after the old and new Testament written and the Canon of the Scriptures established and confirmed there bee any thing further to bee receiued for doctrine of faith and truth appertaining to saluation that is not contained in the Scriptures Tradition as he here speaketh thereof is confounded with Scripture because it is one and the same doctrine first preached by word of mouth and afterwards committed to writing in the Scripture but Tradition as we question it is diuided against Scripture and importeth doctrine ouer and beside that which is now taught vs by the Scriptures We know well that the doctrine of saluation vntill the time of Moses was only taught by word of mouth but is that an argument to proue that now that wee haue the Scriptures we must also receiue vnwritten Traditions besides the Scriptures Nay when it seemed good to the wisedome God to commit his word to writing hee would not doe it in part only but fully and perfectly so that a Exod. 34. 4. Moses wrote all the wordes of the Lord and said of that which he wrote b Deut. 12. 32. What I command thee that only shalt thou doe vnto the Lord thou shalt put nothing thereto nor take ought therefrom Therefore although the word of God were afterwards also deliuered by word of mouth in the Preachings and Sermons of the Prophets yet were they in their Sermons to preach no other doctrine neither did they but what had authority and warrant by Moses law Now their Sermons being also written for exposition and application of the law of Moses and a further supply added of the Scriptures of the Apostles and Euangelists how much more ought we to content our selues with the Scriptures without adding to them or taking from them receiuing and beleeuing only those things that we are taught thereby as being assured of that which the Scriptures themselues teach that c 2. Tim. 3. 15. the Scriptures are able to make a man wise vnto saluation through the faith which is in Christ Iesus Hereby then appeareth M. Bishops fallacy in the citing of those texts which he hath here alleaged St. Paul willed the Romans d Rom. 16. 17. to marke and auoide them that made dissensions and scandals contrary to the doctrine which they had learned True it is and what then But the doctrine saith he which they had then learned before St. Paul sent them this Epistle was by word of mouth and Tradition for little or none of the new Testament was then written Marke what he saith before St. Paul sent them this Epistle for hereby hee in a manner acknowledgeth that St. Paul comprised in this Epistle the doctrine which they had before learned by Tradition The Apostles intendment then appeareth plainly to be this that they should shunne those which dissented from the doctrine which they had hitherto learned by Tradition that is by preaching and word of mouth the summe whereof he had now sent them written in this Epistle that they might henceforth learne to shunne them that dissented from the same doctrine deliuered to them in the Scriptures How ill-fauouredly then doth M. Bishop argue out of these wordes that we are now to receiue other doctrines then are contained in the Scriptures There can no argument be rightly framed out of that text whereof it can be any harme to vs to grant the conclusion If he will set it in due order it must be this The doctrine which the Romans had learned they had learned hitherto by Tradition but the Apostle teacheth them to auoide such as dissented from the doctrine which they had learned therefore he teacheth them to auoide such as dissented from the doctrine which they had hitherto learned by Tradition This we grant and what will he conclude thereof Surely if he will inferre any thing against vs hee must goe on and say But they learned somewhat then by Tradition which is not since deliuered in the Scriptures Which if hee will say wee require proofe of it and the text which he here alleageth will yeeld none We say that the whole doctrine which the Apostles first deliuered by Tradition and word of mouth they committed afterwards to writing ech his part as God inspired and directed for comprehending of the whole Seeing therefore they were tyed to shunne all that dissented from the doctrine receiued by the Tradition and Preaching of the Apostles wee hauing the same doctrine contained in the Scriptures are likewise tyed to shunne all doctrine that hath not testimony of the Scriptures Albeit it is here further to be noted how rashly M. Bishop saith that the doctrine which the Romans had learned they learned only by Tradition and word of mouth inasmuch as the Apostle telleth vs that the Gospell as it e Rom 1. 2. was promised in the Scriptures of the Prophets so was also f Rom. 16. 26. preached by the Scriptures of the Prophets so that St. Luke telleth vs that the noble Iewes of Berhea hearing the Apostles preaching g Acts 17. 11. searched the Scriptures daylie whether those things were so and that our Sauiour Christ when he sent them forth to preach h Luke 24. 45. opened their vnderstanding that they might vnderstand the Scriptures that so they might be enabled for their preaching I haue i Chap. 4. §. 5. before shewed out of Gregory and others that the whole faith which the Apostles preached they receiued from the Scriptures of the Prophets and therefore they deliuered not the Gospell only by Tradition but what they taught they confirmed by the Scriptures So then the Apostles admonition to the Romans will fall out to be this that they should auoide them that dissented from the doctrine which they had learned by the Scriptures though not yet by the Scriptures of the new Testament yet by the Scriptures of the old k Luke 24 27. 44. the law of Moses the Prophets and the Psalmes l Aug. cont 2. Gaudent lipist l. 2. cap. 23. Quibus Dominus testimonium perhibet tanquam testibus suis which Christ named for his witnesses and whereof he said m John 5 39. Search the Scriptures for in them yee thinke to haue eternall life and they are they that testifie of me The two next proofes which hee bringeth are such as that he iustly deserueth to be dubbed for them It is of record saith he how St. Paul n Acts 15. 41. walking through Syria and Cilicia confirming the Churches commanded them to keepe the precepts of the Apostles and of the Ancients and o Acts 16. 4. when they passed through the Cities they deliuered vnto them to keepe the decrees that were decreed by the Apostles and Ancients which were at Hierusalem and the Churches were confirmed in the faith And what hereof It appeareth saith he that those decrees were made matter of faith and necessary to be beleeued to saluation before they were written Yea were But did not you know M. Bishop that
inferiore apud Polycarpum essem c. Commemorarequeam quomodo se cum Joanne ac reliquis qui DominuÌ„ viderunt conuersatum esse dixerit sermones eorum memorauerit quae ex illis de Domino audierit de virtutibus eius doctrina tanquam ex ijs qui ipsi verbum vite viderant percepta cuncta sanctis Scripturis consona recâ—nsuerit that he had beene in his childhood with Polycarpus and that he had heard him tell how he had beene conuersant with Iohn and the rest that had seen the Lord and remembred their speeches and what he had heard of them concerning the Lord and his miracles and doctrine as receiued from them who themselues had seene the word of life and reported all things agreeable to the holy Scriptures Here is a commendation of the Scripture and an intimation giuen that tradition ought to be no other but consonant and agreeable to the holy Scripture but of referring to the Churches in cases of controuersie not so much as one word But though his head here failed hiâ— yet I know well what the place is that he meant to cite which followeth in the booke whence I alleaged the sentence to which he answereth And yet there is nothing in that place fitting to his purpose Ireneus hauing there to doe with Heretikes who being reproued by the Scriptures reiected the triall of the Scriptures vpon the like pretences as the Papists now doe and therefore being forced to vse against them the testimony of the Churches from the time of the Apostles for proofe of those things which were cleare by the writings of the Apostles as we now doe against the Papists but saying nothing at all as to deliuer a rule that when cases of controuersie doe arise we should alwaies haue recourse to such testimony of the Church Of that place of Ireneus I haue spoken sufficiently m Answere to Doctor Bishops Epistle to the King sect 11. before and therefore I will not here againe trouble the Reader any further therewith In what sort also he attributeth principality to the Roman Church I haue already declared in the n §. 2. first Chapter of this booke Now as he is impudent in answering Ireneus so in his answere to Tertullian he is much more impudent The sentences of those two Fathers I cited as depending one vpon another Ireneus saith that the Gospell which the Apostles preached they afterwards deliuered to vs in the Scriptures Tertullian saith o Tertul. de Praescript Nobis non est opus curiositate post Christum nec inquisitione post Euangelium Cum hâ—c credimus nihil desideramus vltrà credere hoc enim prius credimus non esse quod vltrà credere debemus Wee neede no curiosity after Christ nor further enquiry after the Gospell when we beleeue this we desire to beleeue nothing further for this we first beleeue that there is nothing further for vs to beleeue Marke well gentle Reader the coherence of these wordes The Apostles committed the Gospell to writing we neede no further inquiry after the Gospell we desire to beleeue nothing further we beleeue that there is nothing else for vs to beleeue To this what doth M. Bishop say Beleeuing this beleeuing what the written word only nothing lesse The Gospell M. Bishop it is the Gospell you see of the beleefe whereof he speaketh and beside which or after which he desireth to beleeue nothing yea beleeueth that there is nothing further to be beleeued Seeing then the Gospell is written as Ireneus saith it followeth by Tertullian that beside the written word there is nothing else to be beleeued Nothing lesse saith M. Bishop And why For in that whole Treatise saith he his principall drift is to proue that Heretikes cannot be confuted out of the written word but by ancient customes and traditions which he calleth Prescriptions Where he most shamefully abuseth that worke of Tertullian expounding Prescriptions to be meant of old customes and traditions whereas Tertullian hath nothing to that purpose but by Prescriptions meaneth grounds of reasons and arguments whereby to proceede and deale against Heretikes for the reprouing and conuincing of them Neither doth he goe about to proue that Heretikes cannot be confuted by the written word but only sheweth that it was to no purpose to deale with them by the Scriptures or written word because they receiued and reiected Scriptures as they list did put in and blot out alter and chop and change so that whatsoeuer made against them should goe for no Scripture Yea the matters of their heresies were touching those articles of our faith which are clearely and manifestly testified by the Scriptures and therefore M. Bishop dealeth very lewdly with Tertullian to make him to say that they could not be confuted thereby I neede not stand hereupon hauing p Of Traditions sect 10. before at large discouered M. Bishops dishonesty herein and shewed out of the matter of the booke how falsly he fathereth that drift vpon Tertullian Only it is here to be noted what a prety meaning he maketh of those wordes which I cited thence namely this When we beleeue the whole doctrine of Christ both written and deliuered by Apostolicall tradition then we desire to beleeue no more of any vpstart Heretikes new deuises Where I pray thee to note how his two answeres agree together He told vs before to Ireneus that the Apostles left the Gospell in writing Here to Tertullian speaking of the Gospell he answereth that the Gospell signifieth the whole doctrine of Christ both written and vnwritten So when he list the Gospell is written and when he list the Gospell is vnwritten and he cannot tell certainly what it is If the Gospell were left in writing then the Gospell is no doctrine vnwritten or if the Gospell doe signifie also vnwritten doctrine then the Apostles did not leaue the Gospell in writing but only a part and parcell thereof But we beleeue that the Apostles left vs a perfect written Gospell and therefore we say to M Bishop and his fellowes as Athanasius said to the Arian Heretikes q Athanas de Incar Christi Si Discipuli estis EuangelioruÌ„ ne loquamini contra Deum iniquitateÌ„ sed per scripturas cedite Quòd si diuersa à scripturis fabulari vultis cur nobiscum concertatis qui neque â—oqui neque audire sustinemus quod extraneum sit ab istis dicente Domino c. If yee be Schollers of the Gospell speake not iniquity against God but goe by the Scriptures but if you will babble things diuerse from the Scriptures why doe you meddle with vs who endure neither to speake nor heare any thing which is strange from the Scriptures our Lord Christ telling vs If yee abide in my word then shall yee be free indeed Now to shew that beside the written Gospell and word of God there is nothing else to be receiued I alleaged a peremptory sentence of St. Austin r Aug.
him bring in Iacob 5. v. 14. the Priests of the Church and let them pray ouer them anoiling them with Oile in the name of our Lord c. Confesse therefore your sinnes one to Ibidem 16. another These and an hundred more plaine texts recorded in that fountaine of life wherein our Catholike Roman doctrine is deliuered in expresse tearmes to wit Thereall presence of Christs body in the Sacrament That Priests haue power to pardon sinnes That Christ built his Church vpon S. Peter That good workes doe in iustice deserue eternall life That we are iustified not by faith alone but also by good workes That in extremity of sicknesse wee must call for the Priest to anoile vs with holy Oile That we must confesse our sinnes not to God alone but also vnto men these and diuers such like heads of our Catholike faith formally set downe in holy Scripture the Protestants will not beleeue though they bee written in Gods word neuer so expresly but doe ransacke all the corners of their wits to deuise some â—dde shift or other how to flie from the euidence of them Whereupon I conclude that they doe not receiue all the written word though they professe neuer so much to allow of all the bookes of Canâ—nicall Scripture For the written word of God consisteth Lib. 2. de Trinitate ad Const not in the reading but in the vnderstanding as S. Hierome testifieth that is it doth not consist in the bare letter of it but in the letter and true sense and meaning ioyned togither the letter being as the body of Scripture and the right vnderstanding of it the soule spirit and life thereof he therefore that taketh not the written word in the true sense but swarueth from the sincere interpretation of it cannot be truly said to receiue the written word as a good Christian ought to doe Seeing then that the Protestants and all other sectaries doe not receiue the holy Scriptures according vnto the most ancient and best learned Doctors exposition they may most iustly be denyed to receiue the sacred written word of God at all though they seeme neuer so much to approue all the Bookes Verses and Letters of it which is plainly proued by S. Hierome vpon the first Chapter to the Galathians R. ABBOT I Haue noted a §. â— before in this Chapter that St. Austin faith of the Prophets and faithfull of the people of the Iewes that though not in name yet in deede they were Christians as we are As they were Christians then with vs so are we now Iewes with them not according to M. Bishops vnderstanding of the name of Iewes to whom I may well say as Austin said to Iulian the Pelagian b August coÌ„â— Iulian. l. 4. c. 3. Cùm insana dicis rides phrenetico es similis When thou speakest madly and laughest thou art like to a frantike Bedlem but according to the Apostles construction thereof c Rom. 2. 29. He is a Iew which is one within and d Phil. 3. 3. we are the circumcision which worship God in the spirit and reioyce in Christ Iesus and haue no confidence in the flesh We must be Iewes by vnity of faith with them as they were Christians with vs because they with vs and wee with them make but one body and one Church whereof though there be diuers Sacraments yet there is but one faith from the beginning to the end receiued first by the Patriarches written afterwards by the Prophets written againe more clearly by the Apostles so that e Ephes 2. 20. vpon the foundation not foundations but one foundation because one euen one written doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets the houshold of God are built and our faith resteth wholly thereupon I haue walked no rounds I haue broken through no brakes of thornes but haue kept a direct and euen way and haue so strongly builded all this as that I scorne M. Bishops poore paper-shot as much too weake to throw it downe To him I know these things are rounds and mazes he knoweth not which way to get out of them they are brakes of thornes he lyeth fast tyed in them God giue him grace to yeeld to that which he seeth himselfe vnable to reproue He is very angry it seemeth as touching the last point that I should say that the Protestants receiue and beleeue all the written word He saith that therein I begge that which is principally in question and thinketh that I haue little wit or iudgement to thinke that they would freely grant me that But our vsage and debating of questions with them is sufficient to put that out of question We vse the Scriptures our selues we translate them for common vse we reade and expound them publikely in our Churches we exhort men to reade them priuately in their houses wee instruct them to receiue no doctrine but what they see there wee make the same written word the soueraigne Iudge of all our controuersies wee defend the authority and sufficiency thereof against the impeachments and disgraces which Papists haue cast vpon it What may we doe more to make M. Bishop beleeue that we receiue and beleeue the written word Surely if I tell him that the Sunne shineth at noone day he will not beleeue it if it seeme to him to sound any thing against the Pope But he will giue instance to proue that we doe not so first for that we reiect diuers bookes of the old Testament Wherein he saith vntruly for the bookes of the old Testament are the bookes of Moses and the Prophets the Psalmes f August coÌ„t Gaudent lib 2. cap. 23. Non habent Judaei sicut legem Prophetas Psalmos quibus Dominus testimonium perhibet tanquam testibus suis To which saith Austin our Lord Iesus gaue testimony as his witnesses of which we reiect none the other bookes that are adioyned to these we doe not reiect but we reade them and commend them yea we say as much of them as M. Bishop vouchsafeth to say of Pauls Epistles and the rest that they contayne many most diuine and rare instructions but yet we giue them no authority for confirmation of matters of faith because Christ and his Apostles haue giuen no testimony or witnesse of them and the primitiue Church in that respect hath expresly disclaimed them as I haue shewed at large g Of Traditions sect 17. before and resteth hereafter in this booke to bee shewed againe Secondly he bringeth sundry texts of the new Testament to proue that we doe not rightly vnderstand and beleeue all that is written in Gods word wherein he saith their Catholike Roman doctrine is deliuered in expresse termes First to proue the reall presence of Christs body in the Sacrament he citeth the wordes This is my body which shall be giuen for you c. But if the Romish doctrine be here deliuered in expresse termes how is it that their owne Scotus saith that
the body of our Lord Moreouer he speaketh of the Church of Rome being then but in her cradle most honourably saying Your faith is Rom. 1. vers 8. renowmed in the whole world and after Your obedience Rom. 16. ver 19. is published into euery place But no maruaile to the wise though he did not then make mention of her Supremacie for that did not belong to the Church or people of Rome but to S. Peter who when S. Paul wrote that Epistle was scarse well setled there neither did that appertaine to the matter he treated of R. ABBOT NOw to the Masse sâ—ith M. Bishop but there is no wise man that readeth what he hath here written but would thinke that hee had done much more wisely to keepe him from the Masse I cannot tell whether more to pitty his folly or to detest his wilfulnesse See with what a graue preface he entreth to a most ridiculous and childish proofe The same profound diuine St. Austin with other holy Fathers who were not wont so lightly to skimme ouer the Scriptures as our late new Masters doe but seriously searched them and most deeply pierced into them did also finde all the parts of the Masse touched by the Apostle St. Paul in these wordes I desire that obsecrations prayers postulations thanks-giuings be made for all men This phrase of skimming ouer the Scriptures he learned of his Masters of Rhemes who vpon those words of St. Paul alleaging by that place of Austin and some other Fathers that all those kinds of prayers were publikely vsed in the Lyturgie of the Church conclude thus a Rhem. Testam Annot. 1. Tim. 2. 1. So exactly doth the practise of the Church agree with the precepts of the Apostle and the Scriptures and so profoundly doe the holy Fathers seeke out the proper sense of the Scriptures which our Protestants doe so prophanely popularly and lightly skimme ouer that they can neither see nor endure the truth So then it seemeth we must diue very deepe to finde the Masse in the Scriptures but wee are in doubt that they which goe about to diue so deepe will certainly bee drowned and neuer finde that that they seeke for And tell vs in good sooth M. Bishop did St. Austin in your opinion finde in those wordes all the parts of your Masse Nay did he finde that at all to which the name of the Masse is by you properly referred You hold the Masse to be a proper reall sacrifice of the very naturall body and bloud of Christ offered to God for propitiation of the sinnes both of quicke and dead and doth St. Austin speake any thing to that effect or could he finde all the parts of the Masse without finding this Yea that the impudency of him and his Rhemish Masters may the better appeare doth St. Austin say any thing there but what properly belongeth to our Communion and not to their Masse Thou shalt vnderstand good Reader that Paulinus wrote to Austin to be instructed by him of the difference of those sorts of prayers which St. Paul commendeth to Timothy in the wordes aforesaid St. Austin answereth him that b Aug. Epist 59. Illa planè difficillimè discernuntur c. Aliqua singulorum istorum proprietas inquirenda est sed ad â—a liquidò peruenire difficile est Multa quippe hinc dici possunt quae improbandâ— non sint sed eligo in his verbis hoc intelligere quod omnis vel penè omnis frequentat Ecclesia vt precationes accipiamus dictas quas facimus in celebratione Sacramentorum antequam illud quod est in Domini mensa incipiat benedici orationes cum benedicitur sanctificatur ad distribuendum coÌ„minuitur quam totam petitionem ferè omnis Ecclesia Dominica oratione coÌ„cludit Interpellationes siue postulationes fiunt cum populus benedicitur Tunc enim antistites velut aduocati susceptos suos per manus impositionem miserecordissimae offerunt potestati Quibus peractis participato tanto Sacramento gratiarum actio câ—ncta concludit they are very hardly discerned that there is some propriety of euery of them to be enquired of but very hard it is certainly to attaine vnto it For many things saith he may be said hereof which are not to be disliked but I make choise to vnderstand in these wordes that which the whole Church or almost the whole accustometh to take those to be called precations obsecrations as M. Bishop termeth them out of their vulgar Latin which we make in the celebration of the Sacraments before that which is vpon the Lords table beginne to be blessed Prayers those which are vsed when the same is blessed and sanctified and broken to be distributed all which petition almost the whole church concludeth with the Lords prayer Intercessions or postulations which are made when the people is blessed for then the Priests as aduocates doe offer to the most mercifull power them whom they haue receiued by imposition of hands All which being done and after the participation of so great a Sacrament thanks-giuing concludeth all Now what is there in all this that doth concerne the Masse M. Bishop telleth vs that St. Austin findeth all the parts of the Masse here touched by the Apostle and see saith he all the parts of it very liuely painted out but can any man but thinke that he was scant sober when he looked vpon the place and therefore his eyes being troubled thought hee saw that which hee saw not Here is the celebration of a Sacrament the setting of bread and wine vpon the table of the Lord the blessing and sanctifying thereof the breaking of it to be distributed to the people the peoples participating of the Sacrament and in the meane while prayers supplications intercessions giuing of thanks the very true description of our Communion but who seeth any thing here appertaining to the Masse What M. Bishop is there no end of your trifling will yee still goe on to play the wiseman in this sort But to helpe the matter he telleth vs that though he calleth not that celebration of the Sacrament by the name of Masse yet he doth giue it a name equiualent Sacri Altaris oblatio the oblation or sacrifice of the holy Altar It is true indeede that St. Austin nameth the oblation of the holy Altar but nothing at all to M. Bishops vse For willing to giue a reason why the prayers vsed in the very act of the administration of the Sacrament are termed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he taketh the same from the composition of the word and because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is often vsed to signifie a vow therefore he saith that c Ibid. Ea propriè intelligenda est oratio quam facimus ad votum c. Vouentur autem omnia quae offeruntur Deo maximè sancti Altaris oblatio quo Sacramento praedicatur aliud nostrum votum maximum quo nos vouimus in Christo esse mansuros id est
those decrees were written when they were first made Did you not reade that Iames so propounded p Acts 15. 19. 20. My sentence is that we write vnto them c. Did you not finde that it was executed afterwards accordingly q Vers 23. They wrote letters after this manner c. and namely to the brethren that were in Syria and Cilicia of whom you speake But all is one any thing will serue the turne to tell them that will neuer search whether you lie or not With as much discretion and fidelity doth he alleage the other places which follow Paul chargeth his Disciple Timothy r 1. Tim. 6. 20. to keepe the depositum that is saith he the whole Christian doctrine deliuered vnto him by word of mouth as the best Authours take it But who are those best Authours that so take it Forsooth Doctor Allen and the rest of his Rhemish Masters for other hee can name none wee should certainly haue heard of them if he could Againe Paul saith to Timothy Å¿ 2. Tim. 2. 2. Commend to faithfull men the things which thou hast heard of mee by many witnesses Was not this saith he to preach such doctrine as hee had receiued by Apostolike Tradition without writing No M. Bishop there is no necessity to take it so He receiued the doctrine of the Gospell by the preaching of the Apostle but it doth not follow that therefore he receiued it not in writing yea the Apostle euen there telleth him as I haue before alleaged t 2. Tim. 3. 15. The Scriptures are able to make thee wise vnto sâ—luation through the faith which is in Christ Iesus To answere him in a word as touching that depositum and the things which Timothy had heard of Paul hee himselfe will not doubt but that those things which are written doe appertaine thereto The wordes then hauing a necessary construction of those things that are written how will he make it appeare to vs that they haue further reference also to some things that are not written They must perforce grant that a great part of those things is written and how doe they proue that not the whole The same doe I answere him and haue answered him before concerning the wordes which he citeth to the Thessalonians u 2. Thess 2. 15. Hold the Traditions the things deliuered vnto you which you haue learned whether by word or by our Epistle He calleth Traditions those things which hee had written to them in that Epistle Hee had not set downe in that Epistle all the doctrine of the Gospell which is contained in other Scriptures which all notwithstanding hee had by word preached vnto them Hee willeth them therefore to hold fast both the things which hee had written to them in his Epistle and all the things which hee had preached vnto them which are written otherwhere this we are sure of but how may we bee sure that hee meant to commend to them the holding fast of those doctrines which are neither written in that Epistle nor otherwhere Surely if the wordes may haue a sufficient meaning being vnderstood of those things which are written though not in that Epistle yet in other either Gospels or Epistles then vainely are they alleaged as a necessary proofe for receiuing of doctrines which are not written any where And therefore whereas M. Bishop inferreth You see that some Traditions went by word of mouth from hand to hand aswell as some others were written he sheweth that he himselfe seeth not what he saith because the place proueth only that the Apostle wrote not all in the Epistle whereof hee speaketh but that all otherwise is not written it proueth not and that all is written that is necessary to eternall life I haue before sufficiently proued out of the very doctrine it selfe of the ancient Roman Church Now therefore it is neither ignorance nor insolency nor impudency in me to say that the Apostle saith nothing for Popish Traditions but it is M. Bishops trechery to bring texts to that purpose to deceiue thereby simple men when as they haue plaine and cleare construction otherwise W. BISHOP §. 9. I Could were it not to auoide tediousnesse adde the like confirmation of most controuersies out of the same blessed Apostle as that the Church is the pillar and 1. Tim. 3. ver 15. ground of truth wherefore any man may most assuredly repose his faith vpon her declaration That Christ gaue Pastors and Doctors to the edifying of that his mysticall Ephes 4. vers 11. 13. body vntill we meete all in the vnity of faith c. Therefore the Church shall not faile in faith vntill the day of iudgement nor be inuisible that hath visible Pastors and Teachers Also that Priests are chosen from Hebr. 5. vers 1. among men and appointed for men in those things that appertaine to God that they may offer gifts and sacrifices for sinne That Preachers and Priests are 1. Cor. 3. vers 9. Gods coadiutors and helpers and not only idle instruments That S. Paul and Timothy did saue other 1. Cor. 9. ver 23. men and therefore no blasphemie to pray to Saints to helpe and saue vs. That S. Paul did accomplish those 1. Tim. 4. v. 16. things that want to the passions of Christ in his flesh for Christs body which is the Church therefore Christs passion doth not take away our owne satisfaction That he gloried in preaching the Gospel of free cost * Coloss 1. v. 24. which was a worke of supererogation That a Ephes 5 v. 32. Marriage 1. Cor. 9. ver 16. is a great Sacrament That b 1. Tim. 4. v. 23. grace was giuen to Timothy by the imposition of the hands of Priest-hood whence it followeth that Matrimony and holy Orders bee true and perfect Sacraments But what doe I I should be too long if I would prosecute all that which the Apostle hath left in writing in fauour and defence of the Roman faith This I doubt not will suffice to confront his shamelesse impudency that blusheth not to affirme there was not a word in S. Paul that sounded for the Catholike but all in shew at least for the Protestant As for S. Peter I will wholly omit him because the Protestants haue small confidence in him Here I may be bold I hope to turne vpon M. Abbot this dilemma and forked argument which S. Augustine framed against the Manâ—chean Adimantus Hoâ— si Lib 1. cont Adimant imprudens fecit nihil caecius si autem sciens nihil sceleratius If M. Abbot did ignorantly affirme Saint Paul to haue said nothing for the Roman Catholikes what could be more blinde then not to be able to discerne any thing in such cleare light if he said it wittingly knowing the contrary then did he it most wickedly so to lie against his owne conscience to draw after him selfe other men into errour and perdition R. ABBOT MArke here I pray
I will take it here in his due place making it to appeare that this mistaking in a circumstance altereth nothing of the substance of that comparison which I had there in hand The first branch then of the comparison shall bee this The Donatists did set vp a particular Church to be the Catholike Church all of them first in the south of Africa some of them afterwards namely the Rogatists at Cartenna in Mauritania and so haue the Papists done at Rome in Italie Against this branch as it was before set downe hee giueth two exceptions First that they doe not hold it so to be at Rome aâ— the Rogatists did at Cartenna And what is the difference Marry they hold it to be so at Rome as that it is dispersed also all the world ouer but the Rogatists held it to be wholly included in the bounds of Cartenna and confines thereof The first part of which answere on their owne behalfe is false and the second part thereof concerning the Rogatists is vaine For it is false that hee saith that their Romish Church is dispersed all the world ouer and hee knoweth well that the Churches of Greece and all the Easterne Churches are holden by them to be Schismatikes because they disclaime subiection to the Church of Rome True it is they would haue it all the world ouer and they make simple fooles beleeue that it is so but they themselues know that the skirts of it are too short to reach so farre and that a huge part of the Church there is that will haue nothing to doe with them And this drew from Bellarmine that caution that I before mentioned in the first Chapter that a Supra cap. 1. §. 1. though one only Prouince did imbrace the true faith yet the same should truly and properly be called the Catholike Church so long as it could bee plainly shewed that it is one and the same with that which at any time or times was ouer the whole world Now hereof it followeth that the other part of his exception concerning the Rogatists is vaine For although the communion of the Church of Rome be farre larger then that was of the Rogatists at Cartenna yet doth neither of them containe any more but a part and their doctrine as touching their communion sorteth all to one For whereas M. Bishop saith that the Rogatists included the Church within the bounds of Cartenna and the Countrey thereabout it was not by position of doctrine that they so included it as if it could not be any where else but because they pretended that the Church was only in their communion and there were none in any other part of the world that tooke part with them it followeth of this defect that they so included it But though there were now not aboue b Aug. Epist 48. Tu cum decem Rogatistis quâ— remansistis c. ten or eleuen Bishops of them remayning as Saint Austin obiecteth to them yet by that hee vpbraideth them with this number remayning it appeareth that they had beene of greater number and extent and wee cannot doubt but that they would as willingly haue had the whole world to ioyne with them as the Church of Rome would Now inasmuch as they held themselues only to bee the Catholike Church And there were none of them otherwhere to bee found to Baptise and reconcile peâ—itents but only within the confines of Cartenna Saint Austin rightly obiecteth it as an absurdity ensuing thereof that c Ibid. Quisquis fâ—â—rit hac praedicatione commotus in qualibâ—t paâ—te orbis terâ—arum nisi quaesierit inuenerit latentâ—m in Mauritania Caesariensi Cartennensem Vincentium aut aliquem ex cius nouâ—m aut decem conâ—ortibus dimitti ei peccata non posâ—int c. Nisi Cartennas venerit aut in viâ—â—iam Cartennensium mundari omninâ—â— delictis suis non potâ—rit then whosoeuer there were in any part of the world that were moued with the preaching of the Gospell vnlesse he did seeke and finde out Vincentius Bishop of Cartenna lurking in Mauritania Caesariensis or some one of his nine or ten consorts he could not haue remission of sinnes or as otherwise hee expresseth it except hee came to Cartenna or into the Countrey neare adioyning hee could not bee clensed from his sinnes Now although the Roman Church as M. Bishop vnderstandeth it is of much larger extent and stretcheth it selfe into sundry Countries and Nations yet being but of small compasse in comparison of the whole world the exprobration of the same madde fancy lyeth vpon it that whosoeuer in the further parts of the world shall be moued with the preaching of the Gospell and conuerted thereby vnlesse hee come to Rome or into some part of the world where he may meete with a Popish Priest hee cannot bee baptised or reconciled to God hee cannot obtayne the remission of his sinnes it being by them resolued of themselues as by the Rogatists of themselues that out of their particular communion there is no saluation Therefore both Rogatists and Papists let them goe together and the truth is that in this behalfe there is no difference betwixt them As touching his second exception although it bee not generally true of the Donatists that they placed the Catholike Church at Cartenna yet it is not altogether vntrue because the Rogatists were Donatists d August vt supra Vos qui non solum cum illis communiter Donatistae a Donato verumetiam propriè Rogatisâ—â— a Rogatâ— appâ—llâ—nuâ— being in common with the rest called Donatists of Donatus as Saâ—nt Austin noteth and by a more proper name Rogatists of Rogatus For although they had in some spleene and vpon some peâ—uish quarrell diuided themselues from the rest yet the substance of their doctrine was still the same as before as appeareth by St. Austin who disputing against Vincentius the Rogatist chargeth him in effect with nothing else but the common positions of the Donatists and therefore they were all at once coÌ„monly comprehended vnder the name of Donatists The Donatists then though not all the Donatists but of them the Rogatists only placed the Catholike church at Cartenna and to the Rogatists then being a part of the Donatists the Papists are like who doe in the same sort place the Catholike Church at Rome Yea and although the Donatists in generall did not seate the Church at Cartenna yet M. Bishop is not ignorant that they in generall before some quarrelling fell amongst them did in effect the same thing by designing the place thereof in Africa properly so called so as that none should be called Catholikes in any part of the world but such as did communicate with that African Church of theirs For although they acknowledged that the Church by the preaching of the Apostles had beene dispersed ouer the world according to the manifold testimonies and prophecies of holy Scripture in that behalfe which they professed to beleeue â—et they said that c Aug. de
Commandements to deserue and merit life euerlasting and that man hath by the aide of Gods grace free-will to performe them Fourthly they that were skilfull in the law of Moyses could not be ignorant of workes of supererogation that is that there were many good workes which men were not bound to doe yet if they did them they might thereby aduance themselues in Gods fauour because there is speciall Numer 6. order taken for the sanctification of any man or woman that would be a Nazarite that is any one that of deuotion would withdraw himselfe from secular affaires and for some certaine time serue God more religiously yet no man was bound thereunto Further they were allowed and encouraged to make vowes which is also a worke of supererogation against M. Abbots fift instance For not only Dauid saith Vow and render it Psalm 75. v. 12. to our Lord but in the law it is written When thou Deut. 23. v. 21. doest vow a vow vnto the Lord thy God slacke not to performe it because the Lord thy God doth require it c. but if thou wilt not promise thou shalt be without sinne And to leaue the word Monkery as fitter for a Monkey then for an Abbot Iosephus a graue authour among the Iewes witnesseth That there liued Antiquitat Iudaic lib. 18. c. 2. in the time of the law many thousands called Esseni who were contemners of riches liued in common hauing neither wiues nor seruants What other thing doe Monkes professe then such pouerty and chastity sauing obedience which must needes also in some degree be among the others who liued no doubt in orderly society Sixtly neither they nor we either buy or sell pardons yet had great mercy and pardon shewed them for their forefathers sake as God testifieth in the first Commandement And that they were on the other side to endure temporall punishment for sinne after the guilt of the sinne and the eternall paine was forgiuen them is most clearly recorded both of all the people of Israel Whose murmuration against Numer 14. God was at the earnest intercession of Moyses pardoned and yet were they therefore depriued of entring into the land of promise Yea Moyses and Numer 20. v. 24 Aaron themselues were in like manner both pardoned for their diffidence that they did not glorifie God at the waters of contradiction and yet neuerthelesse debarred from entring into the land of promise for the Deut. 32. v. 51. same offence so that after the mortall guilt of sinne is remitted there remaineth either some temporall satisfaction to be made on our parties or else to be forgiuen and pardoned vs by God and his Ministers Seuenthly that they made prayers and offered Sacrifice for the soules in Purgatory is manifest by the fact of Iudas Machabeus 2. Mach. 12. who was a most noble vertuous and faithfull Israelite as all Christians doe confesse Neither is there any neede for this purpose to auerre and proue the bookes of the Machabees to be Canonicall Scripture when it serueth this turne that they be taken for a graue History and that the Protestants allow them to be of sufficient authority for instruction of manners Further all the Iewes euen to this day doe pray for the soules in Purgatory see the Catholike Apologie out of Protestant Authours Eightly the Titul 1. Sect. 4. Iewes of the male-kinde by their law were bound to goe as it were in pilgrimage at three solemne feasts in the yeare vnto one speciall place that God should choose for his seruice And King Salomon encouraged all strangers to goe on pilgrimage to the Temple builded by him when hee prayed that what stranger soeuer should Deut. 16. v. 16. come thither to pray hee might obtaine his sute And the bones of the Prophet Elizeus giuing life by 3. Reg. 8. v. 21. 4. Reg. 13. v. 21. their touch vnto a dead man doth sufficiently instruct all true beleeuers that it is very profitable to goe on pilgrimage vnto the sacred bones and holy relikes of Gods faithfull seruants departed Lastly they were not wholly vnacquainted with a kinde of shrift and absolution for they Numer 5. Leuit. 5. were charged to confesse the sinnes they had committed and to bring with them vnto the Priest a prescribed Sacrifice to be offered by them for their pardon and absolution And as the lepers by that law were bound to present themselues to the Priests and were by them declared such or purged from that imputation so in the law of grace men infected with the soules leprosie that is mortall sinne are either to be bound and declared obstinate by the Priests if they will not repent or repenting and confessing the same are to be cleansed therefrom by the Priests absolution as both S. Chrysostome Chrysost lib. 3. de Saceraot Hieron in cap. 16. Math. and S. Hierome doe argue This in briefe will suffice I hope for answere vnto M. Abbots particulars R. ABBOT I Gaue instance in mine answere of sundry points of faith and religion which I affirmed to bee vnknowen to the first Fathers which notwithstanding are such as they could not haue beene ignorant of if they were matters of so great moment in religion as they are pretended now I named the worshipping of Idols and Images Inuocation of Saints and Angels Merits and supererogations Monkish vowes Popish pardons and prayers for soules in Purgatory Pilgrimages to Relikes and dead mens bones auricular Confession and shrift in which and sundry other such like deuices the very substance of Catholike religion is now with the Papists imagined to consist Now M. Bishop affirmeth to the contrary that they held the most of these the most he saith not all thereby importing concerning some of them at least that they were vnknowen to them And yet as though hee wist not what hee had said he taketh in hand to touch euery one of my instances and to giue some proofe of euery one of them referring the Reader for more full satisfaction to the proper places of the head controuersies whereas he knoweth well that in the answere to those controuersies is already taken away almost all that he hath here said As first his exception against the name of Idoll a Of Images sect 5. I haue shewed to be wholly vaine and haue made it plaine out of Tertullian and others that euery Image consecrated to be worshipped is properly an Idoll Againe his allegations of Images in the Tabernacle and in the Temple of Salomon and of the wordes which he bringeth out of the Psalme b Ibid. Sect. 8. 16. Adore yee his foote-stoole haue beene also declared to be to his purpose false impertinent and vaine But yet to giue a touch for a touch note here also briefly the folly of them I say that the old Fathers worshipped no Images and he to proue the contrary alleageth that in the Tabernacle and Temple they had Images What is the one of these to
will teach you when I come some new doctrine and points of faith which Christ hath not taught or commanded me to teach but I haue added of mine owne If he thinke so let him tell vs that we may wonder at him If he doe not thinke so to what end is it that he alleageth those wordes Surely he who a little before so religiously telleth them that o Vos 23. he receiued of the Lord that which he deliuered to them should not seeme likely presently after to say that he would hereafter teach them other matters of his owne which he had not receiued of the Lord. M. Bishop therefore should haue vsed his discretion to put a difference betwixt matter of order and matter of faith so to vnderstand that though the Apostles might as the Church alwaies may prescribe orders for decency and conueniency in the publike assemblies and gouernement of the Church yet that in doctrine and faith neither they then nor the Church now may adde any thing to that which Christ our Lord commanded and deliuered both to them and vs. Of the same kinde is his other proofe out of that which the Apostle faith for aduice to the vnmarried so still to abide concerning which he professeth to haue receiued p 1. Cor. 7. 12. 25. no commandement from the Lord for what is this to shew that the Apostle hereby added a new point of faith when as whether the married or the vnmarried whether they that follow his aduise or they that follow it not all are saued by the same faith Aduise is of things arbitrary to be done faith is of things necessary to be beleeued The Apostle therfore might giue wholsome aduise without coÌ„mandement of the Lord and yet cannot hereupon be said to teach a new article of faith I said further in my answere that the Apostles preached only q Rom. 1. 2. the Gospell promised before by the Prophets in the holy Scriptures M. Bishop telleth me that I belye the Apostle and corrupt the text by adding the word only But I set downe the word only in a letter distinct from the wordes of the text as appeareth in my booke though he would not obserue it but hudleth all together and therefore there was no cause for him to charge me with corrupting the text And what will he say notwithstanding that it was not meant that they preached only the Gospell promised in the Scriptures Surely the Apostle noteth his calling and seruice to haue bin to preach the Gospell of God This Gospell of God he saith God had promised before by his Prophets in the holy Scriptures Now if M. Bishop will say that though the Gospell were there promised yet the whole Gospell was not promised he wrongeth the Apostle by making his wordes partly true and partly false true in one part of the Gospell because one part was promised false in another part because that other part was not promised Which to auoide he must confesse that the whole Gospell was promised in the Scriptures of the Prophets and because the Apostles preached only the Gospel of God therefore they preached only the Gospell promised in the Scriptures And thus in the end of the same Epistle the Apostle speaketh againe to the same effect that r Rom. 16. 26. the myslerie of the Gospell was published amongst all nations by the Scriptures of the Prophets We doe not thinke he dallied in so saying as to meane the Gospell is published that is to say a part thereof but not the whole but the Gospell entirely and perfectly is preached by the Scriptures of the Prophets Therefore elsewhere he professeth that in preaching the Gospell f he said no other things but what the Prophets and Moses did Acts 26. 22. say should come But here M. Bishop saith I mangle the text and breake off in the midst of a sentence that it might seeme appliable to all points of the Apostles preachings which the Apostle applieth only to Christs death and resurrection and the preaching and carrying of light to the Gentiles But he himselfe rather doth wrong in so abridging the wordes of the Apostle contrary to the practise of the Apostle who though here he name only a briefe of some principall points as accuslomably is done yet vnder these as the chiefe comprehendeth the whole doctrine which he taught He vsed the wordes to take away the offence which was generally conceiued against his preaching and seeing he did not preach these only particulars which are here set downe neither were they offended only at these therefore he must be so vnderstood as that the wordes must be applyed to all the rest and that taken as put in steede of all whereat they were offended most of all And if we doe not so take them we make him subiect to calumniation because he could not affirme that he said no other things then the Prophets and Moses did say should come if in any other points he taught any thing that had not the testimony of Moses and the Prophets Yea when the same Apostle saith generally of t Rom. 3. 21. 22 the righteousnesse of God by the faith of Iesus Christ that it hath the witnesse of the law and the Prophets how can M. Bishop perswade vs that in the preaching of the righteousnesse of God by the faith of Iesus Christ he should teach any thing but whereof hee had witnesse and warrant of the law and Prophets especially when wee see him as in other of his Epistles so specially in the Epistle to the Romans instifying all points of faith accordingly And that this is a truth not to be contradicted we will take witnesse of Gregory Bishop of Rome who saith that u Gregor in Cant c. 5. Apo 〈…〉 a Pro 〈…〉 â—ruâ—n dâ—ctis vt 〈◊〉 persisterent fidem integram 〈…〉 the Aposiles receiued the whole faith from those things that were spoken by the Prophets And againe x Idem in Ezech hom 6. Qued praedicat lâ—x hoc â—iani Prophete quod dâ—nuilciant Prophatae â—o◠〈…〉 bâ—t 〈◊〉 quod exâ—â—ourt Euangelium hoc praediâ—aâ—erunt Apostoâ—â— per mundum Looke what the law preacheth the same also doe the Prophets and what the Prophets teach the same the Gospell hath exhibited and what the Gospell exhibited the Apostles preached through the world Thus the law and the Prophets and the Gospell and the preaching of the Apostles haue all deliuered only one and the same thing Therefore he saith that y Ibid. Vâ—raque Testamenta in nullo a se dâ—screpant c. Inâ—st testamento veteri testamentum noâ—um c. Prophetia testamenti noâ—i testamentum vetus est expositio testamenti veteris testamentum nouum the two Testaments differ not in any thing one from the other that the new Testament is contained in the old that the old Testament is a prophecio of the now and the new Testament the exposition of the old The same had St. Austin said before that
heauen The other points were touched before and shall be shortly againe But I would in the meane season be glad to heare where the written word teacheth vs that Kings and temporall Magistrates are ordained by Christ to be vnder him supreme Gouernours of Ecclesiasticall affaires because M. Abbot made choise of this head-article of theirs for an instance that the written word was plaine on their side he should therefore at least haue pointed at some one text or other in the new Testament where it is registred that Princes are supreme Gouernours of the Church Nay are temporall Magistrates any Ecclesiasticall persons at all or can one that is no member of the Ecclesiasticall body be head of all the rest of the Ecclesiasticall members or is the state Secular higher and more worthy then the Ecclesiasticall and therefore meete to rule ouer it though they be not of it to say so is to preferre the body before the soule nature before grace earth before heauen or is it meete and decent that the lesse worthy-member should haue the supreme command ouer the more honourable where the Christian world is turned topsie-turuy that may be thought meete and expedient but in other places that will not be admitted for currant which in it selfe is so disorderly and inconuenient without it had better warrant in the word of God then that new position of theirs hath R. ABBOT THe truth of mine assertions hath hitherto appeared by my defence of them but let them no further be taken for true then he is here found to be false that is the oppugner of them He saith that my conclusion conuinceth me euen by the verdict of my selfe to fall into the foule fault and errour of the Donatists To proue this he maketh me to speake in my answere in this sort Our faith because it is that which the Apostles committed to writing is the Apostolike faith and our Church by consanguinity and agreement of doctrine is proued to be an Apostolicall Church c. and is the only true Catholike Church c. Hauing set downe all these as my words he inferreth thus see you not how he is come at length to proue their Church to be Catholike by perfection of their doctrine which was as he himselfe in this very assertion noted a plaine Donatisticall tricks reproued by St. Austin c. But I pray thee gentle Reader to looke where thou canst finde those wordes by me set downe And is the only true Catholike Church Aske M. Bishop if thou meete with him where he found them and if he cannot tell thee aske him in sadnesse what spirit he thinketh it was wherewith he was led when he set them downe for my wordes Fie M. Bishop fie for shame doe you talke so against lying and will you in the meane time lye so wittingly and willingly so as that there is no meanes to salue it no colour to excuse it I did not say that ours is the only true Catholike Church I made no shew of prouing it by perfection of doctrine to be the Catholike Church I neuer wrote it I neuer thought it and therefore once againe I wish you to bethinke your selfe of your words whereof I remembred you before a Reproofe pag. 283. The diuels cause it is that needeth to be bolstered out and vnderpropped with lyes Surely it is beyond doating folly it is desperate fury that draweth men on to such courses To let that goe foule and shamefull as it is he telleth vs next that he liketh well of Tertullians obseruation that our faith ought to haue consanguinity and perfect agreement with the Apostles doctrine But he curtolleth Tertullians obseruation by this recitall of his because Tertullian doth not only say what our faith ought to haue but telleth vs that b Tertul. de Praescript Quae licet nullum ex Apostolis vel Apostolicis authoreÌ„ suum proferaÌ„t vt mâ—â—tò posteriores quae denique quotidiè instituiâ—tur tamen in eadem fide conspirantes non mâ—â—us Apostolicae depâ—tantur pro consanguinitate doctrinae those Churches which cannot bring any of the Apostles or Apostolike men for their authour as being much later euen the Churches which daylie are begunne yet according in the same faith are for this consanguinity or agreement of doctrine reputed Apostolike Churches no lesse then the rest Hence I concluded that our Church because it agreeth in faith and doctrine with the Apostles is therefore to be reckoned an Apostolike Church But that saith M. Bishop is not the question at this time And what then is the question Marry saith he whether our doctrine or the Protestants be truly called Catholike that is whether of them hath beene receiued and beleeued in all nations ouer the world But did not he see that the one of these directly followeth of the other for the faith of the Apostles is it that was spred ouer the whole world Our faith is the same with the faith of the Apostles because it is that which is recorded in the Scriptures of the Apostles Therefore our faith it is that was spred and beleeued through the world Abrahams faith was it that was spred ouer the whole world for Abraham is c Rom. 4. 12. 16 the father and patterne of all that beleeue both circumcised and vncircumcised Our faith is the same with Abrahams faith Therefore againe it is our faith that was generally receiued throughout the world At this M. Bishop biteth the lip it troubleth him that he knoweth not what to say to it He seeth this proofe to be most certaine and impregnable aboue all other and therefore he seeketh by all meanes to diuert and turne away his Reader from listening to it He telleth him that I doe not deale plainly and soundly that I goe about the bush that I fetch wide and wild windlesses from old father Abrahams daies But I answere him that I haue so gone about the bush as that I haue scratched him with it and my wide and wild windlesses haue so inclosed him as that he cannot finde which way to get out againe Well if my course like him not what would he haue me doe I should he saith haue demonstrated by good testimony of the Ecclesiasticall histories or ancient Fathers that the Protestants religion had flourished since the Apostles daies ouer all Europe Afrike and Asia I haue done already sufficient to demonstrate that I haue astonished him and choaked him with the euidence of Scriptures Stories Councels Fathers so as that hitherto he hath left all that he hath written to the question of religion without defence I shall make further demonstration thereof in this booke euen in the Roman Church What am I the nearer with him by that that I haue done What shall I be the nearer when I haue all done for he hath resolued himselfe to a wicked course and therefore though the light shine into his eyes yet he will sweare that he seeth it not He blameth me for concluding without
way to goe and vncertaine where they shall arriue And this he doth to hide from them the true vse of that ground and foundation which he himselfe hath layed from whence it properly and naturally ariseth that sith that was the certaine truth which was first deliuered and taught and is to be the measure and rule of the faith and doctrine of all succeeding times therefore we should first haue recourse to the monuments and records of that that was first taught thereby to iudge of the faith and religion of our fathers and to esteeme whether their steps were such as that we may securely follow them In this behalfe Christ hath prouided for vs who h Gregor in Ezech. hom 13 Ipsa quae dixit etiam Scripturae tradidit vt posteris mandâ—â—etur what he spake saith Gregory he committed also to writing that posterity might know the same i August de consens Euangel lib. 1. c. 35. Quicquid ille de suis factis dictis nos legere voluit hoc illis scribendum tanquam suis manibus imperauit Whatsoeuer he would haue vs to reade saith Austin of his doings and sayings he commanded his Disciples as his hands to write the same And thus k Idem in 1. Epistol Ioan. tract 2. Contra insidiosos â—rrores Deus voluit ponere firmamentum in Scripturis contra quâ—s nullus audet loqui qui quoquo modo se vult videri Christianum against deceipt â—ill errours saith the same St. Austin God would set vs a fortresse or bulwarke in the holy Scriptures against which no man dare speake that will in any sort be thought a Christian man Hauing then certaine records of the truth first deliuered such as no man dare contradict what way can we imagine for resolution either more compendious and short or more lightsome and comfortable then to looke to the patterne of faith expressed in those records thence to informe our selues and thereby to rectifie whatsoeuer we finde to haue swarned or declined from that rule This M. Bishop cannot abide this they know to be the gall and bane of Popery and therefore from this they labour to withdraw men that what they cannot defend by testimony of truth they may notwithstanding colour by the example of their fathers This was the intent of M. Bishops not humble but presumptuous request to his Maiesty that he would maintaine and set forth that faith wherein all his royall Progenitors liued and dyed not that he is able to demonstrate in what religion all his Maiesties royall Progenitours liued and dyed but that he may leade him from that rule whereby he should be able to iudge of the faith of his Progenitours and whether his fathers haue in any sort swarued from that faith which at the first was deliuered to their forefathers Albeit if it be true which he saith that Symmachus the Pagan played the part of a foolish Sophister when he pleaded so with the Emperor Valentinian We are to follow our fathers because the Emperors father and nearest Predecessors were no Pagan Idolaters but profâ—ssed Christians then doth himselfe also play the part of a foolish Sophister in pleading so with King IAMES that he must follow his fathers inasmuch as his nearest Predecessours his father and grandfather were no Popish Idolaters but professours of the religion of the Protestants and his mother so well perswaded thereof as that shee would not goe about to disswade him from it But against the plea of Symmachus â—e excepteth further because his forefathers for whose idolatry he pleadeth had before forsaken the true worship of one liuing God Which though it be true yet I maruell how M. Bishop would make him to beleeue it inasmuch as he had to alleage that for so many hundred yea for thousands of yeares their Ancestours had continued those deuotions and that it might seeme strange that amongst so many wise Gouernours so many learned Philosophers so many vertuous men there should not be one of so many generations that euer could see that they did amisse Wee see how he saith not only l Relat. Symmach apud Ambros Epist lib 5. Seruanda est tot seculis fides sequendi sunt nobis parentes qui sâ—cuti sunt felicitèr suos Let vs follow our Ancestours but addeth who with great felicity followed theirs being fully resolued that both their Ancestours and the Ancestours of their Ancestours had in all times past beene the same as they M. Bishop by beleefe of holy Scripture knoweth the contrary because he there vnderstandeth all nations to haue been the posterity of Noah who was a worshipper of one true liuing God saued by faith in Christ to come whose religion set forth in Scripture being compared to the superstitions of the Pagans doth clearely conuince that they were farre departed from that that he was Now then M. Bishop be content that we returne the same to you You say that all our Ancestours from the beginning continued in one and the same euen your religion Shall we now for triall hereof goe to our Ancestours and aske them whether it be so or not No but we will goe to holy Scripture and there see what was the faith and religion of them who are our true Ancestours the first fathers and founders of the Christian Church the Apostles and Euangelists and there we finde a farre other manner of faith then Popery doth yeeld whereby we certainly vnderstand that they haue corrupted the true faith His exception against the Donatists pleading of their fathers is the same as against Symmachus that their fathers were degenerated from the integrity of their grandfathers and therefore were not to be followed But yet the Donatists held that all their forefathers were of their minde euen as stifly as the Papists doe They said that they were not fallen from the Catholike Church but the Catholike church from them so as that they affirmed it to haue beene their Church which was persecuted by Nero and the rest of those Roman Tyrants as I haue before shewed in the second Chapter But St. Austin euery where bringeth them to the Scriptures m Collat. Carthag 1. c. 18. In eis literis Ecclesiam esse quaerendam vbi Christus redemptor eius innotuit Et Collat. 3. c. 101. Nos eam Ecclesiam retinemus quam in illis Scripturis inuenim in quibus etiam cognouimus Christum there to learne and seeke the Church of Christ where we learne to know Christ himselfe and thereby iustifieth that they were fallen away from the Church and not the Church from them and therfore that they were to renounce their fathers that had so done and returne to the Church againe This M. Bishop cannot pleade against vs whose parents haue beene Protestants to moue vs to refuse the religion of our fathers and to returne to the example of our forefathers because by the Scriptures we learne that our forefathers did amisse and therefore that it shall be to vs a
another Psalme handling the wordes at large expoundeth them as in al these places he hath done z Idem in Psal 80. Qui aedificat amorem terrenorum super fundamentum regni coelorum c. ardebit amor rerâ—m temporalium ipse saluus erit per idoneum fundamentum â—t paulo ante Grauâ—tèr conturbâ—ntur foenum stipula ligna ardent Si tristis perdis saluus eris tanquam per ignem He that buildeth the loue of temporall things vpon the foundation of the Kingdome of heauen that is vpon Christ his loue of temporall things shall burne namely by sorrow and griefe in the losse of them but he himselfe shall be saued by the right foundation Thus very constantly doth he vnderstand the fire spoken of by the Apostle of the griefe and tribulation that God layeth vpon the faithfull in bereauing them of those earthly goods which they haue ouer-carnally affected and desired Now in all these places it is to be noted that Saint Austin was so farre from expounding that text of the Apostle concerning Purgatory as that in euery of the former he hath signified expresly that hee doubted thereof and in the last of all denyeth it expresly In the first place hee saith a De â—ide Oper. c. 16. Siâ—â— in haâ— vâ—â—a tantum homines ista patiuntur siue etiam post hac vitam â—alia quae dâ— iudicia subsequnâ—â—r non abhorret quantum arbâ—â—ror à ratione veritatis iste intellâ—ctus bâ—â—us â—â—ntentiae Whether in this life only men suffer such things or whether after this life also some such iudgements fâ—llow the meaning which I haue giuen of this sentence as I suppose abhorreth not from the truth In the second place hee saith b Enchirid. ad Laurent c. 69. Tale aliquid 〈◊〉 pest hanc vitam â—eri incredibile nâ—a est vtrum ita sit quaeri potest aut inueniri â—ut latere nâ—nnullos fidelâ—s per ignem quendam pâ—rgatoriii quatò magis unâ—usue bâ—na pereuntia dâ—lexerunt tanto tardâ—â—s citiâ—sâ—â— saluari That sâ—me such thing there is also after this life it is not incredible and may be enquired of whether it be so or not and either be sound or remaine hidden that some faithfull by a kinde of Purgaâ—ory fire by how much they haue either the more or the lâ—sse loued transitory goods are either the sooner or the more slowly saued The repeating of both these places to Dulcitius without any reuocation or alteration may serue in steede of a third testimony of his doubting of it And in the last place he saith againe c De ciâ— Dâ—â— lib. 21. cap. 26. Post istius corâ—oris mortem c. si hoc 〈◊〉 â—tâ—ruall◠〈◊〉 tus defunctorum eiusmodi ignem dicuntâ—r perpeti c. sâ—â—â— ibi tantum sâ—u◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vt noa ibi secâ—laria quamâ—â—s à damnatione vemalia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inueniant non redarguo quiâ— forsiâ—an verâ—m est After the death of this body if the soules of the dead in this meane time till the râ—surrection be sâ—id to suffer some such kinde of fire and whether there only or both here and there or whether here they finde a fire of transitory tribulation burning their secular desires that they may not finde it there I reproue it not I say not against it because perhaps it is true Here we finde it is not incredible and it may be disputed whether it be so and perhaps it is so but vpon his best aduice hee could not finde in the Apostles wordes or in any other place of Scripture that certainely it is so Yea in the last place which is worthy to be noted propounding to answere some who by pretence of the Apostles wordes here in question hoped to be saued by a Purgatory fire he vseth these words d In Psal 80. 〈◊〉 per 〈◊〉 salaus eâ—o Nam quid est quod art Apostolus fundamentum aliud c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 das esse volo 〈◊〉 est enim non vobis dare securitatem malam Non dabo quod non 〈◊〉 tâ—meus terreo securos vos saccrem si securus â—iâ—rem ego Ignem aeternum tin â—â— Non 〈◊〉 nisi ignem aeternum de quo â—lio loco Scriptura dicit c. Brethren I am very fearefull it is not good to giue you any euill security I will deliuer nothing but what I receiue in feare I terrifie you I would secure you if I could secure my selfe I feare eternall fire I receiue or learne no fire but that that is eternall of which the Scripture saith in another place Their fire shall neuer goe out and so hee goeth on to expound the place in such sort as I haue said Marke this well St. Austin will deliuer nothing but what he hath receiued and hee professeth to haue receiued no other fire but only eternall fire Therefore very definitely he saith elsewhere e Hypognost l. 5. Tertum loâ—um penitus ignoramus un mò nec esse in Scripturis inuenimus Wee are vtterly ignorant of any third place yea and we finde in the Scriptures that there is none and therefore he diuideth all the soules of the dead either to perpetuall ioy or perpetuall torment as I haue shewed f Answere to Doctor Bishops Epistle sect 10. otherwhere As Austin so Gregory also though hee expound the place concerning Purgatory as M. Bishop citeth yet saith elsewhere that g Greg. Dial. 〈…〉 c. 39. Hoc de â—â—â—e tribulationis in hac nobis vita adâ—nbito potest intelligi the same may be vnderstood of the fire of tribulation applyed vnto vs in this life and if it may be vnderstood of tribulation in this life then can it be no proofe for warrant of a Purgatory in the life to come Now it is true indeed that Gregory was superstitiously conceipted concerning Purgatory although allowing of it only h Ibid De quibusdam 〈◊〉 culpis de paruts minimâ—â—que peceatis for very small and light offences but it is worth the while to note how sometimes the truth forcing it selfe vpon him hee crosseth himselfe in this behalfe and putteth that downe in one place which he buildeth in another For he writing vpon Iob he saith i Greg. Mor. l. 8. c. 8. Quem nequaquam modo miserecordia eripit sola post praesons seculum iustitia 〈◊〉 Hinc Salomo ait quia lignum ta quocunque loco ceâ—â—derit c. qua â—um humani casus tempore fiue sanctus fiâ—e malignus spiritus egredientem amnâ—a claustra carnis acceperit in 〈◊〉 secum 〈◊〉 pernâ—â—tat 〈◊〉 aterâ—is suppliâ—iis vltra ad remedium creptionis ascendat Whom mercy now deliuereth not him iustice only after this world imprisoneth Hereof Salomon saith that in whatsoeuer place the tree falleth whether towards the South or towards the North there it shall be because when at the time of a mans death either the good spirit or the euill spirit shall receiue
is therein approued by the Councell of Ephesus n Cyril Epist 10. ad Nestor Nec praeter ipsum alteri cuipid homini siue sacerdotij nomen siue rem ipsam ascribimus We ascribe not the name of Priesthood or the thing it selfe to any other but to Christ only o August coÌ„t Faust l. 22. c. 17 Vnus verus Sacerdos Mediator Dei hominum c. The only true Priest as St. Austin calleth him p Ibid. l. 20. c. 18. Verum sacrificium c. quo eius Altare solus Christus impleuit Who only saith he hath filled Gods Altar with true sacrifice Whilest he limiteth the sacrifice of Christ to his q Heb. 7. 27. 10. 10. once offering of himselfe r Heb. 9. 12. by the shedding of his bloud and denyeth plainly his Å¿ Heb. 7. 27. 9. 1. 25. often offering he disclaimeth the Popish sacrifice which is often offered not from yeare to yeare only but from day to day after the manner of the Leuiticall sacrifice which is therefore argued not to haue taken away sinnes t Heb. 10. 1. 2. because it was often offered For u Vers 18. where there is remission of sinnes there is no more offering for sinne Where there is therefore still offering for sinne there is a deniall of the purchase of remission of sinnes But in the x Mat. 26. 28. shedding of the bloud of Christ who doubteth but that there is remission of sinnes Who then can doubt but that after the shedding of the bloud of Christ there is no more offering or sacrifice for sinne Therefore St. Austin saith y Aug. cont aduersar leg proph lib. 1. cap. 18. Singulari solo vero sacrificio Christi pro nobis sanguis effususest For the soueraigne and only true sacrifice the bloud of Christ was shed for vs. If the shedding of the bloud of Christ be the only true sacrifice then is there no true sacrifice in the Popish Masse and therefore St. Austin neuer vnderstood the Apostles words of any Popish sacrifice Well though the Apostle say nothing for the sacrifice yet he saith somewhat M. Bishop telleth vs for the principall part of the Masse which is the Reall presence But what is the Reall presence now the principall part of the Masse They will haue vs by the Masse to vnderstand a sacrifice and the Reall presence may stand without any sacrifice and so by this meanes wee shall haue a Masse without a Masse But what saith the Apostle for the Reall presence Forsooth he deliuereth it in as expresse termes as may be euen as he had receiued it from our Lord This is my body which shall be deliuered for you c. and addeth that he that eateth and drinketh it vnworthily eateth and drinketh iudgement to himselfe not discerning the body of our Lord. Wee see the wordes we reade them daylie but we cannot see in them the Reall presence Christ saith there This is my body but he doth not say This is my body really present He telleth vs that the vnworthy receiuer incurreth iudgement for not discerning the Lords body but he doth not tell vs that this is for not discerning his body really present M. Bishop should here haue giuen vs a sound reason that these wordes doe necessarily enforce a reall presence and cannot be verified but by the granting thereof For if there may be another interpretation of these wordes standing well with Scriptures approued by Fathers confonant and agreeable to the nature of all Sacraments then how childishly how vainly doth he deale only to set downe the place and to say it is a proofe for the reall presence Nay see how by alleaging places in this sort he circumuenteth himselfe and destroyeth by one place that which he seeketh to fortifie by another For whereas Transubstantiation is the foundation and ground of Reall presence the latter place which he citeth is the bane of Transubstantiation and giueth vs a conuenient and true exposition of the former wordes without any necessity of Reall presence For how can it stand which the Apostle saith z 1. Cor. 10. 16. The bread which we breake is the coÌ„munion of the body of Christ if the Popish doctrine of transubstantiation be true that there is no bread to breake It is true which St. Paul saith that it is bread which we breake therefore it is false which the Papists say that the bread by consecration is substantially turned into the body of Christ and ceaseth thenceforth to be bread And this the Apostle inculcateth againe and againe in the former place a 1. Cor. 11. 26. 27. 28. As oft as yee shall eate of this bread c. Whosoeuer shall eate of this bread c. Let a man examine himselfe and so let him eate of this bread c. and yet notwithstanding all this it must be denyed to be bread But of this bread he telleth vs that it is the communion or participation of the body of Christ and thereby giueth vs a true and certaine exposition of the wordes of Christ This is my body that is this bread is the communion or participation of my body signifying that though in naturall substance and being it be but bread yet by sacramentall vnderstanding and effect it is to the due and faithfull receiuer the communion of the body of Christ. For by Gods institution and ordinance b Cypr. serm de Resurrect Christi Quod videtur nomine virtute Christi corpus censetur the visible element as Cyprian saith is accounted both in name and power the body of Christ and therefore in the due receiuing of the Sacrament is the participating of Christs body as on the other side the not discerning of the Sacrament is the not discerning of the body of Christ which to vs the Sacrament is though in it selfe it be not so Now the body of Christ is here vnderstood as giuen for vs and his bloud as shedde for vs and therefore the communion of the body and bloud of Christ is the participation of his Passion Death and Resurrection so that the Sacrament is to vs as Optatus saith c Optat. cont Parmen lib. 6. Pignus salutis aeternae tutela sidei spes resurrectionis the pledge of eternall life the protection of our faith the hope of our resurrection There was cause therefore why our Sauiour Christ should say of the Sacrament This is my body because to vs it is in effect the body of Christ though really it be not so but d Tertuâ—l coÌ„t Marc. lib. 4 Hoc est corpus mâ—um id est figura corporis mei the figure of his body as Tertullian expoundeth e August coÌ„t Adima â—t c. 12. Non dubitauit Dominus dicere Hoc est corpus meum cum daret signum corporis sui the signe of his body as St. Austin speaketh f Hieron in Mat 16. Vt veritatem corporis sangâ—â—is sui
them or will you haue men before due time to say O St. William helpe vs and saue vs l Iam. 5. 20. He that conuerteth a sinner from going astray saueth a soule from death and doth it follow that thenceforth wee must pray vnto him to helpe and saue vs Yea many a time it commeth to passe that hee which thus saueth another is found a reprobate himselfe and doth it yet follow that we must pray to him Paul and Timothy saued men as all Preachers doe by preaching the way of saluation by m Acts 11. 14. speaking the wordes vnto them by which they were saued They saued them to whom they preached them to whom they preached not they saued not nor can be said to saue vs otherwise then as Gods instruments they haue left vnto vs in writing the word of the Gospell by the faith whereof wee obtaine saluation And doth it follow that because they thus saued men when they were aliue therefore we must pray to them when they are dead or because they saued men by their preaching when they were aliue must we pray to them to helpe vs and saue vs by their merits and intercessions now they are dead or because Paul and Timothy saued men by their preaching must we pray to our Lady to holy Virgins and other Women that they will helpe vs and saue vs that preached not What sharpe eye-sight doe men get by being at Rome that can looke as farre into a text as they doe into a mil-stone and can see more in it then euer they thought of that were the writers of it Can wee doubt but that the Roman religion may bee proued by Scripture when as we see so pregnant places for the proofe of it or may we not rather thinke them besotted and bewitched that rest their faith and saluation vpon such proofes The like faculty and dexterity we see in the next proofe St. Paul did accomplish those things that want to the passions of Christ in his flesh for Christs body which is the Church therefore Christs passion doth not take away our owne satisfaction Of which place and his construction thereof I haue n Of Satisfaction sect â— formerly said so much and so plainly laied open his abuse of it as that for very shame hee should haue for borne to apply it any more to that effect There is no Father of the Church no ancient writer that hath either so expounded the place or affirmed the doctrine that they gather from it It is a meere Antichristian deuise full of blasphemy and indignity to the Sonne of God forged only for aduantage of filthy lucre and gaine so that we may iustly wonder that they dare thus wrest holy Scripture to the defence of it But doth St. Paul say any thing there that soundeth for satisfaction Hee telleth vs that for the Churches sake he fulfilleth for his part that which is wanting or yet behinde of the afflictions of Christ but doth he any way import that this is to satisfie for sinne or to redeeme the Church either from temporall or eternall punishment The Father o Heb. 2. 10. hath consecrated Iesus the Prince of our saluation through afflictions p Luke 24. 26. It behoued him first to suffer and so to enter into his glory God then hauing q Rom 8. 29. predestinated vs to be made like vnto the image of his sonne it followeth that r Vers 17. wee must also suffer with him that wee also may be glorified with him And because we are members of Christ who hath made the Church Å¿ Ephes 1. 23. his body and the fulnesse of himselfe and hath called the whole himselfe the head and vs the body by the one name of t 1. Cor. 12. 12. Gal. 3. 16. Christ professing expresly u Mâ—â— 25. 4â— 45. What yee haue done to one of the least of these my brethren yee haue done it vnto me therefore our afflictions and sufferings are called x 2. Cor. 1. 5. the sufferings and afflictions of Christ wheroâ— therefore there shall be some what behinde and to which there shall be still somewhat wanting vntill the passions and sufferings of the whole body euen of all the elect shall bee accomplished and fulfilled To St. Paul then it belonged being a member of the body of Christ to drinke of this cup and to be baptized with this baptisme but no otherwise did it belong to him then it belongeth to all the faithfull neither doth hee professe any thing here to bee fulfilled by him but what must successiuely and in order be fulfilled by them all Thus and no otherwise did Gregory Bishop of Rome vnderstand the Apostles fulfilling of the remainder of the afflictions of Christ y Gregor Expoâ—t in 1 Reg. lib 4. cap 4. pâ—ope finem No omnia nostra Christus expleuit Per crucem qui. dem suam omnes redemit sed remansit vt qui redimi cum eo regnore nititur crucifigatur Hoâ— profectòre fiduum viderat qui dicebat si compatimur conregnabimus quasi dicot Quod explâ—uit Christus noÌ„ valet nisi ei qui id quod remansit adimplet Hinc beatus Petrus Apostolis dicit Christus passas est pro nobis c. Hâ—nc Paulus aitâ— Aâ—â—mpleo â—a quae desunt pâ—ssoâ— Christâ—m coâ—pore meo Christ saith he did not fulfill all that appertaineth to vs. By his Crosse indeede he redeemed all but it remaineth that hee that seeketh to bee redeemed and to raigne with him must also be crucified This saith he he saw to be remaining which said If we suffer with him we shall raigne with him as if he said That which Christ fulfilled auaileth not but to him who fulfilleth that which yet remaineth Hereof St. Peter saith Christ suffered for vs leauing you an example that yee should follow his steps Hereof St. Paul saith I fulfill in my body those things which are yet wanting to the passion of Christ Hee attributeth redemption which is the satisfaction for our sinnes wholly to the Crosse of Christ but signifieth withall that God hath appointed that they shall be ioyned with Christ in z Phil. 3 10. the fellowship of his afflâ—ctions that shall bee partakers of his redemption and that this is the fulfilling of that that is wanting of the passions of Christ Now whereas he saith that he doth this for the Churches sake hee meaneth no other thereby then when hee saith to the Corinthians a 2. Cor. 12 15. I will most gladly be bestowed for your soules and to the Ephesians b Ephes 3. â— I am a prisoner in the Lord for you Gentils and to the Philippians c Phil 2. 17. I will gladly be offered vpon the sacrifice and seruice of your faith and to Timothy d 2. Tim. 2. 10. I suffer all things for the elects sake that they may also obtaine the saluation which is in Christ Iesus with eternall glory What did he intend
Gospell to the Corinthians of free cost though he omitted therein a liberty which God by speciall prouision and ordinance hath yeelded in that case yet the occasion waighed where he did it he did no more then in generality of duty God requireth and commandeth who will haue his fauours so to be a commodity vnto vs as that they be no wrong to him and our liberty so to be vrged and vsed as may stand with charity that it bee not a snare to our brethren or a wound to them whom wee should seeke to heale M. Bishop therefore is yet to seeke for his workes of supererogation St. Paul will yeeld him no helpe for them and a simple man would I hold him for alleaging this text for the proofe thereof but that I know he is tyed to goe that way that other Roman Hackneis haue gone before him Next and for conclusion he commeth to the Sacraments and although he cannot bring colour for their whole fiue superadded Sacraments yet he sheweth his good will by alleaging somewhat for two of them but still hath ill happe and commeth too short of the marke that he aymeth at For marriage he alleageth the wordes of St. Paul as commonly they doe y Ephes 5. 32. This is a great Sacrament Sacrament say they out of their vulgar Latin whereas considering the vse of the word Sacrament that now is they should rather say mysterie or secret as we doe Albeit if the very word Sacrament in their vulgar translation be sufficient to proue a Sacrament in that sense wherein the number of Sacraments is questioned betwixt vs and them they may tell vs of a greater number then now they doe and adde z Ephes 1. 9. the Sacrament of the will of God a Ephes â— 9. the Sacrament hidden from the ages past b 1. Tim. 3. 16 the Sacrament of Godlinesse c Apoc. 1. 20. the Sacrament of seuen Starres d Apoc. 17. 7. the Sacrament of the woman sitting vpon the Beast and sundry other of which their interpreter vseth the word Sacrament as well as hee doth concerning Marriage But the Masters of Rhemes acquit themselues in this behalfe affirming that e Rhem. Testam Annot. Ephes 5. 32. they doe not gather this only of the word Mysterie in Greeke or Sacrament in Latin both which they say they know haue a more generall signification and that in the Scriptures also which being so how idlely doth M. Bishop deale only to bring vs the very word for proofe that Matrimony is one of the Sacraments properly so called of the grace of Christ But the greater is his fault and the fault of his fellowes also in drawing this text to that purpose inasmuch as the Apostle expresly declareth that the mysterie or secret which he intendeth is concerning Christ and his Church This is a great mysterie but I speake concerning Christ and his Church that is saith Hierome in his lesser Commentary f Hieron in Ephes 5. Ego hoc inquit in Christo intelligendum dico in Ecclesia I say that this is to be vnderstood in Christ and in the Church And thus Leo Bishop of Rome wholly vnderstandeth it saying g Leo Epist 22. Quicunque in Christo non confitetur corpus humanum nouerit se mysterio incarnationis indignum nec eius Sacramenti habere consortium quod Apostolus praedicat dicens Quia membra sumus corporis eius c. Et exponeâ—s quid per hoc significaretur adiecit Sacramentum hoc magnum est ego autem dico in Christo in Ecclesia Whosoeuer confesseth not in Christ an humane body let him know himselfe vnworthy of the mysterie of the incarnation and that he hath no participation or fellowship of that Sacrament whereof the Apostle speaketh saying for we are members of his body of his flesh and of his bones for this shall a man leaue Father and Mother and shall cleaue to his wife and they two shall be one flesh and expounding what was signified hereby he addeth This is a great Sacrament but I speake of Christ and of the Church He vseth the word Sacrament as the Latin Fathers commonly doe as it extendeth to all things that are mysticall and spirituall but as touching the place is so farre from conceiuing Marriage here intended to be made a Sacrament as that he referreth the Sacrament or secret here spoken of altogether to the mystâ—â—ie of the incarnation and the spirituall coniunction and vnion betwixt Christ and his Church To the very same effect speaketh St. Austin and much more to the purpose because he toucheth the very point in hand h August in Ioan. Tract 9. Illud vnum quatum mysterium de Christo continet quod praedicat Apostolus dicens Et erunt duo in carne vna Sacramentum hoc magnum est Et nequis istam magnitudinem Sacramenti in singulis quibusque hominibus vxores habentibus intelligeret Ego aâ—tem dico in Christo c. Quod est hoc Sacramentum magnum Erunt duo in carne vna Cum de Adam Bua Scriptura Geneseos loqueretur vnde ventum est ad haec verba Propterea â—â—linquet homo patrem c. That one thing which the Apostle mentioneth saying They two shall â—e one flesh this is a great Sacrament how great a mysterie doth it containe concerning Christ And that no man should vnderstand this greatnesse of Sacrament in all men that haue wiues he saith But I speake of Christ and of the Church What is this great Sacrament saith he They two shall be one flesh Marry when the Scripture of Genesis spake that whence it proceedeth to those wordes for this cause shall a man leaue Father and Mother c. In which wordes wee see that St. Austine is so farre from M. Bishops Popish construction and application of this Text as that hee plainely denyeth the matter of Sacrament here spoken of to appertaine to the common Marriage of Men and Women and referreth the same wholly vnto Christ and his Church figured and resembled in our first Parents Adam and Eue and that in some things proper to them only Hereto belongeth that which hee saith i Ibid. Paulò pòst Dormit Adam vt fiat Eua moritur Christus vt fiat Ecclesia Dormienti Adâ— fit Eua de latere mortuo Christo lancea percutitur latus vt proâ—luant SacrameÌ„ta quibus formetur Ecclesia Adam sleepeth that Eue may be made and that the Church may bee made Christ dyeth Whilest Adam sleepeth Eue is made for him out of his side and the side of Christ being now dead is striken through with a speare that the Sacraments may issue forth by which the Church is framed Whereof Leo also addeth in the place before cited k Leo vt supr Quae de Sponsi â—arne prodijt quando ex latere crucifixi manaÌ„te sanguine aqua Sacramentum redemptionis regenerationis accepit The Church came out
iust imputation of apostasie if to them we shall retire our selues from the religion of our fathers And see here how M. Bishop goeth a way quite contrary to St. Austin for St. Austin vsed the Scriptures to draw the Donatists to the example of their former fathers and M. Bishop vseth the example of our former fathers to draw vs away from the Scriptures But against all his vaine motiues we are setled by the charge giuen by God himselfe n Ezech. 20. 18 Walke yee not in the ordinances of your fathers neither obserue their manners nor defile your selues with their Idols I am the Lord your God Walke in my statutes and keepe my iudgements and doe them Gods statutes are the line and rule whereby he hath appointed vs to goe we respect not therefore what our fathers haue done but we looke to the statutes of God in the word of God to the example and teaching of Christ in the word of Christ there to learne how farre we may approue the doings of our fathers To doe otherwise is as the Prophet speaketh o Ierem. 2. 13. to forsake the fountaine of liuing waters which God hath shewed and to digge to our selues broken pits that will hold no water at least no other but puddle water For conclusion strange it is to see how impudently he peruerteth the wordes of Cyprian To returne to the originall of the Lords tradition is with Cyprian to leaue the example of our fathers and to looke to the Gospell what the Lord hath there deliuered but with M. Bishop it is to returne to our forefathers and in steede of the Gospell to learne of them what it is that Christ taught Cyprian saith We are not to regard what any man before vs hath thought fit to be done but what Christ did who was before all M. Bishop saith that we are to regard what our fathers before vs haue thought fit to be done that of them we may learne what Christ did who is before all Cyprian saith We are not to follow the custome of men but the truth of God M. Bishop saith we are to follow the custome of men that we may thereby come to the knowledge of the truth of God Thus very directly he crosseth Cyprian and yet will be very angry if we say that he speaketh any otherwise then Cyprian doth W. BISHOP §. 2. NOw to that point which followeth in M. Abbot There shall be a time when the Kings of the Apocal. 17. earth shall giue their power to the beast and bend themselues to fight against the Lambe which I doe willingly admit but when that time shall be or what Kings it is very vncertaine for there shall be also a time When the Kings of the earth shall be as nurses to Esay 60. Psalm 72. the true Church and shall most humbly both obey it and also enrich and defend it to the vttermost of their power Now by the very insinuation of the Text and the vniforme consent of ancient writers the good Kings shall cherish exalt and magnifie the Church before those euill Kings shall arise who falling away from their fathers faith and from the Catholike Church will lend their aide to her professed enemies to worke her ouerthrow which is a shrewd presumption that the Kings of former ages stoode farre better affected to the true Church of God then some of later times Well this I leaue to vnderstanding mens iudgement But I may not slippe M. Abbots exceeding grosse ouer-sight or rather hainous crime in ranking his Maiesty among those Kings mentioned in the Apocalypse for albeit they shall hate Cap. 17. the whoore and make her desolate and naked and eate her flesh c. yet they shall be most wicked and impious Kings and shall adore the monstruous beast there described and fight against Christ Iesus These be the very wordes of the Text And the ten hornes c. be ten Kings c. these haue one counsell and force and their power they shall deliuer to the beast these shall fight with the Lambe and the Lambe shall ouerthrow them c. And the ten hornes which Vers 16. thou sawest in the beast these shall hate the harlot and make her desolate and naked c. so that the very same ten Kings signified there by ten hornes that did giue all their power to the beast did hate the harlot But how can it be saith one that they who hate the wicked harlot should ioyne with the beast who was as wicked as shee Yes that may well be for it is no newes that wicked men fall out among themselues so that one vngodly and wicked Prince doth sometimes with all his might aide another more wicked then himselfe and at the same instant perhaps or shortly after fight against a third the most wicked of all they doe fight against both good and euill as their owne rage passions or occasions carry them Which I say to stoppe a starting hole of the Protestants who to auoide this inconuenience say that first these ten Kings were bent to all mischiefe and then helped the beast against the Lambe but afterward repented them of their former iniquity then loe they hated the harlot and persecuted her which they would not haue done if they had beene badde Princes this is a prety shift Well say first that this sense could stand with the wordes of the text yet they cannot be applyed to his Maiesty who was not in his former time any â—ider of our religion and now is fallen of from that to the Protestants wherefore this deuice if it could stand with the text will not serue their turne But the spirit of God hath preuented and wholly cut off this vaine imagination for it saith in the next verse That the ten Kings who hated the harlot euen then and after too gaue their Kingdomes to the beast till the word of God be consummate that is till the end of all Wherefore most manifest it is euen by the warrant of Gods sacred word that those Kings mentioned in the Apocalypse were reprobates such did they liue and such shall they die Let then his most excellent Maiesty censure what reward they are worthy off who feare not to thrust his Highnesse into that list of condemned cast-a-waies and that too after they had such faire warning as in my answere to M. Perkins I gaue them to beware how they did his Maiesty that shame and despite If it please his Highnesse to take notice of it I doubt not but that he will conne them little thanke for this their commendation of him R. ABBOT IT hath beene already very gloriously fulfilled which God promised vnto his Church a Esay 49. 23. Kings shall â—e thy nursing fathers and Queenes shall be thy nourses c. The great states of the world the Emperours and Kings and Princes Constantine Theodosius Valentinian Honorius Lucius of Britaine Theodebert and Theodelind of France Reccaredus of Spaine and infinite other of the