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
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
the graue counsel of that sage Lawier Sr. Edward Cooke whose booke â—e citeth wherein is said In the preface of his fift of reportes That controuersies in religion are to be handled with al candor and charity and not with bitter invectiues like men transported with fury To end this point if he hold â—n that course of scurrility he wil driue me and others to giue him ouer in the plaine field for a foule-mouthed wrangler that deserueth no answere Thus much by the way of the manner of his inditing Now to the matter of his booke which doth principally consist in allegation of Authors and applying their sentences to his purpose How insufficiently he hath behaued himselfe therein shal be particularly discyphered 〈◊〉 their proper places I wil here only for a tast of his judgement and sinâ—erity therein giue a touch vnto some general heades thereof First doth 〈◊〉 not euidently proue great want of judgement and discretion to alleage 〈◊〉 vpright witnesses in matters of controuersie such authors as are knowne to al the world to be professed parties of the same side If I should cite for confirmation of the Catholike cause D oct Harding D oct Sanders D oct Stapleton or any other Catholike late writer would not the vnpassionate reader take me for very simple if I thought that any man would the sooner beleeue me for their opinions that were men though most learned and right honest yet not indifferent because they were professed aduocates of the same cause Euen so a man of any wit cannot but maruaile where M. Abbots senses were when he so commonly and confidently for proofe of any doubt doth produce the authority of Bale a late Irish Apostata Frier whome be sometime also calleth Balaeus to make him seeme two worshipful authors that is not worthy to be halfe one Fox Iewel Humphrey Holinshed Sr. Edward Cooke the Magdeburgenses Kemnitius Illyricus Sleidan Hospinian and many others open and professed aduersaries of the Catholike Roman Church and therefore no vpright and fit witnesses against it He without doubt may garnish his margent with variety of quotations that blusheth not to cite so frequently as M. Abbot doth such partial writers But no man I hope wil be so foolish as to giue credit vnto any thing that is no better verified then by the verdict of such false witnesses For to cal one of them to giue testimony is no better then after our English prouerbe to hidde a man aske one of his fellowes whether he be a theefe or no. Againe there is another circumstance in the citing of his late partial authors which maketh it yet more absurd and ridiculous For he sticketh not to produce the credit of a seely writer of this last hundred yeares for verification of a matter done more then a thousand yeares before he was borne For example to proue that Pope Eleutherius acknowledged Lucius King of our Country 1400. yeares past to be supreame gouernour in causes Ecclesiastical Page 26. M. Abbot alleageth Holinshed a Chronicler of our age what a jest is this how knew this late writer what passed so long before his owne time was there not any one Hystoriographer more ancient then he neither Latin nor English that could tel any tidings of such a matter And yet M. Abbot is so il aduised as to perswade vs to receiue it vpon his seely poore credit Of the like stuffe is that in another place of his booke Page 60. to wit that Syritius Bishop of Rome who liued about 1200. yeares agoe was a noueller and that by the worshipful verdict of Polidore Virgil who liued eleauen hundred yeares after him What are learned men growne so carelesse of their credit that they dare let passe to the print such doting follies and so grosse absurdities this may serue for a note of his ouersight in alleadging his owne pew-fellowes for vpright and indifferent vmpeers and late moderne authors for the certainety of ancient matters Now to his citations of the more authentike approued writers whome he doth greatly abuse in diuers and sundry fashions The first and most gentle is when he doth cite their wordes truly but doth apply them cleane contrary to their meaning For example in his Epistle to the Kinges Majesty be approueth his Highnesse course for the answering of Catholike bookes producing for it this sentence out of S. Bernard That though thereby the Heretike arise not from his filth yet the Church may be confirmed in her faith M. Abbot meaning as the sequele of his speech doth import that if thereby men of the Roman religion wil not be conuerted from their errors yet the good Protestants may be confirmed in their new faith which is very farre wide from S. Bernardes expresse declaration as else-where so in that very place For that deuout holy Father was so farre off from disswading any man from the Roman faith that he wisheth al men to make their recourse vnto the See of Rome for resolution of al doubts in faith these be his wordes to Pope Innocentius We must referre to your Apostleship Epist 190. al the scandals and perils vvhich may fal in matter of faith specially because the defects of faith must be holpen where faith cannot faile for to what other See was it euer said Luc. 22. vers 31. I haue prayed for thee Peter that thy faith doe not faile See then what Church S. Bernard would confirme in her faith not the Protestant but the Roman Moreouer in that very discourse out of which M. Abbot â—icketh the former sentence Serm. 66. S. Bernard doth in particuler describe those Heretikes whome he perswaded to arise from their filth to be such as held the Church not to haue beene visible for many yeares but to haue lyen hidde in corners Item that vvould not beleeue â—hat any soules departed went to Purgatory but either to heauen or to hel presently and so defrauded the dead of the prayers of the liuing Also such as vvould disswade from praying to the Saints these and such like are those Heretikes by S. Bernardes judgement whome he would haue to rise from the drosse and dregs of such erronious opinions and returne vnto the Roman Catholike faith Now judge with what conscience M. Abbot could cul some wordes out of the same discourse to perswade men by the countenance of S. Bernard to forsake praying to Saints and for the dead and the whole Roman religion so strongly established by that reuerend religious Father in the very same place This may suffice for a proofe of his misapplying the Fathers sentences wherein he offendeth as often and as grieuously I thinke as euer did any Christian writer as shal be hereafter shewed Now to another tricke of his no lesse shameful which is the misconstruing of their wordes let this serue for a paterne Against the worshipping of Images he produceth the authority of S. Gregory Bishop of Rome Page 104. Commending as he fableth the zeale of
purpose for the Apostle saith not that he taught any one article which the coÌ„mon sort of the Iewes did beleeue but such things as the Prophets said should come to passe Who knowes not that they fore-saw and fore-told many thinges that were no articles of faith in their daies and touching these very particulars how many of the Iewes did beleeue that their Messias should die so shameful a death or that Mâ—ises law should be abrogated by their Messias and that the Gospel of Christ should be preached vnto al nations al these vvere great nouels and exceeding scandalous to the body of the Iewes wherefore though some better learned among them and more religiously affected might vnderstand the Prophets speaking of those points yet vvere they farre from the common reach perswasion of that people of the Iewes from these points that the Iewes beleeued al that Christ taught and al that he coÌ„manded his Apostles to deliuer to al nations M. Abbot runneth like a vvandering Planet to a third that al which the Apostles taught they committed to writing vvhich is notwithstanding as false as any of the former for many of them vvho neuer ceassed to preach left not one sentence in vvriting behinde them and he that wrote most did not write the hundreth part of that which he taught by word of mouth We know vvel that they left the Gospel in writing and many other most diuine and rare instructions in their Epistles vvherefore he needed not cite Ireneus to witnesse that which no man is ignorant off but that they wrote al which they preached or al thinges necessary to saluation Ireneus saith not a word but plainly signifieth the contrary vvhere he most sagely counsaileth al men Euseb hist Eccles lib. 5. cap. 19. when any controuersie in religion ariseth to make their recourse to the most ancient Churches where the Apostles had conuersed amongst which he commendeth the Roman for principal of al the rest and from them to take their resolution he then was of opinion that the decision of al controuersies vvere not to be searched out of the vvritten word but rather to be taken from the resolution of the Church De Praescriptionibus Oh but Tertullian saith That beleeuing this we desire to beleeue no more because we first beleeue that there is nothing else for vs to beleeue Beleeuing this beleeuing what the vvritten word only nothing lesse for in that very Treatise his principal drift is to proue that Heretikes cannot be confuted out of the written word but by ancient customes traditions which he calleth Praescriptions but saith he when we beleeue the whole doctrine of Christ both written and deliuered by Apostolical tradition then we desire to beleeue no more of any vpstart Heretikes new deuises To S. Augustine I answere first that those be not his formal wordes which he citeth Secondly admitting the sence if it be rightly taken I say that these wordes Gallat 1. If any man or Angel shal preach any thing besides that which is writen vvhere he alludeth to the Apostles like vvordes are to be vnderstood as S. Augustine himselfe expoundeth those of the Apostle that is If any man shal preach contrary to that which is written For this is his owne interpretation Aug. lib. 17. cont Faust. cap. 3. The Apostle saith not more then you haue receiued but otherwise then you haue receiued for if he had so said he had prejudiced himselfe who desired to come to the Thessalonians to supply what was wanting to their faith He that supplies addeth that wanted but doth not take away any thing that was before so that you see when he faith that nothing is to be preached besides that vvhich is vvritten his meaning is nothing vvhich is contrary to it allowing withal that much more conformable to it may be added for a supply to make it ful and perfect M. Abbot hauing in few lines run ouer 4. large questions to wit first That the Prophets and Patriarkes beleeued no principal points of the Roman faith secondly that Christ deliuered nothing but what the Iewes before hand beleeued thirdly that the Apostles preached the same and no other to the Gentiles fourthly that whatsoeuer they preached they afterwardes wrote he fiftly addeth that the Protestants receiue and beleeue al the written word Whence he wil haue it to follow finally that the Protestants are very good Iewes and doe jumpe just with them in al articles of faith and consequently are true Catholikes so that in M. Abbots reckoning before you can be a true Protestant Catholike you must first become a good honest Iewe. Behold what a round this man is driuen to walke how many brakes of thornes he is forced to breake through ere he can come to make any shew of proofe that the Protestants are Catholikes the matter is so improbable I haue already declared how false euery one of his former foure propositions be the fift is as vntrue and more if more may be then any of the other and he plaies the sophister in it egregiously to begge that which is principally in question How proues he that Protestants receiue and beleeue al the writen word hath he so litle wit and judgement as to thinke that we would freely graunt him that for to omit that they receiue not but reject diuers bookes of the old Testament because they vvere not in the Canon of the Iewes or doubted off by some in the primitiue Church by which reason they might refuse as many of the new doe they rightly vnderstand and beleeue truly al that is vvritten in that blessed booke of Gods vvord nothing lesse Doe they giue credit to our Sauiour IESVS Christ himselfe telling them a Math. 26. v. 27. 28. This is my BODY that shal be broken for you this is my BLOVD that shal be shedde for you b Iohan. 20. vers 23. Whose sinnes yee shal forgiue on earth shal be forgiuen in heauen c Math. 16. vers 18. Thou art PETER and vpon this Rocke wil I build my Church c. and the gates of hel shal not preuaile against it d Math. 20. vers 8. Cal the worke-men that had laboured in his vine-yearde and pay them their hire e Iacob 2. vers 24. Doe you see that by workes a man is justified and not by faith only f 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 c. g Ibidem 16. Confesse therefore your sinnes one to another these and an hundred more plaine texts recorded in that fountaine of life vvherein our Catholike Roman doctrine is deliuered in expresse tearmes to wit The Real presence of Christes body in the Sacrament That Priests haue power to pardon sinnes That Christ built his Church vpon S. Peter That good workes doe in justice deserue eternal life That
haue to euery place picked by M. Abbot out of S. Paul in fauour of their religion opposed another out of the same Epistle that speaketh more plainly against them for vs I vvil here out of the aboundance of testimonies vvhich the same S. Paul vvhom the simple Protestants take to be wholy for them beareth to our doctrine set downe some store euen in defence of those very points vvhich M. Abbot hath made special choise off to object against vs. To beginne with the first there is plaine testimony that we are justified before God by vvorkes vvhich I cited before Rom. 2. v 13. With God the doers of the law shal be justified There is much for freewil witnesse this Ibid 6. vers 12. 13. Let not sinne therefore raigne in your mortal body that you obey the concupiscence thereof but neither doe you exhibite your members instruments of iniquitty vnto sinne but exhibite your selues to God of dead men aliue and your members instruments of justice to God for sinne shal not haue dominion ouer you for you are not vnder the law but vnder grace See how the Apostle maketh it in the power and vvil of euery man indued with Gods grace either to doe wel or to doe euil and that sinne hath no such dominion ouer them but that they may doe wel if they wil concurre with Gods grace Item that it is not grace which doth al but a man must worke with grace and exhibite the powers of his soule as instruments towardes the producing of good workes vvhich is flatly our doctrine of freewil And before we depart from this matter of justification as M. Abbot doth very quickly you shal heare more of it out of the same Apostle he teacheth expresly that a man in the state of grace may fulfil the law in these wordes Ibid. cap. 8. vers 3. For that which was impossible to the law in that it was weakned by flesh God sending his Sonne in the similitude of the flesh of sinne euen of sinne damned sinne in the flesh that the justfication of the law might be fulfilled in vs who walke not according to the flesh but according to the spirit Which is seconded in the thirtenth chapter where he concludeth Ibid. vers 9. 10. loue to be the fulnesse of the law hauing before said that he who loueth his neighbour fulfilleth the law And as for that certainty of saluation vvhich many Protestants bragge off the Apostle doth vvholy dispossesse them of it first in the place before cited vvhere he willeth Rom. 11. vers 20. them that stand right in the true faith to beware that they fal not and assureth them that they shal fal as others had done before them if they did not diligently looke vnto it Else vvhere he aduiseth vs Philip. 2. vers 12. with feare and trembling to worke our saluation Marke how two points of the Protestant doctrine be wounded in one sentence and two of ours confirmed both that vve must worke our saluation it comes not then by only faith and that with feare and trembling we are not then assured of it before hand by the certainty of faith which excludeth al feare and doubt of it Now that we ought to haue a firme hope of saluation S. Paul teacheth vs Rom. 5. v. 2. We haue accesse through faith in to this his grace wherein we stand and glory in the hope of the Sonnes of God Also Ibid. 8. v. 24. For by hope we are saued Item vve giue thankes to God c. Colloss 1. v. 5. for the hope that is laid vp for you in heauen With whom S. Peter consorteth 1. Pet. 1. vers 3. Blessed be God and the Father of our Lord IESVS Christ who according to his great mercy hath regenerated you into a liuely hope vnto an incorruptible crowne c. laid vp in heauen Not to prosecute al the particular points of justification which haue euery one good ground in the Apostle S. Paul as in that question may be seene the very faith whereby Abraham was and we are justified is no such kind of faith as the Protestants claime to be justified by that is by an apprehension and drawing of Christs righteousnesse to themselues but that faith vvhereby we beleeue al thinges to be true which God hath reuealed as S. Paul declareth in the fourth to the Romans where he reporteth Rom. 4. v. 19. Abraham to haue beene justified by beleeuing that God according to his promise would giue him a Sonne and make him the Father of many nations so that finally there is not a word in S. Paul vvhich in his owne meaning maketh for any one peece of the Protestants justification but heapes of testimonies for euery branch of justification as we beleeue it Now I come to the other points named by M. Abbot There is nothing saith he in S. Paul for the merit of single life But he is greatly mistaken for the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 7. vers 32.33 34. That the care of the single and vnmarried is to please God and their study to thinke vpon those thinges that appertaine vnto God and how they may be holy both in body and in spirit vvhich must needes be more acceptable in Gods sight then to be carping for this world and caring how to please their yoke-mate To this we adde Monkish vowes of which if he were worthy to be a good Abbot he vvould speake more respectiuely somwhat S. Paul hath of the vow of chastity which is one of their principal vowes for he auoucheth 1. Tim. 5. vers 12. certaine widowes worthy of damnation because they broke the same former vow of chastity And S. Paul himselfe Act. 18. vers 18. shoare his head in Cenchris because he had a vow vvhich was the vow of a Nazarite not much vnlike for the time though much inferiour vnto the vow of religious persons see of that vow the sixt Chapter of the booke of Numbers There is nothing saith M. Abbot in S. Paul of praier for the dead vvhich is not true for he teacheth that some of the faithful who haue 1. Cor. 3. v. 13 built vpon the right foundation hay stubble and such like trash shal notwithstanding at the day of our Lord be saued yet so as through fire Which the ancient * SS Aug. in ps 37. Hier. l. 2. cōt Iouin 13. Ambros in hūc locū Gregor in psal 3. poenit entialē Doctors doe take to be the fire of Purgatory Now if many vvhiles the drosse of their vvorkes be purged doe lie in fire it wil easily follow thereof that euery good soule who hath any Christian compassion in him vvil pray for the release of their Christian brother out of those torments I come now to Images and Relikes of vvhich he affirmeth that S Paul saith nothing vvhere was the good-mans memory vvhen he wrote this or remembring the matter vvel enough was he so
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
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
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
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