we offend in one commaundement we are guiltie of the whole Law but no man can fulfill the whole Law ergo Answer I denie the first proposition for one good worke done with his due circumstances doth bring forth merite as by all the properties of merite may be proued at large and by his owne definition of merite set downe in the beginning Now if a man afterward fall into deadly sin he leeseth his former merit but recouering grace he riseth to his former merit as the learned gather out of that saying of our Sauiour in the person of the good father Luc. â—5 Do on him that is on his prodigall sonne returning home his former garment His second proposition is also false as hath bene proued at large in a seuerall question To that of Saint Iames although it belong not to this matter I answer that he who offendeth in one is made guiltie of all that is hee shall be as surely condemned as if he had broken all See Saint Augustine Epist 29. ad Hieron R. ABBOT M. Perkins saith that he that will merite must fulfill the whole Law M. Bishop denieth that and saith that one good work done with his due circumstances doth bring forth merite Now happie men are they with whom one good worke is of so great worth But what doth a man merite by that one worke Surely if it be a merite of heauen I doubt not but M. Bishop for his part in that meriting facultie wherein he liueth hath in his opinion by many merits deuoured a number of the heauens of Democritus his innumerable worlds But I pray you tell vs M. Bishop if he be a Gal. 3.10 cursed that continueth not in all things that are written in the booke of the Law how should any man merite by performing onely one thing If life be tied onely to the doing of all why do you make so many merites of that which by the sentence of the Law can yeeld onely one Nay S. Iames plainely telleth vs as M. Perkins alledgeth that b Iam. 2.10 he that keepeth the whole Law and yet faileth in one point is guiltie of all that is he is in generall guiltie of breaking the Law and therefore lieth vnder the curse that is pronounced by the Law But this place M. Bishop saith belongeth not to this matter and why but because he knew not what to say vnto it for that that he doth say doth fully make against himselfe For how should one worke done with his due circumstances bring forth merite when notwithstanding the doing of many workes with their due circumstances a man for offending in any one is as surely to be condemned as if he had broken all Marry saith he a man may merite and after by falling into any mortall sinne he loseth his merite But that cannot be for the Law as hath bene said maketh no promise but to him that fulfilleth all and therefore till a man haue fulfilled all he can merite nothing and therefore hath merited nothing by any former act or acts if afterward he fall into any trespasse of the Law Now therefore there can be no rising againe to former merit where there is no merite at all and the place which he citeth in that sort as he citeth it may import a renewing to the former estate but as touching merit it importeth nothing at all But whether those words of S. Iames belong to this matter or not let S. Ierom tel him who thereupon infers thus c Hieron aduer Pelag. lib. 2. Quis nostruÌ„ aliquando non peccauit Si autem peccauit quod negari nou potest per vnum peccatum omnium est reui peccatorum non suis viribus sed Dei misericordia saluatur Which of vs hath not sometime sinned And if he haue sinned which cannot be denied and by one sinne be guiltie of all sinnes then is he not saued by his owne power but by Gods mercie The place then by his iudgement taketh away from man all power of being saued by any thing in himselfe and leaueth him to be saued onely by the mercie of God To the other proposition of M. Perkins argument he answereth also by deniall and saith that in a seuerall question he hath proued that a man may fulfill the whole law but by that he hath read the disproofe of his proofe it will appeare to him I hope that he hath proued nothing Now it is to be obserued how silly he omitteth the place of S. Iohn alledged by M. Perkins d 1. Ioh. 1.8 If we say we haue no sinne we deceiue our selues c. which inuincibly proueth that no man fulfilleth the whole law because there is no man without sin and euery sinne is e Cap. 3.4 the transgression of the law 12. W. BISHOP His fift reason We are taught to pray on this manner Giue vs this day our dayly bread where we acknowledge euery morsell of bread to be the meere gift of God much more must we confesse heauen to be Answ M. Perkins taketh great delight to argue out of the Lords prayer but he handleth the matter so handsomly that a man may thinke him to be so profoundly learned that he doth not yet vnderstand the Pater noster for who taketh our dayly food to be so meerly the gift of God that we must not either make it ours with our penie or trauell we must not looke to be fed from heauen by miracle by the meere gift of God but according vnto S. Pauls rule either labour for our liuing in some approued sort or not eate Yet because our trauels are in vaine vnlesse God blesse them we pray to God dayly to giue vs our nouriture either by sending or preseruing the fruites of the earth or by prospering our labours with good successe or if they be men who liue of almes by stirring vp the charitable to relieue them So we pray and much more earnestly that God will giue vs eternall life yet by such meanes as it hath pleased God to ordaine one of which and the principall is by the exercise of good workes which God hath appointed vs to walke in to deserue it And it cannot but sauour of a Satanicall spirit to call it a Satanicall insolencie as M. Perkins doth to thinke that eternall life can be merited when Saint Augustine and the best spirit of men since Christs time so thought and taught in most expresse termes R. ABBOT It well appeareth that M. Perkins better vnderstood the Lords prayer then that he had any need to learne of any such slender master as M. Bishop is The argument which he vseth is very effectuall and strong If we cannot merit the food of this life but must craue it of gift much lesse can we merite euerlasting life But saith M. Bishop our dayly bread is not so meerly the gift of God but that we must either make it ours with our penie or trauell we must labour for our lining c.
Austin verie rightly argueth thereof l August de peccat merit remiss lib. 2. cap. 7. Qui de die in dieÌ„ reneuâ—â—ur nondum totus est renouatus inquantum nonduÌ„ est renouatus intantum adhuâ— in vetustate est that he that is renewed from day to day is not yet all renewed and therefore in part he is old stil Now from what is he renewed but from vice and whereto is he renewed but to vertue If then the will be not yet wholy renewed to vertue then vice as yet in part remaineth with vertue in the will from whence as yet in part the will remaineth to be renewed Therfore our wil carieth vs still contrarie wayes m Idem in Ioan. tract 81. Alâ—ud volumus quia sumus in Câ—risto aliud volumus quia sumus adhuc in hoc seculo One way we will because we are in Christ another way we will because we are still in the world Therfore the Apostle calling the Corinthians Saints yet anone after telleth them that they are carnall and walke like men Therefore our Sauiour saith to his Disciples one where n Iohn 15 3. Ye are cleane by the word that I haue spoken vnto you Another where he saith o Math. 7 11. You being euill do know to giue good gifts to your children Yet againe Can the soule be truly conuerted to God saith he and as truly auerted from him at one time No M. Bishop but yet in the soule conuerted to God remaineth a part of that infection whereby p Gen. 19.26 Lots wife being gone out of Sodome looked backe to the place from whence she came so that q August Enchirid cap. 64. Sic spiritu Dei excitantur tanquaÌ„ filij Dei profâ—tiuÌ„â— ad DeuÌ„ vt etiam Spiritu suo maximè aggrauante corruptibili corpore taÌ„quam siâ—â— hominum quibusdam moribus â—umanis deficiant ad seipsoâ— ideb pecceÌ„t the children of God albeit they be moued by the spirit of God and as the children of God do go forward towards God yet by their owne spirit as the children of men through some humane motions they fall backe to themselues and thereby commit sinne Therefore they of whom we cannot doubt but that they were conuerted vnto God yet found somewhat in themselues for which they saw that they had cause stil to pray r Psal 85.4 Lament 5.21 to be conuerted Againe Is Christ saith he agreed to dwell with Belial We answer him No Å¿ 2. Cor. 6.15 there is no agreement betwixt Christ and Belial and therefore doth Christ come to dwell in vs that Belial may be dispossessed driuen out And therfore t Bernard in Cantic Serm. 6. Vbi peccatum remittitur ibi proculdubio diabolus de corde peccatoru expellitur Et Aug. contra Iulian. lib. 6. cap. 8. Expulsio daemoniorum est remissio peccatorum c. where there is by Christ forgiuenesse of sinnes the diuel without doubt is expulsed out of the heart of the sinner But yet there remaine still the venimous feedes of his planting u August de nat grat cap. 66. Certamen est aduersus tentatorem de ipsa coÌ„tra nos necessitate pugnantem a necessitie of sinne by the aduantage whereof this tempter fighteth against vs x Bernard in Cantic Ser. 58. Velu nolu intra fines tuos habitat Ieâ—usaeus subiugari potest sed non exterminariâ— will we nill we this Iebusite for the time dwelleth within our borders he may be subdued but he cannot vtterly be destroyed Last of all Is the holy Ghost saith he content to dwell in a bodie subiect to sinne Againe we answer him No for y Rom. 6.12 sinne doth not reigne in the bodies of the faithfull that they should be subiects vnto it in obeying the lusts thereof z August in Ioan tract 41. Quamdus viuit necesse est esse peccatum in meÌ„bris iuis For so long as they liue sinne must needs haue a being in them it is tempting it is entising it neuer ceasseth vrging and prouoking froÌ„ day to day but yet a Rom. 8.2 the kingdome thereof is abolished because the law of the spirit of life hath freed them from the law that is the kingdome and power of sinne and of death But if he meane subiect to sinne of the hauing of sinne then the Apostle telleth him b Rom. 7.14 I am carnall sold vnder sinne c Vers 23. a captiue vnto the law of sinne that is in my members so that d 1. Ioh. 1.8 if we say we haue no sinne we deceiue our selues and there is no truth in vs. So then some of his collections we denie not being consequents of our doctrine but his owne vaine and idle amplifications the rest that are direct to the point we affirme as I haue declared and whatsoeuer his naturall sconce conceiueth thereof the Scripture iustifieth that the fault and deformitie of sinne though not in former degree remaineth in a man renewed and endued with Gods grace And what doth he thinke of himselfe I maruell is he a man renewed and endued with Gods grace What and no fault no deformitie of sinne remaining in him no spot no wrinkle We wonder that a troupe of Angels cometh not from heauen to applaud him and to conuey him as a great iewell out of the world But had he grace to know himselfe he would soone perceiue that this fault of sinne is not penned vp in an odde corner of him but possesseth all his corners and spreadeth it selfe as an infection ouer the whole man And surely he that well considereth this booke of his will be of opinion that doubtlesse there is some deformed matter in him that could yeeld so much absurditie and vntruth as he hath contained therein As for his Remember he telleth vs that we shall meete with it againe and therefore I will referre it to his due place 3. W. BISHOP Let vs now come vnto the difference which is betweene vs. The Catholikes teach that Originall sinne is so far foorth taken away by Baptisme that it ceasseth to be a sinne properly the effects of it remaining are an imperfection and weakenesse both in our vnderstanding and will and a want of that perfect subordination of our inferiour appetite vnto reason as was and would haue bene in Originall iustice which make the soule apt and readie to fall into sinne like vnto tinder which although it be not fire of it selfe yet is fit to take fire yet say they that these reliques of Originall sinne be not sinnes properly vnlesse a man do yeeld his consent vnto those euill motions Maister Perkins teacheth otherwise That albeit Originall sinne be taken away in the regenerate in sundrie respects yet doth it remaine in them after Baptisme not onely as a want and weakenesse but as a sinne and that properly as may be proued by these reasons 1. Rom. 7. S. Paul saith directly It is no more
That many of the Propheticall bookes were lost may be proued out of the history of Paralipomenon which they translate Chronicles Now as for M. Perkins guesses that some of them are yet extant but otherwise called some were but little roles of paper some prophane and of Philosophie I hold them not worth the discussing being not much pertinent and auowed on his word onely without either any reason or authoritie R. ABBOT Of this argument well propounded we deny the minor propositiō We say that some of the Scriptures though some other had miscaried should containe all doctrine needfull to saluation The consequence that he maketh thereof that then those other are superfluous is childish and absurdly iniurious to the Scripture The same doctrines are contained in a hundred places of holy Scripture and who will hereupon conclude that they are superfluous in one place because they are contained in another The Euangelists diuers times record the same stories and euen word for word and must it follow that the latter did superfluously write that which the former had set downe There is no point of necessary doctrine and faith contained in any one booke of holy Scripture but the same hath testimonie and witnesse of other bookes Matters of fact and circumstance there may be one where which otherwhere are not mentioned but points of necessary doctrine and faith haue manifold testimonie of the written word Supposing it then to be true which M. Bishop saith that some of the old bookes were lost which the wisedome of God thought necessary for those times though vnnecessary for vs yet it cannot be inferred hereof that any doctrine was thereby lost because though there might be some matters of storie there onely mentioned yet there could be no matter of doctrine that was not contained in Moses law And if Maister Bishop will needs perswade vs that some points of doctrine were there deliuered that are not in other scripture and must now be learned by tradition we desire to vnderstand whether by tradition he haue learned what those traditions were and that out of their Churches treasury of traditions he will discouer these secrets of which neither the Prophets nor Euangelists nor Apostles nor Fathers nor Councels were euer able to informe vs. He telleth vs that Chrysostome affirmeth the losse of those books but doth Chrysostome tell him of any doctrines deriued by tradition from those books Surely he wanted some proofe for the Popes triple crowne his yeare of Iubile and the great storehouse of merits and satisfactions at Rome and dreaming it in his sleepe beleeued it when he was awake that these matters were written of in these bookes and the bookes being now lost they come to vs by a tradition of which the world neuer heard any thing for the space of two or three thousand yeares But we must thinke that he wrote not these things for vs but for them who he thought would be more ready to beleeue him then we are Now M. Perkins further answereth that though those bookes were lost yet it followeth not that any part of the Canon of the Scripture was lost because there might be bookes which were not reckoned for Scripture bookes For proofe hereof he bringeth the words of the Apostle a Rom. 15.4 Whatsoeuer things were written before time were written for our learning arguing hereof that because bookes that be lost cannot serue for our learning and all the books of scripture that were formerly written were to serue for our learning therefore no bookes of scripture formerly written could be lost M. Bishop after his manner calleth it a shamefull answer but saith not a word to disproue it He telleth vs that there were such bookes but he proueth not that they were bookes of scripture and to the reason alledged out of the Apostles words he replieth nothing at all and therefore I passe him ouer without any further answer 19. W. BISHOP Master Perkins his fourth obiection of the Iewish Cabala is a meere dreame of his owne our argument is this Moses who was the pen-man of the old Law committed not all to writing but deliuered certain points needfull to saluation by tradition nor any Law-maker that euer was in any country comprehended all in letters but established many things by customes therfore not likely that our Christian law should be all written That Moses did not pen all thus we proue it was as necessary for women to be deliuered from originall sinne as men Circumcision the remedie for men could not possible be applied to women as euery one who knoweth what circumcision is can tell neither is there any other remedy prouided in the writen law to deliuer women from that sinne therefore some other remedy for them was deliuered by tradition Item if the child were likely to die before the eight day there was remedy for them as the most learned do hold yet no where written in the law Also many Gentiles during the state of the old Testament were saued as Iob and many such like according to the opinion of all the auncient Fathers yet in the Law or any other part of the old Testament it is not written what they had to beleeue or how they should liue wherefore many things needfull to saluation were then deliuered by tradition To that reason of his that God in his prouidence should not permit such a losse of any part of the Scripture I answer that God permitteth much euill Againe no great losse in that according to our opinion who hold that tradition might preserue what was then lost R. ABBOT It concerneth M. Bishop to speake well of the Iewish Cabala for if the Cabala be not good certainly Popish traditions are starke naught the Iews hauing as good warrant for the one as the Papists for the other Both of them to purchase credit to their owne fancies and deuices betooke themselues to this shifting pretence that the word of God was deliuered first by Moses and then by Christ and his Apostles partly written and partly vnwritten Whatsoeuer they haue listed to bring in either of curiositie or for profit they haue referred it to the vnwritten word and this hath bene the sinke of all both Iewish and Popish superstition both verifying in themselues that which our Sauiour obiecteth to the one a Mat. 15.6 Ye haue made the commaundement of God of no authoritie by your tradition M. Bishop here like a louing brother taketh the Iewes by the hand and will help them for the maintenance of their traditions that by them he may gaine some reputatiō to his owne His proofs for them are such as that without doubt they being but dul-heads in cōparisō of him were neuer able for themselues to deuise the like That Moses committed not all to writing he proueth because it was necessary for women to be deliuered from originall sin but they could not be deliuered from it by circumcision not being capable therof and no other remedy is prouided in
casting her with violence into the sea neuer to rise againe And you most noble King in whom God hath turned the period of time which threatned alteration and danger to our state gouernment to the further strength and establishment thereof and hath lifted your throne far aboue the thrones of your royall Progenitors and hath made you in a manner the ballance of the Christian world consider that it is vndoubtedly for some great work that in his prouidence he hath so disposed it and thereto apply those singular ornaments and endowments of the mind wherein you excell all that haue bene before you God hath made your Highnes able to espie and discerne the conicatching deuices of those bastard Catholik seducers we assure our selues that in your self in your royall posteritie it shall be found to the great aduancement of the faith and kingdome of Iesus Christ Wherein that our hope may not be frustrate we most humbly beseech almighty God to put into your Maiesties heart not to be too secure of them who account it a martyrdome to die for the murthering of Christian Princes and in the shedding of your sacred bloud would think themselues to haue gained the one half of their desires content perhaps by instructions for a while to temporize and to make shew of meaning no harme till the memory of their late villany being somewhat ouerblowne they may be the lesse suspected but hauing already giuen to vnderstand what your Maiestie shall looke for at their hands if oportunitie should second their designes The Lord auert and turne that iudgement from vs and n 1. Sam. 25.29 bind your Maiesties soule in the bundle of life with the Lord your God that your eies may long behold that noble Impe of grace the branch of our hope together with the other branches of your royall line growing before the Lord to the further dismay and terror of your enemies and the greater securitie and assurance of the church of Christ As for the seruice which according to your Maiesties commandement I haue here performed albeit it be far from that perfection which the weight of the cause requireth yet I doubt not but it is sufficient to shew on whether part the truth is to be found and to iustifie the proceedings of your Maiesty against the cauillations of wilfull men desperatly shutting their owne eyes that the light of the Gospel may not shine vnto them Whatsoeuer it is it most humbly craueth your Maiesties acceptance and royall protection and fauour whereto with all loyall duty I recommend it and your Highnesse selfe to the protection of the most high God whose cause it is that is defended thereby Your Maiesties most humble and dutifull subiect ROB. ABBOT TO THE CHRISTIAN READER GEntle Reader thou wilt I hope impute it in some part to the condition of the time that I giue thee this answer not altogether so well featured and shaped as thou haply wouldst desire it Though it be a fruite that may seeme to haue bene long in growing yet as the case standeth with me the length of time hath but serued to bring it to his greatnesse and therefore howsoeuer it commeth forth with defiance to the aduersaries yet I confesse it seemeth to me not so throughly digested and seasoned as I would haue wished it to content thee In this defence of Gods truth the things that are specially to be respected against the importunitie and aduantage of our aduersaries are strength and expedition I haue had care as the matter would permit to satisfie thee in both these respects and let my care herein obtaine pardon of thee if I seeme vnto thee to faile in some complements otherwise If thou thinke this my answer needlesse because another man hath already taken paines therein thou must remember that no mans priuate preuention could yeeld me dispensation to be free from doing that which publike authoritie required of me I doubt not but in the reading of either it shal appeare vnto thee what spirit it is wherewith these Romish factors are led in their opposition against vs and that it is not truth and sauing of soules whereto they bend themselues but onely the vpholding of their faction whether by truth or falshood by right or wrong it skilleth not so that that may be performed That thou mayst the better see and iudge of all I haue inserted the whole text of Doctor Bishops booke altogether condemning that falshood and guile which he hath vsed towards M. Perkins and they al vse in their pretence and shew of answering our books in that they neuer set downe the copie of that to which they answer Which policy serueth them to blind the Reader and to gaine libertie to themselues to conceale and dissemble what they list to peruert to vilifie to falsifie and by absurd imputations to calumniate without being controlled As our fidelitie and good conscience of the cause which we handle manifestly appeareth in that we neuer forbeare to publish our aduersaries bookes to the world when we haue adioyned an answer to them so their guilt and guile is manifest by the contrary for that they feare to put forth our bookes with their answers as doubting least the bookes being at hand should bewray and shew the vnsufficiencie of the answers As for Master Perkins booke being loth too much to increase the greatnesse of the volume I haue forborne to put it in the rather for that the substance thereof for the most part may appeare by that that Master Bishop hath set downe and where he faulteth I haue taken occasion in my answer to declare if not the words yet the summe and effect of it the booke it selfe also being easily had by any that is desirous more exactly to compare them The authors conceit for the forme and maner of that work was greatly to be approued and whereas it hath had the liking of very many for the briefe and plaine deliuery of our controuersiall grounds they shall see now that it was not without cause that they caried so good opiniō of it inasmuch as the malice of an enemie out of their many large volumes can find so little matter of waight and substance to say against it I doubt not but it had bene well that in some places he had giuen it some better strength but it is to be considered that as the midwife iudgeth better of the birth then the mother that trauelleth with it and in gaming the stander by sometimes seeth more then he that playeth so it is in writing of bookes that the Reader and examiner seeth sometimes a defect where the busied and intangled minde of the writer obserued none and therefore of welwillers and men indifferent it is to be expected that that which it somewhat vnperfectly deliuered in one place be no impeachment of that which is sufficiently fenced and fortified in another Thou shalt finde it gentle Reader to haue bene so written as that Maister Bishop is faine to vse
u Percurie Ecclesias Apostolicaâ— apud quas ipsae adâ—uc Cathedrae Apostolorum suis locis praesideÌ„tur apud quas ipsae authenticae literae eorum recitantur c. Proxima est tibi Achaia habes Corinthum Si non longe es à Macedonia habes Philippos c. si Italiae adiaceâ— hâ—bes Romanam c. Cum Aphricanis quoque Ecclesijs contestatur vnum Deum nouit Creatorem vniuâ—sitaâ—â—â— Iesum Christum ex Virgine Maria filium Creatoris carnis resurrectionem legem Prophetâ—s cum Euangelicis Apostolicis literis miscet inde fidem portat eam c. where were still Bishops in the seates of the Apostles and their authenticall Epistles were still read as of the Corinthians the Philippians the Thessalonians the Ephesians the Romanes which together with the Aphricane Churches acknowledged one God the Creatour of the whole world and Iesus Christ of the Virgin Mary the Sonne of the Creator and the resurrection of the flesh ioyning the lawe and the Prophets with the writings of the Euangelists and Apostles and thence deriuing that faith Thus had he before set downe the doctrine and faith which in all this treatise he thus laboureth to vphold and maintaine x Regula est autem fidei illa scilicet qua creditur vâ—um omninò Deum esse nec alium quà m mundi Creatorem qui vniuersa produxerit de nihilo per verbum suum primò omnium omissum c. Superest vt demonstremus an haec nostra doctrina cuius regulam supra edidimus de Apostolerum traditione censcatur The rule of faith is this to beleeue that there is one onely God and the same no other but the Creator of the world who by his word first of all sent foorth made all things of nothing The same word called his Son was vnder the name of God diuersly seen of the Patriarkes euermore heard in the Prophets last of all by the spirit and power of the Father was brought into the Virgin Mary made flesh in her wombe and being borne of her did the part of Iesus Christ preached thencefoorth the new law and the new promise of the kingdome of heauen wrought miracles and being nailed to a crosse rose againe the third day and so forth according to the articles of Christian beleefe VpoÌ„ the assertion of this rule he inferreth that y Si haec ita se habent vt veritas nobis adiudicetur quicunque in ea regula incedimus quam Ecclesia ab Apostolis Apostoli à Christo Christus à Deo tradidit constat ratio pro positi nostri definientis non esse admittendos haereticos ad eanâ—è de Scripturis prouocationem quos sine Scripturis probamus ad Scripturas non pertiâ—ere sith the truth must be adiudged to them who walke in that rule which the Church had deliuered from the Apostles the Apostles from Christ and Christ from God it was hereby assured which he had before propounded that the heretikes were not to be admitted to disputation by the Scriptures who without the Scriptures were proued to haue no title to the Scriptures Therefore for conclusion of all this he saith that z Illic igitur ScripturaruÌ„ expositionum adulteratio deputanda est vbi diuersitas muenitur doctrinae Quibus fuit propositum aliter doceÌ„di necessitas institit aliter disponendi instrumenta doctrinae Alias enim non potuissent alitèr docere nisi alitèr haberent per quae decerent Sicut illis non potuisset succedere corrup tela doctrinae sine corruptela instrumentorum eius ita nobis integritas doctrinae non compentisset sine integritate eorum per quae doctrina tractatur Etenim quid contrarium nobis in nostris quid de proprio iâ—tulimus vt aliquid contrarium ei in Scripturis deprehensum detractione vel adiectione vel transmutatione remediaremus Quod sumus hoc suntinde Scripturae ab initio suo Ex illis sumus antequam nihil aliter fuit quà m sumus the corrupting of the Scriptures and of the meaning thereof must be reckoned to be there where there was found diuersitie of doctrine from the Scriptures For they saith he who intended to teach otherwise had need otherwise to dispose of the instruments of doctrine and teaching For they could not teach otherwise except they had somewhat otherwise whereby to teach But on the contrarie side he saith As their corrupting of doctrine could not haue successe without corrupting of the instruments thereof so neither could integritie or soundnesse of doctrine haue stood with vs without the integritie of those instrumeÌ„ts by which doctrine is handled For in our Scriptures what is there contrarie to vs What haue we brought in of our owne that somewhat being found in the Scriptures thereto contrarie we should remedie by adding or taking away or changing any thing What we are the same are the Scriptures euen from their beginning From theÌ„ we are euer since there was nothing otherwise then we are This is the briefe summe of all that Tertullian in that booke saith pertinent to the matter here in hand wherein as there is nothing in fauour of the cause which M. Bishop maintaineth so there is much to be obserued for the oppugning and conuincing thereof First it is apparent that Tertullian here saith not a word for the auouching of any doctrine beside the Scripture but onely for iustifying the doctrine that is contained in the Scripture The heretikes oppugned the maine and fundamentall grounds of Christian faith concerning the vnitie of the Godhead the creation of the world the Godhead and incarnation of Christ the resurrection of the dead the coming of the holy Ghost and sundry other such like They reiected such whole bookes and razed such testimonies of Scripture as euidently made against them affirming the same not to haue bene written by the Apostles or by any diuine inspiration a Contra Marc. lib. 4 Contraria quaeque sententiae suae erasit conspirantia cum Creatore quaesi ab assertoribus eius intexta but foisted in yea sometimes that they were to correct and reforme those things which the Apostles had written Therefore albeit the points in question were manifestly decided by cleare testimony of Scripture yet the authoritie of Scripture being reiected and refused it was necessarie for many mens satisfaction to take some other course for the conuicting of them b Ibid Haeresis sic semper emendat Euangelia dum vitiat Iren. lib. 3 cap. 1. EmeÌ„datores Apostolorum Hereupon he referred men to the consideration of the Apostolicke Churches where the doctrine of the faith of Christ was most renowmedly planted and had successiuely continued from the time of the Apostles that by the testimonie of those Churches it might appeare both that the Scriptures were authenticall and true and that the doctrine auouched against the Heretickes was no other but what the Apostles themselues by the institution of Christ had in those Scriptures
cauilleth but we make the Church as the hand of God whereby he putteth the Scriptures into our hands and priuate spirit doth no more but subscribe to the testification of the Church But now if Maister Bishop will question the publike testimonie of our Church as touching knowledge what Scriptures are to be deliuered we answer him that such and such onely we acknowledge and deliuer by our testimonie because by like testimonie those onely haue beene acknowledged and deliuered vnto vs. Here then we referre our selues to Tradition and therefore all that Maister Bishop alledgeth to the end of this section is but fighting with a shadow of his owne and nothing against vs. He saith in the end that Brentius and Chemnitius admit of this Tradition albeit they reiect all other Traditions beside this one whereas Chemnitius setting downe eight kindes of Traditions acknowledgeth seuen of them and determineth our defence against the Papists to consist in one kinde onely We fight not against the word we know it hath his vse Maister Perkins in three conclusions here acknowledgeth Traditions the Church of Rome hath brought it by her abuse to one speciall vse and meaning and in that vse onely wee impugne it namely as it importeth matters not of temporarie rites and ceremonies indifferently vsed but of perpetuall doctrine and faith which neither in word nor in meaning can be verified and confirmed by the written word presupposed and acknowledged to be the word of God In this sence wee denie Traditions the name otherwise we reiect not wee say that by testimonie of Tradition the notice of the canonicall Scriptures is giuen vnto vs. This Maister Bishop thinketh should make for the credit of their Church of Rome dreaming that this must be by the tradition of that Church or that that Church must be the witnesse vnto vs of this tradition But therein hee very much deceiueth himselfe amongst all the traditions mentioned by the auncient Writers wee neuer finde this tradition that for the number of the bookes of canonicall Scripture wee must take the tale and tradition of the Church of Rome If he can make good any such tradition he shall finde vs much the more fauourable for all the rest Otherwise we doe not know why it should not be as readie for the Church of England to iudge which are canonicall Scriptures as it is for the Church of Rome What meanes should they haue for the discerning of them that is not as open to vs as it is to them We take the account of holy Scriptures in the same sort as the auncient Church did o Ruffin in exposit symb Secundum traditionem patrum Sicut ex patrum monumentis acceptmus Hilar. prolog in Psal SecunduÌ„ traditiones veterum according to the tradition of the fathers and out of the monuments of the fathers Wee reckon those onely for canonicall bookes which from the time of the Apostles haue had certaine and vndoubted testimonie to be so testimonie I say of so many Churches and nations and peoples to which at first they were deliuered and thenceforth vsed amongst them to be read in their Churches expounded in their pulpits meditated in their houses which the fathers haue perpetually cited in their bookes and opposed in generall Councels against Schismatikes and heretikes to which they haue attributed all authoritie for the deciding and determining the causes and controuersies of the Church p Aug. in Ioannis epist. tract 2. Contra quas nullus audeat loqui qui se vult quoquo modo vocari Christianum against which none dare speake saith Saint Austine who will in any sort be called a Chrstian man q Idem cont faust l. 11. cap. 5. Excellentia canonicae authoritatis veteris noui testamenti Apostolorum confirmata temporibus per successiones episcoporum propagationes ecclesiarum tanquam in sede quadam sublimiter constituta est cui serutat omnis fidelis pius intellectus The excellencie of the canonicall authoritie of the old and new testament saith he againe being confirmed in the time of the Apostles hath by succession of Bishops and propagation of Churches beene set in a high and loftie seate that all faithfull and religious vnderstanding may be seruant vnto it Now by the Scriptures which thus irrefragably and vnquestionably haue beene receiued vniuersally of the whole Christian world wee learne to iudge of those bookes adioined to the old testament whereof question is betwixt the Church of Rome and vs. For in those bookes as touching the old testament we learne that r Rom. 2.2 to the Iewes were committed the words of God whereof it followeth that none are to be accounted the words of God that were not committed vnto them The bookes committed to them our Sauiour Christ nameth to haue beene Å¿ Luk 24.44 Moses and the Prophets and the Psalmes and calleth these t Ver. 27. all the Scriptures as before was noted Because then these are all the Scriptures and those which we seclude from the Canon are none of these it followeth that by the sentence of Christ himselfe they are declared to be no Scriptures And hereto agreeth the auncient tradition of the Church of the Iewes recorded by Iosephus who acknowledgeth that they had u Ioseph cont Apion lib. 1. SuÌ„t nobis solummodo duo viginti libri quoruÌ„ iustè fides ad nutitur Horum quinque sunt Moseos c. Amorie Moseos vsque ad Artaxerxem PersaruÌ„ regem Prophetae temporum suorum res gestas conscripserunt in tredecim libris Reliqui vero quatuor hymnes in Deum vitae humanae praecepta noscuntur continere onely two and twenty bookes to which iustly they gaue credit whereof fiue are the bookes of Moses From whom to the time of Artaxerxes King of Persia the Prophets wrote the matters of their times in thirteene bookes which are thus reckoned 1. Iosuah 2. the Iudges with Ruth 3. the two bookes of Samuel 4. the two bookes of Kings 5. the two bookes of Chronicles 6. Ezra and Nehemiah 7. Esther 8. Iob. 9. Esay 10. Ieremy 11. Ezechiel 12. Daniel 13. the booke of the twelue lesser Prophets The other foure saith he containe Hymnes and Songs to God and precepts of humane life which are the Psalmes the Prouerbs Ecclesiastes and the Canticles Of those things which were afterwards written hee saith x Ab Artaxerxe vsque ad nostrum tempus singulae sunt conscripta noÌ„ tamen priori simili fide sunt habita cò quod non fuerit certâ— successio prophetarum that they were not of like credit to the former because there was no certaine succession of Prophets amongst them This tradition the Iewes hold constantly and inuiolably till this day and in their dispersion through the world do still giue witnesse to the bookes that were deliuered to their fathers God by his prouidence appointing them to be y August cont faust lib. 12. cap. 23. Quid est hodie genâ—
of the temple of the Lord. But it pitieth me to think of the sillinesse of this man in vpbraiding vs with not searching the writings of the auncient fathers of whoÌ„ I am perswaded that we may truly say that he neuer read so much as one volume of any one of the fathers had bene in pitifull case for the writing of this book had not Bellarmine bene content vpoÌ„ trust to lend him the whole stock Well he hath read them that haue read the fathers if they lie be it so he cannot tell how to help either himselfe or them Thus for the finding of a Iudge we came first to the Pope and from the Pope he hath brought vs to the councels from the councels to the writings of the fathers now froÌ„ the writings of the fathers he leadeth vs to the Church He alledgeth to this purpose two sayings of S. Austin The former vpon occasion of the question betwixt the Donatists him is thus m August cont Crescon lib. 1. ca. 33. Quisquis falli metuit istius obscuritate quaestionis candem ecclesiam de illa consulat quam sine vlla ambiguitate sancta Scripturae demonstrat Whosoeuer feareth to be deceiued by the obscurity of this question let him seeke for aduice to that same Church which without any ambiguity the holy Scripture doth demonstrate and point out We admit the condition we willingly hearken to the iudgement of that Church in obscure points which we do not readily vnderstand we highly esteeme the censure of that Church which otherwise by the Scripture is demonstrated to be the true Church S. Austine in those words hath reference to the whole Church from the time of the Apostles very rightly directeth him that was not able otherwise to discerne to presume that to be the truth which from the very originall had bene continued and practised in the Church This serueth not M. Bishops turne because it fitteth not to M. Bishops Church No more doth that other place which he citeth n IdeÌ„ cont epist funda cap. 5 Ego verò Euangelio non credereÌ„ nisi me Catholicae ecclesiae coÌ„mcueret authoritas I should not beleeue the Gospell vnlesse the authority of the catholike Church should moue me to it M. Bishop before hand telleth vs that S. Austin did not speak this as touching his being at first a Christian but euen now being a learned and iudicious Doctor he would not beleeue but for the authority of the Church But very lewdly doth he abuse S. Austine in making him so to say as if he had resolued that it being supposed that the Church should backslide and fall away he himselfe also would play the Apostata and fall away from the faith of Christ What was his faith built vpon men and not vpon God himselfe Did he not know that though o Rom. 3.4 euery man be a liar yet God is true What if the whole world had conspired against the booke of God as not long before by Arianisme it had against the Sonne of God when Constantius the Emperour said to Liberius Bishop of Rome concerning Athanasius p Theodoret hist li. 2. ca. 16. Quota pars tiles orbis terrarum qui solus facis â—â—m homine scelerato Liberius NoÌ„ dimnuitur solitudine mea verbum fidei Who art thou to the whole world who thus alone standest with a wicked man Liberius though afterwards he yeelded yet for that time answered well The word of faith is no whit impeached by my being alone and would not think we S. Austine beare the like minde howsoeuer all other sell away yet constantly to cleaue to that which he knew to be the truth It is not all M. Bishops foolish Rhetorick that can make vs to beleeue that S. Austin would make any such protestation to that effect Yea and were not both he his fellowes very absurdly wilfull they would well enough see as haply they do by that which goeth before and that which followeth that it can be no otherwise construed but as in the person of a man at first receiuing the Christian faith to whoÌ„ it is no small motiue thereunto that the same faith hath found credit entertainment throughout the whole world But the words themselues shall best declare to what purpose they were set down q IdeÌ„ vt supra Si inuonires aliquem qui Euangelio nonduÌ„ credit quid faceres dicenti tibi Non credo Ego verò Euangelio non crederem nisi me Catholicae ecclesiae commoueret authoritas Quibus ergo obtemperaui diceÌ„tibus Credite Euangelio cur eis non credereÌ„ diceÌ„tibus mihi Noli credere Maniâ—haeo Elige quod vâ—lis Si dixeris crede Catholicis ipsi me monent vt â—ullam fidem accoÌ„modeÌ„ vobis c Si dixeris Noli Catholicis credere noÌ„ rectè facies per EuangeliuÌ„ mo cogere ad fidem Manichaei quia ipsi Euangelio Catholicis praedicantibus credidi If thou shouldest find any man who yet beleeueth not the Gospell what wouldest thou do to him saying vnto thee I do not beleeue Surely I should not beleeue the Gospell vnlesse the authority of the catholike Church should moue me vnto it Whom then I haue hearkened vnto saying vnto me Beleeue the Gospell why should I not hearken to them saying to me Beleeue not Manicheus Chuse whether thou wilt If thou wilt say Beleeue theÌ„ of the catholike Church they giue me warning to giue no trust to you If thou wilt say Do not beleeue theÌ„ of the catholike Church thou shalt not do well to force me by the Gospel to the faith of Manicheus because by the preaching of them of the catholike Church I haue beleeued the Gospell We see that both the propounding and the processe of these whole words do cry out against M. Bishop and as it were with loud voice do proclaime that S. Austins meaning was no other but that the consent and authority of the Church ouerspreading the whole world was at first a mighty strong inducement vnto him to beleeue that Gospell wherein all so constantly did accord because it could not be taken but to be of God which had gotten that estimation and account with so many nations and peoples of so strange and diuers dispositions Marke the words gentle Reader What wouldest thou do to him saying I do not beleeue Surely I should not beleeue vnlesse c. vnto whoÌ„ I hearkned saying Beleeue the Gospel c. By the preaching of them I beleeued the Gospel The thing is apparent vnto any man that doth not stop his owne eies that he may not see And hereof most holily deuoutly the same S. Austin speaketh in his confessions to God euen as it were to tell vs the meaning of these words r IdeÌ„ Confess lib. 6 cap. 5 Semper credidi esse te curam nostri gerere etiamsi ignorabam vel quid sentiendum esset de substaÌ„tia tua vel quae
vident et audiuÌ„t vniuersa supernacua ergo sunt simulachra illis vbique praesentibus cuÌ„ satis sit audientiuÌ„ nomina precibus aduocare To what end are images which are the tokens either of them that are dead or of them that are absent Now if the Gods cannot be absent who because they are Gods or of diuine nature in whatsoeuer part of the world they be do heare and see all things then are their images vaine they being euery where because it is sufficient in their hearing to pray vnto them by their names And to this purpose do they obiect vnto them out of their owne bookes the sentences of their owne writers condemning the worshipping of their Gods by images as Austin bringeth in Varro acknowledging that l Aug de ciuit Dei lib. 4 ca. 31. Dicit Varro antiquos Romanos plusquam annot centum septuaginia Deos sine simulachro coluisse quod si adhuc inquit mansisset castius dij obseruarentur c Dicit qui primi simulachra Deorum populis posuerunt meâ—uÌ„ dempsisse errorem addidisse prudenter existimanâ— Deos facilè posse in simulachrorum stoliâ—itate contemnâ— the Romanes for aboue a hundred and seuenty yeares worshipped their Gods without images and that if they had still so done the Gods should haue bene more holily and purely serued or regarded and that they who first set vp the images of the Gods for the people did both take away feare and added error wisely esteeming saith S. Austine that the Gods in that blockish senselesnesse of images might easily be contemned Much more might be said to like effect out of Clemens Alexandrinus Origen Cyprian Athanasius and others in their tracts against the Pagans but by these it is sufficiently to be vnderstood that the coÌ„deÌ„nation of their idols ariseth not only of being the images of false Gods but of that being images they were worshipped howsoeuer the Gods might be supposed to be true Gods which they worshipped therby And who wold doubt but that the CarpocratiaÌ„ heretiks m Epiphan haer 27 Carpocrat Habent imagines Pythagorae Platâ—nis Aristotelis c cum quibus etiam imagines Iesu collocant collocatasque adorant gentium mysteria perficiunt c. sacrificium atque alia c. August de haeres Colobant adorando incensumque ponendo Iren. li. 1 ca. 24. setting vp the images of Iesus and Paul withall of Pythagoras Homer Plato Aristotle and doing worship offering sacrifice burning incense vnto theÌ„ did coÌ„mit idolatry make idols of these images albeit they were so far froÌ„ taking theÌ„ to be Gods or images of Gods as that it was one part of that heresie to deny n August ibid. Iesum hominem tantummodo putasse perhibetur the godhead of Christ Thus the name of Idols and Idolatry are sometimes metaphorically applied to those creatures which are vnlawfully worshipped albeit they be either not supposed or expresly denied to be Gods In which sort the Councell of Laodicea o Theodoret. in Col cap. 2 Laodicenae synodus lege cauit ne precarentur Angelos forbidding to pray to Angels as Theodoret briefly expresseth the effect of that Canon addeth p Laodic Concil ca. 35. Quicunque autem inuentus fuerit occultè huic idololatriae vacanâ— anathema sit quoniam derelinqueÌ„s Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum filium Dei accessit ad idola Whosoeuer shall be found giuing himselfe secretly to this idolatry accursed be he because forsaking our Lord Iesus Christ the Son of God he hath made accesse to Idols By which words it is plain that by praying to Angels men make Idols of theÌ„ though they do not think theÌ„ to be Gods because praier is a deuotion that belongeth only to God The like M. Bishop must confesse according to the opinion of Arius euen of Christ himselfe For if the first commandement forbid onely Idols as M. Bishop will haue it and Arius in impugning the diuinitie of Christ and yet acknowledging to worship him did breake the first coÌ„mandement then it cannot be denied but that by the doctrine of Arius Christ must become an Idol That Arius therin brake the first commandement appeareth by Theodoret q Theodoret. in Exod. q 37. Qui Trinitatis vnam substantiam coÌ„fitentur diuinae vocis legem obseruant nihil enim aliud pro Deo coli permittunt excepta diuina naturae Qui vero erroreÌ„ sequuntur Arij atque Eunomij manifestè in diuinam legem committunt confitentes quidem vnum filium sed creatum esse asserentes à diuina substantia alienuÌ„ CuÌ„ auteÌ„ Deus dicat Non erunt tibi dâ— alij praeter me isti profectò Deum aliuÌ„ introducuÌ„t They saith he who confesse one substance of the Trinitie do obserue the law of the word of God for they permit nothing to be worshipped for God saue only the nature of God But they which follow the error of Arius and Eunomius do manifestly trespasse against the law of God coÌ„fessing that the Son is one but affirming him to be created a straÌ„ger froÌ„ the substance of God Whereas God then saith Thou shalt haue no other Gods but me these verily bring in another God M. Bishop therfore must necessarily graunt that Arius made an Idoll of Christ whom notwithstanding he denied to be God and therefore that the name of an Idoll may belong to that which yet is not taken to be a God Therfore doth Athanasius say of them that by their opinion r Athan. cont Arian orat 4. Cur sese non adnumerant gentilibus siquidem ambo Creatore omisso creaturae inseruiant they were to be reckoned with the Gentiles because together with them in steed of the Creator they worshipped the treasure which as it was idolatry in the Gentiles so it must be in them also The like we haue heard before of the Nestorian heresie condemned of idolatry for worshipping the manhood of Christ without acknowledging the personall vniting thereof to the Godhead To be short S. Austine saith of the works of the flesh reckoned vp by the Apostle fornication vncleannesse c. Å¿ Aug. de verb. Apost ser 3. ista in nobis taÌ„quam idela frangenda sunt These are we to breake in our selues as Idols again telleth the Manichees t IdeÌ„ cont Faust lib. 14. ca. 11 In phantasmatibus fabularuÌ„ suaruÌ„ idola colunt that in their fabulous fancies they worship Idols and Hierome generally saith of heretikes that u Hieron in Zachar. ca 13. HaereticeruÌ„ peruersa doctrina quodcunque simulauerit vertit in Idolum whatsoeuer they deuise or feigne they turne it to an Idoll not for that men haue any opinion of Godhead in their lusts and fancies but because they yeeld them that affection and seruice which they owe to God By all this then it appeareth that because the name of Idols is metaphorically applied to things for being worshipped or deuoutly and affectionately embraced