purpose for the Apostle saith not that he taught any one article which the coÌ„mon sort of the Iewes did beleeue but such things as the Prophets said should come to passe Who knowes not that they fore-saw and fore-told many thinges that were no articles of faith in their daies and touching these very particulars how many of the Iewes did beleeue that their Messias should die so shameful a death or that Mâ—ises law should be abrogated by their Messias and that the Gospel of Christ should be preached vnto al nations al these vvere great nouels and exceeding scandalous to the body of the Iewes wherefore though some better learned among them and more religiously affected might vnderstand the Prophets speaking of those points yet vvere they farre from the common reach perswasion of that people of the Iewes from these points that the Iewes beleeued al that Christ taught and al that he coÌ„manded his Apostles to deliuer to al nations M. Abbot runneth like a vvandering Planet to a third that al which the Apostles taught they committed to writing vvhich is notwithstanding as false as any of the former for many of them vvho neuer ceassed to preach left not one sentence in vvriting behinde them and he that wrote most did not write the hundreth part of that which he taught by word of mouth We know vvel that they left the Gospel in writing and many other most diuine and rare instructions in their Epistles vvherefore he needed not cite Ireneus to witnesse that which no man is ignorant off but that they wrote al which they preached or al thinges necessary to saluation Ireneus saith not a word but plainly signifieth the contrary vvhere he most sagely counsaileth al men Euseb hist Eccles lib. 5. cap. 19. when any controuersie in religion ariseth to make their recourse to the most ancient Churches where the Apostles had conuersed amongst which he commendeth the Roman for principal of al the rest and from them to take their resolution he then was of opinion that the decision of al controuersies vvere not to be searched out of the vvritten word but rather to be taken from the resolution of the Church De Praescriptionibus Oh but Tertullian saith That beleeuing this we desire to beleeue no more because we first beleeue that there is nothing else for vs to beleeue Beleeuing this beleeuing what the vvritten word only nothing lesse for in that very Treatise his principal drift is to proue that Heretikes cannot be confuted out of the written word but by ancient customes traditions which he calleth Praescriptions but saith he when we beleeue the whole doctrine of Christ both written and deliuered by Apostolical tradition then we desire to beleeue no more of any vpstart Heretikes new deuises To S. Augustine I answere first that those be not his formal wordes which he citeth Secondly admitting the sence if it be rightly taken I say that these wordes Gallat 1. If any man or Angel shal preach any thing besides that which is writen vvhere he alludeth to the Apostles like vvordes are to be vnderstood as S. Augustine himselfe expoundeth those of the Apostle that is If any man shal preach contrary to that which is written For this is his owne interpretation Aug. lib. 17. cont Faust. cap. 3. The Apostle saith not more then you haue receiued but otherwise then you haue receiued for if he had so said he had prejudiced himselfe who desired to come to the Thessalonians to supply what was wanting to their faith He that supplies addeth that wanted but doth not take away any thing that was before so that you see when he faith that nothing is to be preached besides that vvhich is vvritten his meaning is nothing vvhich is contrary to it allowing withal that much more conformable to it may be added for a supply to make it ful and perfect M. Abbot hauing in few lines run ouer 4. large questions to wit first That the Prophets and Patriarkes beleeued no principal points of the Roman faith secondly that Christ deliuered nothing but what the Iewes before hand beleeued thirdly that the Apostles preached the same and no other to the Gentiles fourthly that whatsoeuer they preached they afterwardes wrote he fiftly addeth that the Protestants receiue and beleeue al the written word Whence he wil haue it to follow finally that the Protestants are very good Iewes and doe jumpe just with them in al articles of faith and consequently are true Catholikes so that in M. Abbots reckoning before you can be a true Protestant Catholike you must first become a good honest Iewe. Behold what a round this man is driuen to walke how many brakes of thornes he is forced to breake through ere he can come to make any shew of proofe that the Protestants are Catholikes the matter is so improbable I haue already declared how false euery one of his former foure propositions be the fift is as vntrue and more if more may be then any of the other and he plaies the sophister in it egregiously to begge that which is principally in question How proues he that Protestants receiue and beleeue al the writen word hath he so litle wit and judgement as to thinke that we would freely graunt him that for to omit that they receiue not but reject diuers bookes of the old Testament because they vvere not in the Canon of the Iewes or doubted off by some in the primitiue Church by which reason they might refuse as many of the new doe they rightly vnderstand and beleeue truly al that is vvritten in that blessed booke of Gods vvord nothing lesse Doe they giue credit to our Sauiour IESVS Christ himselfe telling them a Math. 26. v. 27. 28. This is my BODY that shal be broken for you this is my BLOVD that shal be shedde for you b Iohan. 20. vers 23. Whose sinnes yee shal forgiue on earth shal be forgiuen in heauen c Math. 16. vers 18. Thou art PETER and vpon this Rocke wil I build my Church c. and the gates of hel shal not preuaile against it d Math. 20. vers 8. Cal the worke-men that had laboured in his vine-yearde and pay them their hire e Iacob 2. vers 24. Doe you see that by workes a man is justified and not by faith only f Iacob 5. vers 14. Is any man sicke among you let him bring in the Priests of the Church and let them pray ouer them anoiling them with OILE in the name of our LORD c. g Ibidem 16. Confesse therefore your sinnes one to another these and an hundred more plaine texts recorded in that fountaine of life vvherein our Catholike Roman doctrine is deliuered in expresse tearmes to wit The Real presence of Christes body in the Sacrament That Priests haue power to pardon sinnes That Christ built his Church vpon S. Peter That good workes doe in justice deserue eternal life That
Roman Church the faith whereof he in al his life-time imbraced and by al meanes possible confirmed I reserued to this place for the affinity of proper applying the other two sentences taken out of S. Augustine the former is set in the fore-front of his booke and is rehearsed againe in the latter end Eorum dicta contraria c. If I would refel their sayings against vs so often as they impudently resolue not to care what they say so that they speake in what sort soeuer against our positions it would grow vnto an infinite peece of worke This sentence of S. Augustine is pronounced against Infidels who did not beleeue at al in Christ nor professe the Christian faith as appeareth both by the general scope of those bookes of the citty of God Lib. 2. de ciâ—itat cap. 2. vvhich are written against the Heathens and more particularly by the third chapter of the same second booke by him cited Now with what countenance and congruity could M. Abbot cite that against vs Christians vvhich he knew right vvel not to concerne them any thing at al at least in S. Augustines meaning M. Abbot thought belike to vvinne no smal reputation of great reading and good remembrance of the ancient Doctors workes but alleaging them as he commonly doth cleane besides the holy Fathers intention he shal I weene picke very smal thankes of any juditious reader for his labour but be esteemed rather for one that is somewhat pretily ouer-seene then any vvhit vvel seene in their learned writinges Now to the other sentence of S. Augustine which he pronounceth against the Donatists our Predecessours if al be true that M. Abbot saith where they cannot by fly and wily cosenage creepe like Aspes In psalm there with open professed violence they rage like Lions Note that M. Abbot cited this place euen as that of S. Bernard in general not quoting particularly where there being aboue 200. discourses of S. Augustines vpon the Psalmes the cause was that he knew vvel that it did make nothing for his purpose The Donatists were diuided among themselues into three principal sects called Donatists Rogatists and Maximianists Now the Donatists being the strongest part and the head of the others vvould in a certaine citty thrust out their younger bretheren the Maximianists and not knowing how otherwise to compasse it because of the temporal Magistrate who fauoured neither party greatly but was rather Catholike the Donatists finally resolued to pleade that the Maximianists vvere Heretikes and therefore by the Imperial lawes then and there in force not to enjoy any spiritual liuinges vsing this crafty tricke of cosenage against their neare kinsmen the Maximianists for which S. Augustine resembleth them to Aspes Now against the Catholikes in their coasts they did rore and rage like Lions Then doth that holy Father shew How the Lions teeth were to be broken in their owne mouthes for if saith he the Maximianists because they were Heretikes were not capable of any Church liuinges much lesse were the Donatists who were the greater Heretikes of the two and against whom more specially the Imperial lawes were enacted Hence it is easie to be seene how this sentence might be applied vnto the Lutherans that in some places of Germany hoise out their younger bretheren the Caluinists as Heretikes and also to the Protestants in England vvho deale in lâ—ke manner vvith the Puritans carrying themselues like Aspes more wilely towardes them pretending only to censure and chastise them vnder colour of Ecclesiastical vniformity among themselues but proceeding against the Catholikes Lion-like with open professed violence But how this may be cast vpon the Catholikes no man can see I trow vnlesse it be M. Abbot with his spiteful soare eies so that finally few men can be found to match M. Abbot in the vntoward and il fauoured applying of the Fathers sentences which hath beene also before declared And because he both here and often afterward calleth vs Donatists and the Donatists our Predecessours I wil here once for al shew who be true natural Donatists and that out of S. Augustine and Optatus both very renowmed Bishops both most learned and sincere vvitnesses that liued also in the middest of the Donatists when they most flourished August ad Quod-vult These then were the Donatists chiefest heresies First That the true Church of Christ was perished al the world ouer sauing in some coasts of Africke where their doctrine was currant Secondly They rebaptised Catholikes that fel into their sect Thirdly They held not the faith of the blessed Trinity intire and whole but some of them taught like Arrians the Sonne to be lesse then the Father but as S. Augustine noteth this was not marked of their followers Fourthly They were soone deuided among themselues into three principal sects Donatists Rogatists and Maximianists There vvere also amongst them many frantike furious fellowes called Circumcelliones August Epistola 50. who rouing vp and downe in troupes committed many outrages set fire on Catholike Churches tormented Priests abused most impiously the blessed Sacrament of Christs body reserued in the Churches Optat. lib. 2. coÌ„t Parmeni Aug. Epist 119. cap. 18. cast the boxes of holy Oiles out of the Church windowes that they might be broken and the holy Oiles trodden vnder feete Finally The Donatists deuised a new kinde of Psalmes to be songe before their diuine seruice and sermons These be the special points of the Donatists errours and erroneous practises as they witnesse who best knew them and were least like of any men to belie them S. Augustine I say and Optaetus Bishop of Mileuitane both very sound authours of singuler same and credit Now let any man of wit judge whether the Catholikes or Protestants doe most resemble them yea who can deny but that the Protestants doe almost in euery point follow them at the heeles For first the Protestants teach euen as they did that Christes visible Church was perished for the inuisible Church the Donatists held could not perish as S. Augustine witnesseth for 900. Aug. in psal 101. cap. 2. yeares at the least al the vvorld ouer and is euen now wholy decaied in al other parts of the world sauing where their doctrine is embraced and this was the maine point of the Donatists heresie Secondly though al the Protestants doe not rebaptise yet one part of them to wit the Anabaptists doe vse it For the Protestants be deuided into Lutherans Sacramentaries and Anabaptists to omit Trinitarians and Arrians euen as the Donatists were into Donatists Rogatists and Maximianists Thirdly diuers of their principal teachers as Melancthon Caluin and many others doe corrupt the sound doctrine of the most sacred Trinity as I haue shewed in the Preface of the second part of the Reformation of a deformed Catholike though the common sort of them doe not greatly obserue it Fourthly for plucking downe of Churches abusing the most blessed Sacrament holy Oiles and al holy ornaments that belonged
meaning that it vvas in Ianuary past before he had seene my booke vvhich though he say not directly but that my booke was then sent to him yet he would haue his reader take it so that he might thereby and by that vvhich followeth gather vvhat expedition he had vsed in the answering of it wherein he giueth him vvrong to vnderstand For two monethes before that the booke vvas common to be had and great communication about the answering of it in the place of his abode and either he or one of his name had in short marginal notes assaied to giue answere vnto many points of the same epistle by that very Ianuary But admit that he saw not the booke before why did he not then goe in hand with it hauing receiued straight commandement from so high a personage to vse al expedition for the answering of it Forsooth the Barber-surgeon hauing his soare eies in cure would not giue him leaue to doe it Is it likely that the L. Archbishop was so euil informed of his estate that he would require him to make a speedy answere to a booke before he knew that he was in case to reade it But his Lordships letters perhaps found M. Abbot according vnto the season of the yeare frozen and could not as then vvorke in him any great resolution to answere but the spring following beganne to reuiue his drowsie spirits and in Iuly vvhen the heate of Sommer had throughly warmed him then â—â—e his affection to answere was so feruent and his disposition so fiery that he bestirred himselfe beyond al measure dispatching within three moneths not only this booke of thirty sheetes of paper but preparing also woofe and warpe as he speaketh for three hundreth more Surely this vvere vvonderful celerity if we might be so bold as to beleeue him but vntil he make better proofe of his fidelity he must pardon vs if in hast we giue not credit vnto him For vvho can perswade himselfe that M. Abbot being injoined to vse such expedition in answering would haue staied one yeare and a halfe before he published his answere vnto one sheete and halfe of paper for my Epistle containeth no more if he could haue sooner compassed it and who knowes not that a dedicatory Epistle vvhere matters are summarily touched only is none of the hardest partes of the booke to be answered But the man meaning in this Preface to commend himselfe aboue the skies saw that it was necessary to remoue this stumbling-block out of the vvay and before hand to excuse his extreame slownesse that it might not seeme strange how so admirable quicke a pen-man should be holden occupied so long time about so little I may not omit to note that vvhich now three times M. Abbot hath repeated to wit That the answering of my booke was committed â—o him from great authority vvherein he seemeth by his often reiâ—erating of it to take no smal pride that such a charge should be â—ssigned him from so high a personage But good Sir if my booke be nothing else but A fardle of baggage and rotten stuffe as you â—earme it it must needes redound rather to your shame to be â—hought a fit man to giue it answere For as euery man knoweth 〈◊〉 bald beggarly scholler is the meetest match to deale with a fardle of baggage But if there be more in my booke then you sometimes would haue people to beleeue they that haue a good opinion of it may hap to thinke that those graue wise-men in high authority fore-saw that it would hardly be answered by laying nakedly testimony of Scripture and Fathers to testimony and reason to reason vvherefore they thought it best pollicy to make choise of some jolly smooth-tongued discourser that might with a â—ufling multitude of faire pleasing wordes carry his reader quite from the matter and then blinding him vvith some colourable shew of learning lâ—â—de him into errour Proceede ROBERT ABBOT NOw the Treatise against which M. Bishop writeth is commonly knowne and entituled A reformed Catholike c. written by one M. Perkins since deceassed a man of very commendable quality and wel deseruing for his great trauaile and paines for the furtherance of true religion and edifying of the Church Against this booke M. Bishop so bendeth himselfe in his dedicatory Epistle as that with al he traduceth the whole doctrine of our Church and with such motiues and reasons as a badde cause wil afford him plaieth the part of Symmachus the Pagan Labouring vnder the name of antiquity Symmach relat ad Imp. Ambr. epistolarum lib. 5. to bring in Idolatry and to perswade his Majesty that that is Catholike religion which indeede is nothing else but errour and superstition In the due examination whereof waighing wel the sundry and slippery foundations wherevpon he buildeth I presume gentle reader that thou wilt be of my minde that he did not thinke hereby to preuaile any whit with his most excellent Majesty but only vsed the pretence of this dedication to credit his booke with them who he knew would take al that he said hand ouer head vpon his owne bare word Surely if he had not presumed of very wel-willing and friendly readers he would neuer haue dreamed to gaine any credit by writing in this sort What his Epistle is thou maist here see concerning the rest as yet I wil not say much only I aduertise thee and doe assure thee that if thou diddest like of M. Perkins booke before thou hast no cause by M. Bishop to dislike of it now Thou shalt see it assaulted with ignorance with impudency with vntruth and falshood with grosse and palpable heresie and that which he commendeth to be the marrow and pith of many large volumes thou shalt finde to be nothing else but a fardle of baggage and rotten stuffe For some tast thereof let me intreate thee to take wel in worth for the time this answere to his Epistle for the rest to haue me excused as yet both in respect of that weakenesse whereby I haue beene so long withholden from the following of this worke as also for the care I haue as wel to giue thee ful satisfaction in the questions here discussed as to stoppe the aduersaries mouth that he may haue nothing further to reply I haue propounded to my selfe the rule of Tertullian in such businesses alwaies to be obserued Decet veritatem totis vti viribus non vt laborantem truth is to vse it whole strength and not to fare as if it had much a doe to defend it selfe I am loth therefore to come hastily into the field and with mine owne sworde only to make an vncertaine fight but to take conuenient time to leuy such troupes and bandes â—as that I may not neede to doubt of the victory and it may appeare vnto thee that notwithstanding the crakes and brags of these Romish sicophants yet the truth is 2. Reg. 6. vers 16. That they that are with vs are more then they that
future moderation in matters of religion the expectation of forraine Princes his deare Allies these I say and diuers other important motiues could not but giue great hope of some better course to be taken in those matters of religion then had beene in former time And great reason it vvas that I who had beene to my smal power a fauourer of his rightful claime to the crowne should be as forward to doe vvhat in me lay to vvinne his Majesty to deale fauourably with them that so willingly honoured loued and followed him Al this notwithstanding M. Abbot if his aime faile him not vvil perswade his reader that I had no hope of preuailing First Because of my allegations against the Gospel of Christ and his true religion embraced by his Majesty Which reason of his is not worth a rush for the former part of my Epistle is to perswade his Majesty to embrace the true ancient Catholike Roman religion which al his most roial progenitours did loue and maintaine Now to performe that I must needes speake against the new and false exposition of the Gospel broached by the runnegate Frier Martin Luther and also further say what was fitting in commendation of the old religion that his Highnesse considering more maturely of that high and graue matter comparing the antiquity piety and purity of the Catholike with the nouelty corruption and vngodlinesse of the Protestant might the sooner be induced to embrace the Catholike Besides knowing that the harts of Princes are in Gods handes to be dispose◠off at his good pleasure vve may neuer be out of hope of any man so long as he liueth so that my allegations against the religion embraced of his Majesty and established with lawes vvas no sufficient reason to moue any man to thinke that I was out of al hope of preuailing with his Majesty Did not sundry of the ancient Christian Doctors present vnto some of the Roman Emperors then Heathens Apollogies and Defences euen of that religion vvhich they then greatly persecuted Did not S. Hillary that glorious light of the French nation to omit al others dedicate his booke vvritten against the Arrians euen vnto Constantius the Emperor who was a most earnest defendor of the Arrian heresie and were they trow you out of al hope of doing any good because of their exceptions and allegations against those Emperors proceedings and the religion established by their imperial lawes nothing lesse Nay they vvere therefore much respected of the same Emperors and had great fauour shewed them for those their zealous indeauours vvherefore this reason of M. Abbot is of no moment And lesse worth be his lies that follow That I deale not sincerely and faithfully but seeke to abuse his Majesty The good-man if he vvere so vvise as he should be vvould forbeare such injurious wordes vnles he did withal shew some particulars wherein I commit some such faults as he speaketh off otherwise he must be content to be accounted rather a slanderous brabler then a discreete disputer He saith also that we father our bastards vpon the Fathers and powreth forth after his rude māner many lauish foule wordes vpon vs but because he goeth not about to proue any one of them to be true he needeth no other confutation then a bare denial I wish very hartily good Sir that you could and vvould obtaine of his Majesty that we both might freely appeare in person before his Highnesse there to justifie whether of vs hath sought by lies to abuse his Majesty and by pretending antiquity for those thinges which by antiquity were condemned Now vvhat other answere shal I make vnto this audatious assertion of his that followeth That I in my owne conscience acquite their religion of heresie impiety and blasphemy then that of the Roman Oratour which fitteth wel such brasen fore-heades He that hath once passed the bounds of modesty careth not to become exceeding impudent For vvho hath made M. Abbot so priuy to the secrets of my conscience If their religion be not acquited and cleered of those imputations before I in my conscience purge it of them no doubt but it must alwaies stand justly charged with them see the Preface vnto the second part of the reformed Catholike wherein I haue deliuered mine opinion of their religion concerning those points M. Abbot hauing as he thinkes soundly proued that howsoeuer I vvas vvilling to put my request to aduenture yet I my selfe vvas vvithout al hope of successe he then diuineth and deuiseth what I respected in that my dedication The first thing saith he was to lengthen the exspectation of Catholikes If he meane that I endeauoured to encourage them to perseuer constant in their religious courses he is not deceiued for though the Epistle were principally meant and directed to his Majesties good yet consequently it may redound vnto the benefit of others Marry if he thinke that Catholikes doe continue firme in their faith vpon hope only of the Princes fauour he is fouly deceiued for they haue learned this lesson of S. Peter Act 5. v. 29. That we must obey God rather then men and that of Dauid Psal 117. vers 8. That it is better to trust in God then in Princes God we know of his inestimable mercy and goodnesse and by his almighty power can when he please restore the Catholike religion in our country in the meane season we are content to beare Christs crosse patiently and to follow him rather then to depend vpon the pleasure of mortal men As for other practises which he faineth to haue beene my second respect besides the diligent deuout exercise of Gods true religion vve allow of none much lesse doe we prepare any mans minde thereto Thirdly touching mine and my fellowes craft and occupation by which he meaneth the holy exercise of Priestly functions it was not at any time since they beganne to persecute our religion in lesse jeopardy to grow to decay then at that time for in that first yeare of his Majesties raigne when my booke was compiled more were conuerted to our religion then in any other yeare since I can remember which also was so notorious to al Protestants and so much spoken off throughout al England that M. Abbot must needes confesse himselfe to be either of simple intelligence or rather of so scared and corrupt a conscience that he passeth not how palpably he fableth Lastly vvhat grace could the dedication of my booke to his Majesty giue it if it be such a foolish bable as you make it wherefore your surmises about my drift of addressing my booke vnto the Kinges Highnesse are vaine and false But what is that that followeth it seemeth very strange and to haue leaped out of his pen vnaduisedly Doubtlesse saith M. Abbot he thought some exploite to be performed by him by offering his booke to his Majesty and that we may be sure that M. Abbot speaketh not this in other mens names without his owne consent thereunto he addeth
and to the publike tranquillity of the common vveale Now let the indifferent reader consider vvhether there be any one word in this supposed letter that carrieth meate in mouth as they say to feede the Protestants faith so that here is an ancient and reuerend Fathers letter cited to no purpose But M. Abbot saith that now a-daies not the King but the Pope is Gods Vicar and his Vicar general for al Kingdomes True it is the Pope is Gods Vicar in al Christian Kingdomes Sext. proem in glossa though there be not one vvord of any such matter in the glosse cited by him but that is in Ecclesiastical matters vvhich nothing hindereth but that the King is also Gods Vicar in temporal affaires for he may be called a Vicar that doth Vicem gerere alterius that is another mans Deputy Lieutenant or Substitute One King may haue many Vicars that is substitutes or deputies to whom he committeth some principal charge King Henry the eight for example hauing giuen him by the Parliament supreme power in both Ecclesiastical and Temporal causes had one Vicar for spiritual causes and many other for the temporal so God hath the Bishop of Rome for Christes Vicar general in causes of the Church and Kinges in the administration of the common vveale And the very Canon cited by M. Abbot would haue taught him so much if he had read it vvith a minde to learne the truth rather then to sucke out some matter of cauil out of it Distinct 96. Si Imperator for therein be these wordes The Emperour hath the priuiledges of his power which he obtained of God for the administration of publike lawes Marke here the Pope acknowledgeth the Emperour to be Gods Deputy and Vicar in the administration of the common lawes vvhich in the Canon that goeth next before is confirmed for there Gelasius an ancient Pope speaketh thus to Anastatius the Emperour Ibidem duo sunt There be two thinges ô Sacred Emperour wherewith this world is principally gouerned to wit the holy authority of Bishops and the power of Princes These two then be both Gods Substitutes and Vicars the one for spiritual causes the other for temporal wherefore M. Abbot reasoneth very childishly vvhen he goeth about to proue that we deny the King to be Gods Vicar because we teach the Pope to be Gods Vicar for vve hold that they both be Gods Vicars though in distinct and different matters Neither lastly can he take any aduantage of the word gouerne if it be in that letter for King Lucius demand was for the Imperial lawes to gouerne the temporal state of his realme vvherefore it is euident that he spake there of temporal gouernement and not of spiritual Now because the maine question is whether Kings haue authority ouer Bishops in Ecclesiastical causes or Bishops ouer Kinges let vs heare some two or three of S. Peter and S. Paules Successours M. Abbots owne vvitnesses deliuer their knowledge thereof The first shal be the same learned and holy Pope Gelasius last named he affirmeth in the same Epistle vvhich vvas written to the Emperour himselfe that the authority of Bishops in spiritual causes doth extend it selfe ouer Kinges and Emperours these be his vvordes Distinct 96. Duo sunt Thou knowest ô Emperour thy selfe to depend on their judgements and that they cannot be reduced to thy wil and pleasure therefore many Bishops fortified with these ordinances and with this authority supported haue excommunicated some Kinges others Emperours And if a particular example be demanded of the persons of Princes blessed Innocentius the Pope did excommunicate the Emperour Archadius for consenting vnto the deposition of S. Iohn Chrisostome And blessed S. Ambrose though a holy Bishop yet not Bishop of the vniuersal Church for a fault that to others did not seeme so grieuous excommunicating Theodosius the great did shut him out of the Church c. Is not this plaine enough and directly to the purpose that Bishops haue power ouer Princes in Ecclesiastical causes and the authority of Gelasius is of such vvaight with M. Abbot shortly after that here he cannot gaine-say it vvith any honesty I vvil joine to him Anacletus vvhom M. Abbot also noteth the next who succeeded immediately after Clement S. Peters Scholler he saith expresly Epistola 1. prope finem That the Church of Rome receiued by our Sauiour Christes order the primacy and preeminence of power ouer al Churches and ouer the whole flocke of Christian people If then M. Abbot vvil allow that Kinges be any of Christes people the Pope hath authority ouer them S. Clement himselfe one of S. Paules Philip. 4. v. 3. coadjutors and whose name is in the booke of life hath left this vvritten among the constitutions of the Apostles Lib. 2. c. 11. Wherefore ô Bishop endeauour to excel in sanctity of workes knowing thy place and dignity thou art Gods Lieutenant and placed ouer al Lordes Priests Kinges and Princes Fathers Sonnes Masters and al Subjects joined together Ibid. cap. 33. And in the same booke touching by the vvay the dignity of Bishops repeateth these memorable wordes out of holy Scripture spoken to Moyses as a King Bishop Exod. 7. v. 1. Ecce constitui to Deum Pharaonis Behold I haue created thee the God of Pharao vvho was King of the land of Aegipt vvhere both Moyses and al the children of Israel then liued see the dignity of a Bishop aboue his owne King And the 38. chapter of the same booke of Clement is formally intituled That Priests are more excellent then Kinges and Princes And finally that the gouernement of the whole Church was committed to Bishops that vessel of election S. Paul is a sufficient witnesse vvho saith Act. 20. v. 28. Take heede to your selues and to the whole flocke wherein the holy Ghost hath placed you Bishops to rule the Church of God which he hath purchased with his owne bloud If then M. Abbot wil allow that Kinges be any of Christs flocke and that he purchased them with his bloud they are to be ruled by Bishops who are placed by the holy Ghost to rule the whol◠flocke of Gods Church Hitherto comparing the Bishop of Rome with temporal Princes I haue proued the prerogatiue of Ecclesiastical gouernement to appertaine to the Bishops Now a word or two of the preeminence of the Church and See of Rome ouer al other Churches vvhich shal be briefly verified euen by the testimony of some of the most ancient and most holy successours of S. Peter and S. Paul to whom M. Abbot attributes so much The afore named Anacletus who succeeded next after their owne Disciple S. Clement hauing shewed that al Ecclesiastical causes belong to Bishops euen as temporal causes doe to the temporal Magistrate Epistola 1. ad omnes Ecclesias addeth that if more difficult questions shal arise as the judgements of Bishops and greater causes let them if any appeale be made
not a word out of him that wil greatly helpe their cause For what saith he that we say not we hold with him that the want of knowledge of the Scriptures is the cause of heresie for he that knoweth and vnderstandeth wel the holy Scriptures can neuer fal into errour or heresie Besides vve denie not but that it is expedient for al men either to reade the Scriptures or to heare them to reade them themselues if they be men of judgement and indued with a lowly spirit carrying with them this rule of S. Peter 2. Pet. 1. vers 19. That the Scriptures as they were not written by a priuate spirit so they must not be vnderstood by a priuate interpretation vvherefore in al darke and doubtful places they must not trust to their owne wit but make their recourse vnto the Catholike Church Ioh 14. v. 26. Ioh. 16. v. 13. 1. Tim. 3. vers 15. Which is directed by the spirit of God into al truth and therefore called the pillar and ground of truth for the true sence and meaning of them Al the rest both Men Women and Children we would haue to heare the holy Scriptures read vnto them and expounded by their lawful Pastours and approued Preachers who are chosen and sent to feede their soules with that heauenly foode of the word of God So that Gregory the ninth differeth nothing from Paul the fift the present Pope of Rome who is fully of the same opinion And M. Abbots audatious assertions to the contrary are but meere slanders For we hold it not pernitious for al sortes of people to reade the Scriptures vnlesse it be in such false translations as the Protestants haue made but haue our selues translated them into the vulgar tongue that al Godly wel minded people of any reasonable capacity may diligently and deuoutly reade them at their good oportunity M. Abbot vvas wont heretofore to alleage some authour or other to giue the better countenance to his lies but now he is faine to face them out himselfe without the helpe of any other and hauing put his special confidence in lying as they did of vvhom the Prophet speaketh Esai 28. Posuimus mendacium spem nostram We haue put our hope in lying he thrusteth them out lightly by huddles False then it is first that we teach the people to be secluded from the reading of Scripture as dogges are from holy thinges for vve would haue none other debarred from reading of them but wauering wilful and peruerse fellowes 2. Pet. 3. vers 16. Who as S. Peter teacheth abuse the holy Scriptures to their owne destruction and to the seducing of others Secondly it is a lie in graine to auouch that we teach the knowledge of the Scriptures to breede errour and heresie vnlesse he meane the corrupt and peruerse knowledge of them which is rather to be tearmed the ignorance of them for the true knowledge of them deliuereth vs from al errour and heresie and settleth vs in the sound doctrine of the Catholike Roman Church True it is that many now a-daies vvho haue some smattering in the vvordes and verses of the text hauing itching eares and wauering minds are the sooner lead away through their little skil in the Scriptures and ouer-great presumption of their owne wits for hearing Heretikes cite for proofe of their heresie some texts of Scripture which they know to be Gods vvord and hauing neither sufficient learning to answere them nor grace to aske counsel therein of the true Pastors of Christs Church vvho would rightly informe them become a pray to the rauening vvolues Againe the very experience of this age doth sufficiently informe an vnderstanding man that the ouer common reading of Gods word by the more rude and vnruly sort hath rather ingendred a corruption of manners then bredde any amendment thereof for euery peeuish scripturist puffed vp with the opinion of his owne learning wil rather take vpon him to be a teacher of others then a practiser of them himselfe And often very preposterously Women wil teach Men Children their Fathers Sheepe their Pastours in a word many wil be jangling about matter of religion and very few studious to liue religiously These disorders I graunt doe not spring directly out of Gods word but out of our corrupt nature too too prone to presumption on our owne skil And there fore let any reasonable man judge vvhether they did not more vvisely who vsed to bridle this itching appetite of reading in the curious and thought it better to binde them to follow the aduise of their spiritual guides which haue charge of their soules then our new bretheren who allow euery Man Woman and Child to read vvhat bookes of Scripture they list and to wrangle about them so commonly S. Paul insinuateth that al places of Scripture are not fit for al sortes of men but in some parts 1. Cor. cap. 3. vers 2. There is milke for sucklings and in others Strong meate for the more perfect And our Sauiour Christ IESVS spake much in parables vvhich are not for euery ones capacity A sword is a good weapon but put it into the hand of a madde man it wil doe more harme then good so if some men get a smattering in holy Scriptures they wil vse it ful madly Wherefore the Catholike Church though shee wish euery child of hers to know so much of the Scriptures as vvil doe them any way good yet shee knowes it to be holesome and very necessary that a moderation be vsed therein according to the discreet aduise and judgement of Godly and prudent Ghostly Fathers ROBERT ABBOT HIEROME and RVFFINVS by the doctrine of the Church of Rome Hier. in Prolog Galiat in Praefat. lib. Salomonis Ruffin in expositione Simboli excluded from Canonical Scripture the same bookes that we doe the bookes of Iudith Tobias Wisdome Ecclesiasticus Baruch and the rest they say plainly Non sunt in Canone non sunt Canonici They are not Canonical nor in the Canon The Church readeth them for instruction of manners not to giue any authority to any Ecclesiastical doctrine But now the Church of Rome wil haue them to be receiued and beleeued for Canonical Scriptures and of equal and like authority withal the other bookes WILLIAM BISHOP I Obserue first that M. Abbot forgetting himselfe vvhich is a foule fault in a liar and leauing his owne prescript order is now fallen cleane from S. Peter and S. Pauls successours the Bishops of Rome Secondly that he neuerthelesse holds his old custome in lying I winke at that petty lie that he thrusteth in Baruch among the rest vvhich his Authors doe not but may not dissemble this greater for whereas he saith Hierome and Ruffinus by the doctrine of the Church of Rome exclude from Canonical Scripture the same bookes that we doe therein he fableth for though they so did yet did they it not by the doctrine of the Church of Rome For Innocentius the first Pope of Rome
vvhom S. Augustine alleageth stiling him a Saint and ranking him with S. Ireneus S. Cyprian and S. Ambrose in these wordes August lib. 1. cont IulianuÌ„ cap. 4. Cùm hijs etiam ipse considet etsi posterior tempore prior loco In time somewhat after some of them but in dignity of place before them This holy and learned Bishop of Rome I say vvho flourished in S. Hieromes daies or else S. Augustine vvho was in manner his equal Epist. 3. ad Exuper cap. vltimo could not haue cited his testimony doth expresly declare those very bookes to be Canonical Scripture I trust his declaration that ruled that See of Rome wil rather be taken for the doctrine of the Church of Rome then any other mans besides Againe Pope Gelasius the first who liued not long after him which also is one of M. Abbots chosen patrons did in publike assembly In Decret de Libris sacris in 2. tomo CoÌ„ciliorum assisted also vvith 80. other Bishops define the same bookes to be Canonical Scripture who can then doubt but that the Church of Rome in S. Hieromes and Ruffinus daies tooke those bookes to be Canonical Scripture wherefore it was but M. Abbots addition to the text to affirme that Hierome and Ruffinus according to the doctrine of the Church of Rome did so say Besides the third Councel of Carthage holden at the felfe-same time CoÌ„cil 3. Carthag cap. 47. doth declare the said bookes of Tobias Ecclesiasticus c. to be Canonical Scripture affirming also that therein they followed the sound judgement of their Ancestours Lib. 2. de Doctrina Christ cap. 8. Lib. 18. de Ciuitat cap. 36. S. Augustine in sundry places of his workes doth by name declare the bookes of Wisdome Ecclesiasticus Tobias Iudith and the two bookes of the Machabees to be Canonical Scripture and seemeth to expound S. Hieromes sentence in these wordes The bookes of the Machabees the Iewes indeede doe not receiue but the Church of God taketh them for Canonical Scriptures Whence we after the auncient Lib. 7. Etimolog cap. â— learned and holy Bishop Isidorus doe collect this distinction The Canon of the Scriptures is twofold the one of the Hebrewes the other of the Christians that of the Hebrewes vvas compounded long before Christes daies in which these bookes of Wisdome Ecclesiasticus c. are not comprehended because they vvere written in later times and not in the Hebrew tongue Prolog Galiator Of this Hebrew Canon speaketh S. Hierome in that Prologue as it wil be manifest to al that shal but reade it for he saith first That the Hebrewes haue but 22. letters and according to the same number but 22. bookes in their Canon then reckoning them vp by name inferreth therefore the booke of Wisdome c. be not in the Canon to wit that Canon of the Hebrewes whereof he there spake vvhich also appeareth more euidently by his answere to Ruffinus vvho objected against him as a shameful reproach that he rejected certaine Chapters of Daniël because they were not in the Hebrew though they were in the Septuaginta S. Hierome excuseth himselfe saying Lib. 2. cont RuffinuÌ„ versus finem That therein be shewed the opinion of the Hebrewes but did not deliuer his owne sentence And as he there saith That he who would calumniate that his doing should shew himselfe a sycophant so he doth thereby giue al others to vnderstand that he vvho would after that faire warning build any Catholike conclusion vpon his relation of the Hebrewes opinion should proue him selfe a foole in trusting to so sandy and slippery a foundation And yet further in his Preface vpon the booke of Iudith he teacheth That the Hebrewes did not take that booke of Iudith for Canonical yet the first Nicene Councel vvhich is the most authentike of al general Councels did account it in the number of holy Scripture so that in S. Hieromes opinion also though these bookes were not in the Canon of the Hebrewes yet they may be very sincere Canonical Scripture with the Christians vvho haue the spirit of discerning and judging of such Canonical bookes as wel as the ancient Hebrewes had But S. Hierome saith in the later place That the Church doth not vse them to establish Ecclesiastical doctrine I answere that the Churches of Afrike did vse them euen in his owne time and the Church of Rome which is the principal of al Europe at the least as hath beene proued before so that his vvordes must needes be restrained vnto some Churches in Asia where he liued for the most part or it may be said that the Church had not then when S. Hierome so wrote generally declared them to be Canonical though very shortly after euen before his dying day they were in the most principal places of the Church both declared and receiued for Canonical That the Church had sufficient authorâ—ty by declaration to make bookes of Scripture Canonical that before were not generally taken for such the Protestants themselues must needes confesse because they take for Canonical the Epistle to the Hebrewes and diuers others with the Reuelation of S. Iohn which vvere doubted off by many of the learned Christians in the primitiue Church Lib. 3. Hist. Eccles c. 10. 19. as witnesseth Eusebius ROBERT ABBOT VIGILIVS borne at Rome and Bishop of Trent according to the doctrine of the Church of Rome that then was affirmeth That the body of Christ when it was vpon the earth Vigil coÌ„t Eutich lib. 4. was not in heauen and that now because it is in heauen it is not vpon the earth But now the Councel of Trent and Church of Rome perswade vs that the very body of Christ though it be in heauen yet is really and substantially here vpon earth also vpon the Altar and in the Pix and in the Priests belly and in the bellies of as many as are partakers of the Sacrament WILLIAM BISHOP In vita S. Sisinnij THIS large amplification is shortly answered Vigilius though a holy Catholike Bishop as his praying to Saints doth demonstrate yet was none of S. Peters successours neither doth he speake any thing against Christs real substantial presence in the Bles SacrameÌ„t if his wordes be taken in his owne meaning to wit that Christ since his ascention is not here in that maÌ„ner and fashion as he did conuerse vpon the earth with his Disciples that is in the forme of man Which I gather out of Vigilius his owne wordes for he saith that Christ is departed from vs in the forme of a seruant and so according vnto that forme of a seruant in the habit and likenesse of a man he is not present with vs but the very same body vnder the forme of bread is in as many places as the blessed Sacrament is consecrated See for this more in the question of the Real presence ROBERT ABBOT Hier. in Catalogo TERTVLLIAN being for enuy of
their saying doe alleage this Canon which maketh nothing at al for them because it speaketh only of a Priest that had a wife in times past Qui vxorem habuit that had a wife not that hath a wife Such men that vvere once married after their vviues death we doe admit to be Priests and to offer sacrifice condemning the Eustachians or vvhosoeuer else vnder pretence of their former mariages doth seeke to debarre them from that sacred function Marry such sensual or weake men that cannot or wil not refraine from marriage or company of their wiues vve doe wholy exclude from the celebration of the holy misteries And verily ignorantly and sawcily doth Mathew of Paris or any other late writer reprehend Gregory the seauenth for forbidding al men to be present at their Masses For it argueth great and grosse ignorance in al learned antiquity to account it a strange thing that Priests keeping company with their wiues should be repelled from the Altar vvhen not only Gregory the great Leo the great and Epiphanius vvhose sentences I haue before recited but also euen by M. Abbots owne confession Pope Stritius with the Clergy of Rome and S. Hierome did teach the very same little lesse then a thousand yeares before Mathew of Paris daies to omit sundry other ancient Fathers and decrees of approued Councels so that it was no strange example or vnaduised act to forbidde such fleshly fellowes to celebrate Masse neither could any but loose libertines be offended at it ROBERT ABBOT THE Valentinian Heretikes and Heracleonites Irenae lib. 2. cap. 18. Epiph. Haeres 36. August de Haeres 16. were condemned by the old Church of Rome for vsing expiations and redemptions by anointing men vvhen they were about to die yet thereof hath the Church of Rome now framed to themselues their Sacrament of Extreme vnction WILLIAM BISHOP HERE are but a few lines and yet not free from some lies The Church of Rome hath her Sacrament of Extreme vnction registred in the holy Scriptures as M. Abbot knoweth wel enough in these wordes Iacob 5. vers 14. Is any man sicke among you let him bring in the Priests of the Church and let them pray ouer them anoiling them with oile in the name of our Lord and the praier of faith shal saue the sicke and our Lord lift him vp and if he be in sinnes they shal be remitted him Where we see a set holy ceremony which was instituted by Christ and published by his Apostle S. Iames to be vsed ordinarily by the Priests for remission of sinnes which doth conuince it to be a true and proper Sacrament A fond fiction then was it to say that it was after the Apostles time inuented by Heretikes and that the Church of Rome hath borrowed it of them vvith which foolish deuise of theirs it hath also very smal affinity for their dreame was that by the pronouncing of certaine vnknowne Hebrew vvordes ouer the head of the sicke their soule was made inuisible and incomprehensible Epiph. Haeres 36. euen vnto the infernal spirits as M. Abbots owne authour witnesseth Briefly they differed in forme of wordes in substance of matter and in the state and intention of the Minister They vsed certaine Hebrew vvordes Messia Vphared and such like vvhich are set downe by Epiphanius We these God of his most pittiful mercy and by this holy anointing forgiue thee thy sinnes They vsed oile or some other ointment mixed with vvater We oile alone blessed by a Bishop Any lay person of their brother-hood might minister their drugs Our Sacrament is to be administred by a Priest only Their intention was to make the soule inuisible to the infernal spirits But ours is according to the doctrine of the Apostle to purge the sicke from the relikes of sinne and to giue him comfort and strength to resist the assaults of the ghostly enemy There being so great difference in al the essential points of these two anoilinges judge what a wonderful inginer M. Abbot did take himselfe to be when he conceited that he could by his fine pen shal I say or brazen fore-head make them seeme al one to the simple ROBERT ABBOT IT vvas heresie in the Pelagians with the old Church of Rome to affirme in this life a possibility perfectly to fulfil the law of God and S. Hierome as touching this point L. 1 2. 3. aduers Pelag. expresly disputeth against them but now it is heresie with the Church of Rome to affirme and teach the same that Hierome did as M. Bishop afterwardes giueth vs to vnderstand The same Pelagians were accounted Heretikes for saying that a man in this life might be anamarticos without sinne and that by baptisme he becommeth so but now the Church of Rome teacheth the same And M. Bishop in plaine tearmes telleth vs Page 32. That there is no more sinne left in the new baptized man then was in Adam in the state of innocency to vvhich state of baptisme they also equal a man vvhen he is shriuen to the Priest and of him hath receiued absolution from his sinnes I reserue the Pelagian doctrine of Free-wil and Satisfaction to their due place vvhere God-vvilling it shal appeare that therein also the now Church of Rome approueth those points as Catholike and true for which the ancient Church of Rome condemned them Yea so farre is the Pelagian heresie in request vvith the Papists as that Faustus a Bishop of France at that time a maintainer thereof Bignae Bibliot sacrae Tom. 2. Osor de Inst lib. 9. is by some of them recorded for a Saint and his booke vvhich he hath vvritten in behalfe thereof is called Opus insigne A notable worke And by some other the doctrine of S. Augustine against the Pelagians concerning Predestination is repugned which of old vvas acknowledged by the Church of Rome to be the Catholike doctrine of the Church WILLIAM BISHOP M. ABBOT comes now to make an end of his slanders and false imputations against the present Catholike Roman Church after the same sort as he hath heretofore vsed to wit with wrested and vntrue reportes of the old Heretikes opinions and the ancient Fathers refutations of them The Pelagians did teach indeed that it was possible to keepe Gods Cōmandements but therefore they were not accounted Heretikes for the same doth both S. Augustine and S. Hierome that writ against them approue and confirme in many places I wil touch some of each of them S. Augustine hauing alleaged certaine texts of holy Scripture to proue the same doth conclude thus By these and innumerable other testimonies De Peccatis Meritis Remissione lib. 2. cap. 6. I cannot doubt either that God hath commanded man any thing that is impossible for him to doe or that it is impossible for God to helpe man to fulfil whatsoeuer he hath commanded him and therefore a man holpen by God may if he wil be without sinne De Grat. l. Arbit ca. 16. And