouer Emperours not Emperours ouer Bishops S. Gregory the great in expresse wordes vvitnesseth L. 4. epist 31. That the Emperour Constantine durst not judge Bishops though they themselues wished and desired it By the record therefore of these most ancient holy and learned Prelates neither Constantine the great nor any other Catholike Emperour was or could be judge in Ecclesiastical affaires ouer Bishops vvhence it followeth most perspicuously that Constantines owne wordes confessing that it did not belong to him to judge Bishops and their causes are to be taken plainly as they signifie and vvere not spoken by him as M. Abbot speaking by ghesse affirmeth of modesty only as though he meant himselfe to be their judge in al causes aswel Ecclesiastical as Temporal But let vs heare what moued M. Abbot to hold that strange opinion so contrary to the Emperours owne confession and the declaration of the worthiest men of that age His first conjecture is that though Constantine sate not downe vntil the Bishops beckned on him yet he sate in the highest place on a seate of gold vvhich if it were true Euseb de vita Constant lib. 3. cap. 10. as it is false yet vvould it not proue Constantine to be the President or Iudge of that assembly For as Theodoret doth expresly note the place that he there had vvas by permission of the Bishops at his sute and not properly belonging to him these be his vvordes Then the Emperour sate downe Theodor. l. 1. histor cap. 7. in a little chaire set in the middest istud enim sibi permitti ab Episcopis postulauerat for he had requested the Bishops to permit him so to doe It being then a place by permission of the Bishops it rather argueth that he acknowledged the Bishops of vvhom he requested that place to haue beene the Presidents and commanders there Secondly the Tripartite Hystorie doth manifestly declare that Constantine sate below the Bishops Lib. 2. Hyst Tripar ca. 5. these be the wordes taken out of Zozomenus The Emperour Constantine entred into the Councel house after al the Bishops and had his seate beneath them al neither would he sit downe before the Bishops commanded him Theodor. l. 1. Histor cap. 7. And the wordes of Theodoret may also import as much He sate in a little seate placed in the middest amongst them And falsly or craftily doth M. Abbot report out of Eusebius That he sate in the highest place for Eusebius saith not so but that
Kingdome But now the * Rhem. Test Annot. in 2. Tim. 4. v. 8. ad Hebr. 6. vers 10. Church of Rome attributeth so great perfection of righteousnesse to good workes as that they fully satisfie the law of God and worthily deserue eternal life yea they affirme them to be so farre meritorious as that God should be vnjust if he rendered not heauen for the same chargeing the justice of God not in respect of his promise but in respect of the merit and desert of the workes WILLIAM BISHOP NOW that M. Abbot is driuen to flie to that most holy and renowmed Pope S. Gregory the great for defence of their doctrine he is like to speed wel no doubt for he was the first founder of the Catholike religion amongst vs English-men and a great maintainer of it al the world ouer as shal appeare to the eie of euery vnpartial man that wil but reade that little which shal by me hereafter be produced out of him First touching the merit of workes we beleeue the same that S. Gregory taught to wit That al the merit of our owne vertue al our owne righteousnesse that is al that vertue and righteousnesse which we haue by our owne nature or strength is rather vice and iniquity then vertue And therefore that vve had neede most humbly to sue and pray to God for mercy and forgiuenesse of our sinnes and for the assistance of his heauenly grace which is the roote and fountaine of al good workes and merits M. Abbot therefore mistakes S. Gregory grosly if he thinke him to deny any true merit or righteousnesse to be in a vertuous Christian for though he say that our owne to wit that which we doe by vertue of our owne natural power be nought vvorth yet he teacheth most expresly that good workes done by the helpe of Gods grace doe merit life euerlasting Thus he hath left vvritten vpon that verse of the Psalme I haue meditated in thy workes Gregor in Psal 141. He that acknowledgeth the riches of this world to be deceitful and doth through the loue of heauenly thinges contemne earthly that man doth meditate vpon good workes which when this life doth passe away shal remaine yeeld the reward of eternal life For we liue not here profitably Nisi ad comparandum meritum quo in aeternitate viuatur But to get merits by which we may liue eternally And vpon these wordes of the 101. Psalme Their seede shal be directed for euer Our workes are therefore called seedes saith he because like as we gather fruit of seede euen so doe we expect reward of our workes for the Apostle saith Gallat 6. Whatsoeuer a man wil sow that shal he reape He therefore that in this life soweth the seede of good workes shal in the life to come reape the fruit of eternal recompence And in the same booke of his Morals out of vvhich M. Abbot snatched his darke wordes S. Gregory declareth clearely Greg. lib. 4. Moral c. 42. That as there is among men a great difference of workes in this life so in the next there shal be as great distinction of dignities that how farre here one man exceedes another in merits so much shal be there surmount the other in rewardes If then according to S. Gregories plaine doctrine grounded vpon the Royal Prophets Dauid and the Apostle S. Paul good workes be the seedes vvhich bring forth life euerlasting If the merit of this life be that wherewith we must liue eternally hereafter If according to the difference of merits in this life we shal receiue distinct dignities in the life to come can any man of judgement doubt but that he most perspicuously taught both that there be true merits in vertuous and good workes and also that according vnto the different degree of merits distinct dignities of glory shal be rendred in heauen The most sweet and religious father S. Bernard is haled into this ranke of S. Peters successours against al due order because he was no Bishop of Rome but our prophane Abbot saith that the holy Abbot Bernard herein agreeth vvith the ancient Church of Rome How may we know that Is it because that godly and deuout man did in al points imbrace and follow the ancient Roman faith L. 2. de Cons ad Euge. In Vita lib. 2. c. 3. 6. Item lib. 4. cap. 4. Lib. 3. cap. 5. Serm. 66. in Cant. lib. Sententiarū non procul ab initio then it is a cleare case that the Bishop of Rome is supreme gouernour of Christes Church that the sacrifice of the Masse is a most true holy sacrifice and that the same body that was borne of the blessed Virgin Mary is really and substantially there present that it is flat heresie to deny either praier to Saints or praier for the dead that euery one must confesse his sinnes to a Priest that the vowes of Monkes and religious persons are most pretious jewels and ornaments of a Christian soule vvhereof he was so earnest a Patrone and perswader that in his * In Vita life-time he instituted 160. Monasteries Briefly there is no branche of the present Roman faith which may not be confirmed out of his godly and learned workes Wherefore if S. Bernard agreed vvholy with the doctrine of the ancient Church of Rome so doth the Church of Rome that now is But if M. Abbot wil say that in this point of merits only he jumpeth vvith the auncient Church though in none of the rest should he not rather haue proued it to be so then to haue taken it as granted Yes verily vnlesse he vvould be esteemed for such a trifler as ordinarily doth petere principium begge that which he should principally proue To the purpose then I say that neither the ancient Church of Rome doth deny the merits of good workes as may be seene in that question nor yet S. Bernard for when he saith That our merits doe not in justice deserue heauen he vnderstandeth that of our merits taken by themselues without Gods promise and appointment of heauen for the reward of them the which secluded excepted God should not doe any body wrong if he gaue not heauen for the same but Gods ordinance promise presupposed and the grace of Christ by which the merit is wrought then it doth euen in S. Bernards opinion of right deserue heauen and God should doe wrong not to repay it with heauen And this in effect doth S. Bernard himselfe teach in the second place cited by M. Abbot vvhere he saith That it is just that God pay that which be oweth De Lib. Arbitrio In fine but he oweth that which be promised the promise was indeede of mercy but now to be performed of justice which justice though it be also principally Gods because it proceedes from his grace yet it hath pleased God to haue vs to be partners of that his justice that he might make vs merit ours of his
they thought then it was a seruice of God I omit here to bring any further proofes because this is not the place to stand vpon the matter of fasting but only to answere to M. Abbots naked objections vvhereof the fift is as M. Abbot saith that the Montanists thought by their fasting to merit at Gods hand Good reason had they for that if they did so teach and that the rest of their doctrine had beene answerable to it for our blessed Sauiour doth teach the very same expresly in these vvordes Math. 6. When thou doest fast anoint thy head and wash thy face that thou appeare not to men to fast and thy Father who seeth thee in secret wil repay thee Whereupon that graue and holy Father S. Ambrose saith Where be these new Masters that doe exclude the merit of fasting Epistola 82. ad Eâ—cl Here here Sir saith M. Abbot If they were new sect-masters in S. Ambrose time that denied the merit of fasting then surely the ancient Church of Rome did maintaine the merit of fasting Againe Epiphanius a more credible reporter of Montanus errors then his owne disciple Tertullian hath left written Haeres 48. coÌ„t Montan. That many of the Montanists did remoue the reward of vertue and crowne of glory from fasting where fore M. Abbot doth wrongfully attribute that vnto them Besides S. Augustine doth affirme De Ecclesiast dogm ca. 68. That to equal marriage with virginity and to beleeue that they who doe abstaine from wine and flesh to chastise their bodies doe thereby merit nothing is not the part of a Christian but of a Iouinian It is then more then manifest that the ancient Church of Rome did vphold the merit of fasting and that they were of old esteemed no better then Heretikes that denied it To come now to the last fained concord betweene vs and the Montanists They taught as he auoucheth fasting to be a satisfaction or expiation of sinne and a special meanes to appease Gods wrath towards vs which if they did they had good warrant in the word of God for it For the children of Israël 1. Reg. 7. fasting with Samuël appeased God and obtained victory of their enemies so did they againe and againe in the time of Hester 4. Iudith 4. Hester and Iudith The * Ionae 3. ¶ Niniuites turned away the wrath of God by fasting Daniël also as a Ser. de laps Lib. de Vtilit Iejunij ca. 3. S. Cyprian witnesseth by fasting promeruit Deum appeased his wrath did winne his fauor S. Augustine proposeth the delicate Protestants objection shewes vs how to answere thereunto What say they is God so cruel that he taketh pleasure to see thee torment thy selfe Answere saith that most learned Doctor I put my selfe to paine that God may spare me I punish my selfe that he may succour me that I may please his eies that I may delight his sweetnesse for the Host is hampered and vexed that it may be laid vpon the Altar c. Briefly vve haue by the euident warrant of Gods vvord and by sound testimony of the Nicene Councel S. Cyprian S. Ambrose and S. Augustine no Montanists but most holy juditious Prelates of the ancient Catholike Church that by fasting God is truly serued his just indignation against vs is appeased satisfaction is made for the temporal paine due to sinne and the increase of his grace and heauenly glory is thereby also merited Whence it followeth finally that when M. Abbot assaied by these common accidents and circumstances of fasting vvhich were as wel defended by the ancient Church of Rome as by the Montanists to proue the present Church of Rome to be turned Montanist his soare eies were piteously troubled with such a defluxion either of enuy or ignoraÌ„ce that had wel-nigh blinded him But if the discreet reader for his further satisfaction desire to know wherein lay the proper error of the Montanists concerning fasting for they held besides diuers other pointes of erronious doctrine I answere in briefe out of the Ecclesiastical history Euseb lib. 5. cap. 17. Epistola ad MarcelluÌ„ de fide nostra dogmate haeretico Montanus decreed new lawes of fasting vvhich did consist partly in the time and partly in the manner of fasting S. Hierome recounting the principal points of Montanus heresie as that they held but one person in the Deity and that al second mariages were wicked commeth to the third point of fasting and saith We Catholikes doe fast one Lent or fourty daies once in the yeare according to the tradition of the Apostles at a conuenient time They that is the Montanists make three Lents in the yeare as though three Sauiours had suffred for vs not that we may not fast any time in the yeare except betweene Easter and Whitsontide but that it is one thing to doe so voluntarily and another vpon necessity So that the fiâ—st nouelty of their fast was that euery man vvas bound to fast three Lents euery yeare Other daies perhaps they might haue proper to themselues vvhich I haue not read off but the manner of their fast Tertullian in the place before cited doth signifie that it was to hold out their fast vntil the Sunne were set without tasting of any thing and then to vse that Cherophagia mentioned by M. Abbot that is to eate only dry meates that had no juyce or nourishment in them Al vvhich must needes be done according to their doctrine by the commandement of the Paraclete or holy Ghost vvhich dwelt in Montanus and was powred out vpon his disciples as they fabled farre more pientifully then vpon Christes Apostles These indiscreete lawes then of fasting that few vvere able to indure enacted also by him that had no authority to make lawes and peremptorily published in the name of the holy Ghost to be obserued of al vnder paine of damnation vvere Montanus errours touching fasting Let M. Abbot if he can shew out of Philastrius Epiphanius S. Augustine S. Hierome or any other approued Authour who haue registred Montanus heresies either in his owne name or vnder the name of Cataphriges because he was a Phrygian borne and there his heresie did most rage that his errours about fasting were That he thought fasting to please Gâ—d to be meritorious or satisfactory and then he shal beginne to speake to some purpose But any auncient sincere Authour truly taken and reported wil not serue his turne they must be Heretiks or writing at least in an heretical vaine as Tertullian then did or else they wil â—fford him no helpe or comforr The Montanists indeed the more easily to intrappe Catholikes in their snares might perhaps pretend the same end and spiritual fruites of fasting vvhich the Catholikes liked wel off as al Heretikes doe mingle and blend many truthes with their errours the better to colour their trumpery and deceit like vnto Wolues that put on Sheepe-skinnes that they may thereby the sooner catch them vvhom
extolled him so farre forth that they affirmed him to be both Father and holy Ghost In like manner as there be some Heretikes that dishonoured the holy Virgin Mary so there were some other foolish women that would haue made her a God offering vp to her sacrifice and instituting women Priests to doe her seruice Whose doating folly Epiphanius reproueth in the next chapter teaching first that it was not lawful for any woman to offer sacrifice or to baptise Secondly that neither the blessed Mother of God nor any other creature was to be adored that is worshipped vvith that honour which is due to God alone but he deliuereth in most expresse tearmes that shee is to be worshipped with another meaner kinde of worship that is due vnto excellent holy men and the sacred seruants of God Most goodly saith he is the blessed Virgin holy and to be honoured but not so farre forth as to adoration that is shee is to be honoured but not with diuine honour vvhich he otherwise repeateth thus Let the holy Virgin Mary be honoured but let the Father Sonne and holy Ghost be adored And yet more plainly explicating himselfe by that tearme of adoration Let not the Virgin be adored so as we take her for a God or offer vp sacrifice in her name Wherefore nothing wil appeare more manifest to him that pleaseth to reade that reuerend Authour then that there he reproueth them only vvho gaue Diuine and Godly honour vnto the immaculate virgin Mary making her a God and offering sacrifice to her But that shee is to be worshipped with another sort of honour due vnto the best seruants of God he doth both in that and in the former Chapter teach most plainly twenty times which is the very doctrine of the present Church of Rome vvhich holdeth God alone to be worshipped with diuine honour called Latria but the Saints in heauen and holy Personages on earth with a holy worship due to their gifts and graces of heauenly Wisdome Fortitude and Holinesse which God hath indued them withal This matter of worshipping Saints S. Augustine that most learned Doctor and firme pillar of the Roman Church hath fully and distinctly deliuered 1200. yeares agoe in these most memorable vvordes August lib. 1. cont Iustum Manich. cap. 21. Christian people with religious solemnity doe celebrate the memory of Martirs aswel to stirre vp an imitation of their vertues as to be made partakers of their merits and to be holpen with their praiers yet so as we doe erect Altars only vnto the God of Martirs though in remembrance of the Martirs For what Prelate or Priest seruing at the Altar in the place of their holy bodies hath at any time said we offer vnto thee Peter or Paul or Cyprian but that which is offered is offered to God who hath crowned the Martirs and is offered at the memorial or relikes of them whom he hath crowned to the end that by the admonition of those places there may arise greater deuotion to inflame our charity both towardes them whom we may imitate and also towardes him by whose helpe we may be enabled so to doe Therefore we doe worship the Martirs with that reuerence and respect with which holy men whose harts we thinke ready to suffer as much for the truth of Christ are in this life worshipped yet with this difference that we doe more deuoutly worship the Saints of whose vertues we are assured and who doe now triumph in heauen then we doe those that are yet combating in the field of this life but with that worship which in Greeke is called Latria and hath no one proper Latin word it being a certaine worship properly due vnto the God-head neither doe we worship or teach to be worshipped any other then God alone And whereas the offering of sacrifice doth properly appertaine to this kinde of worship whence their act that offer it to Idols is called Idolatry we doe not in any case offer any such thing or command any such offering to be made vnto Martirs nor to any other and if any man fal into that errour he is reproued by this sound doctrine that he may be amended or auoided hitherto S. Augustine Now let the vpright reader consider wel of this sacred and sound doctrine deliuered by the best learned in the pure estate of the primitiue Church and then judge vvhether the present Roman Church doth teach any other vvorshipping of Saints at this day We worship Saints in heauen vvith a kinde of holy and religious vvorship for their holy and religious vertues so did the good Christians in S. Augustines daies With a religious solemnity and with greater deuotion then they did the Godliest and most holy men aliue We doe teach vvord by word after S. Augustine that with that kinde of worship which is proper to God alone vvhich for vvant of a proper Latin word we cal Latria God only is to be worshipped Another kinde of vvorship which for distinction sake we cal Dulia of Doulos that in Greeke signifieth a seruant we doe exhibit as due to Gods seruants which is infinitely lesse then that vvhich we giue vnto the soueraigne Lord and Master of Men and Angels Now because the worship due by sacrifice is a recognising of his soueraigne dominion ouer vs to vvhom we doe offer sacrifice and of our subjection to him as to our soueraigne Lord therefore to God alone sacrifice is to be offered Yet as you haue heard out of S. Augustine Sacrifice is principally to be offered at the relikes and memorial of Martirs and Saints and in their remembrances that we may thereby be made partakers of their merits holpen with their praiers and also inflamed with a feruent desire of following their excellent vertues Note by the way the antiquity of the Christians offering sacrifice of communicating the merits of Martirs to others of the helpe of the Sâ—ints praiers Now if any vvould offer sacrifice to the blessed Virgin Mary or attribute to her any other part of that honour vvhich is proper to God alone we would be as ready to checke and reproue them as Epiphanius then was to confute the foolish female Collyridians To returne to M. Abbot vvhere were his wits when he cited out of his authour these wordes The holy Virgin is to be in honour yet not to be worshipped for had he but marked wel those wordes he might easily haue perceiued that Epiphanius did not mislike with al kinde of worship that was giuen to that most blessed Virgin seing that he vvould haue her to be honoured which is a higher kinde of reuerence then ordinary worship is for to be honourable is more then to be worshipful as euery man meanely seene in titles doth know vvherefore M. Abbot cannot be excused from a foule fault in that he hath translated the Latin word adorare and adoratio into bare and naked worship for in that place it is taken for Diuine and Godly worship as al the circumstances of
in another place It is certaine that we may keepe Gods Commandements if we wil. Againe Grace is giuen vs not because we did good workes before but that we may be able to doe them De Spirit Liter ca. 10. that is as he expoundeth himselfe Non quia legem impleuimus sed vt legem implere possimus Not because we did before we receiued grace fulfil the law but that we may be able afterward to fulfil the law Can any thing be more manifest then that according vnto S. Augustines opinion a man indued with Gods grace may keepe al his Commandements and fulfil the law The very same doth S. Hierome confesse in that very Treatise cited by M. Abbot adding this reason We confesse that God giueth vs Commandements possible to be fulfilled least God should be authour of injustice if be exacted of vs to doe that which cannot be done so that the present Church of Rome doth herein follow S. Augustine and S. Hierome a noble paire of most learned Patrones of the ancient Church of Rome And doth nothing lesse then agree with Pelagius in his errours about that matter which were two The first That without the helpe of Gods grace a man may keepe al Gods Commandements The second That a man could keepe al the Commandements so perfectly that be needed neuer to sinne so much as venially Which two erronious branches of Pelagius doctrine we doe condemne as roundly as did the most holy Fathers and consequently that a man comming to yeares of discretion is anamarticos without sinne for if the justest man aliue say that he is without sinne that is some venial sinne he is euen thereby made a liar as S. Iohn witnesseth and therefore a sinner Al this Pelagian doctrine the present Church of Rome doth as wel reproue as did the former Marry to affirme as M. Abbot doth that Pelagius was of old cōdemned for affirming children to be made without sinne by baptisme is sauing your reuerence a starke lie confronted and confuted by S. Augustine in formal tearmes these be his wordes De Peccatis Meritis Remissione lib. 10. ca. 9. They that is the Pelagians wil not beleeue that baptisme doth cleanse Infants from original sinne vvhat a notable tale then was it to say that the Pelagians vvere therefore accounted Heretikes because they held men by baptisme to become vvithout sinne vvhen they flatly denied baptisme to cleanse them from sinne That which I said of the state of man newly baptised that there was no sinne left in him is S. Augustines and S. Hieromes doctrine word for word thus saith S. Augustine * Cont. duas Epist Pelag. lib. 3. cap. 3. Baptisme doth wash away al sinnes vtterly al of deedes wordes and thoughts whether they were originally contracted or afterward committed either of ignorance or wittingly The same he repeateth treating of the Creede De Simbol ad Catech. lib. 3. cap. 10. Omnia prorsus delicta delet sanctum baptisma originalia propria dicta facta cogitata cognita incognita omnia dimittuntur vvhich he doth inculcate in many places I wil cite but one more which containeth also an explication of that other Pelagian proposition how a good Christian may be without sinne these be his wordes L. cōt Iulian. ca. 13 15. Cōt duas Epist Pelag. lib. 10. c. 14. Multi baptisati fideles sunt sine crimine sine peccato autem in hac vita neminem dixerim c. Many of the faithful baptised are without crime that is without mortal sinne but I wil say no man to be without sinne to wit venial how much soeuer the Pelagians doe rage against vs for so saying not that anything of sinne doth remaine which is not forgiuen in baptisme but because in vs remaining in the frailty of this life there ceasseth not to be committed some-thing that is daily to be pardoned to them that pray faithfully and doe the workes of mercy In this one sentence of S. Augustine there is declared first that al manner of sinne is wholy pardoned in baptisme and that therefore a man newly baptised is as free from al sinne as were our first parents in Paradise as I said Secondly that though many of the better sort of the baptised doe continue without mortal sinne yet none at al without some kind of sinne the blessed Virgin MARY only excepted De Natur. Grat. cap. 36. Of whom saith S. Augustine for the honour of our Lord I wil haue no question when the matter of sinne is handled S. Hierome is as cleare for the vertue and efficacy of baptisme as in many other places so specially in his Epistle to Oceanus vvherein he proueth by many texts of holy writ That al manner of sinne is drowned in the water of baptisme Hieron in Epistol ad Oceanum not one being left to swimme out aliue And doth cal it the heresie of Cain To hold the woundes of our sinnes to be so venimous and incurable that the medicine of Christ in baptisme cannot heale them Thus much out of learned Antiquity to shew how ignorant M. Abbot is therein who thought that he had hit me home and giuen me some great blow vvhen he produced these my wordes M. Bishop in plaine tearmes telleth vs that there is no more sinne left in the newly baptised man then was in Adam in the state of innocency vvhereas you now see that the best learned among the auncient Fathers had 1200. yeares before maintained the same doctrine against the Pelagian Heretikes Concerning the Sacrament of Penance we in deede teach the very same touching the ful and absolute purgation from sinne and the eternal punishment due to the same which euery true penitent making his humble confession doth obtaine by the absolution of his ghostly Father which is no late inuention of ours but we learned it out of these our Sauiours owne vvordes Iob. 20. vers 23. Whose sinnes you forgiue on earth they shal be forgiuen in heauen Al antiquity hauing vnderstood thereby that Christ gaue to his Apostles as Pastors of his Church ful power to pardon sinnes and by them vnto al other Pastors that should lawfully succeede them vntil the worldes end This matter I haue handled in a Question by it selfe to which I referre the reader that desireth to heare more of it in particular As M. Abbot reserues the Pelagian doctrine of Free-wil and Satisfaction to their due place so doe I where it shal appeare that therein the now Church of Rome doth no more approue those points then it doth these which he hath here touched but that therein he is as fouly deceiued and goes about to deceiue others as here he hath done And if one D octor Bignee hath beene so much ouerseene as to commend a fauourer of the Pelagian heresie let it be inquired of the learned what thanke the present Roman Church doth yeeld him for his labour for I haue heard that it hath laid a
long before hand saying Iohan. 15. vers 19. If the world hate you know yee that it hated me before you If you had beene of the world the world would haue loued her owne but because you be not of the world but I haue choosen you out of the world therefore the world hateth you Remember my word that I said vnto you the seruant is not greater then his Master If they haue persecuted me you also wil they persecute Had not M. Abbot fouly forgotten this vvorthy lesson vvhich Christ willed al his so wel to remember when he imagined that there was no other remedy but that we must needes teare our tongues for anger and fare like madde men when we saw the state setled against our religion and vs If he had not beene such a mercinary temporizer that esteemeth the highest and greatest happinesse of Priests and Preachers to consist principally in the fauour of great personages in fat benefices and bodily pleasures he would neuer haue thought much lesse haue vvritten that the settling of the state against vs was like to cast vs into such a desperate bloudy agony S. Paul surely vvas of a farre other minde vvhen he exhorted the Thessalonians not so much as to be moued in tribulations 1. Thessal 3. vers 3. For your selues know saith he that we are appointed to this as if he had said it is incident to the true state of a good Christian to liue in the disgrace and hate of worldlings Vndoubtly then M. Abbot was greatly ouer-seene vvhen he supposed the discountenance of the state to be able to put good Catholikes to their vvits end May he not therefore be saluted with these wordes of S. Iames Iacob 4. vers 4. O adulterers O base and bastardly minded Ministers know yee not that the friendship of this world is the enemy of God Whosoeuer therefore wil be a friend of this world he is made an enemy of God Let them therefore that preferre the frienship of this vvorld before the fauour of God esteeme as highly as they list of worldly cherishings and preferments we by the helpe of Gods grace wil be so farre off from tearing our tongues so long as they please to persecute vs that we wil rather after our blessed Sauiours counsel Math. 5. vers 12. rejoice be gladde when we be reuiled vntruly and persecuted for his sake For howsoeuer our good meaning and desert be mistaken in earth yet therefore very great shal be our reward in heauen Finally leauing the falsenesse and vanity of hope vnto them that by pleasing worldly men seeke after vanity and false felicity and vvho are not vnlike so to fare as M. Abbot vvriteth if according to their badde deserts they were by our Sauiour Christ whipped out of his Church we Catholikes following the Apostles instruction Rom. 5. vers 2. Doe glory in the true hope of the glory of the Sonnes of God The testimony of an vpright conscience is to vs here as it were a continual banquet And the assured hope vvhich we haue to enjoy hereafter the perpetual glory of Gods deare Sonnes in his heauenly Kingdome doe yeeld vs more quietnesse of minde and true harty joy in one day then most of the Ministers receiue by their worldly prosperity al their liues long ROBERT ABBOT AND now that there is no hope of remedy God knowes you say what that forcible weapon of necessity may constraine and driue men to at length (*) Behold the faire flowers of his sweet eloquence False Traitor Base fugitiue doest thou take vpon thee to threaten thy Prince vvhat of a preaching Priest haue we now a Herald at armes if he cannot perswade religion to denounce warre is this the Catholike religion that you commend to vs did Peter and Paul deale in that sort to tel Princes that if they would not giue them way God knowes what that forcible weapon of necessity might constraine and driue men to at length vvas this the language or stile of the first Church but what doe I aske you of Peter and Paul or the first Church God knowes they are strangers to you and you to them you loue to talke of them but little doe you care to be guided by them The first Church could say to their Persecutours Tertul. Apolog ca. 37. If we would deale with you not by secret reuenge but by open enmity doe we want thereto either number or strength we are foraigners to you and yet we haue filled al places of yours your Citties Ilands Castles Boroughes meeting places your Tents Tribes Bands Pallaces your Senate and Court what warre were we not fit for though vnequal in power who so willingly yeeld our selues to be slaine but that with vs more tollerable it is to be killed then to kil And so Augustine speaketh thereof That the Citty of Christ August de Ciuitat Dei 22. cap. 6. albeit it had troupes of mighty peoples yet did not fight for temporal life but for the obtaining of eternal life It did not resist their fighting for life was nothing else but for their Sauiours sake to despise life thus they were able to rescue themselues and their religion yet no forcible weapon of necessity could moue them to rebel to take armes against them by whom they were oppressed And this was then thought to be the proper condition of the faith of Christ WILLIAM BISHOP FALSE Traitor Base fugitiue c. Faire wordes courteous Sir if not for honesties sake yet for the honour of the Ministery This man to say the least was surely some passionate vvomans sonne he is on the suddaine so mutable into strange passions This passage he beganne grauely playing both the Polititian and Prophet then counterfaiting an ouer-kinde Proctour he cleareth me of that I neuer offended in though he there-with condemned himselfe of forgery so fast a friend vvould he then needes shew himselfe to me And presently after vpon no other occasion but the very recital of the same vvordes againe he is in a moment so transported vvith choller that he seemes to fare not much vnlike one of those sober fellowes in Bedlem that haue their heads bound vp in a clout and crieth out false traitor base fugitiue Can I then in better fashion encoūter him then with these verses of graue Seneca Pone vesanos precor Animi tumores teue pietati refer Asswage I pray you the swelling waues of your minde Recouer your wits and stray not so farre out of your kinde Gentle Sr. Robert if you please to pacifie a little your distempered humours you shal not only auoide the obloquy of the vveake bretheren that may hap to be scandalized to behold so sage a reputed Doctor and sober Preacher to let flie such base and barbarous vvordes but hauing purged your braines from the foggy mistes of those grosse exhalations you also shal be able to discerne more clearely what my wordes signifie for you haue not forgotten I
Rome vvhereas neither that Church then nor vve now doe reject the true fasting which the Scripture teacheth but only those opinions of fasting vvhich the Montanists first deuised and the Papists haue receiued against the Scripture to forbeare continually by way of religion such and such daies from such and such meates with a minde there in and by their very forbearing to doe a worship to God to satisfie for sinne to merit and purchase the forgiuenesse thereoff and to deserue eternal life WILLIAM BISHOP BEFORE we come to joine issue let this maxime of arguing be obserued He that vvil proue one to be the proper disciple of any Sect-master must doe it by producing the proper and peculiar doctrine of the same sect and not by alleaging such points of doctrine as are common to that sect vvith many others For example if I would proue a Protestant to be an Arrian I must not thinke to performe it by prouing that they beleeued in one God as the Arrians did or that they flie to the touch-stone of the Scriptures as the Arrians did refusing Traditions and that they relied much on the power of temporal Princes setting the Bishop of Romes authority at naught c. for none of these be proper branches of the Arrian sect but common to them with others Marry if I could proue them to affirme the Sonne of God touching his diuinity to be lesser then his Father or after his Father or not of the same substance vvith his heauenly Father I must needes be taken then to speake to the purpose Euen so if M. Abbot doe insist vpon those points of the Montanists errors which were proper to themselues and not common with others prouing vs to maintaine the same I then wil graunt that he acquiteth himselfe like a braue champion But if he doe make al his instances in such general circumstances of fastinges as the Catholike Church then did maintaine as vvel as the Montanists Yea that the Protestants themselues doe in part vphold and defend as wel as the Catholikes then euery man must needes acknowledge and take him for a wrangling Sophister and a vaine bragging writer that crakes of wonders and performes nothing Let vs now descend to his particulars and try what sharpnesse of wit and soundnesse of judgement he sheweth therein The Montanists saith he appointed certaine and standing daies for fasting and forbearing of certaine meates so doe the Papists I graunt vvhat be they therefore Montanists then the Protestants be also Montanists because they appoint certaine and standing daies of fastes as Friday Saturday the Imber and Lent-fasts and many feasts eues vvhich daies they appoint for the forbearing of flesh Is not this a proper peece of Montanisme that is common to so many Nay the Apostles themselues did the like as Tertullian in the same place graunteth vvere they also therefore Montanists see how M. Abbot beginneth to shame himselfe To the next The Montanists did not take any creature or meate to be vncleane but did only by way of deuotion forbeare at certaine times and the Papists doe also the same vvhich I also graunt And doe not the Protestants agree vvith them in the former part thinking no meate to be vncleane Now in the later they doe vvorse for they forbeare flesh at certaine times not of deuotion to chastise their bodies and to please God as the Montanists pretended but for worldly pollicy of fauouring the increase of flesh for the vpholding of the trade of fisher-men and to please their Prince Here let any Godly man be judge whether of these two endes of pleasing God or the Prince be more Christianlike and whether of them doe more sauour of the spirit of God he shal no doubt finde that herein it is much better to concurre with Tertullian then consort with the Protestants And that the best learned in the primitiue Church so thought and so taught I haue proued in the Question of fasting The Montanists being vrged with that place of S. Paul that it was the doctrine of Deuils to command to abstaine from meates answered that it touched Marcion and Tatianus who condemned meates as vncleane in their owne nature the same answere doe the Papists giue which I acknowledge vvillingly What are they thereby become Montanus disciples then vvas S. Augustine as a great Papist so no smal Montanist for he doth in most expresse tearmes so expound that place these be his wordes The Apostle doth in these wordes properly point at Aug. cōt Adimant Manichaeū c. 14. 1. Tim. c. 4. not them who therefore abstaine from such meates that they may thereby bridle their owne concupiscence or spare another mans weakenesse but those who thinke the flesh it selfe vncleane Doe you see how S. Augustine interpreteth those wordes of S. Paul euen as we doe who also answereth to euery of the Protestants objections against set fasting aboue a 1000. yeares before they troubled the world In like manner doth S. Hierome in the very wordes that M. Abbot sets downe for ours thus he writeth Lib. 1. cont Iouin ca. 41. The Apostle doth condemne them that forbidde to marry and command to abstaine from meates c. true but he aimed at Marcion and Tatianus and such other Heretikes that command perpetual abstinence as though the creatures of God were abhominable but we commend euery creature of God and doe only preferre fasting before fulnesse c. So that by this exposition of S. Paules doctrine vve are not proued Montanists but doe imitate therein the principal pillars of the ancient Roman Church S. Augustine and S. Hierome and doe therein also wipe away a sluttish imputation of Iouinian reuiued and set a foote againe by the Protestants that forsooth Lib. 1. cont Iouin cap. 3. We teach the doctrine of Deuils condemned by the Apostles and doe fal into the opinion of the Manichees because we command to abstaine on fasting daies from some kinde of meates which God created to receiue c. but of this more exactly in the Question of fasting Now to the rest of M. Abbots text The Montanists tooke that their fasting to be a seruice and worship to God vvherein they were not deceiued for it is written in the word of God Luc. 2. That Elizabeth a blessed widdow departed not from the Temple by fasting and praier seruing night and day seruing in Greeke Latreuousa that is doing seruice and worship to God as by praier so by fasting Againe by fasting watching and other bodily austerities we doe according to the common exposition of the auncient Fathers Rom. 12. exhibit our bodies to God a liuing bost as the Apostle speaketh holy pleasing God and a reasonable seruice It must needes then be a very holy and most acceptable seruice and vvorship of God that is resembled by S. Paul vnto a liuing and pure sacrifice Canon 5. And in the Councel of Nice it is said That we may offer to God the pure and solemne fast of Lent