not Apostolical traditions which appeare certainely so to be and yet woorthily we reiect those vnwritten doctrines and counterfet traditions of the Papists which are falsely fathered vpon the Apostles It is by these vnwritten doctrines and counterfet traditions that the grounds of our faith are impeached and shaken We therefore cannot be said to shake the grounds of faith who retaine the meere simplicity of those grounds and refuse all other strange and bastard stuffe but they shake the grounds of faith who become patrons of such tradition coloured with the names of the Apostles when notwithstanding they plainely crosse the written doctrine of the Apostles 2. W. BISHOP But let vs descend to the particulars wherein the truth will appeare more plainely Thus beginneth Master PERKINS with the Creede First of all it must be considered that some of the principall doctrines beleeued in the Church of Rome are that the Bishop of Rome is the Vicar of Christ and head of the Catholike Church that there is a fire of Purgatory that Images of God and Saints are to be placed in the Church and worshipped that Praier is to be made to Saints departed that there is a propitiatory sacrifice daily offered in the Masse for the sinnes of the quicke and the dead These points are of that moment that without them the Roman religion cannot stand c. And yet marke the Apostles Creed which hath beene thought to containe all necessary points of religion to be beleeued and hath therefore beene called the key and rule of faith This Creede I say hath not any of these points nor the expositions made thereof by the ancient Fathers nor any other Creed or confession of faith made by any Councell or Church for the space of many hundred yeeres This is a plaine proofe to any indifferent man that these bee new articles of faith neuer knowen in the Apostolike Church and that the Fathers and Councels could not finde any such articles of faith in the bookes of the old and new Testament Answer is made that all these points of doctrine are beleeued vnder the article I beleeue the Catholike Church the meaning whereof they will haue to be this I beleeue all things which the Catholike Church holdeth and teacheth to be beleeued If this bee as they say wee must beleeue in the Church that is put our confidence in the Church for the manifestation and the certainety of all doctrine necessary to saluation And thus the eternall truth of God the Creatour shall depend vpon the determination of the creature And the written word of God in this respect is made insufficient as though it had not plainely reuealed all points of doctrine pertaining to saluation And the ancient Churches haue beene farre ouer-secene that did not propound the former points to be beleeued as articles of faith but left them to these latter times Thus farre Master PERKINS Wherein are hudled vp many things confusedly I will answere briefly and distinctly to euery point The first is that in the Apostles Creede are contained all points of religion necessary to be beleeued which is most apparantly false as the Protestants themselues must needes confesse or else grant that it is not necessary to beleeue the King to be Supreame-head of the Church or that the Church is to be gouerned by Bishops or that we are iustified by Christs iustice imputed to vs or that there be but two Sacraments or that the Church seruice must be said in the vulgar tongue or that all things necessary to be beleeued to saluation are contained in the Scriptures To be short not one article of their religion which is contrary to ours is conteined in this Creede of the Apostles therefore to affirme as he doth all necessary points of religion to be contained in this Creede is to cast their owne religion flat to the ground and to teach that not one point of it is to be beleeued this Creede may neuerthelesse be called the key and rule of faith because it containeth the principall points of the Christian religion and doth open as it were the doore vnto all the rest and guide a man certainely vnto the knowledge of them by teaching vs to beleeue the Catholike Church which being the pillar and ground of truth 1. Tim. 3.15 Ioh. 16.13 directed and guided by the spirit of truth will alwaies instruct her obedient children in all truth necessary to saluation Then saith M. PERKINS The eternall truth of God the Creatour shall depend on the determination of the creature Nothing lesse for Gods truth is most sincere and certaine in it selfe before any declaration of the church but we poore creatures that are subiect to mistaking and error should not so certainely vnderstand and know that truth of God vnlesse hee had ordained and appointed such a skilfull and faithfull Mistris and interpreter to assure vs both what is his word and what is the true meaning of it Like as pure gold is not made perfect in it self by the Gold-smithes touch-stone but other men are thereby assured that it is true and pure gold euen so the word of God doth not borrow his truth from the Church but the true children of God are by the holy Church assured which is the same his word If we did hold as we do not that the written word containeth all points of doctrine necessary to saluation yet were it most necessary to relie vpoÌ„ the Catholike churches declaration both to be assured which books of scriptures be Canonicall which not whereupon Saint Augustine a man of far better iudgement than any of these daies said Con. Epist. Iud. cap. 5. that he would not beleeue the Gospel vnlesse the authority of the church mooued him therunto as also to vnderstand them truly because the words of holy Scripture without the true meaning and sense of them do but deceiue men and lead them into error and to that end haue alwaies beene and yet are by Heretikes abused to draw others after them into destruction The like may be said of other ancient Creeds and confessions of faith which holding the Apostles Creed did adde some few points vnto it namely such as were in those daies called into question by Heretikes of greater fame and who were followed of many not touching in particular diuers other articles generally beleeued of all true Christians or else by soâ—e fewe and obscure men onely questioned Wherefore to argue that no other points of faith are to be beleeued but such as are expressed in ancient Creeds is to cut off a great part of our faith Lastly it is most vntrue to say that those ancient Fathers and Councels knew not of these articles of faith by him mentioned for they haue most plainely taught them in their writings yea and expresly condemned of heresie most of the contrary positions now againe reuiued and holden by the Protestants as in those seuerall questions I haue before prooued R. ABBOT How M. Pirkins vnderstood that all necessary
seede of Abraham t cap. 9.28 We be Moses disciples u vers 41. We see x Ier. 8 8. We are wise and the law of the Lord is with vs y ca. 18.18 The law shall not perish from the Priest nor counsell from the wise nor the word from the Prophet and yet they persecuted Christ the sonne of God who only is the Truth How then may we now be assured that the Church of Rome is not the same to the church of Christ as they then were to Christ himselfe How may we poore creatures certainely vnderstand that those rich creatures are not subiect to error and mistaking as well as we Well if we will not beleeue it we may chuse but assurance M. Bishop can yeeld none He can tell vs a discourse what Christ said to Peter but that Christ euer spake either of Pope or Cardinall he can shew vs nothing And yet as if this matter were cleere he telleth vs of this church of theirs that whereas we are subiect to mistaking and errour God hath ordained and appointed the same to be a skilfull and faithfull mistresse and interpreter to assure vs both what is his word and what is the true meaning of it But againe we aske him where hath God so ordained and appointed in what Scripture hath he written it or by what words hath he expressed it that the church which he meaneth should bee our mistresse to tell vs what is Gods word what is the true meaning of it If he haue euidence authority for it let him shew it if he haue not what shall we thinke of him that dareth thus to bely the maiesty of God But if he considered the matter aright he would conceiue that those rich creatures of his haue no other or better meanes to assure what is Gods word and what is the meaning of it than other poore creatures haue By what touchstone they can make triall thereof by the same can we also as well as they Which comparison of the gold-smith and the touchstone which he himselfe vseth if it be rightly explicated serueth notably to set foorth the fraud and falshood of that church for which he pleadeth True it is that the church in this behalfe may rightly bee compared to the Goldsmith Now the Gold-smith for the discerning of true and perfect gold doth not take his owne fingers ends but goeth to the touch-stone and no otherwise can hee either make triall himselfe or giue assurance thereof to other men In like sort therefore the church which is the Gold-smith must vse a touch-stone for the assuring of that which it propoundeth to bee receiued and beleeued Now then whereas M. Bishop saith that we must rely vpon the churches declaration to be assured which bookes of Scripture be Canonicall I answer him that we cannot be assured thereof by the churches declaration vnlesse the church declare it and manifest it by the touch-stone The touch-stone whereby we are to take assurance heereof is the constant and perpetuall tradition and testimony of the former church And this testimony we first deriue from the church of the Iewes z Rom. 3.2 to whom the words of God were committed and to whose Scriptures a Luk. 24.44 the law and the Prophets and the Psalmes and to no other b Aug. cont Gaudent lib. 2. cap. 23. quibus dominus testimonium perhibet tanquam testibus suis Christ himselfe hath giuen testimony as witnesses of himselfe reckoning them for c Luk. 24.27 all the Scriptures and wherof the Iewes in their dispersion giue acknowledgment vntill this day God so prouiding that d Aust in Psa 58. Per omnes gentes dispersi sunt ludaei testes iniquitatis suae veritatis nostrae ipsi habent codices de quibus prophetatus est Chrislus in Ps 56. Codicem portat Iudaeus vnde credat Christianus Christian faith should be prooued out of those bookes which are acknowledged for true by them that are enemies thereto This testimony the Christian church receiued of the Apostles and hath continued the same together with the acknowledgment of those other bookes of the new testament which by the Apostles and Euangelists were added to the former What bookes then haue had this generall and vndoubted auerment and witnesse of the church continued from time to time those and no other are to be holden for Canonicall bookes and this is the true touch-stone for trial of certaine and vndoubted scriptures By which touchstone the church of Rome is found to bee not a faithfull Mistresse but a false harlot bringing her bastards into the Church and forcing men to take them for lawfully begotten And whereas it is the tradition and declaration of the former church which hath beene from the beginning by which both they and we are to be instructed as touching the true bookes of Canonicall Scripture they force vpon vs the tradition of their owne church now deliuered vpon their owne word howsoeuer contrary to that which the church formerly hath declared If we follow the declaration of the ancient church then are no other bookes to be taken for Canonicall but what are now accknowledged and approoued in our Church the same onely being testified concerning the old testament by the Church of the Iewes concerning both new and old by the whole Christian church both the Greeke and Latine the Easterne and Westerne churches as e Of Traditions sect 17. before hath been declared But the church of Rome perceiuing the authorising of some other writings to be likely to gaine credit to some broken wares whence her thrift and gaine ariseth hath taken vpon her very presumptuously as a Mistresse or rather a goddesse to giue diuine authority to those bookes reiecting the testimony of that church which in this behalfe should bee mistresse both to her and vs. In a word whatsoeuer is to be attributed to the church in this respect it is idlely by M. Bishop referred to the church of Rome as if all other churches must rely vpon her declaration we our selues being able by the touchstone to make triall of true Scriptures as well as the church of Rome and therefore there being no cause why we should rely vpon them more than they vpon vs. And as vainely doth he apply to his purpose the saying of Saint Austin that he should not beleeue the Gospell except the authority of the church mooued him thereunto there being nothing therein meant but what may bee applied to the church England as well as to the church of Rome Saint Austin speaking generally of the vniuersall church thorowout the world without any maner speciall intendment of the church of Rome But how leudly they abuse those words of Austin wholly against his meaning and purpose I haue f Of Traditions sect 22. before sufficiently declared and neede not heere to repeat againe As for the churches declaration for vnderstanding the Scripture that is also to be tried and made
good by the touchstone because no exposition or sense of Scripture is to be admitted the doctrine whereof is not to be iustified by other Scripture and they that bring other senses and meanings do but deceiue men and leade them into errour as other heretikes formerly haue done and as the Papists now doe abusing the Scriptures to draw others after them into destruction Heereof also enough hath beene said g Of Traditions sect 21. before whereof I wish the Reader duely to consider for his satisfaction in this point That which he saith of other ancient Creeds and Confessions of faith that they containe not all points of Christian doctrine I eaily admit but yet let him vnderstand that it is a maine preiudice against them that neither any ancient Creed nor any exposition of the Creed or confession of faith conteineth sundry pointes which they now make to be matters of the meaning of the Creede Let him shew that euer any ancient Creed or expositour of the Creed did vnderstand or deliuer that the name of the Catholike church in the Creed hath any speciall reference to the Church of Rome that the Catholike church is to be defined as they now define it by being subiect to the bishop of Rome that the certaine declaration of the Canonicall bookes and of the true sense of Scripture is alwaies infallibly to be expected from the sentence of that Church that all Christians are fully to beleeue and wholly to relie vpon that Church for resolution of all points of faith necessarie to saluation Which and such other points made by them matters of the Creed because neuer any ancient writer hath found to be conteined or intended in the Creed therefore we iustly affirme them to be new Creed-makers coiners of new articles of faith and thereby peruerters and corrupters of the true Christian faith As concerning the Articles mentioned by M. Perkins now holden by the Romish Church that the Pope is Christs Vicar and head of the Catholike Church that there is a purgatorie fire after this life that images of God and of Saints are to be worshipped that praier is to be made to Saints departed and their intercession to bee required that there is a propitiatorie sacrifice daily offered in the Masse for the sinnes of quicke and dead M. Bishop answereth that the Fathers haue most plainly taught them in their writings and expresly condemned of heresie most of the contrary positions But what Fathers are they and in what writings haue they so done Surely if the Bishop of Rome in the ancient Church had beene taken to bee the Vicar of Christ and head of the Catholike church it cannot be but that we should haue very currant and frequent and memorable testimonie thereof as a matter vniuersally receiued and euery where practised But now let M. Bishop shew vs one let him shew so much as one that for diuers hundreds of yeeres after Christ did euer dreame of any such thing Which though indeed he cannot doe yet hee telleth vs of that and the rest that in those seuerall questions he hath before prooued what he saith whereas hee hath not spoken of any more of these points saue onely one and in that one point cannot be said to haue prooued any thing because whatsoeuer hee hath said standeth hitherto reprooued And surely if he haue no better proofes than hitherto he hath brought in all the questions that hee hath handled the Protestants will but scorne him as a very vnproouing disputer and aduise him to bestow his time a while longer in the Schooles to know what it is to prooue 3. W. BISHOP Touching beleeuing in the Church which he thrusteth in by the way we vse not that phrase as the very Creed sheweth following therein S. Augustine with others who hold that to beleeue in a thing is to make it our Creatour by giuing our whole heart vnto it in which sense we beleeue not in Saints nor in the Church albeit some other ancient Doctors take the words to beleeue in not so precisely but say that we may beleeue in the Church and in Saints that is beleeue certainly that the Catholike church is the onely true company of Christians and that to the lawfull gouernours thereof it appeâ—taineth to declare both which bookes be Canonicall and what is the true meaning of all doubtfull places in them so we beleeue the Saints in heauen to heare our prayers to be carefull to pray for vs and to bee able to obtaine by intreaty much at Gods hands in whose high fauour they liue Thus much in answer vnto that which M. PERKINS obiecteth in generall Now to that he saith in particular R. ABBOT a Greg. Nazia de sp sancto orat 6. Sâ—â—reatuÌ„ est quo pacto in ipsum eredimu c. Non enim idem est in aliquem credere de eo credere nam illud diuimt atis est hoc cuiusuis rei It is one thing saith Gregory Nazianzene to beleeue in any one another to beleeue of or concerning him the one belongeth to the Godhead the other is vsed of euery thing And heereby hee prooueth that the holy Ghost is God because wee beleeue in the holy Ghost By which argument our Sauiour Christ also teacheth vs to acknowledge him to be God when he saith b Ioh. 14.1 Yee beleeue in God beleeue also in me where c Hilar. de Trin. lib. 9. Vniens se fidei dei naturae eius vniuit c. deumse per id docens cum in eum credendum sit ab his qui in deum credant vniting himselfe to the beleefe of God saith Hilarie he vniteth himselfe also to his nature thereby teaching that he himselfe is God for that they who beleeue in God must beleeue in him I might further enlarge this point by the testimonies and expositions of d Aug. in Ioan. tract 29. de ciu dei l. 18. ca. 54. Euseb Emissen Ruffin Venant in symbol Apost Austin Eusebius Emissenus Ruffinus Venantius and others who all acknowledge that that phrase belongeth to God and is not to bee applied to any creature But it shall not neede because the Elucidatour of the Romane Catechisme according to the doctrine of the Catechisme it self as he pretendeth though quite contrary both to their doctrine and practise otherwise doth tell vs that e Elucidat Catech Roman c. 9. q. 5. Cùm dicimus nos credere in deum patrem in filium in sp sanctum phrasis haec loquendi significat nos ita credere deum patrem filium spiritu sanctuÌ„ vt etiam in eis omnem fiduciam nostram collocemus quam in deo solo non autem in creaturis ponere possumus ex quibus tamen ecclesia composita est when wee say wee beleeue in God the Father in the Sonne in the holy Ghost this phrase of speaking doth signifie that wee so beleeue God the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost as that also we place all
when I saw M. Bishop thus confidently auouching that I belied them I thought vndoubtedly that euen for shame in their latter impressions they had altered those words neuer imagining that he would be so shamelesse as to charge me with belying them in a thing apparent to the sight of euery man Thus I meant in simplicity to haue passed it with referring the Reader to the old books though it were changed in the new But now I pray thee to doe the same that in the end for more assurance I thought good to doe Looke to their edition of the Canon Law printed at Paris Anno. Dom. 1601. and there thou shalt finde it still as I cited it i Extrauag Ioan. 22. cap. Cum inter in glossa Parisiis Anno dom 1601 Cum priuilegio Gregorij 13. aliorum principum Credere dominum Deum nostrum Papam sic non potuisse statuere c. haereticum censeretur To beleeue that our Lord God the Pope might not so decree should be accounted heresie Now whether shall we thinke heere to be more impudent the Pope or M. Bishop Surely the Popes sin is the greater who by k Optat. lib. 3. Passus est homines per se sie iurare tanquam per deum in quo si vnusquisque hominuÌ„ errauerat ipse prohibere debuerat cùm non prohibuit deus sibi visus est Optatus his argument because he doth not forbid this stile taketh vpon him to be our Lord God the Pope M. Bishop hath some grace to be ashamed of it but little grace hath he to deny that which is so open for euery man to see By the hardnesse of his forehead in this thou maiest take occasion to esteeme what hee is in all the rest 12. Againe he saith that it is l Answer to the Epistle sect 13. p. 119. a lie which I cite out of the Decretals that they say the Pope is not a meere man The words are m Decretal Greg. de translat episc Quantò Non puri hominis sed veri Dei vicem gerit in terris Where I doubted not but that by a phrase of speech often vsed where the word of double gouernement hath his proper signification onely in respect of the latter not of the former which it gouerneth the meaning is that he hath not the condition of a meere man but is the vicar of the true God And this meaning is elsewhere confirmed where it is said that n Sext. proaem inglossa Ostenditur per mutation mâ—nominis facta mutatio hominis cùm enim prâ—ùs esset purus homo nunc vicem veri deigeâ—it interris by the changing of the Popes name is imported the changing of the man for where he was before a meere man now he is Gods vicar vpon the earth leauing it to be vnderstood that therefore now he is not a meere man But yet because I knew they might make another construction of those words I would not thereupon rest the proofe of that that I said that the Canonists perswaded the Pope that he was not a meer man but added for that purpose their noble verse whereby they say to the Pope o Clement Prooem in glâ—ssa Nec deus es nec homo quasi neuterâ—es inter vtrunque Thou art neither God nor man but as it were a neuter or mungrell betwixt both euen as elsewhere it is said p Dist 96. Constantinus in glossa In hac parte Papa non est homo sed vicarius dei The Pope in this behalfe is not a man but the vicar of God Tell vs now M. Bishop did I lie or not or doe not you rather dally with your Reader in cauilling thus vainely at one place when you saw the thing that I said purposely iustified by another Surely you take a wrong course this is not the way to recouer the credit that you desire 13. His next quarrell is concerning a place of Beda I alledge out of him that q Answer to the epistle sect 31. pag. 199. in his time the Scriptures were in foure seueral languages of so many seueral nations in this Iland beside the Latin tongue common to them all thereout to search the knowledge of Gods truth This he saith is a lie also but to perswade his Reader that it is so he leaueth out the words wherein I conceiued the proofe to stand The words of Beda are these r Beda hist eccles gent. Anglor lib. 1 cap. 1. Haec in praesenti iuxtra numerum librorum quibus lex diâ—ina scripta est quinque gentium linguis vnam candemque summae veritatis verae sublimitatis scientiam scrutatur confitetur Anglorum videlicet Britonum Scotorum Pictorum Latinorum quae meditatione scirpturarum facta est omnium communis This Iland at this present according to the number of bookes wherein the Law of God is written doth in the languages of fiue Nations search and confesse one and the same knowledge of the highest truth and of true sublimity or height namely of the English the Britons the Scots the Picts and the Latines which by meditation of the Scriptures is become common to all the rest Where I confesse that in those words according to the number of bookes wherein the law of God is written I vnderstood Beda his meaning to be that they studied Gods truth according to the Canonical Scriptures which are contained in a certaine number of bookes not conceiuing such was then my dulnesse that it might be taken that as the Law of God is written by Moses in fiue bookes so this Iland in fiue languages did study and search the knowledge of Gods truth which in further waighing the words I since considered Now M. Bishop to shew his fidelity leaueth out those words imagining that the Reader might perhaps take my first meaning to be as likely as this latter These be S. Bedes wordes saith he This Iland at that time did study and confesse one and the same knowledge of truth of the highest truth he should haue said in fiue sundry languages But if he had meant honesty and plaine dealing he would not haue done thus he would haue set downe the words and left them to the consideration of the Reader that it might appeare what it was that might induce me to that that I affirmed thereupon Albeit setting those words aside I would aske him and he indeed should heere haue told vs how this Iland should in fiue languages study and search the knowledge of the highest truth if they had not in fiue languages the bookes of the highest truth Tell vs M. Bishop we desire to know of you and if you would needes answer the place you should haue declared it how they should study the highest truth without hauing the bookes of the highest truth And that they had so we cannot doubt because it was said by Theodorâ—tlong before Å¿ Theodoret. de enrand Graecor affectib lib. 5. Hebraici libri non
man should answer him in this sort The thing that he reporteth is indeed a very lie and a tale meerely deuised by themselues but yet it goeth for a tradition at Rome and he will heereupon haue it to be beleeued But that which Holinshed setteth downe is a matter of record extant and to be seene in the ancient u Inter leges S. Edwardi cap. 17. Lambert de priscis Anglor legib lawes of our land and therefore hath testimony sufficient to mooue vs to giue credit vnto it And that the matter might not rest vpon the silly poore credit as he speaketh of Holinshed onely of whom notwithstanding I may assure any man that he was a man of much more fidelity and honesty than M. Bishop is I cited also Stow as a witnesse thereof a man knowen to haue beene too well affected to the Romish religion so as that for his partiality that way hee is commonly alledged by themselues as a most authenticke authour specially by Parsons in his three Conuersions of purpose by him to thwart M. Fox the vttermost he can and therefore of whom M. Bishop cannot doubt but that he found it in good record x In lib. Constâ—â— tut London as he professeth to haue done or else he would haue made no such mention of it Now what might be the cause that he could heere see Holinshed and could not see Stow but that he desireth to make some shew of exception where notwithstanding he himselfe knoweth that iustly he can take none 7. Now we see that Stow for countries sake findeth more fauour with him than Polydore Virgil whom I cited as testifying Siricius Bishop of Rome to be y Answer to the epistle sect 8. pag. 60. a noueller in forbidding the mariage of Priests and he saith that I prooue it by the worshipfull verdict of Polydore Virgil Surely Polydore Virgil was no Protestant he was a writer of their own and deserued well of them a man of great learning and knowledge of history one that would write nothing in fauour of vs and therefore his verdict in reason and equity should be strong for vs. Yea that which he wrot he wrot by the warrant z Polyd. Virgil de inuent rer lib. 5. cap. 4. Siricius primus sacerdotibus diaconis vt ait Gratianus dist 82. coniugio interdixit of Gratian the Collectour of the Decrees the founder of their Canon Law and saith no more than the receiued Glosse of the Canon Law mentioneth as a thing commonly receiued a Dist 84. Cum in praeterit in glossa Dicunt quòd olim sacerdotes pâ—terant contrahere antâ— Siricium Men say that of old before the time of Siricius Priests might marry Being then a man of so good worth and speaking vpon so good ground doth M. Bishop with the flout of a worshipful verdict thus scornfully turne him off But it is nothing with him thus to spurne at their owne writers when they stand in his way and therefore telleth vs afterwards that Matthew Paris the Monke who wrot three hundred yeares ago b Reproofe Pag. 2â—9 did ignorantly and saucily reprehend Gregory the seuenth for forbidding men to be present at the Masses of maried Priests whereas c Matth. Paris in Willielm 1. ex Chronico Sigeberti anno dom 1074. Matthew wrot the conceit and opinion of many that liued in that time and borrowed the same from Sigebert the Monke that liued before him 8. I come at length to examine how in the processe he maketh good that horrible crimination which he hath expressed in the title of his booke of my abusing mangling misapplying falsifying both scriptures and fathers Now whereas a man in the entrance of this accusation would expect some great and waighty matter which might worke some impression in the Reader the more strongly to apprehend the rest that followeth see how coldly hee beginneth for want of better matter with a ridiculous and childish cauill that by the very beginning it may be conceiued how idlely he carrieth himselfe in his whole discourse In my Epistle d Epist dedicat to the Answer to D. Bishops epistle to the Kings Maiesty I noted the necessary vse of the course intended by his Highnesse as touching the answering of the dedications and supplications of these Popish Proctours for the discouering of the impudency of the petitioners for the gaining of such as may be gained to the acknowledgment of Gods truth and that as Saint Bernard saith though the heretike arise not from his filth yet the Church may be confirmed by the faith From these words he taketh his example of my misapplying the sentences of the fathers because Bernard meant not thereby e Pag 7. to disswade any man from the Romane faith and doth in that discourse describe those heretikes to be such as denied Purgatory and praier for the dead and inuocation of Saints c. Where I pray thee first to obserue that the words by me alledged import only a phrase of speech no sentence or argument for proofe They serue fitly to signifie the thing by me intended but for any waight they haue one way or other it had beene all one to haue set them downe as mine owne words without adding Bernards name And who knoweth it not to be a thing vsuall to borrow the phrases and speeches of Poets Oratours Philosophers yea of heretikes of schismatikes of Apocryphall bookes or writings without respect what they meant that spake them so long as they fitly expresse the minde of him that vseth them Bernard meant not by those words to disswade men from the Romane religion no more did Aratus the Poet meane to disswade men from Paganisme by those words f Acts 17.28 For we are also his generation the generation of God and yet Saint Paul vseth them to that purpose Neither did Menander by those words g 1. Cor. 15.33 Euill words corrupt good maners intend to reproue them that denied the resurrection of the dead which he himselfe beleeued not and yet the same Apostle forbeareth not to turne them that way and will M. Bishop enter an action against the Apostle for misapplying the Poets words Neither did Petilian the Donatist meane it well and yet who doubteth but that by his words it may be truly said h Apud Aug. cont lit Petil. lib. 2. cap. 8. Laqueo traditor perijt laqueum talibus dereliquit Iudas the traitour perished with a halter and to such as himselfe he left the halter Let M. Bishop take an example of this vsage from M. Higgons their late conuert who alleaging it to be said of him by the Apostles words i Gal. 5.7 He did run well who did let him that he did not obey the truth saith thereto thus k Motiues booke 2. in the preface Vnto these men I returne a louing a faithful and iust answer founded in the demand of an eminent professour of their Gospell Will you be any longer
modò in Graecum idioma conuersi sunt sed in Romanam quoque linguam Aegyptiam c. semelque vt dicam in linguas â—mnes quibus omnes gentes in hunc diem vtuntur that the bookes of the old Testament were translated noâ— onely into the Greeke tongue but also the Latine Aegyptian Persian Indian Armenian Scythian all tongues which all Nations vsed at that time But of that that Beda saith that the Latine tongue by meditation of the Scriptures became common to the rest M. Bishop maketh a very poore and simple collection that they needed not to haue learned the Latin tongue for the studying of the Scriptures if the Scriptures had beene translated into their owne mother languages As if he should say that because we haue the scriptures now translated into our English tongue therefore we need not for the studying of the Scriptures learne the Latine Greeke and Hebrew tongues The absurdity of which connexion is such as that we may thinke M. Bishop out of his wits that would so much disgrace himselfe as to be the authour of it 14. Another notorious vntruth and most malicious slander he saith I cast out against Austin the Moonke whom he tearmeth our English Apostle of whom I say in my answer that t Answer to the Epistle sect 31. p. 198. he being offended at the bishops of the Britons for that they refused to be subiect to his Romish authority prouoked against them Ethelbert then King of Kent by whose procurement an army of Infidels was sent to slay them who cruelly and vnmercifully performed the slaughter not sparing them who in their shirts came foorth to them to intreat mercy For the iustifying wherof he saith I can produce no ancient authour but am glad to shroud my selfe vnder an old namelesse Chronicle cited by the Arch-liar and late partiall writer Iewel I doe not maruell that Bishop Iewel in his reckoning is a liar because he knoweth that where Bishop Iewel is not taken for a liar there he and his fellowes must be accounted so to be But as touching the story if his eies had serued him he might haue seene that I cited not the old Cronicle onely alleaged by Bishop Iewel but also Galfridus Monumetensis whom in the beginning of that narration I quoted as a witnesse therof who out of the ancient British story reporteth that u Galfrid Monumetens lib. 11. cap. 12. Augustino petenti ab Episcopis Britonibus subiectionem c. Dinoâ—t diuersis argumentationibus ipsos ei nullam subiectionem debere respondit Et. c. 13. Edelbertus rex Cantiorum vt vidit Britones dedignantes subiectionem Augustino facere c. hoc graâ—issime ferens EdelfriduÌ„ regem Northanumbrorum caeteros regulos Saxonum instimulauit vt collecto grandi exercitu in ciuitatem Bangor Abbatem Dinoot caeteros Clericos qui eos spernerent perditum irent c. Edelfridus ciuitate capta cuÌ„ intellexisset causam aduentus MonachoruÌ„ vt pro salute populi sui orarentâ— iussit in eos primum arma verti et sic mille duâ—enti corum in ipsa die martyrio decorati regni caelestis adepti sunt sedem in the city of Bangor there was a most noble Church of 1200. Monks all liuing with the labour of their hands Their Abbot was named Dinoâ—ch a man maruellously well learned who by diuers arguments made it appeare when Austin required the Bishops to be subiect vnto him that they ought him no subiection Edelbert therefore the King of Kent assoone as he saw them refuse to yeeld obedience to Austin and despise his preaching sturred vp Edelfride other princes of the Saxons to gather a great army and to goe to Bangor to destroy Dinoochand his Clergy Who taking the city commanded the swords of his men to be turned first vpon the Monks and so twelue hundred of them the same day decked with Martyrdome entred the kingdome of heauen By which record it is plaine that though that slaughter were not committed by Ethelbert as M. Bishop saith yet by the procurement of Ethelbert as I affirmed it was done Albeit our English Chronicle cited x Defence of the Apology part 5. in the beginning by M. Iewell deliuereth that both the Kings Ethelbert and Edelfride ioyned their power together and so the murther was committed by them both Austin also meeting them at Leicester as they were going to the place where that act was done Moreouer he citeth a Chronicle written in French by one y Ibid. Thomas Gray aboue two hundred yeeres agoe wherein it is said that Austin being so refused of the Bishops and other learned of the Britans made such complaint thereof to Ethelbert King of Kent that foorthwith he leuied his power and marched against them and slew them in most cruell wise hauing no more regard of mercy then a woolfe hath vpon a sheep So then it should seeme that neither Austin nor Ethelbert were free of that bloudy and cruell murther howsoeuer M. Bishop doe his good will to cleere them both Yea by that which Beda reporteth it may be well coniectured that Austins hands were not free of it for that he threatned them when he saw they would not yeeld to him z Beda hist li. 2. cap. 2. fertur minitans praedixisse quòd si pacem cum fratribus accipere nollent bellum ab hostibus forent accepturi that if they would not accept of peace with their brethren they should finde warre of their enemies But it may better be coniectured by the same answer as in two written Cronicles in the Library of Baliol Colledge in Oxford it is expressed where it is not they should finde warre of their enemies but * Polychron magn Polychron Monachi Cistrensis Quòd qui pacem cum fratribus accipere nollent bellum ab eisdem forent accepturi if they would not accept of peace with their brethren they should ab eisdem of them or from them finde warre and reuenge plainely importing that he himselfe would procure the same For whereas M. Bishop alleageth out of Beda that Austin was dead and buried many yeeres before that slaughter happened Bishop Iewel sheweth that therein they haue for Austins credit falsified the Latine story of Beda because by Beda translated by Alfred seuen hundred yeeres agoe into the Saxon tongue the contrary plainely appeareth that Austin after that slaughter was aliue Yea he produceth a Charter of the Church of Canterbury yet extant and to be seene which was granted and confirmed by King Ethelbert and by Austin accepted and subscribed the same yeare that that was done whereby it is without all controuersie manifest and cleere that it is false which M. Bishop saith that Austin was dead many yeares before And for some further coniecture of this matter I wil not omit to note out of Doct. Powell his history of Wales certaine verses of that famous and renowmed Poet Ambrosius Telesinus or Taliessin surnamed in his time