Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	according_a	life_n	work_n	2,217	5	5.2779	4	false

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A18305	The second part of the Defence of the Reformed Catholicke VVherein the religion established in our Church of England (for the points here handled) is apparently iustified by authoritie of Scripture, and testimonie of the auncient Church, against the vaine cauillations collected by Doctor Bishop seminary priest, as out of other popish writers, so especially out of Bellarmine, and published vnder the name of The marrow and pith of many large volumes, for the oppugning thereof. By Robert Abbot Doctor of Diuinitie.; Defence of the Reformed Catholicke of M. W. Perkins. Part 2	Abbot, Robert, 1560-1618.	1607 (1607)	STC 49; ESTC S100532	1,359,700	1,255

Thomas Aquinas his braines who seeing that that which he was to say for their other vowes could not well hang together if the promise of baptisme should be taken for a perfect vow hewed and pared the definition of a vow that it might be fitted for his turne Azorius the Iesuite telleth vs that e Azor. lib. 11. cap 14. Baptisma esse votuÌ„ propriÃ¨ dictum veteres Theologi cuÌ„ magistro videntur sentire sed probabilius est quod scholastici alij tenent the auncient Diuines as also the Master of the Sentences seeme to thinke that baptisme is a vow properly and truly so called but saith he it is more probable which the rest of the Schoole-men hold Thus against the iudgement of the ancient Diuines they frame all things as they list and we must take euery of their blinde sophismes to be a certaine rule of truth But we refuse them to be our masters and chuse to follow that which the Church before them hath followed accounting all those things the matters of our vowes to God which were figured by those ceremonies and sacrifices which were vowed by the law euen all the spirituall sacrifices of praise and thanksgiuing and al good works whereby we honor and glorifie almightie God all which according to our state of life we promise to God in baptisme and therefore do account that promise a vow because it containeth the spiritual substance of those ancient vows The compiler of the book of Sentences in S. Austins works hath froÌ„ one or other gathered this sentence f Sent. apud August to 3. in fine Quisquis benÃ¨ cogitat quae voueat Deo quae vouendo persoluat seipsum voueat reddat Hoc exigiur hoc debetur Whosoeuer well bethinketh him what to vow to God and what in vowing to pay let him vow himselfe and pay himself This is required of God and this is due to God If this be the right conceit of a vow then the promise of baptisme is a vow and it is not true which M. Bishop saith that there is no vow properly so called of necessary duties because we vow that which God requireth and which is due to God Albeit for conclusion I am to aduertise thee gentle Reader that we make not the matter of vowes to consist onely in necessary duties that is such duties as God namely requireth of vs but that sometimes we vow those things which rest vpon our choise and whereof in particular we are commanded nothing For albeit God require thankfulnesse and dutie for the mercies which we haue receiued of him yet he hath not precisely set downe that by way of thanks a man should always do this or that but hath left the deuout and thankfull minde to cast and consider which way he may testifie the affection of his heart by doing some good worke whereof he hath vnderstanding by the word of God that it shal be acceptable vnto him Thus a man though not bound to it yet may vow to do seruice to God in the ministery of the Church and being a minister conceiuing his seruice in this or that sort to be profitable to the Church may by vowing himself thereto abridge himselfe of that libertie which otherwise he might enioy So may a man vow a part of his goods to the poore as g Luke 19.8 Zacheus did when as by no commaundement he is vrged so to do The like may men do for the building and endowing of Schools Hospitals Colledges and such other godly charitable vses when yet these things by precept are not necessarily layd vpoÌ„ them Yea neither do we question but that a man vpon good grounds and so long as he shal not therby be h 1. Cor. 7.35 intangled in a snare may priuatly vow vnto God a single life to the end that he may the more commodiously apply himselfe to the seruice of i Mat. 19.12 the kingdome of God this vow being conditionall only so far as it shal be seconded with the gift of God and so long as it shal stand with peace of conscience towards him In these such like is the true imitation of the outward ceremony of the law wherin men were at their liberty whether to vow or not works wherof generally we haue warrant by the word of God but whereof in particular there is no necessitie imposed vpon vs being left vnto vs at large thereby freely and voluntarily to exercise our zeale and deuotion towards God Wherin notwithstanding we are to remember that caution that Chrysostome giueth k Chrysos in psal 49. Si quis auteÌ„ exactÃ¨ perpenderit etsi minimÃ¨ promittatur virtus tamen ei debetur Id Christus fignificans dicebat Quae debuimus facere fecimus If a man exactly weigh the matter our vertues are due to God albeit they be not promised or vowed which Christ signifieth when he saith We haue done that that was our dutie to do For seeing we are bound l Luke 10.17 to loue the Lord our God with all our hart with al our soule with all our mind with al our strength we must conceiue that though nothing be directed vnto vs in particular as touching the necessity of such or such a worke yet in the generall we do nothing therein but what we owe to God because whatsoeuer is within vs or whatsoeuer is without vs we owe all to him Yea and the vow of our baptisme doth after a sort containe all these other vowes in that being there consecrated wholy to God we vndertake thereby to take all occasions and oportunities to do honor vnto God As for popish vows being as they are for the most part brainsick idle fancies such as whereof neither in the general nor in the particular we haue any testimonie from God that they are accepted in his sight they are onely apish counterfeits of those legall and ceremoniall vowes but do no way carrie the true resemblance of them nor that life of spirituall worship and seruice that was shadowed thereby 2. W. BISHOP The second point of our supposed consent is that Vowes were some part of Gods worship in Moses law but are not so in the Gospell which we also deny M. Perk. proues his assertion thus Vows belonged to the ceremonies of Moses law but all those ceremonies are abolished by Christs passion Ans That Vowes in theÌ„selues were no part of the ceremonies of Moses law but true parts of the worship of God in all estates as well in the state of nature and the Gospel as in Moses law but this point M. Perk. handleth againe in the first point of our difference where it shall be discussed Thirdly he saith that speciall vowes may be made in the new law to performe some bodily exercise for some good end as to fast to taske our selues to prayers or study of holy Scripture and such like but many rules must then be obscrued that we vow an honest thing agreeable to

de proposito Dei firmior suppetit securiorque gloriandi ratio c. NoÌ„ est quÃ²d iam quae ras quibus meritis speremus bona praesertim cÃ¹m audias apud prophetam Non propter vos c. Ezec. 36. Sufficit ad meritum scire quÃ²d non sufficiunt merita c. Merita habere cures habita data noueru fructum speraueris misericordiam Dei c. Perniciosa paupertas meritorum penuria est To what end is the Church carefull as touching merites which hath a more sure and secure ground of reioycing by reason of the purpose of God It is not for thee to aske by what merits we hope for good things seeing thou hearest by the Prophet Not for your sakes but for mine owne sake will I do it saith the Lord. It sufficeth for merite to know that merits are not sufficient Be carefull to haue merits when thou hast them know them to be giuen thee but for fruite thereof hope for the mercie of God The waâ—t of merits is a pernicious pouertie Thus vnder the name of merites he commendeth the hauing of good workes and our care to be rich therein shewing that it is a pernicious want to be destitute thereof and to be men fruitlesse in the Church of God But yet when we haue them he teacheth vs to conceiue the vnsufficiency thereof and to rest the expectation of the fruit and reward thereof onely vpon Gods mercie who hath promised to performe it not for our sakes but for his owne sake and so fully bereaueth them of that nature of merite which M. Bishop doth assigne vnto them Thus doth he euery where giue vs to vnderstand his mind g Ibid. ser 61. Meritum meum miseratio domini My merit saith he is the mercie of the Lord. h Ibi. ser 73. Opus habent sancti pro peccatis exorare vt de misericordia salui fiant propriae iustitiae non fidentes Euen the Saints haue need to intreate for their sinnes that by thy mercie they may be saued not trusting to their owne righteousnesse And againe i In Psal Qui habitat ser 1. Periculosa habitatio illorum qui in meritu suiâ— sperant periculosa quia ruinosa Dangerous is the dwelling of them that trust in their owne merit it is dangerous because it is ruinous k Ibi. ser 16. Hoc totum hominiâ— meritum si totam spem suam ponat in illo qui totum hominem saluuÌ„ fecit This is the whole merite of man to put his whole trust in him who hath wholly saued man Many other such like speeches of his might be alledged whereby M. Bishop may well take occasion to bethinke himselfe whether he haue not done S. Bernard wrong to make him a patron of the doctrine of merits which the Church of Rome now maintaineth Let him duly consider whether he haue done well to take a little aduantage of a scrap of a sermon and to vrge it contrary to the whole drift of the Author in that place and his perpetuall doctrine other where For conclusion we are assaulted with a whole generall Councell that saith neuer a word against vs. The Arausican Councell saith l Concil Arausic cap. 18. Debetur merces de bonis operibus si fiant sed gratia quae non debetur praecedit vt fiant Reward is due for good works if they be done but grace which is no due goeth before that they may be done Euen so say we we also confesse that there is a reward due vnto good workes which God taketh vpon him to owe vnto vs but we say it with that limitation that before we haue heard out of S. Austin from whom that Councell boroweth almost all that they haue set downe that m Supra sect 17 God hath made himselfe a debtor vnto vs not for any thing that he hath receiued of vs but by promising all things vnto vs. It is due then to the worke not simply in respect of the worke it selfe or for the merite and worth thereof but by vertue of the promise that God hath made to them that so worke And thus we are come to an end of M. Bishops antiquitie which we may see doth pitifully faile him in that out of all antiquitie he could bring no stronger proofes then he hath done his doctrine of merits being expresly thwarted by the most of them whom he hath brought for defence of it But as touching Antiquitie gentle Reader for thy further satisfaction and the better arming of thee if need require against the fraud of these vndermining Sophisters it shall not be amisse to aduertise thee thus much that as we do so did the auncient Fathers vpon diuers occasions speake diuersly of good workes and both their speeches and ours are always to be weighed according to the same occasions When there is cause to set forth the true and proper cause of our saluation they referre the same as we do to the free grace and mercy of God and wholly to his gift they vilifie as we do the workes and worth of men and acknowledge that there is nothing in vs in the confidence whereof we may offer our selues to God nothing in strength whereof we can stand before God or whereby we should merite and deserue any thing at Gods hands Here workes are considered meerly as they are and as God instrict and precise iudgement findeth them to be and therefore are pronounced of accordingly But when occasion requireth to speake only of good works and of the end thereof and we look no further but to inforce a conscience of the way wherein God hath called vs to walke to that saluation that he hath promised or when we haue in hand to commend any speciall point of godly and vertuous conuersation we presse the same with all instance as the Fathers do we shew how necessarily God requireth the workes of our obedience how graciously he vouchsafeth in mercie to accept them how he hath promised of his bountie to reward them We forbeare not to say that eternall life is the stipend of our warfare the hire and wages of our workes that God hath not appointed heauen for idle persons and loiterers but for such as labor for it that because God rendereth heauen we must haue that whereto it is to be rendered if we haue not there is no heauen for vs. We say it is a crowne or garland win it and weare it it is a haruest labor for it if thou wilt enioy it it is a field of treasure if thou wilt possesse it thou must purchase it Such kind of speeches euery man may obserue who is either a hearer of our sermons or a reader of our bookes Now if any man will hereof conclude that we teach the merit of workes it is his ignorance and mistaking and he doth vs wrong We teach what followeth of what we teach the dependance and consequence of good life and eternall life of the work and

casting her with violence into the sea neuer to rise againe And you most noble King in whom God hath turned the period of time which threatned alteration and danger to our state gouernment to the further strength and establishment thereof and hath lifted your throne far aboue the thrones of your royall Progenitors and hath made you in a manner the ballance of the Christian world consider that it is vndoubtedly for some great work that in his prouidence he hath so disposed it and thereto apply those singular ornaments and endowments of the mind wherein you excell all that haue bene before you God hath made your Highnes able to espie and discerne the conicatching deuices of those bastard Catholik seducers we assure our selues that in your self in your royall posteritie it shall be found to the great aduancement of the faith and kingdome of Iesus Christ Wherein that our hope may not be frustrate we most humbly beseech almighty God to put into your Maiesties heart not to be too secure of them who account it a martyrdome to die for the murthering of Christian Princes and in the shedding of your sacred bloud would think themselues to haue gained the one half of their desires content perhaps by instructions for a while to temporize and to make shew of meaning no harme till the memory of their late villany being somewhat ouerblowne they may be the lesse suspected but hauing already giuen to vnderstand what your Maiestie shall looke for at their hands if oportunitie should second their designes The Lord auert and turne that iudgement from vs and n 1. Sam. 25.29 bind your Maiesties soule in the bundle of life with the Lord your God that your eies may long behold that noble Impe of grace the branch of our hope together with the other branches of your royall line growing before the Lord to the further dismay and terror of your enemies and the greater securitie and assurance of the church of Christ As for the seruice which according to your Maiesties commandement I haue here performed albeit it be far from that perfection which the weight of the cause requireth yet I doubt not but it is sufficient to shew on whether part the truth is to be found and to iustifie the proceedings of your Maiesty against the cauillations of wilfull men desperatly shutting their owne eyes that the light of the Gospel may not shine vnto them Whatsoeuer it is it most humbly craueth your Maiesties acceptance and royall protection and fauour whereto with all loyall duty I recommend it and your Highnesse selfe to the protection of the most high God whose cause it is that is defended thereby Your Maiesties most humble and dutifull subiect ROB. ABBOT TO THE CHRISTIAN READER GEntle Reader thou wilt I hope impute it in some part to the condition of the time that I giue thee this answer not altogether so well featured and shaped as thou haply wouldst desire it Though it be a fruite that may seeme to haue bene long in growing yet as the case standeth with me the length of time hath but serued to bring it to his greatnesse and therefore howsoeuer it commeth forth with defiance to the aduersaries yet I confesse it seemeth to me not so throughly digested and seasoned as I would haue wished it to content thee In this defence of Gods truth the things that are specially to be respected against the importunitie and aduantage of our aduersaries are strength and expedition I haue had care as the matter would permit to satisfie thee in both these respects and let my care herein obtaine pardon of thee if I seeme vnto thee to faile in some complements otherwise If thou thinke this my answer needlesse because another man hath already taken paines therein thou must remember that no mans priuate preuention could yeeld me dispensation to be free from doing that which publike authoritie required of me I doubt not but in the reading of either it shal appeare vnto thee what spirit it is wherewith these Romish factors are led in their opposition against vs and that it is not truth and sauing of soules whereto they bend themselues but onely the vpholding of their faction whether by truth or falshood by right or wrong it skilleth not so that that may be performed That thou mayst the better see and iudge of all I haue inserted the whole text of Doctor Bishops booke altogether condemning that falshood and guile which he hath vsed towards M. Perkins and they al vse in their pretence and shew of answering our books in that they neuer set downe the copie of that to which they answer Which policy serueth them to blind the Reader and to gaine libertie to themselues to conceale and dissemble what they list to peruert to vilifie to falsifie and by absurd imputations to calumniate without being controlled As our fidelitie and good conscience of the cause which we handle manifestly appeareth in that we neuer forbeare to publish our aduersaries bookes to the world when we haue adioyned an answer to them so their guilt and guile is manifest by the contrary for that they feare to put forth our bookes with their answers as doubting least the bookes being at hand should bewray and shew the vnsufficiencie of the answers As for Master Perkins booke being loth too much to increase the greatnesse of the volume I haue forborne to put it in the rather for that the substance thereof for the most part may appeare by that that Master Bishop hath set downe and where he faulteth I haue taken occasion in my answer to declare if not the words yet the summe and effect of it the booke it selfe also being easily had by any that is desirous more exactly to compare them The authors conceit for the forme and maner of that work was greatly to be approued and whereas it hath had the liking of very many for the briefe and plaine deliuery of our controuersiall grounds they shall see now that it was not without cause that they caried so good opinioÌ„ of it inasmuch as the malice of an enemie out of their many large volumes can find so little matter of waight and substance to say against it I doubt not but it had bene well that in some places he had giuen it some better strength but it is to be considered that as the midwife iudgeth better of the birth then the mother that trauelleth with it and in gaming the stander by sometimes seeth more then he that playeth so it is in writing of bookes that the Reader and examiner seeth sometimes a defect where the busied and intangled minde of the writer obserued none and therefore of welwillers and men indifferent it is to be expected that that which it somewhat vnperfectly deliuered in one place be no impeachment of that which is sufficiently fenced and fortified in another Thou shalt finde it gentle Reader to haue bene so written as that Maister Bishop is faine to vse

thou shalt find in it the marrow and pith of many large volumes contracted and drawne into a narrow roome And reade it ouer as it becometh a good Christian with a desire to find out and to follow the truth because it concerneth thy eternall saluation and then iudge without partialitie whether Religion hath better grounds in Gods word more euident testimony from the purest antiquitie and is more conformable vnto all godlinesse good life and vpright dealing the infallible marks of the best Religion and spedily embrace that Before I end this short preface I must intreate thy patience to beare with the faults in printing which are too too many but not so much to be blamed if it be courteously considered that it was printed farre from the Author with a Dutch composer and ouer seene by an vnskilfull Corrector the greatest of them shall be amended in the end of the booke Before the printing of this part was finished I heard that M. Perkins was dead I am sorte that it commeth forth too late to do him any good Yet his worke liuing to poyson others a preseruatiue against it is neuer the lesse necessary R. ABBOT IF you had respected the glorie of God M. Bishop it should haue appeared by your respect to yeeld soueraigne honour and authoritie to the word of God God is in heauen and we are vpon the earth we haue no knowledge of him no acquaintance or dealing with him but by his word Therein we seeke him and find him therein he speaketh vnto vs and thereout we learne to speake to him If we haue the word of God God is present with vs if we be without the word of God God himselfe is absent from vs. Therefore by our honour and obedience to the word of God it must appeare that we truly and sincerely intend and seeke for the glorie of God Hereby it appeareth that you M. Bishop in this your booke haue not fought for the glorie of God but rather to glorifie a Extrauag Ioan 12. CuÌ„ inter in glossa Credere dominum Deum nostrum Papam sic non potuisse statuere c. haereticum censeretur your Lord God the Pope as your Glosse of the Canon law most blasphemously hath stiled him You haue in this worke of yours vsed all maner of vntruth and falshood to vphold and iustifie his wicked proceedings against the word of God Whatsoeuer God hath taught vs whatsoeuer Christ and his Apostles haue deliuered all is nothing if your Lord God the Pope and your master Bellarmine his proctor generall do say the contrary Howsoeuer simply and plainly they speake yet they meane not as they speake if the Pope and Bellarmine will tell you another meaning As for your talent we take it to be greater in your owne opinion and the opinion of your fellowes then it is indeed But whatsoeuer it is you haue abused it to the wrong of him that gaue it not to edification but to destruction not to fortifie any in the faith but to nourish and harden them that depend vpon you in error and misbeleefe not to leade any into the right way but to intice men to b Prou. 2.15 crooked wayes and leud paths which c Ch. 7.27 go downe to the chambers of death and the end whereof is confusion and shame not to withdraw men from fancies but to draw them to other fancies from fancies in conuersation to fancies in religion that so being fed wholy with fancies they may perish in the end for want of true food And indeed men that wander in fancies are the subiect for your malice and trechery to work vpon Many that liue in the oportunitie of the knowledge of Christ yet neglect and despise the same The light shineth into their eyes and they regard it not God offereth himselfe vnto them and they say in their hearts We haue no delight nor pleasure in thee Therefore being emptie and voide of truth they lie open to be filled with error and lies and hauing vnthankfully withholden themselues from God God by iust iudgement giueth them ouer to the hands of impostors and deceiuers that it may be verified which the Apostle saith d 2. Thess 2 1â— Because they receiued not the loue of the truth that they might be saued therefore God shall send them strong delusion that they may beleeue lies that they may be damned which beleeued not the truth but tooke pleasure in vnrighteousnesse Your friend of good intelligence and iudgement that thought it very expedient that you should take in hand the confutation of M. Perkins booke spake thereof haply as Caiphas did of the death of Christ meaning it one way which was to fall out another way I doubt not but it will fall out to haue bene very expedient which you haue done because you giue hereby occasion of discouering your false doctrine and of iustifying the truth of Christ which M. Perkins was carefull to maintaine I doubt not but many by this occasion will take knowledge of your corrupt and trecherous dealing your patching and shifting your cosening and deluding of men and will discerne the weaknesse and absurdity of that bad cause which with glorious and goodly words you labour so highly to aduance As for your commendation of M. Perkins booke it is but the imitation of some vaine-glorious captains who to grace their owne victories do set out to the vttermost the aduersaries power and prowesse thinking their glory to be the greater by how much the greater men shall conceiue the might and valour of them to haue bene whom they haue ouercome You dreamed of a victorie here and you thought it to be much for your commendation that your aduersary should be deemed of as great strength as any is to be found amongst vs. But we would haue you to vnderstand that the Church of England neuer tooke M. Perkins booke to be a warriour in complete harnesse or a chalenger for the field but onely as a captaine training his souldiers at home where he wanteth much of that munition and defence wherewith he should endure the brunt of battell He wrote it very schollerlike indeed for an introduction onely to the true vnderstanding and iudgement of the controuersies betwixt vs and you but knew well that it wanted much that might haue bene added to giue it ful and perfect strength You haue taken hereof some aduantage as you conceiue and yet how pitifully are you distressed many times both to vphold that which he obiecteth for you and to answer that which he alledgeth for vs. Now if for the compiling of his booke he bestirred himselfe as the Bee going into other mens gardens for the gathering of hony into his hiue yet he made no Rabbines of them to take any thing for hony because it grew in the garden of such or such a man but vsed carefull and aduised consideration of that which he wrote esteeming the weight of his arguments and of his answers that he might

if any man saith he be set in the Apostolike seate without the foresaid concording and canonicall election of the Cardinals and the consent of the religious states following the Cleargie and Laity he shall not be accounted Pope or Apostolicall but Apostatical which is as much to say as Antichristian The Popes then being not now nor hauing bene of long time chosen by this rule but onely by the Colledge of Cardinals are found to be Apostataes and Antichrists by the sentence and decree of the Pope himselfe Hereto M. Bishop saith not a word though he confesse that he knew M. Perkins meaning well enough which indeed was somewhat amisse set downe by putting the Antipope called Innocentius for the Pope called Innocentius He had nothing whereby to excuse the Pope from being Antichrist euen by his owne decrees and therefore putteth the matter ouer to another place where he neuer meant to say any thing of it Onely in the end he chargeth M. Perkins with a grosse fault in citing the Canon of Pope Nicholas for saying that the Pope was to be created by the Cardinals bishops of Rome as though saith he there were some thirtie or fortie Bishops of Rome Belike it was darke and his eyes did not well serue him or else he might haue seene that M. Perkins did not say by the Cardinals Bishops of Rome as he hath set downe and pointed amisse but by the Cardinall Bishops of Rome that is by the Cardinals of Rome which are Bishops For they are all Cardinals of Rome but some are Cardinall bishops some Cardinall priests some Cardinall Deacons and according to this distinction M. Perkins named the Cardinall Bishops of Rome the Popes Canon requiring the Cardinall Bishops to be the Electors of the Pope As touching that which M. Bishop citeth out of S. Bernard for his opinion of the Pope I answer him that we doubt not but that S. Bernard had a very high opinion of the Popes place but I answer him withall that S. Bernard had a higher opinion of the Popes place then he had of the Pope himselfe He knew well that though the Popes place were such in the Church of Christ as he describeth it to be yet the Pope by the abusing of his place might be very Antichrist himselfe He wisheth Pope Eugenius to remember and consider what person what place and office according to his conceipt he did beare in the Church thereby to moue him vpon conscience thereof to the redressing of those intolerable enormities and corruptions that were then growne in the Church and Court of Rome For in those books De consideratione he doth purposely bend himselfe to lay foorth the deformities and abuses then preuailing to shew how the Bishop of Rome by temporall dominion and princely pompe did degenerate from Peter and the rest of the Apostles did rather succeed Constantine then him to note the defaults and corruptions of gouernment of iudiciall proceedings of appeales to Rome of the Popes dispensations of the neglect of the punishment of offendors to shew the neglect of the Cleargie in teaching the people making themselues fitter for any other vse then for that Yea such was the horrible apostasie and iniquitie raigning at that time as that by way of complaint vnto Iesus Christ he saith therof with exceeding griefe in another place r Bernard in conuers S. Pauli Ser. 1. Coniurasse contra te videtur vniuersitas Christiani populi Ã minimo vsque ad maximum Ã planta pedis vsque ad verticem non est sanitas vlla Egressa est iniquitas Ã senioribus Iudicibus Vi carijs tuis qui videntur regere populum tuum c. Heu heu Domine Deus quia ipsi sunt in persecutione tua primi qui videntur in Ecclesia tua diligere primatum gerere principatum Aê° cem Sion occupauerunt apprehenderunt munitiones vniuersam deinceps liberÃ¨ potestatiuÃ¨ tradunt incendio ciuitatem Misera eortem conuersatio plebis tuae miserabilis subuersio est c. Dati sunt sacri gradus in occasionem turpis luerâ— c. De animarum salute nouissima cogitatio est c. IniquÃ¨ agitâ—r caeteri eo â—ra Christum multique nostris temporibus sunt Antichristi The whole company of Christian people seemeth to haue conspired against thee from the least euen to the greatest from the sole of the foote to the top of the head there is nothing sound iniquitie is gone foorth from the auncients the Iudges thy Vicars which seeme to gouerne thy people Alas alas O Lord God for they are foremost in persecuting thee who seeme to loue supremacie and to beare principalitie in thy Church They haue taken possession of the tower of Sion they haue seized vpon the munitions thereof and thencefoorth freely and by authoritie they betray the whole citie to the fire Their wretched conuersation is the miserable subuersion of thy people c. The sacred degrees and orders are yeelded to opportunitie of filthie lucre the sauing of souls is the thing last thought of The rest also deale wickedly against Christ and there are many Antichrists in our times Now the due consideration of these words we suppose may somewhat qualifie M. Bishops opinion of the words by himselfe alledged because hereby we plainely vnderstand not by broken but by perfect sentences that whatsoeuer S. Bernard conceiued of the dignitie and dutie of the Popes place yet that he very well saw that by euill vsage therof the Popes in his time were become the very enemies and persecutors of Christ euen they who as he saith were Christs Vicars and had the supremacie and principalitie in the Church of Christ And so we find that the high Priest of the Iewes who by Gods owne ordinance and institution was a figure of Christ and sate in the place of Christ yet by Apostasie and iniquitie became an Antichrist a persecutor of Christ and solemnly gaue sentence against Christ In like sort therefore nothing letteth but that the Pope may now be Antichrist albeit his place had bene at the first appointed by Christ but much more now in that his place is no diuine institution but onely humane presumption affected by ambition attempted by rebellion yeelded vnto by superstition established possessed by tyrannie and crueltie by villanie and trecherie vpholden by the deuices of Sycophants and Parasites who haue vsed all manner falshood and deceipt to iniect into the minds of men an opinion of it S. Bernard therefore by errour attributed to the Pope that which indeed is none of his and although for the credit of the Popes authoritie he alledge some words out of the Gospell vsed to S. Peter yet he bringeth no Scripture to proue either that that which he giueth to the Pope in that description did euer belong to Peter or that that which in the Gospell is spoken to Peter belongeth to the Pope He attributeth to the Pope to be Å¿ Tues princeps Episcoporum summus

a conuiction of guilt of death incurred thereby and yet could yeeld no remedie against death being afterwards b Heb. 7.18 disanulled because of the weaknesse and vnprofitablenesse thereof so farre should we be from thinking that of the ceremoniall law it should be sayd Do this and thou shalt liue The yong man demandeth of Christ c Mat. 19.16 What good thing shall I do that I may haue eternall life Now looke of what law our Sauior answereth him as M. Bishop hath cited before d Vers 17. If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandements of the selfe same law doth he answer another to the same question vpon recitall of a briefe of the commandements e Luc. 10.28 This do and thou shalt liue namely of the morall law to which it hath reference f Leuit. 18.5 where it is first spoken as appeareth by that that followeth for declaration of it Of which also it is rehearsed by g Ezech. 18.11.13 c. Ezechiel the Prophet and is by the Apostle Saint Paul further alledged to shew the difference betwixt h Rom. 10.5 the Righteousnesse of the law and the Righteousnesse of faith Moses saith he this describeth the Righteousnesse of the lavv that the man vvhich doth these things shall liue thereby i Gal. 3.12 The lavv is not of faith but he that doth these things shall liue in them Of which law he saith k Rom. 3.20 By the lavv commeth the knowledge of sinne that it saith l Cap. 7. ver 7.16.22 Thou shalt not lust that he consenteth to it that it is good that he delighteth in it as touching the inner man that the m Cap. 13. v. 9. Gal. 5.14 summe thereof is Thou shalt loue thy neighbour as thy selfe all which doe vndeniably point out vnto vs the morall law as both n August de spir lit ca. 14. Saint Austine and o Hieron epist ad Ctesiphont Saint Hierome out of the same and such like places haue expresly affirmed Of the same law therefore he saith p Gal. 3.10 So manie as are of the workes of the law are vnder the curse for it is written Cursed is euerie one that continueth not in all things that are written in the booke of the law to do them And because no man continueth in all he concludeth hereof q Ver. 11. cap. 2.16 that by the law no man is iustified in the sight of God that by the workes of the law no flesh shall be iustified Now of the selfe same law doth he say that which M. Bishop hath cited for the cutting of his owne throat r Cap. 5.4 Ye are abolished from Christ whosoeuer are iustified by the law thereby teaching vs to resolue that Iustification by Christ and Iustification by the worke of the law cannot possibly concurre in one Now whereas the Apostle for auouching Iustification onely by faith in Christ taketh it for a ground that no man fulfilleth the Righteousnesse of the law M. Bishop that he may be wholy thwart and crosse vnto him affirmeth that by the helpe of Gods grace men are made able to fulfill the law to be iustified thereby Against which assertion to proue that the Righteousnesse of the regenerate and faithfull is not such as that it can answer the iustice and Righteousnesse required in the law M. Perkins alledgeth the common confession of all endited by the Prophet Esay Å¿ Esa 64.6 All our Righteousnesse is as a menstruous or defiled cloth For if the Righteousnesse commaunded by the law be most exact and perfect and no righteousnesse is performed by vs but what by our weaknesse and corruption is blemished and stained then can no righteousnesse of ours satisfie the commandement of the law But M. Bishop answereth that the Prophet speaketh these words in the person of the wicked of that nation and that time and therefore that they are madly applied vnto the righteous Where a man would wonder that he should be so mad as to imagine that prayer to be vttered in the person of wicked men or that wicked men should make mention or any their Righteousnesse vnto God And as for the time it fitteth not the age wherein the Prophet himselfe liued but was prophetically written in respect of a time long after succeeding He foresaw in the spirit the desolation of Ierusalem and the temple and that whole land and thereupon putteth himselfe into the person of the faithfull and maketh himselfe as one of them that should liue at that time This is verie apparent by the Prophets words t Vers 10. Thine holy cities lye wast Sion is a wildernesse and Ierusalem a desert The house of our sanctuarie and of our glorie where our fathers praised thee is burnt vp with fire and all our pleasant things are vvasted This prayer then was to serue for a direction to the faithfull that then should be to make their mone vnto God and to intreat mercie at his hands And very answerable to this propheticall prayer is the prayer of the Prophet Daniel made presently at that time For whereas M. Bishop to proue that the Prophet speaketh in the person of the wicked alledgeth those words u Esa 64 5. Lo thou hast bene angrie for we haue offended and haue euer bene in sinne the Prophet Daniel likewise saith x Dan 9.5 We haue sinned and haue committed iniquitie and done wickedly y Vers 7. O Lord Righteousnesse belongeth vnto thee and vnto vs open shame z Vers 10. We haue not obeyed the voyce of the Lord our God to walke in his wayes c. And whereas he alledgeth the other words a Esa 64.7 There is no man that calleth vpon thy name and standeth vp to take hold of thee the Prophet Daniel in like sort saith b Dan. 9.13 We haue not made our prayer before the Lord our God Both of them say We haue offended We haue sinned We haue not prayed as shewing plainely that they so spake of other men as that they implied themselues also Nay saith M. Bishop that is but the manner of Preachers and specially of such as become Intercessours for others who vse to speake in the persons of them for whom they sue Where he maketh the holy Prophets and seruants of God as verie hypocrites to God as he himselfe is as if they tooke vpon them to accuse themselues to God when they intended nothing lesse But to driue him out of this hole the Prophet Daniel saith of himselfe that in that prayer c Dan. 9.20 he confessed his owne sinnes and the sinnes of his people and why should Daniel the Prophet be sayd to confesse his owne sinnes and not the Prophet Esay or those iust and faithfull in whose person Esay spake Nay both the one and the other spake out of the true affection of the faithfull at all times who alwayes find in themselues defects and defaults whereby they find iust

cause in confession of sinnes to ioyne themselues with other men euen as the Prophet Esay elsewhere doth d Esa 6.5 Wo is me I am a man of polluted lippes and I dwell in the middest of a people of polluted lippes But saith M. Bishop if he had reckoned himselfe in that number he had lied in saying There is none that calleth vpon thy name because he immediatly calleth vpon him in most vehement sort As if they in whose name the Prophet speaketh might not without a lie by wordes of the present time deplore the vniuersall neglect of calling vpon God which had beene amongst them as Daniel acknowledgeth and for the most part continued still though God had stirred vp some of their hearts now to make supplication vnto him or as if they that did pray might not finde in themselues that faintnesse and want of heart and spirit as might cause them in this behalfe to accuse themselues vnto God We cannot doubt but that there were manie faithfull and godly amongst the Iewes in that time of their desolation yet in those faithfull and godly there was that default to be found as that God sayd of them e Esa 51.18 There is none to guide her among all the sonnes that shee hath brought foorth there is none that taketh her by the hand of all the sonnes that shee hath brought vp In a word the Prophet in saying There is no man that calleth vpon thee might note a publicke contempt of calling vpon God without exception against himselfe as where he saith f Esa 59.4 No man calleth for iustice no man contendeth for truth and such like and yet could not say We haue sinned vve haue all beene as an vncleane thing without intendment of himselfe Last of all he alledgeth that the best learned among vs quoting Luther and Caluin on this place doe confesse that this sentence cannot be alledged against the vertue of good vvorkes What Luther saith vpon the place I know not not hauing the booke at hand but g Assert artic 31 otherwhere he doth alledge it against the vertue of good workes Caluin giueth his opinion that it doth not so properly serue to that purpose but his reason is of lesse waight then that it should take from vs a proofe in the verie words so cleere and pregnant as this is But if Luther and Caluin on our side doe denie it let him take h Pigh controu de fide iustificat Pighius and i Ferus in Mat. cap. 20. Ferus of his owne side confessing and acknowledging that this place doth make against the vertue of good workes both of them alledging it for an argument against the perfection thereof Or if they beare no sway with him let him heare them whose authoritie hee may not well disclaime Origen saying thus k Orig. in Rom. cap. 3. Quis vel super iustitia sua gloriabitur cÃ¹m audiat Deum per Prophetam dicentem quia omnis iustitia vestra sicut pannus mulieris meÌ„struatae Who vvill glorie concerning his Righteousnesse seeing he heareth God saying by the Prophet All your Righteousnesse is as a cloth of a menstruous vvoman Hierome thus l Hieron in Esa cap 64. Quicquid videmur habere iustitiae panno menstruaâ—e mulieris comparatur By thy mercie vve shall bee saued vvho by our selues are vncleane and vvhatsoeuer Righteousnesse vve seeme to haue it is compared vnto a menstruous cloth Saint Austine alluding to the same place sayeth m August soliloq cap. 28. Nos omnes quasi pannus menstruatae de massa corrupta immunda venientes maculam immunditiae nostrae in frontibus portamus c. Whatsoeuer hee toucheth that is vncleane by the lavv it shall be vncleane But vve all as the cloth of a menstruous vvoman being come of an vncleane and corrupt masse do carrie in our foreheads the blot of our vncleannesse vvhich from God that seeth all things vve cannot hide thereby acknowledging that blot remaining in vs which must needes staine whatsoeuer proceedeth from vs. But Saint Bernard is most frequent both in affirming this staine of all our Righteousnesse and in applying this place to the proofe thereof n Bernard in Fest omn. sanct serm 1. Quid potest esse omnis iustitia nostra coram Deo Nonne iuxta Prophetam velut pannus menstruatae reputabitur si destrictÃ¨ iudicetur iniusta inuenietur omnis iustitia nostra minus habens What can all our Righteousnesse be saith he in the sight of God shall it not as the Prophet sayth be reputed as a menstruous or defiled cloth and shall not our iustice if it be strictly iudged be found vniust and scant And in another place o Idem de verb. Esa serm 5. Nostra siqua est humilis iustitia recta forsitan sed non pura nisi fortÃ¨ meliores nos esse credimus quÃ m patres nostros qui non minÃ¹s veracitÃ¨r quam humiliter atebant Omnes iustitiae c. Our base Righteousnesse if it bee any is right perhaps but not pure vnlesse haply vve thinke our selues better then our fathers vvho no lesse truly then humbly sayd All our Righteousnesse is as a defiled cloth Againe in another place he sayeth likewise p Jdem in dedicat eccles ser 5. Ipsae iustitiae nostrae omnes ad lumen veritatis inspectae velut pannus menstruatae inueniuntur All our verie Righteousnesses beeing looked vpon by the light of truth are found as a menstruous cloth Againe q Idem de verb. Apost Qui gloriatur c. Perfecta secura gloriatio est cÃ¹m veremur omnia opera nostra c. Et cum Esâ—ia Propheta omnes iustitias nostras non aliud quâ—m pannum menstruatae reputandas esse cognoscimus Our perfect and secure reioycing is vvhen vvee are afraide of all our vvorkes as holy Iob vvitnesseth of himselfe and vvith the Prophet Esay doe knovv that all our Righteousnesse is to be no otherwise reputed but as a defiled cloth Hereby then let M. Bishop now vnderstand that M. Perkins dealt no otherwise but dexterously in the handling of this place and that that which the Prophet Esay spake did so concerne the faithfull of that time and place whereof he spake as that they haue true application to the faithfull of all times and in all places because no reason can bee giuen why the faithfull of one time should so speake but by the same it is enforced vpon the faithfull of all times 4. W. BISHOP 1. Cor. 4. But he will amend it in the next where he proues out of Saint Paul that a cleare conscience which is a great part of inherent iustice can nothing helpe to our Iustification I am priuie to nothing in my selfe and yet I am not iustified thereby Here is a verie pretie peece of cosinage What doth the Apostle say that he vvas not iustified by his cleere conscience nothing lesse but that albeit he

f Aug. in Psa 83 Fides nidus est pullorum tuoruÌ„ in hoc nido operare opera tua the nest wherein we are to lay our workes that we may hatch them vnto God Faith is g Prosp de voc gen l. 1 c. 8. Fides bonae voluntatis iustae actionis est genitrix the mother of a good will and iust and righteous conuersation Our faith in Christ is h Aug. in Ps 120 Christus in corde vestro fides est Christ in vs and i Ambr. in Luc. l. 1. c. 21. Mihi sol ille caelestis mea fide vel minuttur vel augetur that heauenly Sunne is either impaired or increased vnto me saith Ambrose according to my faith In a word S. Austin telleth vs that k Aug. in Joan. tract 49. Vnde mors in anima Quia fides noÌ„ est Ergo animae tuae anima fides est faith is the soule of our soule what is that to say but the life of all our life It is faith then and not charitie that giueth influence to all the rest euen to charitie it selfe as faith increaseth so other graces are increased as faith decreaseth so other graces decrease the life of faith is our life the strength of faith is our l Cyprian ad Quirinum lib. 3. cap. 43. Tantum possumus quantum credimus strength if our faith be weake there is nothing else wherby we can be strong Therfore M. Bishop goeth much awry yet no otherwise then he is wont to do in assigning to charitie to giue the spirit of life and influence to faith when as it is by faith that we m Galath 3.14 receiue the spirit which is the author of all spiritual life and grace on which all our state dependeth towards God 24. W. BISHOP The fourth reason if faith alone do iustifie then faith alone will saue but it wil not saue ergo M. Perkins first denieth the proposition saith That it may iustifie and yet not saue because more is required to saluation then to iustification Which is false for put the case that an innocent babe die shortly after his baptisme wherein he was iustified shal he not be saued for want of any thing I hope you will say yes euen so any man that is iustified if he depart in that state no man makes doubt of his saluation therfore this first shift was very friuolous Which M. Perkins perceiuing flies to a second that for faith alone we shal also be saued and that good works shall not be regarded at the day of our iudgement Then must those words of the holy Ghost so often repeated in the Scriptures be razed out of the text God at that time wil reÌ„der vnto euery man according to his works But of this more amply in the question of merits R. ABBOT Tertullian rightly saith a Tertul. de poenit Horum bonorum vnus est â—itulus salâ—s hominis criminum pristinorum abolitione praemissa the saluation of man is the one title of all the benefites of God forgiuenesse of sinnes being put in the first place If saluation be the whole and iustification but a part then more is required to saluation then to iustification because more is required to the whole then to a part Vnder saluation we comprehend both iustification and sanctification in this world life and blisse eternall in the world to come The first act of our saluation is our iustification but God hauing by iustification reconciled vs vnto him goeth forward by sanctification b Col. 1 12. to make vs meete to be partakers of the inheritance of the Saints in light To iustification belongeth only faith to sanctification all other vertues and graces wherein consisteth that c Heb. 12.14 holinesse without which no man shall see the Lord. His exception as touching infants dying after baptisme is very idle They are not onely iustified by forgiuenesse of sinnes but also sanctified by the spirit of grace neither is there any man iustified to the title of eternall life but the same is together also sanctified to the possession thereof and therfore hath more to saluation then onely iustification But as touching the verie point his minor proposition is false We say that we are saued also by faith onely according to that that before I alledged out of Origen that d Origen in Ro. cap. 3 sup sect 21 for faith only Christ said to the woman Thy faith hath saued thee Hath saued thee saith he as a thing alreadie done according to the vsuall phrase of the Scripture in that behalfe For so it is said of Zacheus e Luk. 19.9 This day saluation is come to this house So saith the Apostle f 2. Tim. 1.9 He hath saued vs and called vs with a holy calling g Tit. 3.5 of his owne mercy he hath saued vs. The reason whereof is because in iustification as I haue sayd our saluation is begun and in that we are iustified we are saued Christ therein being giuen vs and in him the interest and title of eternall life thenceforth by that right onely to be continued and performed vnto vs. Being then iustified by faith alone we are saued by faith alone the gift of sanctification to holinesse and good works being necessarily coÌ„sequent not as by vertue wherof we are to be saued whom the Scripture pronounceth to be already saued but as the processe of Gods worke for accomplishment of that saluation whereto in iustification we are begotten and in way of inheritaÌ„ce intitled by faith alone We are saued by faith alone saith M. Perkins because faith alone is the instrument whereby we apprehend Christ who onely is our saluation Where obserue gentle Reader what M. Bishop maketh of that speech that for faith alone we are saued and that good works shall not be regarded at the day of our iudgement Os impudens Where doth M. Perkins say that good workes shall not be regarded at the day of our iudgement What a Doctor of diuinitie to lye wilfully to lye What is this but meere varletrie to abuse his Reader not being carefull haply to looke into M. Perkins booke but taking it vpon his word But if thou haue M. Perkins booke I pray thee to looke to the obiections and answers set down in the end of this question of Iustification which M. Bishop hath vnhonestly left out and there in the answer to the sixt Obiection thou shalt find these words In equitie the last iudgement is to proceed by workes because they are the fittest meanes to make triall of euery mans cause and serue fitly to declare whom God hath iustified in this life By which words thou mayest esteeme how little faith or credite is to be yeelded to this wretched man who doubteth not here with manifest falshood to affime that M. Perkins saith that good workes shall not be regarded at the day of our iudgement And by the same words the solution is

to bestow his grace vpon vs as I haue shewed a Sect. 21. before Therefore he doth not direct the words of S. Paul onely against merits but simply against works that he affirmeth b August li. 83. quaest 76. Vt nemo meritu priorum bonoruÌ„ operuÌ„ arbitrotur se ad donum iustificationis peruenisse Dicit posse homineÌ„ sine operibus praecedentibus iustificari per fideÌ„ Dicit de operibus quae fidem praecedunt a man to be iustified without workes precedent or going before that he teacheth that not for any good worke past a man attaineth to the iustification of faith that a man is not iustified by workes that go before faith meaning by faith not a faith which is before iustification but the faith in which our iustification is begun as appeareth very plainly by that that he saith in another place c Jdem de verb. Apost ser 16. Si iustitiae nihil habemus nec fidem habemus Si fideÌ„ habemus iam aliquid habemus iustitiae If we haue no righteousnesse we haue no faith but if we haue faith we haue also some part of righteousnesse alreadie And thus perpetually he excludeth all workes going before iustification from being any causes thereof and still maketh iustification the beginning of all good workes so as that d Idem epist 46. Sine illa cogitare aliquid vel agere secunduÌ„ Deum vlla ratione omninÃ² noÌ„ possumus without the grace of God which with him is no other but the grace e Epist 105. Istam gratiam commendat Apostolus qua iustificati sumus vt homines iusti essemus whereby we are iustified we can in no sort thinke or do any thing according vnto God Of M. Bishops vertuous dispositions before iustification he neuer speaketh word nor euer giueth intimation of any such nay he condemneth the Pelagians for affirming the same as we haue seene in the question of f Sect. 5. Free will 33. W. BISHOP Now to his second reason If you be circumcised Gal. 5. you are bound to the whole law Hence thus he argueth If a mâ—n will be iustified by workes he is bound to fulfill the whole law according to the rigour of it That is Paules ground But no man can fulfill the law according vnto the rigour of it ergo No man can be iustified by workes He that can apply the text prefixed vnto any part of the argument Erit mihi magnus Apollo Saint Paul onely saith in these words That if you be circumcised yee are bound to keepe the whole law of Moses Maister Perkins That if a man will be iustified by workes he must fulfill the rigour of the law Which are as iust as Germains lips as they say But M. Perkins sayes that it is Saint Paules ground but he is much deceiued for the Apostles ground is this That circumcision is as it were a profession of Iudaisme and therefore he that would be circumcized did make himselfe subiect vnto the whole law of the Iewes Of the possibilities of fulfilling the law because M. Perkins toucheth so often that string shall be treated in a distinct question as soone as I haue dispatched this R. ABBOT The force of the sentence alledged that a Gal. 5.3 he that is circumcised is bound to keepe the whole law dependeth vpon the verse going before and that that followeth after He saith before b Ver. 2. If ye be circumcised Christ shall profit you nothing by one particular giuing to vnderstand what was to be conceiued of the rest that c August cont Faust Man lib. 19. cap. 17. Certa pernicies si in huiusmodi legis operibus putareÌ„t suam spem salutemque continerâ— it was certaine destruction for them to thinke that their hope and saluation was contained in such workes of the law because thereby they were secluded from hauing any benefit in Christ Which as he hath namely spoken of circumcision as being a speciall matter then spoken of so he saith it in the verse after of the whole law d Ver. 4. Ye are abolished from Christ whosoeuer are iustified by the law ye are fallen from grace If then in any part of the law a man seeke to be iustified he is thereby voided of the grace of Christ Being abandoned from Christ and his grace he hath no meanes of iustification and saluation but by the law He cannot be iustified by the law but by perfect obseruing of it because it is said e Cap. 3.10 Cursed is euery man that continueth not in all things that are written in the booke of the law to do them What then is said of circumcision belongeth to all the workes of the law He that seeketh to be iustified by the workes of the law he is bound fully and perfectly to obserue the same and if he be any where a trespasser he cannot be iustified by the law And rightly doth M. Perkins say that this is the ground of that which the Apostle saith of circumcision as he shall well perceiue that obserueth how through the whole Epistle he disputeth generally against iustificatioÌ„ by the law to disprooue the doctrine of the false Apostles vrging for iustification circumcision and other ceremonies of the law Therefore in the words alledged this argument is implied He that wil be iustified by the law is bound to fulfill the whole law He that seeketh to be iustified by circumcision seeketh to be iustified by the law he is therefore bound to the perfect obseruation of the whole law As for that which M. Bishop saith that circumcision is as it were a profession of Iudaisme it is a very idle and sleeuelesse answer For what is Iudaisme but a profession of iustification by the law the Iewes f Rom. 932. seeking righteousnesse not by faith but as it were by the workes of the lâ—w Circumcision therefore is a profession of iustification by the law against which the Apostles ground is as hath bene said that he that professeth to be iustified by the law doth tie himselfe to obserue it without any breach being by the law guilty of death if he be found to transgresse in any sort Now that there is no ablenesse in vs to fulfill the law so as to be iustified thereby it shall appeare God willing in the place where Maister Bishop promiseth to treate thereof 34. W. BISHOP M. Perkins third argument Election to saluation is of grace without workes wherefore the iustification of a sinner is of grace alone without workes because election is the cause of iustification Answer That election is of grace without workes done of our owne simple forces or without the workes of Moses law but not without prouision of good works issuing out of faith and the helpe of Gods grace as shall be handled more largely in the question of merits R. ABBOT Here M. Bishop to answer the argument auoucheth a plaine point of Pelagianisme that Gods election is vpon foresight of

4.2 Ye shall put nothing to the word that I command you saith Moses neither shall ye take ought there from that ye may keepe the commandements of the Lord your God which I command you thereby giuing to vnderstand that euery putting too or taking fro is a breach of the coÌ„mandement of the Lord. Against the exception which M. Bishop vseth that these words may be vnderstood of commandements as wel vnwritten as written M. Perkins answereth that these words are as a preface to a long coÌ„mentary or exposition of the written law therfore do import that to the written law nothing is to be added nothing to be taken from it but that onely was to be done which is contained therein Now howsoeuer M. Bishop doat yet the case is plaine that because Moses spake thus in respect of the written law therefore the Israelites were to admit of nothing but what was written in the law But saith he why then were there bookes of the old Testament and of the Prophets written afterwards if God had forbidden any more to be written or taught but that one booke of Deuteronomy Behold a cosening Sophister who seeth well and knoweth that saue onely by falshood and deceipt he auaileth nothing We say not that of the booke of Deuteronomy onely but of the whole written law Moses said Ye shall put nothing to it c. Againe we do not say that God did forbid any more bookes to be written or taught but that no matter of doctrine of faith or of the worship of God should be receiued or written or taught but what was deriued from the written law Now then I wish thee gentle Reader to obserue how the wise man in his owne answer circumuenteth and ouerthroweth himselfe Moses saith Ye shall put nothing to the word which I coÌ„mand you nor take ought therefrom now tell vs M. Bishop of what word did he say this He telleth vs that we must vnderstand it of the word whether written or vnwritten Be it so but you will confesse then that to the word of God deliuered by Moses written or vnwritten nothing is to be added because the words of Moses plainly expresse so much and how then came it to passe that so many bookes were written afterwards We hope you will not deny but that Moses therein taught the Israelites whatsoeuer was necessary to saluation how then doth it stand that the rest of the Prophets added so much more in writing To vse your owne words shall we thinke that the Prophets read not these words or vnderstood them not or did wilfully transgresse them We would gladlie heare whether of these you vvill say The man is mute and he hath nothing to answer if he answer as he must his answer fully serueth our turne for defending the onely written law of Moses that the bookes that were after written by the Prophets serue to explane and declare the law to shew the experiment practise of it but adde no point of doctrine nor teach any article of religion towards God but what Moses hath written in the Law But for the further strengthening of this argument it is to be noted that Moses testifieth of himself that b Exod. 24.4 he wrote all the words of God In another place it is said c Deut. 31.9.10 Moses wrote this law and deliuered it to the Priests and to all the Elders of Israel and coÌ„manded them saying Euery seuenth yeare thou shalt reade this law before all Israel The law then which he gaue them he gaue them in writing that they might read it it might be read vnto them It could not haue bene said Moses wrote this law if he had written but a part of it and left another part vnwritten Nay it is said further afterwards d Ver. 24. When Moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a booke vntill he had finished them then Moses commanded the Leuites saying Take the booke of this law and put it in the side of the Arke c. It is apparent then that Moses gaue not ouer writing the words of the law vntill he had finished them that is vntill he had written all the words of the law so that there was no word of the law but that that was written in the booke of the law And therfore that which is set downe by Moses e Deut. 27.26 Cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them is thus related by the Apostle f Gal. 3.10 Cursed is euery one that continueth not in all things that are written in the booke of the law to do theÌ„ therby to shew that all the words of the law are written in the booke of the law nothing left vnwritten that was any part or parcel thereof Thus when God would giue direction to Iosuah g Iosuah 1.7 to obserue and do according to all the law which Moses had commanded him giuing him charge according to the instruction of Moses here spoken of not to turne away from it to the right hand or to the left either by putting too or taking fro to shew what he meant by all the law he addeth Let not this booke of the law depart out of thy mouth but meditate therein day and night that thou maiest obserue and do according to all that is written therein Here againe it is plaine that to obserue all the law of Moses is to obserue all that is written in the booke of the law And out of this place Cyprian being vrged by Stephanus Bishop of Rome with tradition argueth against the receiuing of vnwritten traditions h Cyprian ad PoÌ„petum Vnde est ista traditriot VirumnÃ¨ de dominica EuaÌ„gelica authoritate descendens an de Apostolarum mandatis atque epistolu veniens Ea enim faâ—ienda esse quae scripta sunt Deus testatur protonit Iesu Naue diceus NoÌ„ recedet c. Whence is this tradition faith he Whether descendeth it from the authoritie of the Lord and of the Gospell or commeth it froÌ„ the coÌ„mandements and epistles of the Apostles For that those things must be done which are written God testifieth saying to Iosuah The booke of this law shall not depart out of thy mouth c. Where he plainely sheweth that out of these words he intendeth this conclusion that concerning faith and deuotion towards God as we are to do the things that are written so what is not written we are not to do And this now is cleare by the place that we haue here in hand for if all that Moses commanded were written and nothing was to be added to that that Moses commanded then nothing was to be added to that that was written and those things which were written afterwards were no additions but only declarations and confirmations of those things which he had before written And thus did the ancient Fathers vnderstand that that is said of adding or diminishing as touching

Church Now then the testimony of the present Church is made of equall like authority with the holy Scriptures and Bellarmine is in as pitifull a case as M. Bishop is For the testimonie of the present Church what is it but the testimony of the learned of the present Church therfore now the mindes of the learned are as good an oracle of truth as the Scriptures are If this be not so let vs heare from M. Bishop what else is to be said hereof for if traditions be to be receiued with like deuotion reuerence as those things that we are taught in Scripture then there must be somewhat or other to commend the same vnto vs with the like authority as the Scripture doth the rest and what that is we are desirous to vnderstand Now M. Bishop addeth two further exceptions against M. Perkins argument and they are such wise ones as that we may very well think them to be his own Secondly saith he they are commonly recorded of more then one of the fathers and so haue firmer testimonie then any one of their writings But what is this to M. Perkins his speech which is not restrained to any one of the fathers writings but taketh them iointly and inferreth it as an absurdity that the writings of the fathers being taken all together should be made equall in credit to the holy Scriptures Thirdly saith he a tradition being related but by one auncient father yet should be of more credit then any other of his owne inuention because that was registred by him as a matter of more estimation But what idle babling is this what maketh this to the clearing of the point in question He will haue vs to receiue traditions with the like pietie and reuerence as we doe those things that we are instructed by the Scripture He putteth a case of a tradition reported by one onely of the fathers He should hereupon haue answered how we can in that sort admit of such a tradition as Apostolicall but by yeelding the like credit to that one father as we do to the holy Scriptures But he like a man in a wood that knoweth not which way he is to go telleth vs that this tradition is of more credit then any other of his owne inuention because it was registred by him as a matter of more estimation O the sharpe wits of these Romish Doctours that can diue so deepe into matters and talke so profoundly that they themselues vnderstand not what they say To as little purpose is that which he addeth that if that tradition were not as it was termed some of the rest of the fathers would haue reproued it which when they did not they gaue it their interpretative consent to be Apostolicall tradition But let the consent be either interpretatiue or expresse what is this against the consequence of the argument which he taketh vpon him to answer that if we must receiue traditions in that sort as they require vs and haue no where to ground them but vpon the testimonie of the fathers then we must giue as much credit to the testimonie of the fathers as we do to the holy Scriptures I am forced thus odiously to inculcate the matter in question to make the ridiculous folly of this wrangler the more plainely to appeare who hauing nothing to say yet hath not so much wit as to hold his peace In this simplicity he goeth forward to answere the place of the Acts where Saint Paule is brought in saying c Acts. 26.22 I continue to this day witnessing both to small and great saying no other things then those which the Prophets and Moses did say should come In which words it is plaine that the Apostle professed in the preaching of the Gospell * ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ c. to say nothing without the compasse of those things which had beene before spoken by Moses and the Prophets M Bishop answereth that he meaneth onely of those things which he addeth That Christ should suffer and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead c. For these things saith he euidently foretold in holy writ he needed not to alledge any other proofe Yea but what other proofe doth he vse for any other doctrine Forsooth when he was to perswade them to abandon Moses law he then deliuered to them the decrees of the Apostles taught them to keepe them Yea but Paul preached a long while before those decrees of the Apostles were made as appeareth froÌ„ his conuersion in the ninth Chapter to the fifteenth Chapter where those decrees are made and all this while what other proofe did he vse but onely the Scriptures of Moses and the Prophets Do we not thinke that this man hath wonderfully hardened both his heart to God and his face to men that can apply himselfe to write in this sort He well knoweth that the question is not here of new decrees but of old traditions what proofe the Apostle had or what ground of doctrine from the old testament but onely the Scriptures of the law and the Prophets The Apostle himselfe saith he had no other he taught nothing but according to the written bookes of the old testament according to that which elsewhere he saith that d Rom. 16.26 the Gospell was published amongst all nations by the Scriptures of the Prophets For a summarie briefe thereof he nameth the suffering and resurrection of Christ c. but he that saith that herewith he preached any thing but what was warranted by Moses and the Prophets maketh him to dally and to speake a manifest vntruth in that he saith that he spake nothing without the compasse of those things which Moses and the Prophets prophecied before Now the wise man for instance against this telleth vs that he deliuered the decrees of the Apostles and taught them to keepe them Which beside that it is nothing to the purpose as hath bene said doth also set forth his notable sillinesse and folly in that for proofe of traditions and doctrines vnwritten he bringeth the example of the Apostles decrees which are expresly mentioned to haue bene sent to the Churches in writing e Acts. 15.23 They wrote letters by them after this manner c. But in the height of his wisedome he goeth forward to proue the same by another speech When he instructed the Corinthians in the Sacrament of the Altar he beginneth with tradition saying I deliuer vnto you as I haue receiued from our Lord not in writing but by word of mouth Surely the mans head was wonderfull quaifie in the writing hereof or else we must thinke that he was in some traunce I deliuer vnto you not in writing but by word of mouth when notwithstanding in his Epistle he sendeth it to them in writing Or what doth he meane that the Apostle receiued it of our Lord not in writing but by word of mouth But what is that to the purpose when he deliuered

loquentis sermonem audientis animuÌ„ confirmat if any thing be spoken without Scripture the mind of the hearers goeth lame but when out of the Scriptures cometh the testimonie of the voyce of God it confirmeth both the speech of him that speaketh and the mind of him that heareth Neither doth it sufficiently giue this confirmation to alledge generally that the Scripture speaketh of traditions because it is still a question whether those be the traditions which the Scripture speaketh of vnlesse by the Scripture it selfe they be iustified so to be To Chrysostome M. Bishop addeth Oecumonius and Theophilact but as they take their exposition out of Chrysostome so in him they haue their answer Next he bringeth in a sentence vnder the name of Basil which is not onely suspected by Erasmus and others but may by the place it selfe be well presumed to be none of his There is good cause to thinke that the Cuckow hath plaid her part and laid her egges in Basils nest that some counterfeit to grace himselfe hath not sticked to disgrace him by putting to him patcheries of his own deuice To say nothing of the difference of style and other arguments noted by Erasmus we may obserue how he maketh Basil coÌ„trarie to himselfe not onely to those rules which he hath giuen otherwhere but euen to the course which he hath before professed in this booke yea and maketh a seuerall question of that whereof Basil in the beginning of his book seuerally propoundeth nothing The matter as Basil declareth was this o Basil de spir Sanct. cap. 1. Glorificationem absoluens Deo ac Patri interdum cum ficio ipsius ac Spiritu sancto interdum per filium in Spiritu sancto that in his prayers in the Church for conclusion he would sometimes pronounce glorie to God and the Father with his Sonne and the holy Ghost and sometimes by the Sonne in the holy Ghost Some p Cap. 2. affected as he conceiueth to the heresie of Aerius or Arius blamed him for saying with the Sonne and the holy Ghost affirming that seuerall termes should be vsed of the three Persons of the Father and by the Sonne and in the holy Ghost intending that in this diuersity of phrases a diuersitie of natures should be vnderstood He sheweth that the heretikes borrowed this fancie q Cap. 3. from the curiosities of vaine Philosophie and propoundeth r Cap. 4. that in the Scriptures no such difference of those syllables is obserued This he prosecuteth Å¿ Cap. 5. at large and in the end propoundeth his aduersaries obiection t Cap. 6. in sine that this manner of speaking with the Sonne was strange and vnusuall but by the Sonne was familiar in the phrase of Scripture and accustomed with the brethren He answereth that u Cap. 7. the Church acknowledged the vse of both those speeches and did not reiect either of them as if the one did ouerthrow the other He affirmeth that so many as did keepe the tradition of their auncestors without alteration in all countries and cities did vse this speech Therefore euen the very countrey clownes saith he do so pronounce according to the maner of their forefathers That then which hath bene said by our auncestors we also say that glorie is common to the Father with the Sonne and therefore we sing hymnes of glorification to the Father together with the Sonne But he addeth which is the thing that we are specially to obserue x QuanquaÌ„ hoc nobis non est satis sic Ã patribus esse traditum nam illi Scripturae secuti sunt authoritatem c. Albeit it is not enough for vs that we haue it so by tradition from the Fathers for they also followed the authoritie of Scripture taking their ground from those testimonies which a little before we haue alledged Thus he calleth by the name of the tradition of the Fathers that wherein they followed the authority of the Scriptures and plainely instructeth vs that without authority of the Scriptures the tradition of the Fathers is no sufficient warrant for vs. And to this accordeth that which hath bene before cited from him that y Supra Sect. 5. it is a declining from the faith to bring in any thing that is not written Thus in another place he saith z Supra Sect. 10 If whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne as the Apostle saith and faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God surely whatsoeuer is beside the holy Scripture because it is not of faith is sinne And againe a Idem reg contract q 95 Necessarium est consonum vt ex sacrae quisque Scriptura quod necesse sit discat cÃ¹m ad pretatis pleroâ—horiam tuÌ„ ne assuescat humanis traditionibus It is needfull and conuenient that euery man do learne out of the Scripture that that is necessarie for him both for the full assurance of godlinesse and that he may not be accustomed to the traditions of men Now how can we imagine that Basil thus reducing all to the Scriptures and though alledging as we do the tradition of the Fathers yet with vs acknowledging that that sufficeth not without authority of the Scriptures should so soone after attribute so much to traditions that haue no confirmation from the Scripture Albeit this contrarietie had bene small neither should we haue had any cause to take exception against those words of traditions whether they be Basils or whose soeuer if in exemplifying the same he had not strained them so far as that M. Bishop himselfe must perforce confesse they cannot accord with truth For if he had no more but required the obseruation of traditions vnwritten we should haue conceiued that he meant vnwritten as Basil elsewhere doth who professeth b Basil de fide Vocibus agraphis quidem verum noÌ„ alienis Ã pâ—a secundum Scripturam sententia c. to vse words that are not written but yet such as varie not from the meaning of pietie according to the Scripture wordes and termes which in letters and syllables are not framed to the Scripture but yet do retain that meaning that is in the Scripture Thus in the former part of the booke de Sp. sancto he mentioneth c Cap. 9. De Sp. sancto Sententiae quas traditione Patrum sine scripto accepimus speeches concerning the holy Ghost which without Scripture saith he we haue receiued by the tradition of the Fathers which yet are such as haue all their foundation and ground in the Scriptures So in the place here questioned he nameth diuers things for vnwritten traditions which we religiously hold according to the doctrine of the Scriptures though the words be not precisely set downe therein Such is in baptisme d Cap. 27. Renuntiare Satanae Angelis eius in baptismo ex qua Scriptura habemus the renouncing of the diuell and his Angels from what Scripture saith he haue

only We take it then for granted as indeed it cannot be denied that the Apostle here intended those things that are written but we wold heare an argument to proue that the Apostle meant any thing further that is not written If he might vse those words of those things that are written what hindreth but that he might vse them of those onely M. Bishop cannot proue that he did not so but we proue that he did so because in the next Chapter he telleth the same Timothy n 2. Tim. 3.15 The Scriptures are able to make thee wise vnto saluation through the faith which is in Christ Iesus Therefore M. Bishops proofes come much too short to giue vs any assurance that S. Paule by traditions vnderstood any thing but what is to be learned by the Scriptures 17. W. BISHOP The second argument for Traditions is this to beleeue that there be so many bookes of holy Scripture and no more and that those be they which are commonly taken so to be is very necessary to saluation now this is not to be found written in any place of holy Scripture but is receiued only by Tradition wherefore it is necessarie to saluation to beleeue some Tradition M. Perkins answereth that the bookes of the Old and New Testament be Scripture is not beleeued on bare Tradition but by the bookes themselues on this maner Let the man who is endued with the spirit of discerning reade the bookes and consider first the author of them who is God then the matter contained which is diuine the maner of speech which is full of maiestie in simple words lastly the end aymed at which is Gods honor and by this meanes he shall discerne any part of Scripture from the writings of men whatsoeuer Reply A wise and deepe obseruation I warrant you and well worthy a graue Author Let vs examine it briefly first he will haue his man endued with the spirit of discerning who shall indue him with that spirit M. P. seemeth to say that euery sheepe of Christ hath his spirit But S. Paule * 1. Cor. 12. teacheth plainely the contrarie that some certaine onely haue the iudgement to discerne And touching this matter of discerning which bookes are Canonicall which are not not the learnedst in the primitiue Church would take vpon him to discerne which they were three hundred yeares after Christ was left vndefined by the best learned whether the Catholike Epistles of S. Iames and Iude the second of S. Peter the second and third of Iohn and his Apocalypse were Canonicall or no as is confessed on all parts hath then euery Christian this spirit of discerning when the best Christians wanted it Who more profound more skilfull to discerne than that subtill and sharpe Doctor S. Augustine and yet the Protestants will not allow him the true spirit of discerning which bookes be Canonicall For he in diuers places of his workes * De doct Christ cap. 8. 18. de ciuit Dei 36. lib. 2. cont Epist Gaudent 23 holdeth the bookes of the Machabees to be Canonicall Scriptures and expresly proueth the booke of Wisedome so to be * De Praedest Sanct. 14. and yet our Protestants will not admit them See therefore how foolish and vaine his first rule is Come to the second His second is that he who goeth about to discerne whether the booke be Canonicall or no must consider the Author who is God If he must at the first take God to be the Author of the booke what needes any further labour it must needes be Canonicall that hath God for the Author This mans wits were surely from home when he discoursed thus and therefore it should be but folly to stand vpon his particularities let this one reason in generall serue to confute him all this manner put together serueth onely to helpe particular men to discerne which bookes are Canonicall who may easily after their diligent inquirie erre and be deceiued in this point because euery man is a lyar * Rom. 3. And if there be no more certaine meanes to assure them of this which is the ground of all their Religion then euery particular mans discretion and iudgement then out of doubt their whole Religion is most vnwisely builded vpon meane mens inuentions and discretion who also for the most part do neither vnderstand the language in which they were first penned nor the vsuall phrases of Scriptures translated that I say nothing of the figures parables prophecies and controuersies which seeme to be and many other difficulties and yet these men need not doubt hauing learned some halfe dozen lines of Master Perkins but that reading any booke they shall be able presently to discerne whether it be Canonicall or no. A goodly mockerie Men were not so taught in the Primitiue Church but the most skilfull and wisest in discerning Canonicall books trusted not vnto their owne iudgement but leaned alwaies vpon Apostolicall Traditions So did Cerapion an auncieni holy Writer as Eusebius reporteth reiect certaine bookes set out in the Apostles names because they had not receiued from their Predecessors any such The like doth Clement of Alexandria * Cap. 11. and that famous Origen * Cap. 19. of the same booke who obserue the Ecclesiasticall Canon as he had learned and receiued by Tradition So doth he deliuer his opinion of the foure Euangelists and other bookes of Canonicall Scripture and not relying on his owne wit which was excellent or learning which was singular in all manner of languages and matters That S. Augustine was of the same mind may be gathered out of these words of his * Lib. 35. cap. 6. Contra Faustum Of what booke can there be any assurance if the letters which the Church propagated by the Apostles and by such excellencie declared throughout all Nations doth teach and hold to be the Apostles should be vncertaine whether they be Apostles or no So that he maketh the declaration of the Church descended of the Apostles to be a sure pillar to rest vpon for the certaine knowledge of Canonicall Scripture and other spirits whatsoeuer if they follow not that rule to be reiected so farre is he off from encouraging euery sheepe of Christs fold to take that waightie matter vpon himselfe as M. P. doth And what can be more against the most prudent prouidence of the diuine wisedome then to permit euery one to be a iudge of the books of Canonicall Scripture For if al those books no other shold passe curraÌ„t for Canonical which any Christian taking vpon him the spirit of discerning would censure to be such then away with all the old Testament because diuers esteemed it to proceed of some euil spirits as witnesses Freueus * Lib 1. cap. 20. 21. 22. and Epiphanius * Haeres 6. 6. Yea not onely all the old must be abrogated but all the new also because it hath many falshoods mixed with the truth as some presuming greatly of their spirit

cauilleth but we make the Church as the hand of God whereby he putteth the Scriptures into our hands and priuate spirit doth no more but subscribe to the testification of the Church But now if Maister Bishop will question the publike testimonie of our Church as touching knowledge what Scriptures are to be deliuered we answer him that such and such onely we acknowledge and deliuer by our testimonie because by like testimonie those onely haue beene acknowledged and deliuered vnto vs. Here then we referre our selues to Tradition and therefore all that Maister Bishop alledgeth to the end of this section is but fighting with a shadow of his owne and nothing against vs. He saith in the end that Brentius and Chemnitius admit of this Tradition albeit they reiect all other Traditions beside this one whereas Chemnitius setting downe eight kindes of Traditions acknowledgeth seuen of them and determineth our defence against the Papists to consist in one kinde onely We fight not against the word we know it hath his vse Maister Perkins in three conclusions here acknowledgeth Traditions the Church of Rome hath brought it by her abuse to one speciall vse and meaning and in that vse onely wee impugne it namely as it importeth matters not of temporarie rites and ceremonies indifferently vsed but of perpetuall doctrine and faith which neither in word nor in meaning can be verified and confirmed by the written word presupposed and acknowledged to be the word of God In this sence wee denie Traditions the name otherwise we reiect not wee say that by testimonie of Tradition the notice of the canonicall Scriptures is giuen vnto vs. This Maister Bishop thinketh should make for the credit of their Church of Rome dreaming that this must be by the tradition of that Church or that that Church must be the witnesse vnto vs of this tradition But therein hee very much deceiueth himselfe amongst all the traditions mentioned by the auncient Writers wee neuer finde this tradition that for the number of the bookes of canonicall Scripture wee must take the tale and tradition of the Church of Rome If he can make good any such tradition he shall finde vs much the more fauourable for all the rest Otherwise we doe not know why it should not be as readie for the Church of England to iudge which are canonicall Scriptures as it is for the Church of Rome What meanes should they haue for the discerning of them that is not as open to vs as it is to them We take the account of holy Scriptures in the same sort as the auncient Church did o Ruffin in exposit symb Secundum traditionem patrum Sicut ex patrum monumentis acceptmus Hilar. prolog in Psal SecunduÌ„ traditiones veterum according to the tradition of the fathers and out of the monuments of the fathers Wee reckon those onely for canonicall bookes which from the time of the Apostles haue had certaine and vndoubted testimonie to be so testimonie I say of so many Churches and nations and peoples to which at first they were deliuered and thenceforth vsed amongst them to be read in their Churches expounded in their pulpits meditated in their houses which the fathers haue perpetually cited in their bookes and opposed in generall Councels against Schismatikes and heretikes to which they haue attributed all authoritie for the deciding and determining the causes and controuersies of the Church p Aug. in Ioannis epist. tract 2. Contra quas nullus audeat loqui qui se vult quoquo modo vocari Christianum against which none dare speake saith Saint Austine who will in any sort be called a Chrstian man q Idem cont faust l. 11. cap. 5. Excellentia canonicae authoritatis veteris noui testamenti Apostolorum confirmata temporibus per successiones episcoporum propagationes ecclesiarum tanquam in sede quadam sublimiter constituta est cui serutat omnis fidelis pius intellectus The excellencie of the canonicall authoritie of the old and new testament saith he againe being confirmed in the time of the Apostles hath by succession of Bishops and propagation of Churches beene set in a high and loftie seate that all faithfull and religious vnderstanding may be seruant vnto it Now by the Scriptures which thus irrefragably and vnquestionably haue beene receiued vniuersally of the whole Christian world wee learne to iudge of those bookes adioined to the old testament whereof question is betwixt the Church of Rome and vs. For in those bookes as touching the old testament we learne that r Rom. 2.2 to the Iewes were committed the words of God whereof it followeth that none are to be accounted the words of God that were not committed vnto them The bookes committed to them our Sauiour Christ nameth to haue beene Å¿ Luk 24.44 Moses and the Prophets and the Psalmes and calleth these t Ver. 27. all the Scriptures as before was noted Because then these are all the Scriptures and those which we seclude from the Canon are none of these it followeth that by the sentence of Christ himselfe they are declared to be no Scriptures And hereto agreeth the auncient tradition of the Church of the Iewes recorded by Iosephus who acknowledgeth that they had u Ioseph cont Apion lib. 1. SuÌ„t nobis solummodo duo viginti libri quoruÌ„ iustÃ¨ fides ad nutitur Horum quinque sunt Moseos c. Amorie Moseos vsque ad Artaxerxem PersaruÌ„ regem Prophetae temporum suorum res gestas conscripserunt in tredecim libris Reliqui vero quatuor hymnes in Deum vitae humanae praecepta noscuntur continere onely two and twenty bookes to which iustly they gaue credit whereof fiue are the bookes of Moses From whom to the time of Artaxerxes King of Persia the Prophets wrote the matters of their times in thirteene bookes which are thus reckoned 1. Iosuah 2. the Iudges with Ruth 3. the two bookes of Samuel 4. the two bookes of Kings 5. the two bookes of Chronicles 6. Ezra and Nehemiah 7. Esther 8. Iob. 9. Esay 10. Ieremy 11. Ezechiel 12. Daniel 13. the booke of the twelue lesser Prophets The other foure saith he containe Hymnes and Songs to God and precepts of humane life which are the Psalmes the Prouerbs Ecclesiastes and the Canticles Of those things which were afterwards written hee saith x Ab Artaxerxe vsque ad nostrum tempus singulae sunt conscripta noÌ„ tamen priori simili fide sunt habita cÃ² quod non fuerit certâ— successio prophetarum that they were not of like credit to the former because there was no certaine succession of Prophets amongst them This tradition the Iewes hold constantly and inuiolably till this day and in their dispersion through the world do still giue witnesse to the bookes that were deliuered to their fathers God by his prouidence appointing them to be y August cont faust lib. 12. cap. 23. Quid est hodie genâ—

ipsa nisi quaedaÌ„ scriniaria Christianorum baâ—ulans legem Prophetas in testimonium assertionis ecclesiae the roll-keepers of the Christians as Saint Austine noteth carying the law and the Prophets for the testimonie of that which the Church teacheth If God then haue appointed them to be witnesses of those bookes of the old Testament which should serue for the assertion of our faith in the new wee should doe amisse to admit of other bookes of the old Testament for assertion of our faith whereof they giue no witnesse This computation of the Scriptures according to their tradition is followed by the fathers of the Christian Church professing exactly to set downe the number of Canonicall bookes as by z Euseb lib. 4 cap. 25. Veteris instrumenti libros diligenter cogritos subieci Where wisedome in the Greeke is added by apposition to the Prouerbs so called by the auncients Melito Bishop of Sardis by a Jdem lib 6. cap. 24. Where a fault is committed by Eusebius in leauing out the booke of the twelue lesser Prophets for the two and twentith Origen by b Athan. in Synopsi Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria by c Epiphan de mens pond Epiphanius Bishop of Cyprus by the whole Councell of d Concil Laodic cap. 59. Laodicea for the Greeke and Easterne Churches and for the Latine and Westerne Churches by e Hilar. Prolog in Psal Ita secundum traditiones veterum deputantur Hilarie by f Hieron in Prolog Galeato Hierome by g Ruffinus in expositione Symboli Ruffinus all reckoning for Canonicall Scriptures the same that wee doe and excluding from the Canon the same that wee exclude The same reckoning we finde in the Canons which haue gone in the Church of Rome vnder the name of the Canons of the Apostles onely h Canon Apostol 84. three bookes of Machabees are foisted in of which we reade not to that purpose any other-where Yea and that they went not in that account in the Church of Rome is apparent by Gregory Bishop there who being to apply the example of Eleazar in the Machabees to the matter that he had in hand saith i Gregor Moral lib. 19. cap. 13. De quae re non inordinatÃ¨ agimus si ex libris licet noÌ„ canonicis sed taâ—â—n ad ecclesiae edificationeÌ„ editis exempliâ—m proferamus Eleazar enim c. Of this thing we shall not doe amisse to bring an example out of the bookes though not canonicall yet set forth for the edification of the Church In which words he plainly sheweth that neither the bookes of Machabees nor the rest of that sort were holden for canonicall Scriptures albeit they were set forth to be read for that they contained many things profitable for the edifying of the people For this cause S. Austine reckoneth them amongst the canonicall bookes but because he confesseth as we haue seene that in contradiction they haue not that k August cont faust lib. 28. cap. 4. Confirmatiua authoritate clarescerent confirmatiue authority which elsewhere he nameth for the prerogatiue of the Scriptures he thereby confesseth that they are not truly canonicall because it is for that authorities sake that the name of canonicall Scriptures is giuen to those to which it doth appertaine Therefore we reckon him also as a witnesse of this tradition whereby our Church discerneth what books wee are to approoue for determining faith and doctrine in the Church and vnder that name to commend as the infallible Oracles of God to the deuotion of the people But now Maister Bishop will aske what the reason is that admitting this tradition we do not admit also of other their traditions of which we also reade in the writings of the fathers Whereto to say nothing that their traditions are vncertaine as touching their beginning variable in their proceeding corrupt in their vse and many of them vpstart deuices shamefully and lewdly attributed to the fathers whereas this tradition of the Scriptures without alteration or interruption hath had constant perpetuall acknowledgment both of the whole nation of the Iewes and of the whole Christian Church throughout the whole world from the beginning vntill this day wee answere him that by this tradition it selfe wee are instructed against the admitting of their traditions For this tradition or deliuering of the Scriptures from God is as the deliuering of a commission from a Prince For as by the commission the subiect is directed what to do in the Princes seruice and is thereby listed and bounded so as to do nothing but according to the tenure and warrant of the commission being punishable if he shall attempt any thing further vpon his owne head so by this commission of holy Scripture deliuered vnto vs by the Church from God we are instructed and limited what to beleeue and what to doe as touching faith and dutie towards God and are iustly to be punished if we shall dare in any sort to go beyond the bounds and warrant of this commission yea and the Church it selfe is to hold and professe it selfe so tied to the precepts and rules of this commission as that it may not presume to obtrude or thrust any thing vpon the people of God to be beleeued and taught but whereof it hath thereby receiued warrant and instruction from God himself And if the Church shall further attempt or enterprise any thing as the Church of Rome doth it is to receiue checke and controlement from this writ of Gods commission neither are we to thinke our selues discharged for that we are thus told by the bearer of the writ so long as by the writ it selfe we are commaunded otherwise 18. W. BISHOP The two next arguments for traditions be not well propounded by Master Perkins The third is to be framed thus Either all the bookes of holy Scripture containe all needfull doctrine to saluation or some certaine of them without the rest not some of them without the rest for then the other should be superfluous which no man holdeth therefore all the bookes of holy Scripture put together do containe all necessary instruction Now then the argument followeth but some of those bookes of holy Scripture haue bene lost therefore some points of necessary doctrine contained in them are not extant in the written word and consequently to be learned by tradition Master Perkins answereth first supposing some of the books to be lost that all needfull doctrine which was in them is in some of the others preserued But why did he not solue the argument proposed were then those bookes superfluous Doth the holy Ghost set men to pen needlesse discourses which this answer supposeth therefore he giues a second more shamefull that none be perished which is most contrary vnto the plaine Scriptures * 1. Paral. vit 2 Paral. 9. as S. Iohn Chrysostome proueth * Hom. 9. in Mat. Et hom 7 an priorem ad Corinth where he hath these expresse words

the written law therefore some other remedie was delivered for them by tradition Further he alledgeth that there was remedy for children dying before the eight day before which they might not be circumcised but there is none found written therefore it was deliuered by tradition O the excellent wit of this man he hath with these arguments so troubled the whole pack of the Protestants as that not one of them can tel what to say But for our learning M. Bishop we are desirous to know of you what these remedies were that you speake of What was the ceremonie for the freeing of women from originall sinne and children dying before eight dayes old Where haue ye found or how can ye prooue that there was any such Surely you that can see so farre into a milstone of traditions are able I trow to informe vs what it was if any such thing were Ridiculous vain man bringing in steed of proofes fantasticall imaginations whereof he hath no ground nor can giue vs any testimony at all either from the Iewes themselues or from other ancient writers but only out of the presumptions and idle dreames of some of their owne schoolmen Yea and in this deuice of his he crosseth the doctrine of his owne part for tell vs M. Bishop did circumcision take away originall sin If it did so what difference then betwixt the sacraments of the old Testament and of the new You are wont to tell vs that the sacraments of the old Testament did signifie grace but not giue grace that they did signifie the taking away of sinne but not take it away that they did signifie iustification but did not iustifie Therefore Bellarmine accordingly determineth that circumcision did not iustifie or take away sinne but in that respect was of as little force as vncircumcision yea and argueth that if circumcision had iustified then iustification should haue bene proper to men because men onely are circumcised so farre is he from conceiuing that some other remedie was prouided for women in steede of circumcision For expounding the Apostles words b Rom 3.29 Is God the God of the Iewes onely as if he had said c Bellar. de effec sacram cap. 14. Quasi dicat Deus est omnium Deus quomodo igitur credibile est cum dedisse remedium contra peccatuÌ„ solis Iudaeis Possumus nos etiam hinc alitÃ¨r argumentari An masculoruÌ„ Deus tantuÌ„ nonne et foeminarum Quis ergo credat Deum dedisse remedium quod solis masculis prosit God the God of all how then is it credible that he should giue remedy against sinne to the Iewes onely he addeth We may hence also argue Is God the God of men onely is he not also the God of women Who then will beleeue that he gaue a remedy against sinne that should be auaileable for men onely His resolution then is that circumcision was no remedie against sin because God would not appoint a remedy against sinne as he conceiueth which should not be common to the Gentiles as well as to the Iewes to women as well as men Now therefore inasmuch as M. Bishops foundation faileth surely that which he buildeth vpon it must needs fall and looke what he will say was the deliuering of men from originall sinne the same he must confesse hath bene the deliuering of women also so that either he must resolue one meanes for both out of the written word or passe ouer to tradition vnwritten and if he haue not a tradition for both then all his matter of Iewish tradition must come to naught and there is nothing proued but that Moses committed all to the written law But his phrase of deliuering from originall sinne implieth an errour before confuted in the question of that point Our regeneration consisteth in the forgiuenesse of sinnes and the first fruites of the sanctification of the holy Ghost the same spirit working sometimes without any signe or sacrament of initiation as in the fathers vntil the time of Abraham who himselfe was iustified before the sacrament of Circumcision sometimes with that signe of circumcision proper in execution to men onely but yet sealing the fruite of Gods promise and the effect of his spirit both to men and women d Ephes 1.5.9 according to the purpose of the grace of God sometimes with a signe common both to men and women as in our baptisme we see thereby shewing that he worketh freely according to his owne will not tying himselfe to outward signes but sauing onely by his grace either with signes where they are or without where either there is no institution as in the beginning or there wanteth meanes and oportunitie of execution as oft befell in circumcision of the old Testament and doth befall in baptisme of the new Now as touching M. Bishops third reason it is as reasonlesse as the former so that we may wonder that the author of it should be so without reason Iob and many such like Gentiles saith he were saued Very true But in the Law or any other part of the old Testament it is not written what they had to beleeue or how they should liue But that is not true for seeing there is but e Eph. 4.5 one faith f 2. Corin. 4.13 the same spirit of faith of the whole body of Christ from the beginning to the end by that faith that is written in the law of Moses we know what they had to beleeue and according to that faith how they ought to liue Yea and where it is written what they did beleeue and how they did liue there it is written what they had to beleue and how they were to liue But in the booke of Iob it is written of himself and of his friends what they did beleeue and what the ordering of their life was all according to the law of Moses and the faith therein contained It is therefore vntrue which M. Bishop saith that it is not written what they had to beleeue or how they were to liue But yet giuing the man his way let vs see what his conclusion is Therefore saith he many things needfull to saluation were then deliuered by tradition We may see his head was troubled and he had forgotten what he was to conclude for this his conclusion should haue bene Therefore Moses committed not all to writing But this would not follow for though it were not namely written of Iob what he had to beleeue yet we cannot hereof inferre that therefore he had any thing else to beleeue but that that is written What hindereth I say but that Moses may be conceiued to set downe the faith whereby Iob was to be saued though he do not expresly say that Iob was to beleeue thus But it may be that M. Bishop meant that that conclusion should be subordinate to the former and so would reason thus Iob and such like receiued many things by tradition therefore Moses committed not all to writing Yet neither can this

stand good because nothing letteth but that Moses might commit to writting all that faith that Iob receiued by tradition Iob was g Ambros Offic. lib. 1. caep 36. Iob antiqutor Mose c. auncienter then Moses as Ambrose saith and might receiue the doctrine of faith by word and tradition of other men but yet we see that that faith is no other but what Moses after comprised in the written law Albeit what that tradition was hath bene i Sect. 1. before declared not resting in relation from one man to another but continually renewed and confirmed by reuelation and illumination immediatly from God being certainly corrupted by tradition where he did not graciously shew himselfe for the preseruation of it And as for other Gentiles whosoeuer they were that were saued after the writing of the Law they were saued onely by that faith which the scriptures of Moses and the Prophets haue described vnto vs. But M. Bishop not content to bring Moses alone for a patron of traditions telleth vs beside that not any law-maker in any country comprehended all in letters but established many things by custome therefore saith he it is not likely that our Christian law should be all written Where we may iustly hisse at his grosse and wilfull absurditie that will measure the Law-maker of heauen with the law-makers of the earth and by imperfection in the lawes of men will argue imperfection in the lawes of God No vnderstanding of man can either by laws or by customes prouide for all occurrents of the commonwealth but dayly there are arising and growing the occasions of new lawes and will he then frame the light of God to the measure of our darknesse And yet what lawmaker hath there bene or is there in the world who if he were able to comprehend an absolute perfection of all lawes would not certainly take course to set the same downe in writing as being the only secure and safe way for the perpetuating therof And if we will thus conceiue of any wise and reasonable man how much more should we attribute it to the wisedome of God that knowing the slippernesse and mutabilitie of the minds thoughts of men he would for safetie and assurance set downe in writing whatsoeuer he would haue to stand for law of worship and seruice towards him I need not to stand vpon this for the comparison is of it selfe so odious and absurd as that euery man may wonder that the mans discretion should faile him so far as to reason in this sort For conclusion of this section a toy took him in the head concerning somwhat said by M. Perkins in the sectioÌ„ before It was said that it should cal the prouidence of God in question to say that any part of Scripture should be lost M. Bishop answereth that God permitteth much euill True but he permitteth no euill iniurious to his owne glory M. Perkins supposeth out of that that was said before that all Scripture was at first written for our learning To say that it was intended for our learning and yet is now lost what is it but to call in question the prouidence of God His other answer that there should be no great losse because tradition might preserue that which was then lost is a temerarious and witlesse presumption contrary to the experience of all ages whereby it is found that nothing is continued according to the first originall which is deliuered by word only from man to man And his assertion is so much the more ridiculous in this behalfe for that he knoweth not any thing that Tradition hath preserued that was written in those bookes If Tradition haue preserued any thing thereof from being lost let him acquaint vs with it or if he cannot do so let him giue vs leaue to take him for that we finde him a meere babler giuing himselfe libertie to say any thing without feare or wit 20. W. BISHOP Now insteed of M. Perkins his fift reason for vs of milke and strong meate wishing him a messe of Pap for his childish proposing of it I will set downe some authorities out of the written word in proofe of traditions Our Sauior said being at the point of his passion * Iohn 16.12 that he had many things to say vnto his Apostles but they could not as then beare them * Acts 1. Our Sauior after his resurrection appeared often vnto his Disciples speaking with them of the kingdome of God of which little is written in any of the Euangelists * 1. Cor. 11. I commend you brethren that you remember me in all things and keepe the Traditions euen as I haue deliuered them to you * 1. Tim. 6. O Timothy keepe the depositum that is that which I deliuered thee to keepe * 2. Tim. 1. Hold fast by the holy Ghost the good things committed vnto thee to keepe which was as S. Chrysostome and Theophylact expound the true doctrine of Christ the true sence of holy Scriptures the right administration of the Sacraments and gouernement of the Church to which alludeth that auncient holy Martyr S. Irenaeus * Lib. 3. c. 4. saying that the Apostles layd vp in the Catholicke Church as in a rich treasury all things that belong to the truth S. Iohn who was the last of the Apostles left aliue said * Epist 3.13 that he had many other things to write not idle or superfluous but would not commit them to ink and pen but referred them to be deliuered by word of mouth And to specifie for example sake some two or three points of greatest importance where is it written that our Sauiour the Sonne of God is ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ that is of the same substance with his Father Where is it written that the holy Ghost proceedeth from the Sonne as well as from the Father Where is it written that there is a Trinitie that is three persons really distinct in one and the very same substance And that there is in our Sauiour Christ Iesus no person of man but the substance of God and man subsisting in the second person of the Trinitie Be not all and euery of these principal articles of the Christian faith and most necessary to be beleeued of the learned and yet not one of them in expresse termes written in any part of the holy Bible Wherefore we must either admit traditions or leaue the highest mysteries of our Christian faith vnto the discretion and courtesie of euery wrangler as shall be more declared in the argument following R. ABBOT The messe of pap hath scalded M. Bishops mouth and he would faine put it off to M. Perkins He is ashamed of the childishnesse of this reason yet not denying it to be one of theirs but onely blaming M. Perkins his maner of proposing it whereas we imagine he would haue done it if he had knowne how to haue proposed it in better sort But because he is so desirous to passe it ouer let vs

h Luk. 12 21. So is euery one that gathereth riches to himselfe and is not rich in God Wo be to them that are rich in this world and are not rich in God but a man may be rich in this world yet rich in God also by acknowledging spiritually his owne pouerty in himself and receiuing all things of Gods mercy Seeing therefore a man may be rich according to this world and yet none of them to whom Christ saith Wo be to rich men surely nothing hindereth but that a man may be rich and yet may be one of those poore whom Christ pronounceth to be blessed and therfore M. Bishops argument is idle and proueth nothing lesse then that Christs sentence is to be vnderstood of voluntary pouertie so that still it remaineth good that the vow of pouerty and beggery is the voluntary casting away of the blessing of God and the vndertaking of his curse 20. W. BISHOP Thus M. Perkins his texts of Scripture against pouertie failing him he fetcheth about another way saying that it is a rule of the holy Ghost He that will not labour namely in some speciall and warrantable calling must not eate * Thess 2. Ans I allow both the text and the glosse and find nothing there against religious persons whose calling is speciall perfect and therefore best warrantable not so saith he because they giue theÌ„selues to prayer fasting What a profane stupiditie is this Is not a life giuen to prayer and fasting agreeable to the wil of God and lawes of his church albeit many religious men do ouer and besides very great seruices to Gods church in preaching teaching and writing of most learned books But suppose they did nothing else but fast and pray did they not very well deserue their sustenance yes much better then they which trauell all the yeare about the prouiding of it For in vaine do men labor if God blesse not their worke with seasonable weather which he doth rather at the prayer and instance of such good innocent soules that are to be fed with it then for the Plough-mans owne labors sake And if by their fasting watching and such like afflictions of their bodies they do partly satisfie for our superfluous pampering of the flesh and teach vs by their good example to bridle and correct it do they not deserue at our hands bodily sustenance And who better performes all duties of the second table then they being most obedient to all their superiours and not hurting their neighbour in life person or any maner of their goods And so in their seuerall callings offend no honest men and do much good both vnto the Church and Common-wealth R. ABBOT If S. Paul wheÌ„ he said a 2. Thess 3.10 He that wil not labor let him not eate did take praying to be laboring then the Messalians had as wel to answer for themselues as the begging Friers because they took as great paines in praying as the begging Friers caÌ„ do yea those idle loiterers concerning whoÌ„ the Apostle speaketh had sufficient to answer for them selues that there was reason for them to eate because they did pray Surely M. Bishop is a good proctor for such thriftles drones who wil be content to pray apace as much as the Friers do if that may be reckned a labor for which to require their meate But praier is a coÌ„mon duty seruice of all callings not a distinct labor of any one Till M. Bish blotted this paper I think it was neuer read that praier fasting was a calling saue only in the conceit of those Euchites or Messalians of whoÌ„ I spake albeit they indeed fasted not But wheras M. Perkins saith that men liuing apart giuing themselues only to praier and fasting do liue in no calling M. Bishop because he cannot proue the contrary beggeth it What a profane stupiditie is this saith he Is not a life giuen to prayer and fasting put in as it should be only to prayer and fasting agreeable to the wil of God and lawes of his Church You should not haue asked the question M. Bishop but haue proued it so to be because therin stood the question which it was your stupidity not to see The argument propoundeth to you that it is necessary for euery man to labor in some calling that he may haue according to Gods ordinaÌ„ce wherof to eate It alledgeth that to liue apart to be giuen only to praier fasting is not to labor in a calling and do you answer al with Is it not so To make vp the matter he addeth that many religious men do ouer and beside very great seruices to Gods church in preaching teaching and writing of most learned books Ye say wel M. Bishop such meÌ„ because they labor may iustly eate but these matters are accidental and their vow religion may stand without them and therfore the matter is not answered by them I admit that which he saith but there might here worthy stories be told of the preachings of their Friers of all sorts But M. Bishop himselfe knowing that this is but impertinent goeth on Suppose they did nothing else but fast and pray did they not very well deserue their sustenance If they did nothing but fast pray it should be with them according to the Apostles rule because then they should eate nothing But now beside fasting and praying they eate also which the Apostle sayth they should not do because they do not worke They fast a little that they may eate enough and there is no idle lozell but would be content with their fasting so that he may haue their diet otherwise In a word M. Bishop may keepe his opinion to him selfe but the Apostle sufficiently teacheth vs that because they labour not therefore they do not so well deserue sustenance as they who labour all the yeare for the prouiding of it As for the blessing of God it dependeth not vpon the prayers of such who haue no warrant for the state of life wherein they pray and the ploughmans prayer is more acceptable to God then theirs because he followeth that rule of life which God hath taught who neuer prescribed any rule of Monkish trade Good innocent soules saith he whereas by all stories it appeareth that there hath not bene a more stinking vermine vpon the earth euen some of their owne men haue discouered them so to be But M. Bishop is not satisfied vnlesse to folly he adde blasphemie saying that they satisfie for our superfluous pampering of the flesh Impious man Christ is the satisfaction for our sins what haue we to do with the satisfactions of wretched men who damnably sinne in those things wherein they take vpon them to satisfie for others sins And what M. Bishop is there any superfluous pampering of the flesh to be found amongst you Alas how haue ye deceiued vs all this while We thought that you had bene nothing but spirit and that superfluous pampering of the

Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Text snippets containing the quad