Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
scripture_n apostle_n faith_n prove_v 2,956 5 5.7639 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A18981 The true ancient Roman Catholike Being an apology or counterproofe against Doctor Bishops Reproofe of the defence of the Reformed Catholike. The first part. Wherein the name of Catholikes is vindicated from popish abuse, and thence is shewed that the faith of the Church of Rome as now it is, is not the Catholike faith ... By Robert Abbot ... Abbot, Robert, 1560-1618. 1611 (1611) STC 54; ESTC S100548 363,303 424

There are 12 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

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
to that order To offer a sinne offering for the multitude it was agreeable to the law and therefore we may well presume that he did so and cannot but take that which he did to be intended so rather then of that whereof the law commanded nothing nor example is there found of any that did the like But the historian not content to set downe the narration of this matter simply as it seemeth hee found it in the former storie which he followed taketh vpon him to giue his iudgement of it and maketh thereof construction according to his owne conceipt as if Iudas had offered for the dead in respect that hee beleeued that they should rise againe when as indeede nothing appeared to that effect And thus hee afterwards giueth his censure of the deede of p 2. Macca 14. 37. c. Razis in killing himselfe giuing approofe and commendation thereof so that by his authority we may as well argue that it is lawfull for a man to kill himselfe as that it is lawfull to make prayers and offerings for the dead Now M. Bishop knowing well our exception against the bookes of Maccabees that they are not Canonicall Scripture and therefore are vnsufficient to giue vs warrant of any point of faith preoccupateth this obiection and telleth vs that it is needlesse to proue the bookes of the Maccabees to be Canonicall Scripture and that it serueth this turne that they be taken for a graue history Very vnlearnedly and childishly as though euery graue history were sufficient to giue vs information in points of faith and as though by the commendation of the fact of Razis it did not appeare that he did not greatly deserue with vs the commendation of a graue historian who know not so much as a graue Heathen Philosopher did know Pythagoras by name from whom Tully learned it that q Tull de Senect Vetat Pythagora● iniussu imperatoris id est Dei de praesidio statione vitae decedere Et Tuscul quaest l. 1. Vetat dominans ille in nobis Deus iniussu hinc nos suo demigrare it is forbidden vs of God but only at his call and bidding to goe out of this life and therefore that it is not lawfull for a man at his owne will to make away himselfe As for our allowing of those Apocryphall bookes to be read for instruction of manners what is it to the warranting of matters of faith neither doe we by that allowance giue them such authority as if euery thing which they say in that behalfe were to be approued but only acknowledge them as contayning for the most part very not able instructions and very profitable to that end which yet must all haue authority from those bookes which by due testimony we haue receiued to be the certaine and vndoubted word of God What the Iewes doe at this day it skilleth not so long as from their law they haue no rule for that they do We know they haue now many superstitions amongst them whereof their example can bee no warrant to vs that wee should thereupon presume to doe the same To the eighth point by me alleaged They made no pilgrimages to Reliques or dead mens bones he answereth that the Iewes were bound to goe as it were in pilgrimage at three solemne feasts yearly to one special place which God should choose for his seruice Where marke I pray thee how when I speake of going in pilgrimage he answereth me of going as it were in pilgrimage and where I speake of going to reliques and dead mens bones he telleth me of going to the Temple of God What accord haue these one with the other who would trouble himselfe to giue answere to an absurd man that fooleth and trifleth in this sort As much is it to the purpose which he alleageth that r 2. Kings 13. vers 21. a dead man buried in the graue of Elizeus vpon the touching of his bones reuiued and liued againe Be it so but doth he reade that hereupon there was euer any pilgrimage vsed to the bones of Elizeus or doth he finde that they who carryed the body to be buried did purposely goe on pilgrimage to the sepulcher of Elizeus as thinking to receiue any benefit thereby Surely they did casually what they did they saw enimies approching and for hast they cast the dead man into Elizeus graue It pleased God to shew that miracle once only for that time to confirme that which had beene taught by his seruant Elizeus but neither any before by any other example nor any after by this example learned to hunt after dead mens bones to receiue any health or comfort by them We can finde no pilgrimage M. Bishop in this storie because here was no pilgrimage nor any was hence learned to the bones of Elizeus As barely and coldly dealeth he in the last point where I say They knew no shrift nor absolution They were not wholly vnacquainted saith he with some kinde of shrift and absolution Marke how faintly the man speaketh some kinde of shrift he saith and againe they were not wholly vnacquainted with it They were not acquainted with shrift but yet they were not wholly vnacquainted with some kind of sh●ift But it is Popish shrift and absolution that we require whereby the penitent is taught to tell in the eare of the Priest all his sinnes particularly and thereupon to receiue absolution and iniunction of penance to be performed afterwards Which if it be of so great vse and necessity as they pretend now we must thinke it was likewise behouefull and necessary then or if they could then be well without it there is no cause to thinke it so religious and necessary now Speake out M. Bishop deale plainly with vs are yee able to tell vs any tidings of it No more forsooth but this they were not wholly vnacquainted with some kinde of shrift and absolution But what was that kinde They were charged saith he to confesse their sinnes which they had committed And is that all We acknowledge the same charge to belong to vs we confesse our sins to God both publikely and priuately in publike trespasses we require confession to be made to the Church of God in priuate griefs of conscience we perswade and commend the disclosing of the wound for aduice and comfort to the Minister of God but what is all this to Popish shrift Againe he saith they were to bring to the Priest a prescribed sacrifice to be offered for their pardon and absolution Of the sacrifice we finde somewhat and we finde Gods promise that ſ Leuit. 4. 20. the sinne should be forgiuen and we finde the Priest directed to t Num. 6. 23. pray for them but that the Priest gaue absolution vpon auricular confession or inioyned penance to any party absolued we can finde nothing Yea but the leapers by the law were bound to present themselues to the Priests and were by them declared such or purged
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 cōmandement 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 〈…〉 ●ru●n d●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 l●x hoc ●iani Prophete quod d●nuilciant Prophatae ●o● 〈…〉 b●t 〈◊〉 quod ex●●ourt Euangelium hoc praedi●a●erunt Aposto●● 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. V●raque Testamenta in nullo a se d●screpant c. In●st testamento veteri testamentum no●um c. Prophetia testamenti no●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 authorē suum proferāt vt m●●tò posteriores quae denique quotidiè institui●tur tamen in eadem fide conspirantes non m●●us Apostolicae dep●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
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 a● 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 qu● 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 pe●itents but only within the confines of Cartenna Saint Austin rightly obiecteth it as an absurdity ensuing thereof that c Ibid. Quisquis f●●rit hac praedicatione commotus in qualib●t pa●te orbis ter●arum nisi quaesierit inuenerit latent●m in Mauritania Caesariensi Cartennensem Vincentium aut aliquem ex cius nou●m aut decem con●ortibus dimitti ei peccata non pos●int c. Nisi Cartennas venerit aut in vi●●iam Cartennensium mundari omnin●● delictis suis non pot●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 Rogatis●● a Rogat● app●ll●nu● being in common with the rest called Donatists of Donatus as Sa●nt Austin noteth and by a more proper name Rogatists of Rogatus For although they had in some spleene and vpon some pe●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 cōmonly 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 ●et they said that c Aug. de
inferiore apud Polycarpum essem c. Commemorarequeam quomodo se cum Joanne ac reliquis qui Dominū 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 rec●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 hi● 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 h●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 Euangeliorū ne loquamini contra Deum iniquitatē sed per scripturas cedite Quòd si diuersa à scripturis fabulari vultis cur nobiscum concertatis qui neque ●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 ●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 Can●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 §. ● 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 cō● 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 cōt 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
of the Valentinian Heretikes and Heracleonites as I haue z Answere to the Preface of the second part sect 20. before shewed St. Iames doth not say Is any man in extremity of sicknesse past hope of life and now departing out of the world as M. Bishop in part speaketh and as they wholly vse that new deuised Sacrament but he saith absolutely Is any man sicke Againe St. Iames maketh the effect of that annointing to be bodily health saying that the Lord shall raise him vp or giue him ease which is the sauing or preseruing of which he speaketh namely from the perill and danger of sicknesse as a Bellarm. de Extr. vnct c. 8. Incipit à sanitate corporali cum ait Oratio fidei saluabit infir 〈…〉 Bellarmine himselfe expoundeth it whereas the effect of Sacraments is no corporall benefit but only inward and spirituall grace For albeit the water of Baptisme haue an effect to cleanse the body and bread and wine in the Lords Supper to nourish and feede the same yet these are no Sacramentall but only naturall effects belonging to these creatures without any Sacrament whereas the proper effect of that whereof St. Iames speaketh is bodily recouery and therefore by b OEcumen in Iac. 5. Hoc etiam Domino adhuc inter homines conuersante Apostoli sacrebant vngentes aegrotos ol●o sanantes OEcumenius is made all one with that which the Apostles did as I haue alleaged whereof health is noted to haue ensued His last text is to proue that we must confesse our sinnes not to God only but also to men because the same St. Iames saith Confesse your sinnes one to another And who denyeth this who gainsayeth it when as our Sauiour Christ so plainly instructeth him that hath c Luke 17. 4. sinned against his brother to returne to him and say It repenteth me that so there may be reconciliation and peace betwixt them We make no question of confessing repentantly and charitably one to another but we question the necessity of confessing auricularly to the Priest by particular enumeration of all our sinnes and so farre is the text which M. Bishop citeth from deliuering expresly this as that his Masters of Rhemes doe plainly tell him that d Rhem. Testam Annotat. Iam. 1. 16. it is not certaine that St. Iames speaketh here of sacrament all confession who notwithstanding would haue bin glad if they could haue had any ground wherupon to affirme that he did so Now what did he then meane thus to heape together such a number of places as wherein their Roman doctrine is deliuered in expresse termes when as there is not one of them that doth iustifie their Roman doctrine and his owne fellowes doe confesse so much of sundry of them What neede we to ransacke all the corners of our wits to deuise odde shifts to auoide the ●uidence as he calleth it of such places which without any shifts at all are so easily and plainly cleared as these are Yet according to his wonted and wise manner he concludeth that the Protestants doe not receiue all the written word who notwithstanding receiue all these places reade them cite them expound them acquaint the people vsually with them which they by no meanes dare to doe Yea but the Scriptures are not in reading but in vnderstanding and we doe not take them in the right sense Silly fellow what hindereth but that we should be thought able to vnderstand the Scriptures as well as he Forsooth we receiue not the Scriptures he saith according to the most ancient and best learned Doctors exposition But be thou Iudge gentle Reader whether in this whole worke to goe no further I haue not brought the most ancient and best learned Doctors exposition more frequently and firmely then he hath done He talketh of the Doctors for shew to blinde simple men but the true cause of their griefe is that wee receiue not the Romish exposition nor bee content to submit the whole Scriptures to the Popes will But because we finde no such rule amongst the most ancient and best learned Doctors that the Popes mouth should be any oracle of Scripture-sense we leaue his babling of the exposition of Scripture as partiall and idle and doe wish him to learne more wit then to take Scriptures in such sort as they that are at Rome are faine to doe W. BISHOP §. 8. NOw to draw towards the end of this clause not only neuer a one of M. Abbots assertions whereby hee went about to proue themselues and their Church to bee Catholike is true as hath beene shewed before but ouer and besides his very conclusion conuinceth himselfe euen by the verdict of himselfe to fall into the foule fault and errour of the Donatists Our faith saith he 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 bee an Apostolicall Church c. and is the only true Catholike Church c. see you not how he is come at length to proue their Church to be Catholike Ex perfectione Page 16. lin 5. doctrinae By perfectnesse of their doctrine which was as he himselfe in this very assertion noted a plaine Donat●sticall tricke reproued by S. Augustine whom in that point he then approued What doating folly is this in the same short discourse so to forget himselfe as to take that for a sound proofe which he himselfe had before confuted as hereticall We like well of Tertullians obseruation That our faith ought to haue consanguinity and perfect agreement with the Apostles doctrine but that is not the question at this time but whether our doctrine or the Protestant be truly called Catholike that is whether of them hath beene receiued and beleeued in all nations ouer the world that is to be proued in this place M. Abbot if he had meant to deale plainly and soundly should not haue gone so about the bush and haue fetched such wide and wilde windlesses from old father Abrahams dayes but should haue demonstrated by good testimony of the Ecclesiasticall Histories or of ancient Fathers who were in the pure times of the Church the most Godly and approued Pastors thereof that the Protestants religion had flourished since the Apostles dayes ouer all Europe Afrike and Asia or at least had beene visibly extant in some one Country or other naming some certaine Churches in particular which had held in all points their faith and religion which he seeing impossible for any man to doe fell into that extrauagant and rouing discourse which you haue heard concluding without any premises sauing his owne bare word that in the written word There is no mention made of the Pope or his Supremacy nor of his Pardons c. Belike there is no mention made of S Peter nor ought said of his singular prerogatiues It hath not peraduenture That whatsoeuer hee should loose on earth should bee loosed in
himselfe notable in his art he telleth his Reader that that vow was not much vnlike to the vow of religious persons and biddeth him thereof to see the sixt Chapter of the booke of Numbers as if looking there he should finde it so to be Now for their pupils and scholers who must yeeld to enlarge their throats to swallow all their Masters googeons hee knew well enough that they would neuer nay they dare not looke the Chapter and as for others though they finde him a lyar what cares he for that He that looketh into that Chapter or any other what shall he finde that may giue him cause to thinke the vow of the Nazarites like to the vow of religious persons The vow of religious persons is a vow of perpetual pouerty chastity and obedience and what is there in the vow of the Nazarites that carryeth any semblance of these things h Num. 6. 2. 3. c. He was to forbeare wine and strong drinke and all things of the grape to suffer no razour to come vpon his head but to let the locks of his haire to grow to come at no dead body not his father his mother his brother or sister and by these ceremonies to separate himselfe to the Lord but of giuing away all his goods to liue in pouerty of forbearing marriage or the company of a wife of liuing vnder obedience to any mans rules or lawes there is nothing I say nothing to bee found Now who can thinke it safe to trust M. Bishop that is not ashamed thus wilfully to falsifie that which is so plainly reported by the holy Ghost As for Saint Pauls taking vpon him that vow of a Nazarite which Saint Luke recordeth it was but a yeelding for the time to the infirmity of the Iewes becomming i 1. Cor. 9. 20. 21 to the Iewes a Iew that he might winne the Iewes as he professeth otherwhere For although in the death and resurrection of Iesus Christ the ceremoniall law of Moses were at an end and now to be abolished yet there was a time to be yeelded for instruction and teaching of the Iewes thereby to withdraw them from the opinion of those things which so long and by so great authority euen from God himselfe both they and their fathers had obserued that the sodaine relinquishing thereof might be no scandall or offence vnto them St. Austin saith notably hereof that k Aug. Epist 19. Cum venisset fides qua priùs illis obseruationibus praenunciata post morte resurrectione Domini reuelata est amiserant tanquam vitam officij sui veruntamen sicut defuncta corpora necessariorū officijs deducendae ●●ant quodammodo ad sepuituram nec simulatè sed religios● non autem deserenda continuò vel inimicorum obtrectationibus tanquam canum morsibus proijcienda when the faith fore-shewed by those ceremonies was after the death and resurrection of Christ reueiled they lost as it were the life of their office or vse but yet as the dead bodies of friends they were by the office or seruice of friends religiously to be brought to their buriall and not to be presently forsaken or cast to the slanders of enemies as to the bitings or gnawings of dogs But though l Ibid. Illo tēpore quo primùm gratia fidei reuelata est hoc nō crat pernicio●● progressu verò temporis perniciosum erat nisi obseruationes illae ab omnibus Christ ani● desererentur it were not hurtfull as he there saith againe that these ceremonies at the first preaching of the faith were for a while obserued yet in processe of time it had beene pernicious that they should not haue beene forsaken of all Christians yea it should haue been impious to retaine them And hath not M. Bishop then for proofe of their vowes made good choise of an example which it were pernicious and impious to retaine in the Church of Christ But hee found there the name of vow and that he thought was enough to soppe them who he knew would take any thing that he should tell them From vowes he ●larteth to praier for the dead and saith that it is not true that in St. Paul there is nothing for prayer for the dead And what is there I pray for it He teacheth saith he that some of the faithfull who haue m 1. Cor. 3. 13. built vpon the right foundation hay stubble and such like trash shall notwithstanding at the day of the Lord be saued yet so as through fire But what is this to prayer for the dead Marry the ancient Doctors doe take this to be the fire of Purgatory and if many while the drosse of their works is purged do lie in fire it will easily follow that euery good soule will pray for the release of them Thus he telleth vs what some Doctors doe thinke and what he himselfe gathereth thereof but otherwise of St. Paul himselfe he can tell vs nothing It appeareth not by St. Paul himselfe that that fire is Purgatory fire it appeareth not by St. Paul himselfe that we are to pray for the dead therfore in all this M. Bishop hath said nothing because it is not the question what some haue gathered of an obscure sentence of St. Paul but what St. Paul himselfe hath deliuered and that in the Epistle to the Romans where Theodoret witnesseth as I haue said all doctrines of faith to be contained But he dealeth here after the very manner of Heretikes who are wont to make choise of some figuratiue and allegoricall and darke speeches of Scripture which they may construe at their owne pleasure and alleage them according to their owne construction to proue their falshoods and heresies by them when as notwithstanding the plaine and euident testimonies of Scripture doe make against them St. Paul speaketh of purpose to giue instruction of our carriage towards the dead where of Purgatory or praier for the dead he teacheth nothing n 1. Thess 4. 13. I would not br●thren haue you ignorant saith he concerning them which are asleepe that yee sorrow not as other which haue no hope for if we beleeue that Iesus is dead and is risen euen so them which sleep in Iesus wil God bring with him And then shewing in what sort God will bring them with Iesus he concludeth Wherefore comfort your selues one another with these words Is it possible that the Apostle should here omit to giue charge of praying for the dead if it were religion to pray for them Nay he telleth vs of the faithfull departed that they sleepe in Iesus and of them that sleepe in Iesus o Apoc. 14. 13. the spirit saith Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord which sleepe in Iesus for they rest from their labours and if they be blessed and at rest then they are not labouring in the restlesse fire of Purgatory and therefore neede none of our prayers for release Albeit if vve grant M. Bishop his Purgatory yet
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 rer●m temporalium ipse saluus erit per idoneum fundamentum ●t paulo ante Grau●tèr conturb●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 ●ide Oper. c. 16. Si●● in ha● v●●a tantum homines ista patiuntur siue etiam post hac vitam ●alia quae d● iudicia subsequn●●r non abhorret quantum arb●●ror à ratione veritatis iste intell●ctus b●●us ●●ntentiae Whether in this life only men suffer such things or whether after this life also some such iudgements f●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 ●eri incredibile n●a est vtrum ita sit quaeri potest aut inueniri ●ut latere n●nnullos fidel●s per ignem quendam p●rgatoriii quatò magis un●usue b●na pereuntia d●lexerunt tanto tard●●s citi●s●● saluari That s●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 Purga●ory fire by how much they haue either the more or the l●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 ci● D●● lib. 21. cap. 26. Post istius cor●oris mortem c. si hoc 〈◊〉 ●t●ruall● 〈◊〉 tus defunctorum eiusmodi ignem dicunt●r perpeti c. s●●● ibi tantum s●u● 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vt noa ibi sec●laria quam●●s à damnatione vemalia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inueniant non redarguo qui● forsi●an ver●m est After the death of this body if the soules of the dead in this meane time till the r●surrection be s●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 e●o Nam quid est quod art Apostolus fundamentum aliud c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 das esse volo 〈◊〉 est enim non vobis dare securitatem malam Non dabo quod non 〈◊〉 t●meus terreo securos vos saccrem si securus ●i●rem ego Ignem aeternum tin ●● Non 〈◊〉 nisi ignem aeternum de quo ●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 lo●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 ●●●e tribulationis in hac nobis vita ad●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 minim●●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 ce●●derit c. qua ●um humani casus tempore fiue sanctus fi●e malignus spiritus egredientem amn●a claustra carnis acceperit in 〈◊〉 secum 〈◊〉 pern●●tat 〈◊〉 ater●is suppli●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
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 s●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 ●a liquidò peruenire difficile est Multa quippe hinc dici possunt quae improband● 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 cōminuitur quam totam petitionem ferè omnis Ecclesia Dominica oratione cōcludit 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 c●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 ſ 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 s●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 Man●chean Adimantus Ho● 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