is none like him in the earth and considering what Iob elsewhere saith b Cap. 9.2 How should a man be iust before God answereth him in this sort c Aug. de peccat merit remiss lib. 2. ca. 10. SecunduÌ„ moduÌ„ coÌ„uersationis humanae perhibet ei Deus tam magnuÌ„ iustiae testimoniuÌ„ Ipse auteÌ„ se metuens ex regula illa iustitiae quam sicut potest conspicit apud Deum in veritate scit quia ita est quia non erit homo iustus ante Deum According to a measure of humane conuersation God giueth him this so great testimonie of righteousnesse but he himselfe being afraid of himselfe according to that rule of righteousnesse which as he can he seeth with God knoweth in truth that so it is that there shall not a man be found iust before God Thus he saith againe that d Ibid. ca. 12. Ex hominum qui in terra sunt coÌ„paratione laudatur he was commended in comparison of men liuing vpon earth Hereby then it appeareth that there is nothing in these words of Iobs commendation that auaileth M. Bishop any whit at all Which that it may the better appeare Iob saith of himselfe as the vulgar Latine translateth e Iob. 9.28 Verebat omnia opera mea I was afraid of all my workes Whereof what we are to conceiue we may esteeme by that that Gregory Bishop of Rome speaketh by occasion of other words of the same Iob that f Grego Moral lib. 9. ca. 1. Sanctus vir quia omne virtutis nostrae meritum vitiuÌ„ esse coÌ„spexit si ab interno arbitro districté iudicetur rectè subiungit si voluero c. the holy man because he saw all the merit of our vertue to be faulty if it be strictly iudged by him that iudgeth within saith rightly If I will contend with him I shall not be able to answer him one for a thousand To which purpose he saith afterwards againe that g Ibid. cap. 8. Interrogationi illius homo respondere non sufficit quia si remota tunc pietate discutitur in illo examine etiaÌ„ iustorum vita succumbit man is not able to answer to God questioning or reasoning with him because if he be sifted without fauour the life euen of the iust quaileth in that examination This made Iob afterwards to say of himselfe againe h Iob. 39.37 Behold I am vile what shall I answer thee I will lay my hand vpon my mouth Whereupon Hierome saith against the Pelagians i Hieron cont Pelag. lib. 2. Ecce Iob noster immaculatus sine querela quali iustitiae fine coronatur vt miserecordia Dei indigeat Behold our Iob so innocent and without reproofe with what end of righteousnesse he is crowned that he standeth in neede of mercy at Gods hands By all which it may appeare how impertinently M. Bishop alledgeth the words of Iames to affirme the perfection of Iobs workes Yea what a mad connexion doth he make S. Iames saith k Iam. 1.4 Let patience haue a perfect worke that you may be perfect and entire failing in nothing Therefore if Iob remained patient then his workes were perfect He should vnderstand that a man may remaine patient and yet his patience not altogether perfect being resisted and interrupted by the weakenesse and rebellion of the flesh euen as came to passe in holy Iob as may appeare by many of his owne speeches and by the reproofe that God vsed to him in the end l Iob. 39.35 Is this to learne to striue with the almighty he that reprooueth God let him answer to it Therefore the remaining of patience doth not prooue it selfe to be perfect much lesse prooueth it the perfection of other workes The perfect worke of patience intended by Saint Iames is perseuerance whereby we continue and grow forward to that perfection which our Sauiour Christ setteth as a marke for vs to aime at m Maâ— 5.48 Be ye perfect as your heauenly Father is perfect but yet still finde cause so long as we liue here to say with the Apostle n Phil. 3.10 Not as though I were alreadie perfect If Maister Bishop thinke that here we can be perfect and encier lacking nothing let him remember what Saint Hierome saith o Hieron cont Pelag lib 1 Omniâ— habere nullo indigere virtutis est eius qui peccatum noÌ„ fecit nec inuentus est in ore eius dolus To haue all things and to want nothing is a matter of his vertue who did no sinne neither was guile found in his mouth Let him not therefore dreame of it p Ephe 4.13 till we all meete together vnto a perfect man and vnto the measure of the age of the fulnesse of Christ But as touching perfection more hereafter That which he alledgeth spoken by Dauid concerning himself is absurdly forced to his purpose whilest he vrgeth it as simply generally spoken which was spoken only in a special respect q Psal 17.3 There was no iniquitie found in him as touching any imagination or practise against Saul wherof he was vniustly and wrongfully accused but otherwise simply speaking of himselfe he saith r Psal 38.4 Mine iniquities are gone ouer my head and as a weightie burden they are too heauie for me Å¿ 130.3 O Lord if thou be extreame to marke iniquities who shall abide it t 143.2 Enter not into iudgement with thy seruant O Lord for in thy sight no man liuing shall be iustified Hereby therefore it is plaine also that that which is said of Dauid that u 1. King 15.5 he turned from nothing that the Lord commaunded him all the daies of his life but onely the matter of Vâ—ias the Hittite is to be vnderstoode according to the occasion whereof it is spoken the text setting downe before the wickednesse of Abiâ—am in his reigne and gouernement ouer the Kingdome of Iudah sinning himselfe by publike idolatrie and causing the people also to sinne with him To him his Father Dauid is opposed as touching lawes and publike gouernement and direction of his people that he turned not aside from the commaundements of the Lord nor caused any publike scandall or offence but onely in commaunding the death of O ij â—h the Hittite for colouring the adulterie committed 〈…〉 â—ith his wife As touching the third proofe that hee bringeth out of Saint Paules wordes to the Corinthians it is apparent by the place it selfe that it is very absurdly wrested For Saint Paul speaketh there of building by the preaching of the Gospell as is cleare by the wordes immediatly going before x 1. Cor. 3.10 According to the grace of God giuen vnto me as a skilfull Maister builder I haue laid the foundation and another buildeth thereon but let euery one take heede how he buildeth vpon it Then signifying the foundation whereupon the building is to stand to be Iesus Christ â—e prosecuteth that caueat giuing
to seeke of that vse which M. Bishop maketh of it that this anger of ours against our selues is a price of satisfaction for the appeasing of Gods anger To this being the very point he saith neuer a word he telleth vs of reuenge but he prooueth not that this reuenge is a matter of satisfaction We say that to this reuenge of true and faithfull repentance God graunteth remission of sinnes but we say he graunteth it because we seeke it not in the merit of our reuenge but onely in the bloud of Iesus Christ 15 W. BISHOP Lastly saith M. Perkins They make three works of satisfaction Prayer Fasting and Almes-deedes For the first it is meere foolishnesse to think that a man by prayer can satisfie for his sins it is all one as if you had said that a begger by asking an almes can deserue the almes or a debtor by requesting his creditor to pardon his debt should thereby pay his debt That Prayer doth appease Gods iustice and obtaine pardon God himselfe is witnesse Psal 49. saying Call vpon me in the day of tribulation and I will deliuer thee Prayer cannot be made without faith in Gods power and hope in his goodnesse and therefore must needes be pleasing in Gods sight by prayer we humble our selues before God and acknowledge his â—mnipotencie and our infirmity By prayer we lament with bitter teares our owne ingratitude folly and wickednes and bewaile the grieuousnes of our sinnes such prayer made King Dauid as his Psalmes do testifie water his couch with teares making them his foode day and night and by them he satisfied for his former offences So did a farre greater sinner then he â— Paral. 33. King Manasses who falling into tribulation prayed vnto the Lord his God and did great penance before the God of his fathers and prayed and intreated earnestly and God heard his prayers brought him back againe to Ierusalem into his Kingdome Now to M. Perkins Similes A begger doth not deserue his almes because he makes not this former kind of prayer but the short sleight one of the Protestants from the lips outward The like we say of a debter whose creditor being a needy man will not be paid without mony but God who needs none of our goods highly esteemeth of an humble contrite heart grieued much for hauing sinned in the sight of God and humbly suing vnto him for pardon Math. 18. To such a one he said Did I not forgiue thee all thy debt because thou besoughtest me R. ABBOT Maister Bishops arguments are like the foxes whelpes neuer a one better then other and all starke naught It is strange to see what shuffling and shifting he vseth to make some good shew of a bad cause The question is whether prayer be a worke of satisfaction that is a worke of that woorth and price as that by the merit thereof we make God a iust and sufficient recompence for the offence that we haue done For the proofe hereof he alledgeth the sentence of the Psalme a Psal 50.15 Call vpon me in the time of trouble and I wil heare thee So then his reason is this God hath promised to heare vs when we pray vnto him therefore prayer is a worke of satisfaction As much as if he should say the prince promiseth a traitour vpon his submission and intreatie to giue him his pardon therefore his submission and intreaty is a sufficient recompence for his treason We may see how maruellously the Romane religion sharpeneth mens eye-sight that they can see mans satisfaction there where God onely signifieth his owne merciful disposition Yea but God doth thereby witnesse that prayer doth appease Gods iustice and obtaine pardon Yea but what need a pardon when the sin is already pardoned for prayer is made a worke of satisfaction after the forgiuenesse of the sinne as I haue shewed before A very ridiculous deuice that God first remitteth the trespasse and we afterwards for a punishment and to make God amends and satisfaction must say Forgiue vs our trespasses Therefore when he speaketh of obtaining pardon he doth but seeke by words of truth to colour absurd dotages of falshood and error The vse of prayer is indeed not to make satisfaction but to craue pardon It appeaseth Gods iustice by the intreating of his mercie whilest we beseech him to heare vs not for our prayers sake but for Christs sake not by the merit of our satisfaction but by vertue of his intercession not for the works sake which we do but for his truths sake for that he hath promised so to do to them that call vpon him By our prayer we request him to forgiue vs that is not to vrge vs to satisfaction and is it not an absurd fancy to affirme prayer it selfe to be a satisfaction And what do men in this case but mocke and dally with God in asking him forgiuenesse when in the meane time they thinke to make him a full and iust requitall of his wrongs so that there shall be nothing to be forgiuen For what remaineth to be forgiuen where there is yeelded a sufficient recompence for the offence done M. Bishop goeth on and telleth vs that prayer cannot be made without faith It is true by faith it is that our prayer obtaineth all things at Gods hand But of faith it is true which S. Ambrose saith that b Ambros de Poenitent lib. 2. cap. 8. Tanquam ex syngrapha fides impetrat noÌ„ tanquam ex debito it obtaineth as by deed of gift not by way of debt It looketh not to our satisfaction but to the promise of God through the mediation of Iesus Christ Further he alledgeth idlely and impertinently that prayer is pleasing vnto God that by it we humble our selues before him acknowledging his omnipotencie and our owne infirmitie that thereby we lament and bewaile the grieuousnesse of our sinnes He mentioneth king Dauid watering his couch with teares and making them his food day and night Manasses greatly humbling himself as the text saith not doing great penance as he translateth intreating the Lord so as that the Lord heard him c. Now all these things are according to the Prouerbe Pro rastris ligones we cal for rakes and he sends vs mattocks we demand one thing and he answereth another We say that prayer is pleasing to God we confesse all these vses and effects thereof but what is all this to the proouing of satisfaction how doth hee make it appeare that that which Dauid and Manasses did they did it with opinion or purpose to make satisfaction for their sinnes I would aske him here with what face he could thus set himselfe to delude his Reader with empty shadowes and shewes of vaine discourse but that I see his whole booke in a manner is made of such delusions But here to shew the absurdity of this assertion of theirs that prayer is a matter of satisfaction M. Perkins had said that it is
abominations or if they haue in any part bene deuised by others yet she hath licked all those monstrous and ilfauoured bastards to their forme The Church of Rome I say that now is we apply nothing to the Church of Rome that then was which he fondly inculcateth without cause The mother we confesse was a chast matron but the daughter is growne to be a filthie harlot W. BISHOP But that it is now become idolatrous M. Perkins doth proue by his second reason gathered also I warrant you right learnedly out of the text it selfe where it is said that the tenne hornes which signifie ten kings Cap. 17. ver 16. shall hate the whore and make her desolate and naked which as he saith must be vnderstood of Popish Rome For whereas in former times all the kings of the earth did submit themselues to the whore now they haue begun to withdraw themselues and to make her desolate as the kings of Bohemia Denmarke Germany England Scotland and other parts In these his words is committed a most foule fault by grosse ouersight and ignorance in the very text What be England Scotland Denmarke as for Bohemia ruled by a Catholike Emperor it must be omitted as also many States of Germany be these Kingdoms your principall pillars of the new Gospell comprehended within the number of the ten mentioned there in S. Iohn which hate the harlot Yes marry Why then they are enemies of Christ and Satans souldiers for in the 13. verse it is said of these that they shall deliuer their power vnto the beast which signifieth either the diuell or Antichrist and shall fight with the Lambe and the Lambe shall ouercome them because he is Lord of Lords and King of Kings Is not this doating in an high degree to infame so notoriously them of whom he wold speake most honor and to make the speciall Patrons of their new Gospell the diuels captaines and fiercely to wage battell against Christ Iesus See how heate of wrangling blindeth mens iudgements R. ABBOT The direct conclusion intended by M. Perkins is that S. Iohns prophecie was not accomplished in heathenish Rome whereupon it remaineth to be vnderstood of the Church of Rome The argument which he vseth to that purpose is inuincible and M. Bishop cunningly ouerslippeth it without saying any thing directly to it He chargeth M. Perkins with most foule fault and grosse ouersight and ignorance in the text and with being blinded with heate of wrangling when he himselfe poore soule knoweth not what he saith or if he do know then carieth himselfe most impudently therein The case is plaine if we do but consider that the beast and the harlot belong both to one as S. Iohn giueth vs to vnderstand by describing a Apoc 17.3.7 the woman to be sitting vpon the beast in respect whereof the Rhemish Diuines do name b Rhem. TestaÌ„ Annotat. Apoc. 131. the whore and the beast and Antichrist all as one So Ferus their Preacher of Mentz saith c Ferus in Mat. 24. Abhominationem disolationis quae est regnuÌ„ Antichristi Ioannes in Apocalypsi nunc quâ—deÌ„ per Bestiam cui draco potestatem suam dedit nunc per mulierem bestâ—â— insidentem intelliga c. The abomination of desolation which is the kingdome of Antichrist Iohn in the Apocalypse vnderstandeth sometimes by the beast to which the Dragon gaue power sometimes by the woman sitting vpon the beast and making all to drinke of the wine of her fornication S. Iohn then giueth vs to vnderstand that ten kings should arise out of the dissolution of the Empire as hath bene said Of these ten kings he saith d Ver. 13. These haue one mind and shall giue their power and authoritie to the beast Hereupon it shall follow that together with the beast e Ver. 14. they shall fight against the Lambe that is against Iesus Christ Afterward it shall come to passe that those ten kings f Ver. 16. shall hate the whore that sitteth vpon the beast and shall make her desolate and naked and shall eate her flesh and burne her with fire For that it may appeare how they shall giue their power to the beast and yet hate the whore that is submit themselues to Antichrists state and gouernment and yet hate the Babylon wherein he hath raigned he addeth g Ver. â—7 For God hath put in their hearts to fulfill his will and to do with one consent for to giue their kingdome to the beast vntill the words of God be fulfilled So then vntill the words of God be fulfilled and he haue performed what in his secret iudgement he hath thereof decreed those ten kings shall submit themselues to the whore to the beast that is to Antichrist raigning in his Babylon But when God hath finished his worke otherwise then the kingdome of Antichrist shall be ouerthrowne the kings that before were subiect shall withdraw their obedience from him they shall hate the whore of Babylon the citie of the beast of Antichrist and hauing stript her of the state and dominion wherby she was aduanced and raigned ouer them they shall furiously bend themselues against her vntill they haue vtterly destroyed her These things we see cannot belong to the dayes of the heathen Emperours as before is said because the diuision of the Empire and these ten kings were not in those times It remaineth therefore that the prophecie belongeth to times afterwards succeeding Now being so vnderstood as necessarily it must be we see the same in part alreadie fulfilled in the Church of Rome and God in his good time will fulfill the rest The Empire hath bene diuided into many kingdomes those kings haue all submitted their scepters to the power and authoritie of the Bishop of Rome He hath plaid the Lord and tyrant ouer them and they haue patiently suffered him so to do Yet God at length hath opened some of their eyes alreadie and they haue learned to see the deceits of Antichrist and to hate the same The like mercie he will shew to the rest in his good time and they shall ioyntly apply themselues to worke the confusion of that wicked strumpet So then they whom God hath alreadie called are not now as M. Bishop cauilleth the enemies of Christ and Satans souldiers they were so so long as they gaue their power and kingdome to the beast but now they are Gods armie and the captaines of the Lords hoast to fight his battels against the beast and the whore vntill they haue wrought his iudgement vpon them Weigh the text gentle Reader and consider well how readily it yeeldeth thee that that we say thereof and hereby conceiue in what a pitifull case M. Bishop was when he was faine to passe it ouer as he hath done Yet his fellowes are beholding to him that he layeth lustily about him with words and seemeth to haue a good courage howsoeuer if he weighed the place at all it could not be but that in
in hoc nos gloâ—â—aâ—imur The name Lateinos saith he conteining the number of sixe hundred sixtie sixe is very likely because the truest kingdome hath that name For they are the Latins that now raigne but neither will we presume of this Irenaeus himselfe saith It is verie likely M. Bishop telleth vs that Irenaeus saith It is the most vnlikely of all other hereby let it appeare who best deserueth the name of a lying author Againe he saith that Irenaeus meaneth it to be a proper name whereas we make it an appellatiue But this appeareth to be false by the reason that is giuen by Irenaeus of the likelihood of the name For if he should haue that name of the kingdome and countrey where he should raigne as the words of Irenaeus import then it is manifest that it should not be his proper name Thirdly he alledgeth that Irenaeus maketh f Ï„. 300. Ï‚. 5. â— 10. Ï„. 300. α. 1. Ï…. 50.  666. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a more likely word I mention not these things in the same order as he hath set them downe but as they yeeld themselues most conueniently to bee spoken of Now it is true that Irenaeus saith that that name is g Omnium nominum quae apud nos inueniuntur magis side dignum est most worthy to be beleeued but that helpeth M. Bishop nothing because that name by the Popes owne decrees lighteth fully vpon himselfe For Titan as Irenaeus noteth is the name of the sunne and the Pope maketh himselfe h Decretal Gregor de maiorit obed ca. solitae Quanta est inter solem Lunam tanta inter Pontifices reges differentia the Sunne and the Emperour the Moone and will haue vs to thinke that so much as the Moone is lesser then the Sunne so much is the Emperour inferiour to him Titan is a name applied to Idols saith Irenaeus and what is the Pope but an Idoll caried vp and downe vpon mens shoulders like an Idoll bedecked like an Idoll publikly adored and worshipped like an Idoll Titan saith he is a name containing ostentation of reuenge and who hath euer more proudly vaunted reuenge then the Pope hath done whose stile against such as offend him vsually is this i 25. q. 1. Generali We decree that he shall bee vtterly accursed k Decretal de haeret cap. Ad aebolendam we bind him with a bond of perpetuall curse l Extrauag de offic delegati cap. Sedes Apostolica passim let him know that he shall incurre the indignation of Almightie God and of the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul yea and not onely by words but by deeds hath made euen the earth to grone and the Princes thereof to stagger and fall vnder the burden of his reuenge But of this name also Irenaeus will affirme nothing and therfore fourthly M. Bishop saith that Irenaeus leaueth it vncertaine and doubtfull what his name shall be And so he doth indeed but with this direction that m Certius sine periculo est sustinere adimpletionem prophatiae the surest way and without danger is to waite for the fulfilling of the prophecie Now the fulfilling of the prophecie hath made that cleere and certaine to vs which some did coniecture then and could but coniecture beeing so many hundred yeares before the fulfilling of it The number of the name of n Apoc. 13.18 the beast that is of Antichrist is set downe in the thirteenth chapter Afterwards in the seueÌ„teenth chapter many things are further added for the better vnderstanding of all that went before Now there we vnderstand that Antichrist shall be o Apoc. 17.9.10 a king that is as before hath bene sayd the highest gouernour of a state We know also by experience that a king taketh his name of the countrey or place or state whereof he is king Thus are we wont to name kings the king of England the king of Denmarke the French king the Spanish king We must therfore conceiue likewise that Antichrist being a king must take his name of his kingdome of the citie or countrey ouer which he raigneth The place where Antichrist shall raigne is set forth to be p Ver. 9.18 the citie vpon seuen hils raigning then ouer the kings of the earth which is vndoubtedly the citie of Rome Antichrist therefore must haue his name from the inhabitants and people of Rome ouer whom hee is to raigne and the name that hee taketh from them which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Latine or Romane fully expresseth the number sixe hundred sixtie sixe But to giue vs yet further light it is noted that he shall be q Ver. 9.10 the seuenth king of the Latines and hee shall bee together with r Vers 18. the ten kings to which the Empire of Rome shall be diuided The sixt king of the Latines we haue before seene was the Emperour So then after the fall of the Emperour and dissolution of the Empire the Latine king shall be the certaine and vndoubted name of Antichrist neither are we to make any question but that he is Antichrist whosoeuer is Lord and king of the Romane state But that the Pope hath euer since bene and therefore doth Turrian the Iesuite call the Popedome Å¿ Turrian de eccles ordinat minist lib. 1. cap. 2. Regnum Romanerum the kingdome of the Romanes and Nauarre the Canonist termeth the Pope t Nauar. Manual Confessar in epist dedicat ad Gregor 13. regem Latinorum the king of the Latines or Romanes and it hath bene before shewed that hee wholy chalengeth to himselfe the right and title thereof The Pope therefore without all doubt is Antichrist and we know him so to be because after the Emperor hee is become the Latine or Romane king vnder the name of the Latine or Romane Bishop by which hee is renowmed through the whole world And because we see that the seuenth king of the Latines is not one onely man but a succession of many as in the other gouernments before therefore wee know that it was not meant that Antichrist should be one onely man but a succession of many in one gouernement of the Romane state Which is the thing wherein Irenaeus erred being deceiued as it seemeth by the traditions of Papias by meanes whereof both he himselfe and others after him by his example more readily entertained sundry fables concerning Antichrist the pretence whereof the Papists now abuse to make men looke for another Antichrist and not to knowe him whom the Scripture hath described so to be W. BISHOP Thus come we at length to the end of M. Perkins proofes and reproofes in his prologue where we finding little fidelitie in his allegations of the fathers bad construction and foule ouersight in the text of holy Scripture briefly great malice but slender force against the Church of Rome we are to returne the words of his theame to all good Christians Go out
done it because he could do it He could haue made man with wings to flie but yet he hath not done it You should proue plainly out of the Scriptures that he would so do As for worthinesse it is but a matter of conceit and fancie No creature can contend vpon worth with the Creator If Adams worth were such as he speaketh of hee had beene worthy to be preserued and he may as sawcily dispute with God that he did him wrong in suffering him to fall As for that which he alledgeth as out of Master Perkins that man in this life at his last gaspe may haue such righteousnesse it is a deuice of his owne neither doth Master Perkins say any thing that should yeeld him anie such construction For conclusion he telleth vs that their doctrine is better to be liked then ours if for no other reason yet for that it doth more exalt the power and goodnesse of God more magnifie the value of Christes merits and bringeth greater dignitie vnto men Where the vaine man seeth not that by the one part of his speech he crosseth the other The thing whereto the true doctrine of the Gospell tendeth is entirely the honour and glorie of God but their doctrine forsooth serueth to bring dignitie vnto men But in that it bringeth dignitie vnto men it detracteth from the glorie of God whose light is most cleerely seene in our darknesse a 2. Cor 12.9 his power in our weaknesse his goodnesse in shewing mercy to vs that are euill his b Dan. 9.7 righteousnesse in the confession of our shame the worth of Christs merits in the true acknowledgement of our vnworthinesse and want of merits God hath appointed vs to be c Ephes 1.6 for the praise of the glorie of his grace and therefore so disposeth d 1. Cor. 1.29 that no flesh shall reioyce in his presence and e Esa 2.11 that he onely may be exalted at that day Therefore f Aug. epist 29. Cùm rex iustus sederit in throno quis gloriabitur se castum habere cor c. when the iust king shall sit vpon his throne who shall glorie that he hath a cleane heart or reioyce that he is free from sinne Our plea then must not be Merit and worth but only g 2. Tim. 1.18 to find mercie with the Lord. But the thing that they seeke for as M. Bishop telleth vs is the dignitie of man as indeed it is They labour to set vp their owne righteousnesse against the righteousnesse of God They extoll their owne Merit their owne worth The Merit of Christ onely yeeldeth matter of grace to their Free vvill to worke vpon and thereby they worke for themselues they Merit for themselues they saue themselues but in seeking this glorie to themselues they purchase their owne shame What we can alledge for imputation of Christs righteousnesse vnto vs to be our Iustification will appeare in that that followeth 3. W. BISHOP M. Perkins first reason is this That which must be our Righteousnesse before God must satisfic the iustice of the law which saith Do these things and thou shalt liue Gal. 5. but there is nothing that can satisfie that iustice of the law but the Righteousnesse and obedience of Christ Ergo. This reason is not worth a rush for when he requireth that our iustice must satisfie the iustice of the law I demaund what law he meaneth If Moses law of which those words Gal. 5. Gal. 5. Do this and thou shalt liue are spoken Then I answer with the Apostle That you are euacuated or abolished from Christ that are iustified in the law that is he is a Iew and no Christian that would haue Christian Iustice answerable to Moses law If M. Perkins would onely that men iustified must be able to fulfill Christs law I then graunt that they so be by the helpe of Gods grace which will neuer faile them before they faile of their duties But saith M. Perkins That iustice of man is vnperfect and cannot satisfie the iustice which God requires in his law Isay 6.4 and proues it out of Esay who saith All our righteousnesse is as a menstruous or defiled cloth I answer that the holy Prophet speaketh those words in the person of the wicked and therefore are madly applied vnto the righteous That he speaketh of the vvicked of that nation and of that time appeareth plainely by the text it selfe For he saith before But lo thou hast bene angrie for we haue offended and haue beene euer in sinne and after There is no man that calleth vpon thy name and standeth vp to take hold by thee And although the vvords be generall and seemes to the vnskilfull to comprehend himselfe also yet that is but the manner of preachers and specially of such as become Intercessors for others vvho vse to speake in the persons of them for vvhom they sue for if he had reckoned himselfe in that number he had lied vvhen he sayd There is none that call vpon thy name vvhen as he immediatly calleth vpon him in most vehement sort for mercie Luther and Caluin on this place all which the best learned among them marking confesse that this sentence cannot be alledged against the vertue of good vvorkes Hence gather how dexterously M. Perkins handleth holy Scripture That vvhich the Prophet spake of some euill men of one place and at one time that he applieth vnto all good men for all times and all places R. ABBOT This reason saith M. Bishop is not worth a rush but I am sure that his answer is not worth a rush as wherein we may see the absurd blindnesse of these men who take vpon them to be the only maisters of the world That saith M. Perkins vvhich must be our Righteousnesse before God must satisfie the iustice of the lavv vvhich saith Do these things and thou shalt liue inferring hereof that because no Righteousnesse of ours doth answer the iustice or Righteousnesse commaunded in the law therefore no Righteousnesse of ours but onely the imputed Righteousnesse of Christ is our Iustification before God For answer to this M. Bishop demandeth what law he meaneth whether Moses law or Christs law But we make to him a counter-demand What he meaneth by Moses law and what by Christs law He should more plainly haue declared his distinction if he would haue made an answer of it but that that we conceiue of it is that by Moses law he meaneth the ceremonies of the law by Christs law the morall law of the commandements commonly so called But had he so little vnderstanding of the law as to thinke that of the ceremoniall law it was sayd Do this and thou shalt liue Surely the ceremonies of the law were but a Col. 2.14 a handwriting against vs because they were an acknowledgement of vncleannesse and sinne and trespasse against that law that faith Do this and thou shalt liue and because an acknowledgement of sinne therefore
saluation in Christ which in the law being a transgressour thereof he could not finde But of these words enough hath bene said before in the question of l Cha. 3. Sect. 3. the Certaintie of Saluation For conclusion of this point to quit M. Bishop I will alledge the words of S. Bernard m Bernard in Cant. ser 50. Non latuit praeceptoreÌ„ praecepti ponduâ— humanas excedere viâ—es sed iudicauit vtile ex hoc ipso suae ipsos insufficientiae admoneri et vt scirent sanè ad queÌ„ iustitiae fineÌ„ niti pro viribâ—s oporteret Ergo mandando impossibilia non praeuaricatores fecit sed humiles vt omne os obstruatur subditus fiat to tus mundus Deo AccipieÌ„tes quippe mandâ—tum sentientes defectum clamabimus in coelum miserebitur nostri Deus sâ—temus in die illa quia non ex operibus iustitiae quae fecimus nos sed secundum miserecordiam suam saluos nos fecit It was not vnknowne to the commaunder that the waight of the commaundement doth exceede the strength of man but he held it expedient that hereby men should be aduertized of their owne vnsufficiencie and that they should know to what end of righteousnesse they should labour to their vtteâ—most Therefore by commaunding things vnpossible to vs he hath not made vs trespassers but humbled vs that euery mouth may be stopped and all the world may be made subiect to God For receiuing the commaundement and feeling our owne defect and want we shall cry to heauen and God will haue mercy vpon vs and we shall know at that day that not for the workes of righteousnesse which we haue done but of his owne mercy he hath saued vs. In which words he giueth vs to vnderstand that God had reason sufficient to giue the law though he knew it vnpossible for vs in this state of mortality and weakenesse perfectly to fulfill the law 44. W. BISHOP Now that iust mens workes be not sinnes which I prooue first That good works be not stained with sinne by some workes of that patterne of patience Iob Of whom it is written that notwithstanding all the diuels power and craft in tempting of him He continued still a single hearted and an vpright man Cap. 2. departing from euill and preseruing his innocencie If he continued an innocent he sinned not Againe if in all these instigations to impatience he remained patient these his workes were perfect For S. Iames saith Esteeme it my brethren all ioy Cap. 1. when you shal fall into diuers temptations knowing that the probation of your faith worketh patience And let patience haue a perfect worke that you may be perfect and entire failing in nothing 2. King Dauid thus by the inspiration of the holy Ghost speaketh of himselfe Thou hast O Lord prooued my heart Psal 16. thou hast visited me in the night thou hast tried me in fire and there was no iniquity found in me It must needes then be graunted that some of his workes at least were free from all sinne and iniquity And that the most of them were such if you heare the holy Ghost testifying it I hope you will beleeue it reade then where it is of record 3. Reg. 15. That Dauid did that which was right in the sight of our Lord and not onely in the sight of men and turned from nothing that hee commaunded him all the dayes of his life except onely the matter of Vrias the Hethite 3. The Apostle affirmeth 1. Cor. 3. That some men do build vpon the onely foundation Christ Iesus gold siluer and pretious stones that is being choise members of Christes Catholike Church doe manie perfect good workes such as being tried in the fornace of Gods iudgement will suffer no losse or detriment as he there saith expresly Wherefore they must needes be pure and free from all drosse of sinne otherwise hauing bene so prooued in fire it would haue beene found out 4. Many workes of righteous men please God Rom. 12. 1. Pet. 2. Make your bodies a quick sacrifice holy acceptable to God the same offering spirituall sacrifices acceptable to God Phil. 4. And S. Paul calleth almes bestowed on him in prison an acceptable sacrifice of sweet sauour and pleasing God But nothing infected with sinne all which he hateth deadly can please God and be acceptable in his sight God of his mercy through Christ doth pardon sin or as the Protestants speake not impute it to the person but to say that a sinfull worke is of sweet sauour before him and a gratefull sacrifice to him were blasphemie wherefore we must needs confesse that such workes which so well pleased him were not defiled with any kind of sinne Mat. 5. 1 Tim. 6. Ephes 2. Finally many workes in holy writ be called good as That they may see your good workes To be rich in good works We are created in Christ Iesus to good workes but they could not truly be called good workes if they were infected with sinne For according to the iudgment of all learned Diuines it can be no good worke that faileth either in substance or circumstance that hath any one fault in it for bonum ex integra causa malum ex quolibet defectu Wherefore we must either say that the holy Ghost calleth euill good which were blasphemie or else acknowledge that there be many good workes free from all infection of sinne R. ABBOT The wise man hauing prefixed this title That good workes be not stained with sinne which we say they be taketh vpon him in his text to proue that iust mens workes be no sinnes which no man saith they be We must beare with him because his vnderstanding doth not serue him to take that for gold wherein there is any drosse for if it did he would easily conceiue that the staine of mans sinne doth not destroy or take away the nature of the good worke which in man by man is wrought by the grace of God But leauing that peece of his folly let vs examine his proofes that good workes be stained with sinne And first he will proue it by the example of Iob because it is said of him that a Iob. 2.3 he continued still a single hearted and an vpright man departing from euill and preseruing his innocencie But it were very hard to say how M. Bishops purpose should be made good out of these words We find here a relation of Iobs goodnesse but we find nothing to proue that that goodnesse of his was no way touched or stained with sin Now the reader is to vnderstand that this coÌ„mendation of Iob set down in the 1. Chapter after repeated in the 2. chapter to shew his constancy therin was of old vrged by the Pelagian heretikes as now by M. Bishop to prooue the perfection of the righteousnesse of man But S. Austine well waighing the circumstance of the text how it is withall said There
his argument must be this Whosoeuer is bound to do the duties of the first and second Table is bound to sinne But euery man is bound to do the duties of the first and second Table therefore euery man is bound to sinne His Prosyllogisme for the proofe of his maior proposition out of his owne words must arise thus Whosoeuer necessarily sinneth in doing the duties of the first and second Table is bound to sinne but whosoeuer is bound to do the duties of the first and second Table necessarily sinneth in the doing therof therefore whosoeuer is bound to do the duties of the first and second Table is bound to sinne Here his maior proposition is apparently absurd for though a man by reason of infirmity cannot but sinne in doing his duty yet it is the duty onely that he is bound to and not to the sinne because the sinne is not implyed in the dutie but ariseth by casuall and accidentall necessitie from the condition of the man Now therefore a man may doubt whether is greater in this man his malice or his ignorance In respect of his malice we may vse to him the words of the Prophet Dauid c Psal 52.3.5 Thy tongue imagineth wickednes and with lies thou cuttest like a sharpe razor Thou hast loued to speake all words that may do hurt O thou false tongue In respect of his ignorance we may iustly scorne him as a presumptuous and sawcie companion who being of so base qualitie and not knowing how to frame an argument aright would take vpon him to encounter a whole armie of learned men and so insolently dedicate his vnlearned fooleries to the King 47. W. BISHOP First they alledge these words Enter not O Lord Psal 141. into iudgment with thy seruant because no liuing creature shall be iustified in thy sight If none can be iustified before God it seemes that none of their workes are iust in his sight Answer There are two common expositions of this place among the ancient Fathers both true but farre from the Protestants purpose The former is S. Augustines S. Ieromes De perf iustic Epist ad Ctâ—s S. Gregories in his Commentaries vpon that place who say that no creature ordinarily liueth without many veniall sinnes for the which in iustice they may be punished sharpely either in this life or else afterward in Purgatory Wherefore the best men do very prouidently pray vnto God not to deale with them according vnto their deserts for if he should so do they cannot be iustified and cleared from many veniall faults And therefore they must all craue pardon for these faults or else indure Gods iudgements for them before they can attaine vnto the reward of their good deedes The second exposition is more ordinarie with all the best Writers vpon the Psalmes as S. Hilarie S. Hierome S. Arnobius S. Euthimius and others which is also S. Augustins S. Gregories All these say Lib. ad Croâ—ia cap. 10. lib. 9. moral cap. 1. that mans iustice in comparison of the iustice of God will seeme to be no iustice at all and so take these words No creature neither man nor Angell shall be iustified in thy sight that is if his iustice appeare before thine and be compared to it For as the stars be bright in themselues shine also goodly in a cleare night yet in the presence of the glittering Sun beams they appeare not at all euen so mans iustice although considered by it selfe it be great perfect in his kind yet set in the sight presence of Gods iustice it vanisheth away and is not to be seene This exposition is taken out of Iob where he saith I know truly it is euen so that no man compared to God Iob 9. shal be iustified Take the words of the Psalme in whether sence you list that either we haue many veniall faults for which we cannot be iustified in Gods sight or else that in the sight of Gods most bright iustice ours will not appeare at all and it cannot be thereof iustly concluded that euery worke of the righteous man is stained with sinne and consequently the place is not to purpose R. ABBOT I would wish thee gentle Reader well to obserue M. Bishops twofold answer to this place The more cleare these words of Scripture are against the inherent righteousnesse of man the more notably his singular impudencie appeareth in seeking to shift them off Dauid saith it a Prophet saith it a man after Gods owne heart saith it a Psal 143.2 Enter not into iudgement with thy seruant O Lord for no man liuing shall be iustified or found iust in thy sight Now M. Bishop answâ—reth that this is spoken in respect of veniall sinnes without which no creature liueth and for which a man may in iustice be punished sharpely either in this life or in Purgatorie Where it is to be obserued that he hath told vs in the Section last saue one that veniall sinne is no formall transgression of Gods law by reason whereof they hold that b Rhem. Testim 1. Ioh. 1.8 veniall sinnes consist with true iustice and hinder it not So saith Andradius c Andrad Orth. explicat lib. 5. Iustitiam euertere nullo pacto possunt neque perfectam ab solutam legis obedientiam quoquo modo impedire They can no way ouerthrow iustice nor in any sort hinder the perfect and absolute obedience of the law So then Dauids prayer must be this Enter not into iudgement with me for veniall sinnes for by reason of veniall sinnes which hinder not but that a man is iust no man liuing shall be iustified in thy sight Which exposition being apparently lewd and shamelesse yet he hath learned of his maister Bellarmine to countenance it with the names of them who neuer thought any such thing He alledgeth Austin who in the place by him cited hath not a word to tâ—at effect which maketh him to set none downe because indeed there are none But in the place mentioned the same Austin rightly saith d Aug. de perfe iustit Superexalâ—at misericordia iudiâ—io Quod si noÌ„ esset quae spes esseâ— Quando quidem cùm rex iustâ—s federit in throâ—o quis glo ritbitur se castuÌ„ habere cor aut quis gloriabitur se esse immuâ—em à peccato Were it not that mercy reioyceth ouer iudgement what hope should there be For when the iust King shall sit vpon his throne who shall glorie that he hath a cleane heart or reioyce that he is free from sinne If no man shall be able then to challenge to himselfe a cleane heart where is that perfect iustice of workes which Master Bishop dreameth of which cannot come but from a cleane heart He citeth in the second place the reuerend Father Saint Hierome who beside that he saith nothing for him speaketh expresly and directly against him e Hieron ad Câ—esiphont Quando â—icit In coÌ„spectu tuo hoc intelligi
r August in Psal 109. Promisit hominibus diuinitatem mor talibus immortalitatem peccatoribus iustificationem abiectis glorificationem Quicquid promisit indignis promisit vt non quasi merces operibus promitteretur sed gratia à nomine suo gratis daretur quia hoc ipsā quód iustè viuit inquantum homo potest iustè viuere nō merite humani sed beneficij diuini est God promised to men participation with God immortalitie to mortall creatures iustification to sinners glorification to abiects and cast-awayes Whatsoeuer he promised he promised to men vnworthie that it might not be promised as a reward to workes but being grace might according to the name be freely giuen because to liue iustly so farre as man can liue iustly is not a matter importing mans merit but the benefite and gift of God Where plainely he sheweth that whatsoeuer God hath promised it is his meere and onely gift that to speake simply thereof it is to be bereaued of the title of a reward of workes because God promised the same when we had no workes that it is not giuen for our woorth because it was promised when we had no woorth yea and that we haue any good workes it is an effect of the same promise it cannot be thought to make any merit on our behalfe but to set foorth grace and mercie on Gods behalfe so that all is free gift all is grace and mercie and the adding of one gift and grace and mercie to another howsoeuer sometimes in some respects as hereafter we shall see the gift of God is set foorth vnto vs vnder the name of recompence and reward In a word by that that followeth I doubt not but it will appeare that the Protestants Proctor if he must needes be so tearmed hath said nothing in this behalfe but what by S. Austine and other auncient Fathers may well be defended against this Romish prater who hath great insolencie of words but sound matter of proofe he can find none at all 3. W. BISHOP But M. Perkins will neuerthelesse prooue and that by sundry reasons that their doctrine is the truth at selfe and ours falshood First by a sorry short syllogisme containing more then one whole page It is taken out of the properties of a meritorious worke which must be saith he foure first That the worke be done of our selues without the helpe of another secondly That it be not otherwise due debt thirdly That it be done to the benefit of another fourthly That the worke and reward be equall in proportion These properties he sets downe pythagorically without any proofe but inserreth theron as though he had proued them inuincibly that Christs manhood separated from the Godhead cannot merit because whatsoeuer he doth he doth it by grace receiued and should be otherwise due He might in like manner as truly say that Christs manhood vnited to the Godhead could not merit neither for he receiued his Godhead from his Father and whatsoeuer he doth is therefore his Fathers by due debt And so the good man if he were let alone would disappoint vs wholly of all merits aswell the imputed of Christs as of all ours done by virtue of his grace Wherefore we must a little sift his foure forged proprieties of merit and touching the first I say that one may by the good vse of a thing receiued by free gift merit and deserue much euen at his hands that gaue it For example the farther bestowes a Farme vpon his sonne freely who may by often presenting his Father of the pleasing fruits growing on the same deserue his further fauour yea he may by the commodities reaped out of that farme buy any thing that it shall please his father to set to sale as well as if he had neuer receiued the farme from his fathers gift Which is so common a case and so sensible that euery man of meane wit may easily reach vnto it euen so by good manuring the gifts which God freely bestoweth vpon vs we may both merit the increase of them and according to his owne order and promise purchase thereby the kingdome of heauen which is plainely proued by that parable Of the talents giuen by a king to his seruants Mat. 25. the which they employing well and multiplying were therefore esteemed worthy of farre greater and withall to be made partakers of their Lords ioyes M. Perkins then was not a litle ouerseene to put for the first proprietie of merit that it must be done by a man and of a man himselfe R. ABBOT M. Perkins saith very truly vpon noting the conditions necessarily required in a meritorious worke that the manhood of Christ considered a part from his Godhead because it is but a creature and hath all by the gift of God and doth all by bond of necessary dutie cannot merit at Gods hands Whereas M. Bishop against this saith that he might in like manner as truly say that Christs manhood vnited to the Godhead could not merit neither because he receiued his Godhead from the Father and therefore whatsoeuer he doth is his Fathers by due debt he bewrayeth his notable and absurd ignorance For Christ receiueth his Godhead of the Father to be equall to the Father not inferiour to be the same in substance and maiestie and glorie that the Father is Now duty and debt do necessarily enforce minoritie and subiection Seeing therefore there is no minority or subiection in the Godhead of the Sonne towards the Father there can be no debt or dutie of the Sonne in that respect towards the Father Thus the good man to repay him with his owne stoute is taken before he is aware in the nets of the Arian heresie which made Christ as God inferiour and subiect to the Father The merit of Christ therefore consisted in this as S. Paule noteth that being equall to God his Father and owing no debt or dutie did voluntarily humble himselfe to obedience and duty for our sakes So then M. Perrkins indeed a good man as M. Bishop shall one day see hath not by his assertion bereaued vs of the merits of Christ but hath taught how rightly to vnderstand the same But now he will a litle sift as he saith the foure forged proprieties of merit which M. Perkins hath set downe Whether they be forged or not will appeare by the sequele in the meane time his answers to them may seeme rather to haue come from the Smiths forge then out of the studie and from the learning of a Doctor of Diuinitie The first condition required in a meritorious worke properly so to be called to which by dutie debt and right for the workes sake reward is to be yeelded is that a man do it of himselfe and by his owne power For so saith Hilary a Hilar. de Trin. lib. 11. Mereri eius est qui ipse sib◠meriti acqui rendi author existi◠It is for him to merit who himselfe is to himselfe the author of getting his
meddle with the vntying of them But this matter as Maister Bishop handleth it would require somewhat further to be considered of We are therefore to vnderstand as in some part hath bene signified before that we are to put difference betwixt outward and temporall forgiuenesse respecting onely a temporall earthly benefit and that inward and spirituall forgiuenesse which serueth for the acquitting of the conscience to the obtaining of eternall life That outward and temporall forgiuenesse is not indeede to be called a forgiuenesse of the sinne but onely a forbearing of the punishment And this forbearance God yeeldeth not onely to true and faithfull repentance but also to the externall signes and tokens thereof proceeding onely from worldly sorow vpon feare of temporall plagues and punishments either imminent or incumbent For we must know that God ordereth the administration and gouernment of the world not onely for the bringing of his elect vnto eternall life but so also as serueth for maintenance of publike order and state and societie amongst men Such is the wickednesse of mans nature and pronenesse to mischiefe and violence to lasciuiousnesse and filthinesse and all kinde of iniquitie as that the state of men would grow intollerable if God did not take course both to restraine men from that enormitie and excesse of sinne whereto nature tendeth and to giue encouragement to those courses which serue for the common good and benefit of mankinde To which purpose Cyprian very rightly saith c Cypr. cont Demeir Si noÌ„ intercederet rebus humanis diuina censura quanta esset in hominibus audacia facinorum imprâ—nitate secura If Gods censure and iudgement did not interpose it selfe amidst the doings of men how great presumption would there be growing secure and carelesse by the impunitie of of sinne Now therefore when men grow to outrage extremity he sendeth amongst them his d Ezech. 14.21 sore iudgements the sword the famine the pestilence which are e Tertul. de anima cap. 14. Reuera lucs fames bella c proremediâ— deputanda tanquam consura insolescentis generis humani as it were the lopping pruning of mankind when they grow too proud and ranke and hereby he redresseth the insolencies and disorders that are found amongst them But when men vnderstanding the wrath and iudgement of God do shew their dread and feare thereof and yeeld themselues though but ciuilly to be reclaimed he sheweth himselfe outwardly appeased and satisfied and putteth vp the sword which he had drawne against them Thus though the Niniuites were heathens and infidels yet when vpon the preaching of Ionas they put on sackcloth and ashes and shewed tokens of repentance God did forbeare the destruction that he had proclaimed against them So when Ahab hearing by the message of Elias the fierce wrath of God conceiued against him did shew himselfe moued thereat by f 1. Kings 21.27.29 rending his clothes and fasting and lying in sackcloth though he were a most wicked man yet the Lord somwhat relented from the sentence that he had denounced and deferred the execution thereof from the father to the sonnes time In like sort the people of Israel when they euery while by idolatrie departed from God yet vpon humbling of themselues at the feeling of Gods heauy hand found mercy deliuerance from the tiranny of their oppressours though by the sequell it still appeared that they did it with a faithlesse and false heart Thus God yeeldeth temporall benefit to outward discipline and conformity to his lawes and sheweth his regard thereof for the course of this life euen in them towards whom he hath no purpose of euerlasting life Now although towards infidels and hypocrites vpon outward submission God shew himselfe outwardly satisfied and contented and do yeeld thereto the remitting of temporall punishments yet M. Bishop will not hereupon conclude that they haue made a satisfaction to God for their sinnes because they themselues teach that no man liuing in mortall sinne of impenitencie or infidelity can performe any worke of satisfaction vnto God So he himselfe here telleth vs that all satisfaction hath his vertue from the grace of God dwelling in vs which is giuen vs for Christes sake whereupon it followeth that where the grace of God dwelleth not by the faith of Christ there can be no vertue of satisfaction in any thing that is done The more vnshamefast man he within foure lines after to bring the Niniuites for a proofe of their satisfaction of whom he himselfe saith that it is not certaine that they had any expresse knowledge of the Messias he should haue said it is certaine that they had none and therefore were farre enough off from laying hold on his satisfaction and consequently were farre off from the participation of the grace of God But all is one with him it carieth a shew and that serueth his turne making no conscience at all of abusing the ignorance or vnaduisednesse of his Reader and onely regarding to vphold a side But now as touching spirituall forgiuenesse of sinnes for the acquitting of the conscience inwardly to God all that mourne and weepe that rend their clothes and lye in sackcloth and ashes that is that performe outward tokens of repentance are not partakers thereof The reason whereof is because these workes of themselues do spiritually yeeld no satisfaction or contentment vnto God Then do they obtaine true forgiuenesse and remission of sinnes when they are vsed only as affections wherewith we plead to the throne of the mercy of God the satisfaction of Iesus Christ that not for the things which we do but for his sake and g Math. 3.17 in him according to his promise he may be well pleased towards vs. In his name not in our owne we come vnto God for his merits not for owne we begge of him to be mercifull vnto vs testifying by our repentance the feeling and grieuance of our wounds but professing to expect in him onely the medicine for the cure Neither do we herein begge the point in question as M. Bishop alledgeth but we giue him plaine and currant answer We denie that which they affirme that workes of penance are true satisfactions to God for sinne They seeke to proue it for that God vpon the doing hereof is appeased and forgiueth sinnes We answer that where God vpon the doing hereof giueth forgiuenesse of sins it is not for the workes sake that is done but for that the doer by faith seeketh and findeth the washing away thereof in the bloud of Iesus Christ it being he onely of whom we are taught that h Col. 1.14 in him we haue redemption through his bloud euen the forgiuenesse of our sins There are that do those workes and yet haue no forgiuenesse and therefore that other in the doing thereof obtaine forgiuenesse it is not to be attributed to the workes themselues but to somwhat else that is respected therein And what is all our repentance but a
record or witnesse of it M. Bishop citeth Sozomen making mētion of that herbe also but he doth it only vpō Eusebius his credit other proofe or knowledge of it he bringeth none Now it is not possible that so famous a testimonie iustification of the name of Christ should be omitted by Iustin Martyr by Clemens Alexandrinus Origen Tertullian Arnobius Minutius Felix and others in their Apologies and defences of Christian religion against the heathen yea in the expounding of the story of that woman in the Gospell neither Origen nor Chrysostome nor Hylarie nor Ambrose nor Hierome make any mention of such a matter This I suppose should much weaken the credit and opinion of the miracle by him reported to say nothing that if any such matter had bene knowne which could not but be knowne it is not credible that it could haue stood for the space of those three hundred yeares in so many terrible persecutions wherin nothing was left vnattempted or vndone to take away all things that might giue any glorie to the name of Christ Some speech it seemeth there grew afterwards concerning it at leastwise of the standard or Image which in likelihood stood there which so soone as d Sozomen hist. lib. 5. cap. 20. Iulian the Apostata heard he sent to haue it taken away and his owne Image to be set vp in steade thereof Which being done in despite of Christ no maruell if by thunder lightning from heauen God reuenged it and turned topsi-turuie the Image which that renegate set vp against the name of Christ Yea we doubt not concerning Popish Idols and Images of Christ and his Saints but that Gods reuenge shall follow them who destroy them in contumely reproch of Christ and in despight and hatred of his name howsoeuer they themselues are abhominable also in the sight of God who are the makers and vsers of them For he who amongst the heathens so notoriously reuenged the sacriledges that were done to idoll-gods when they were done to thē vnder the name of gods will vndoubtedly reuenge the contempts that are offered and done to sacrilegious Idols in the name of Christ because their malicious purpose is therein directed against Christ himselfe The tenne tribes being diuided from Iudah built themselues altars wherewith to sacrifice to God expresly contrarie to the law of God who admitted e Deut. 12.11.13.14 no altar but in the Temple at Ierusalem but yet when Ahab and Iezabell pulled downe those altars in contempt of God and in behalfe of Baal Elias the Prophet complaineth vnto God f 1. King 19.10 Lord they haue digged downe thine altars That therfore which Sozomen reporteth of the destructiō of Iulians image serueth not to adde any credit to Popish Images if at least it be true which he alone also reporteth who in the same place reporteth some other verie fabulous and vaine things The next example of Images is so much the more impudently alledged for that in their owne Decrees those two Epistles g Dist 15. cap. Sancta Romana ex decret Gelas 1. Concil tom 2. Epistola Abagari regis ad Iesum Apocrypha Epistola Iesu ad Abagarum regem apocrypha of Abgar to Christ and of Christ to Abgar whence that fable is taken are condemned for an apocryphall or counterfet deuice It is to be noted also that h Euseb hist. lib. 1. cap. 14. Eusebius mentioneth Abgarus sending an Epistle to Christ and Christs answer to him but of this matter of Christs image he saith not one word The tale it appeareth was then begun but it was not come to perfection till afterwards Damascen that notable Idol-monger added to it another peece and to that peece Nicephorus added yet another peece and so now it serueth M. Bishop and his fellowes for an authentical and good record As for the miracles that he telleth vs of they litle auaile with vs because the one standeth wholy vpon a false ground and for the other or rather for both we know that Euagrius sometimes sheweth too little discretion in the entertaining of such tales The third instance M. Bishop himselfe distrusteth and naming first Athanasius for the reporter of it cometh in presently with either it is his or some other verie graue and ancient writers And why for saith he it is related in the seuenth generall Councell namely wherein they seemed euery man to haue put on a vizard vpon his face that they might not be seene to blush at those leud and shamefull forgeries wherewith they then almost eight hundred yeares after Christ laboured to set vp the worshipping of Idols and Images by the instigation and furtherance of a wicked Empresse vsurping and tyrannizing in the minoritie of her sonne We shall haue afterwardes further occasion to speake concerning this Councell in the meane time it is to be vnderstood that i Sigebert in Chron. anno 765. Sigebert mentioneth this matter of the Image of Christ to haue befallen as the report was 400. yeares after the time of Athanasius in the yeare of our Lord 765. at which time much good drinke was in brewing to make men drunke with the opinion of that Idol-seruice which Satan then by might and maine laboured to bring in Yet M. Bishop so directed by his maister Bellarmine is not ashamed to cite this as vnder the name of Athanasius by his name to gaine some credite to a lye Such another tale doth he tell vs out of Theodorus Lector and Metaphrastes and Nicephorus of the Image of the virgine Marie taken by Saint Luke the Euangelist of whom we reade that he was a Physition but that he was also a Painter we reade not This matter hath no record at all for sixe hundred yeares after Christ and we must beleeue it vpon their words who so long after haue deuised it of their owne heads They come too late to informe vs what Saint Luke did and because it hath no better witnesse we reiect this also for a lye The rest I omit importing onely a ciuill and historicall vse of Images as M. Bishop propoundeth which we question not onely against the seuenth Synod we except as an vnfit witnesse in this cause which from historicall vse lifted vp Images to be adored with religious and holy worship 3. W. BISHOP This briefly of Images in generall now a word or two of the signe of the Crosse which our Protestants haue banished from all their followers neuerthelesse it cannot be denied to haue bene in most frequent vse amōg the best Christians of the Primitiue Church Tertullian hath these words * De corona militis At euery going forward and returne when we dresse vs and pull on our shoes when we wash and sit downe at the lighting of candles and entring into our chambers finally when we set our selues to anie thing we make the signe of the Crosse on our fore-heads Saint Ambrose * Serm. 84. exhorts vs to begin all our workes with the signe
of Baal for the vpholding of the worship of those Calues vaunteth of u 2. King 10.16 the zeale that he had for Iehouah the Lord and the Samaritans accepting of the same worship are said therby x Ibid. ca. 17.32 to serue the Lord. Hereby theÌ„ it is plaine that an Idol is not that only which representeth that to be a God which is not but also that wherein is intended the representation worship of the true God Last of al M. Perkins alledgeth that Hierome saith that Idols are the images of dead men Adde saith M. Bishop that are taken for Gods for many Idols be images saith he all such as truly represent any person that was once liuing here but no image is an Idoll vnlesse it be taken for a God But that this is very false it is manifest because the Pagans themselues at least the wiser sort of them neuer tooke their images to be Gods yea they scorned them that thought them to be so witlesse as to vnderstand theÌ„ so y Origen cont Cels li. 7. Quis nisi sit totus fatuus haec Deos credit noÌ„ dijs dicatas statuas Who saith Celsus vnlesse he be altogether out of his wits taketh them for Gods and not for images dedicated to the Gods z Ibid. li. 1. Probabile non est inter Deos ceÌ„seri nequaÌ„ artificuÌ„ et pleruÌ„que scelestoruÌ„ hominum opera It is not probable or likely saith he that the works of base artificers who are ofteÌ„times lewd meÌ„ should be reckoned amongst the Gods So Olympius another Pagan Philosopher when he saw the people of his part dismaied at the casting downe of their images a Sozom. hist lib. 7. ca. 15 Hortatur ne à religione deficerent assereÌ„s simulachra statuas nihil aliud esse quam materiaÌ„ corruptibileÌ„ ac proinde in nihiluÌ„ potuisse redigi inhabitasse auteÌ„ his virtutes quâ—sâ—am eas iam in coelum auolasse exhorteth theÌ„ not to fall away froÌ„ their religion for as for those images they were no other but corruptible matter therfore might be brought to nought but there had dwelt in theÌ„ diuine powers and those were now gone to heauen Thus Arnobius bringeth them in excusing themselues that b Arnob. adu Gent. li. 6. Deos inquitis per simulachra veneramus by the images they worshipped the gods and Austine c Aug. in Psal 85. Jsta non co limus haec signae sunt We worship not these things these are but onely signes So Athanasius mentioneth that they pleaded for their images that d Athan. adu Jdola Aâ—unt tiltusmodi simulachra pro elementis literarum humano generi esse quae num leguni Dei notitiam condiscere possiâ—t they serued for letters which whilest men did reade they might thereby learne the knowledge of God Seeing then that the heathen images were Idols and yet were not holden to be very gods it is hereby manifest that an image may be an Idoll though it be not taken to be a God If Maister Bishop will say that the multitude notwithstanding tooke the images themselues to be gods we answer him that so the vulgar people do amongst them also as before I shewed out of Polydore Virgil but the heathen were of his minde to haue their religion esteemed according to the vnderstanding of such wise men as he is But in the conclusion he will mend the matter saying that an Idoll requires beside the image that it be made a God or the image of a false God So then though it be not taken for a God yet it must be the image of a false God Where to omit what hath bene already said for disproofe hereof by the example of the golden Calues and to say nothing of Micahs mothers idoll who saith of the siluer wherewith she would make it that for that vse e Iudg. 17 3. she had dedicated it to Iehouah the Lord therby shewing that she meant to do it as a seruice to the true God to let these go I say we finde Hierome alledging that where we read in Genesis f Gen 4.26 Then began men to call vpoÌ„ the name of the Lord g Hieron tradit Heb. in Genes Plerique HebraeoruÌ„ arbitraÌ„tur quòd tunc primum in nomine Domini et in similitudine eius fabricata sint idolae most of the Hebrew writers did so take it that then Idols were first made in the name of the Lord to resemble him By which testimony it is plaine that the name of Idols belongeth not only to the images of false gods but to those images also that are set vp in the name of the Lord and to resemble him In which sort h Synod Nicen 2. Act. 4. in epist GermaÌ„ Hoc vnuÌ„ arbitrati non esse Deum neque veruÌ„ neque falsum nisi cuius idoluÌ„ formatum videant Germanus the patriarch of CoÌ„stantinople saith of the Israelites that they thought him not to be a God neither true nor false of whom they saw not an Idoll framed before them plainly calling that an Idoll also which is framed and set vp in the name of the true God And that this may the better appeare vnto vs we may obserue that the Idols of the Gentiles were not condemned by the fathers only for that they were the images of false gods but vpoÌ„ supposall that those were truly gods whoÌ„ they worshipped yet they dispute against images as things too base and vile and vnfit to be vsed for seruice of theÌ„ to whoÌ„ they would yeeld the acknowledgment of being gods i Arnob. adu Gent. lib. 6. Si certuÌ„ est Deos esse quos remini atque in summis coeâ—i regionibus degere quae causa quae ratio est vt Simulachra ista fingantur à vobis cùm habeatis res certat quibus preces possitis offundere auxiliuÌ„ rebus in exigentibus postulare c Quid fieri pote est iniuriosius coÌ„tumeliosiuâ— durius quà m Deum alterum scire rei alteri supplicare opeÌ„ sperare de numine nullius sensus ad effigieÌ„ deprecari If it be certaine that those be Gods whoÌ„ you think so to be saith Arnobius and that they dwell in the highest regions of heauen what cause what reason is there that you should make these images or as they wil haue it these idols seeing ye haue otherwise to whoÌ„ to pray of whoÌ„ in extremities to request help What can there be more iniurious reproachfull intollerable then to know one to be God and to make his supplication to another to looke for helpe of the diuine power and to make his praier to a senselesse image So Lactantius saith k Lactaent Justitut li. 2. cap. 2. Quid simulachra volunt quae aut mortuorum aut absentiuÌ„ monumenta sunt c. Si dij absentes esse non possunt qui quoniam diuini sunt in quacunque muÌ„di parte fuerint
him to make two Cherubins one at the one end of the mercy-seat and the other at the other end so as that with their wings stretched out they shold couer the mercy-seate Which done he saith d Exod. 25.22 There will I declare my selfe vnto thee and from aboue the mercy-seate betweene the two Cherubins which are vpon the Arke of the Testimonie I will tell thee all things which I will giue thee in commandement vnto the children of Israel According to this commaundement Moses did but what was done with those Cherubins which Moses set vp it is vncertaine whether by the enemies taking of the Arke as most likely it is they were taken away or whether they fitted not the place of the Temple where they should stand the Tabernacle and furniture thereof being before made portable to be remoued from place to place Howsoeuer that were this is certaine that Solomon by vertue of the same commandement and to obserue that which by Moses was prescribed made two Cherubins to stand in the same place as the other did and to the same vse The worke therefore being finished e 1. King 8.5.6 king Solomon and all Israel being assembled together the Priests brought the Arke of the couenant of the Lord into his place into the oracle of the house the most holy place euen vnder the wings of the Cherubins for the Cherubins stretched out their wings ouer the place of the Arke and the Cherubins couered the Arke Inasmuch then as God had by the law directed in what sort this should be done Solomon needed no further speciall cōmandement for the doing of it but had trespassed against God if being appointed to build a house vnto God he had not done it according to such rules as the law before had limited for the doing of it so idle a fancy is it which M. B. here deliuereth that out of his owne high wisedome onely he thought it lawful for him to imitate that which Moses had done before and consequently so vaine a cauill is it which he vseth that the obiection being mooued of the Cherubins made by Solomon M. Perkins answereth by the commandement giuen thereof to Moses when as there was the very same respect of both and Solomon renewed them by the same commandement by which Moses at first made thē Now these 2. Cherubins of which the questiō is specially moued were erected in the most holy place whether as the Christiā saith to the Iew before spokē of in the 2. Nicen coūcell f Nycen Synod 2. Act. 5. ex Leont Quo sanè nulli mortalium dabatur accessus praeterquam summo Sacerdoti idque semel in anno it was grāted to no mortal man to haue accesse but onely to the high priest that once only in the yeare yea and there was also g Exod. 26.33 2. Chron. 3.14 a veile drawne before to make a separation betwixt the holy place and the most holy so that no man had the sight of any thing therin Very falsly therfore vnhonestly doth M. B. deale to cōfound these Cherubins with the rest as touching their place and generally to say There they were placed not onely in the inward but also in the outward parts of the Temple vpon the walles and very doores that they might be seene of all the people it being euident that these were neuer to be seene of the people nor of any saue onely the high Priest and consequently were such as can giue no warrant at all to setting vp of Popish images As for the rest of the Cherubins which the text mentioneth they were of other sort wrought in the curtaines and feeling of the wals and vpon the dores and vessels onely for garnishing and beautifying the works but Cherubins that were standing images there were none but only those two The veile of the most holy place was h 2. Chro. 3.14 wrought with Cherubins i Kings 6.29 the wals were carued with grauen figures of Cherubins palme trees and other grauen flowers k Ver. 35. the doores also with the like l Cap. 7.29 the bases whereupon the caldrons were to stand were grauen in the borders with Lions Buls and Cherubins Here it is plaine then that the Cherubins were of no other respect or vse but as the figures of palme trees Pomgranats Flowers Lions Buls and other such like not in any sort for exercise of the deuotion of the people but onely for the adorning of the house Yea and to these also the people had no accesse within the house being prohibited to come any further thē to the doore neare to which stood the altar to which they were to tender their sacrifice the Priest receiuing the same to do with it according to the law but they themselues might not go in There was one part of the Temple which was called m Exod. 26.33 Heb 9.6.7 the holy place into which the Priests and Leuites ordinarily went to performe their ordinary seruice another part was called the most holy place into which only the high Priest went once a yeare these two parts are most properly called n Luk. 1.21 the Temple in which Solomon bestowed all that curiositie of worke But without these was the vast roome into which the people resorted where they waited o Ver. 10. in prayer whilest the Priests performed the seruice wherin they were accustomed to be taught and our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles preached vnto them going also in generall vnder the name of the temple yet not hauing in any sort that glorious beauty of workmanship that the other parts had neither can M. B. tell vs of any Cherubins therein Seeing then there were no standing Cherubins in Solomons temple but onely two which were wholy remooued out of sight and the rest had no other vse but onely the same as the figures of Lions and Bulles and Flowers and Palme trees and such like and of dead men there were no images at all not of Abraham Isaac Iacob or any other we should thinke that that temple yeeldeth so small grace to Romish Idols as that like Dagon they must fall to the ground and breake their necks vnlesse there be some better means and helpe found for the vpholding of them As for the vse whereto Solomon intended those workes of his who is there that maketh question of it Who doubteth but that by curiositie of Imagerie of caruing and grauing and painting men may beautifie either their houses or their Churches in the like sort as he did Yea M. Bishop well knoweth that we do not thrust Images wholly out of our Churches because we haue in Westminster in Paules and commonly in the rest of our Churches throughout the land many images of our deceased Kings and Queenes of our Nobles and States higher and lower which we preserue and adde more to them from day to day We determine nothing absolutely against Images but we determine against images in case of superstition and
before was said but what was the reason that knowing those Scriptures whereof we speake they could neuer light vpon Master Bishops heauenly shew of the Images of dead men h Aug. de ciuit Dei lib. 4. ca. 31. Sine simulachris castiùs dij obseruarentur Cuius sententiae suae testem adhibet inter caetera gentem Iuâ—eam Varro the heathen Romane alledgeth them for example that religion is more purely and holily obserued without Images Tertullian mentioneth out of Cornelius Tacitus that when Pompey ouercame the Iewes and i Tertul. Apolo cap 16. Tacitus refert Câ— Pompoâ—um cùm Hierusalem cepisset praetereaque templum adisset speculandis Judaicae religionis arcanis nullum illic simulachruÌ„ reperisse entred into the Temple to view the secrets of their religion he found no Image therein King Agrippa telleth Caligula that in it k Philo de legat ad Caiâ—â—n NulluÌ„ ibi simulachrum vel in occulto vel in propatulo there was no Image neither secretly nor openly in respect whereof being strictly holden as a point of their religion he disswadeth the same Caligula from attempting to set vp his Image therein as he went about to do Clemens Alexandrinus saith that l Elem. Alex. in Protrept Qui noÌ„ opera hominum aurea aenea argentea eburnea lignea lapidea hominum qui mortui sunt adorant simulachra quae inanâ— consilio adorantur ab hominibus sed fanctas vlnes tollunt ad coeluÌ„ c. the Iewes worshipped not mens workes of gold of brasse of siluer of Iuorie of wood and stone namely the Images of dead men which men vpon vaine perswasion worshipped but did holily lift vp their hands to heauen This the Iewes practised this they most religiously obserued and what should be the reason hereof if the Scriptures which Master Bishop alledgeth do make for the defence of the worshipping of Images Surely because they did thus for the keeping of the commaundement of God we must necessarily take Master Bishops worshipping of Images to be the inuention of the Diuell 18. W. BISHOP The third reason proposed by M. Perkins in fauour of the Catholikes is It is lawfull to kneele downe to a chaire of estate in the absence of the King Therefore much more to the Images of God and his Saints in heauen glorified being absent from vs. To this he answereth that it is but a ciuill worship to kneele to the chaire of estate and that very commendable to shew our loyaltie vnto our Prince but kneeling vnto the Images of Saints is religious and therfore not alike Reply He proposeth our argument to the halfes or else this answer had bene preuented For thus runneth our reason As the chaire of estate is to be worshipped with ciuill reuerence in respect of the teÌ„porall Prince whom it representeth euen so the Images of holy personages that raigne now in heauen are to be worshipped with a holy and religious kinde of curtesie for as Temporall honour is due vnto a Temporall Prince so religious and spirituall honour is due vnto spirituall and most holy personages And as a good subiect testifieth his loyaltie and good affection towards his Prince by honoring his regall throne So doth a good Christian giue testimonie of his dutifull both estimation and deuotion toward those heauenly creatures by giuing honour vnto their Images At leastwise why do not the Protestants exhibite ciuill reuerence aswell vnto the representations of Gods Saints as to the shadowes of the secular Maiestie vnlesse it be because they are fallen out with the Saints of God and are become adorers of sinfull men R. ABBOT We may here conceiue that images are brought to great distresse in that from arguments in the schooles they are faine to flie to the ceremonies of the Court It should seeme strange that formalities obserued to Princes in their Courts for maiestie and royall state should be made patternes of religious deuotions to be practised in the Church But a man in danger of drowning is glad to catch at euery twigge and this desperate cause of Images hauing no manner probabilitie of any approued reason or example for the iustifying of it is glad to shift any way and setteth foorth shadowes and ghostes to make shew of armed and fighting men M. Bishop saith that M. Perkins answer had bene preuented if the argument had bene well proposed but now that he hath proposed it what doth it containe but onely a begging of that to be graunted him which is denied in M. Perkins answer The thing that he should haue proued is that there is a like respect of religious worship to Saints as of ciuill reuerence to Princes and he onely affirmeth it but reason he hath none But to take such stuffe as he bringeth vs first we tell him that the chaire of estate is not bowed vnto for that it representeth the Prince as he very idlely and fondly dreameth but for that it is the Princes seate it being holdeÌ„ for a matter of princely maiestie that there be a reuerence performed to those things which serue in speciall manner for the Princes vse In which sort at the Princes table though the Prince not yet come vnto it yet the seruice is done vpon the knee as with bowing and obeisance also at the tables of inferiour States where we suppose M. Bishop is not so madde as to thinke that either the meate or the table or any thing else doth represent them in respect of whom this duty is performed On the other side no such duty is done to the Princes image because it is not a matter of the Princes vse and if we should see M. Bishop kneeling to it we should either thinke him drunke or take him for a foole No argument therefore can be drawn from the honour done to Princes to approue the honour that is done to Saints because in that kind wherein it is required to be done to Saints it is absurd and ridiculous to be done to Princes Yea M. Bishop may as wel conclude that the Saints should haue their cloth of state and carry scepters in their hands and that our Lady the Queene of heauen as they call her should haue Ladies to beare vp her traine because Kings and Queenes haue so as that we are therefore to kneele to Saints images because we kneele to the cloth of state Well yet Master Bishop telleth vs that as temporall honour is due to a temporall Prince so religious and spirituall honour is due vnto spirituall and most holy personages But vainely and absurdly for how should his proportion stand when he putteth Princes on the one side and subiects on the other Let him say as he should say As temporall honour is due to a temporall Prince so and much more religious and spirituall honour is due to him who spiritually and in way of religion is our Soueraigne and Prince If he can prooue that the Saints are appointed to be spiritually our Kings and Soueraigne Lords he saith