his spiritual Pastour would of himselfe doe any such lowly seruice as to hold the basin c. that is not to be imputed to him that suffereth it against his wil as a marke of pride To say that any Emperour or King contrary to his wil was enforced to doe it is a very fitten as euery child may perceiue for who either would or could force so mighty a Monarke to so base a seruice vnlesse he himselfe desired it As for that oath of fidelity vvhich the Emperour maketh to the Popes Holinesse I finde it not either in the 69. or 96. Distinction but in the 63 and it is only that the Emperour shal not doe any harme vnto the Popes temporal state in Italy and if he chance to come to Rome that be then shal carry to him and the Church of Rome such respect as is meete I vvould gladly be informed what alleageance may be picked out of this and whether it be not expedient the Emperor being to be confirmed by the Pope that he should take such an oath of him for his owne safety The next text cited out of the Clementine De appellatione is a meere fiction Can. Pastor for there is no such chapter nor matter That Priests be spiritual Fathers and Masters in matters of religion to Kinges and Princes vvho can doubt vnlesse they vvould haue Kinges neither baptized nor instructed in Christian religion by Priests And let the Protestants paint it out al they can a monstrous thing it must needes appeare vnto al men of vpright judgement and the Christian world to be there turned topsy and turuy where children shal take vpon them to rule their fathers and schollers to teach their masters Thus much in answere vnto al that is objected out of S. Leo to vvhich I wil joine that vvhich M. Abbot in another place pleadeth for the same matter out of the example of Constantine the great because it doth principally appertaine thereunto I hauing in my Epistle to his Majesty said that he being at the Councel of Nice would not sit downe before the Bishops beckned to him so to doe and that he there did professe that it did not belong to him to judge of Bishops but vvas rather to be judged of them M. Abbot answereth cleane contrary to the Emperours open confession that he was judge ouer the same Bishops Page 191. Whether wil you beleeue sooner either the Emperour speaking for himself or M. Abbot speaking he knowes not vvhat of his secret thoughts and intentions specially when that which I affirmed of the Emperour hath plaine testimony out of the best approued Authors nearest to that time and M. Abbots proofes to the contrary doe consist meerely vpon his owne surmises and collections Ruffi lib. 1. hist cap. 2. Socrat. lib. 1. hist cap. 5. Ruffinus and Socrates I then cited who in expresse tearmes deliuered so much as I said to whom I adde for further cōfirmation first the irrefragable record of the most famous Doctors that were present at the same Councel Hosius Bishop of Corduba in Spaine the Popes principal Legate in that Councel of Nice affirmeth as is afore rehearsed that one may worthily cal that Emperour the abhomination of desolation fore-told by Daniël who presumeth to make himselfe Prince of Bishops and President ouer Ecclesiastical causes vvhich he would not haue done if he had beene perswaded that the Emperour Constantine vvhom he tooke to be a most vertuous Prince had beene judge ouer Bishops their spiritual causes in that very Councel where he vvas there also present Secondly Athanasius who was a principal agent in the same Councel auoucheth that it cannot be called a Synode and Councel Apolog. 2. Where not a Bishop but some temporal Magistrate is President He then tooke not Constantine for President of the Nicene Councel which he esteemed so highly off and vvas indeede the patterne of al other Councels Thirdly S. Ambrose vvho liued shortly after in formal tearmes doth say that Constantine the great was not judge in the Councel of Nice but left the judgement free to Bishops And writing vnto the Emperour Valentinian addeth When haue you heard most gratious Emperour Ambros l. 5. Epist 32. that lay men did judge ouer Bishops in cases of faith surely if your Majesty please to pervse the course of holy Scriptures or of former times you shal find none that deny but in matters of faith in matters I say of faith Bishops were wont to judge ouer Emperours not Emperours ouer Bishops S. Gregory the great in expresse wordes vvitnesseth L. 4. epist 31. That the Emperour Constantine durst not judge Bishops though they themselues wished and desired it By the record therefore of these most ancient holy and learned Prelates neither Constantine the great nor any other Catholike Emperour was or could be judge in Ecclesiastical affaires ouer Bishops vvhence it followeth most perspicuously that Constantines owne wordes confessing that it did not belong to him to judge Bishops and their causes are to be taken plainly as they signifie and vvere not spoken by him as M. Abbot speaking by ghesse affirmeth of modesty only as though he meant himselfe to be their judge in al causes aswel Ecclesiastical as Temporal But let vs heare what moued M. Abbot to hold that strange opinion so contrary to the Emperours owne confession and the declaration of the worthiest men of that age His first conjecture is that though Constantine sate not downe vntil the Bishops beckned on him yet he sate in the highest place on a seate of gold vvhich if it were true Euseb de vita Constant lib. 3. cap. 10. as it is false yet vvould it not proue Constantine to be the President or Iudge of that assembly For as Theodoret doth expresly note the place that he there had vvas by permission of the Bishops at his sute and not properly belonging to him these be his vvordes Then the Emperour sate downe Theodor. l. 1. histor cap. 7. in a little chaire set in the middest istud enim sibi permitti ab Episcopis postulauerat for he had requested the Bishops to permit him so to doe It being then a place by permission of the Bishops it rather argueth that he acknowledged the Bishops of vvhom he requested that place to haue beene the Presidents and commanders there Secondly the Tripartite Hystorie doth manifestly declare that Constantine sate below the Bishops Lib. 2. Hyst Tripar ca. 5. these be the wordes taken out of Zozomenus The Emperour Constantine entred into the Councel house after al the Bishops and had his seate beneath them al neither would he sit downe before the Bishops commanded him Theodor. l. 1. Histor cap. 7. And the wordes of Theodoret may also import as much He sate in a little seate placed in the middest amongst them And falsly or craftily doth M. Abbot report out of Eusebius That he sate in the highest place for Eusebius saith not so but that
illum esse traditorem Who with their daily out cries were tedious to the Emperour affirming Foelix to be a traitour Whereupon because the Donatists would not admit of any ordinary judge of Bishops vvithin or without Afrike the innocent Bishop was content to referre his cause to be heard by any vvhomsoeuer for so it followeth in the very next vvordes of that same Epistle of S. Augustine For they that is the Donatists had made the Emperour arbitrator and judge of that cause who first sued to him afterwardes appealed vnto him and yet in the end would not stand to his judgements but seing that he gaue sentence against them they like frantike fellowes cried out against the same as vnlawful which vvas their owne seeking and then affirmed contrary to their former opinion and practise that a Bishop was not to haue his trial and purgation before a secular Iudge Whereupon S. Augustine inferreth If he be blame-worthy whom a temporal Iudge acquited when he himselfe sought after no such Iudge how much more are they to be blamed who would needes haue an earthly King to be judge of their cause Iudex eligitur Imperator The Emperour was by the Donatists chosen for their Iudge but the Emperour giuing sentence against them he was by them condemned thus S. Augustine Are not these shuttle and giddy headed Heretikes sure cardes for M. Abbot to build the Princes supremacy vpon a sandy and slippery foundation yet meete for such a peece of worke But S. Augustine doth say That the Emperour caused the matter to be diligently enquired of to whose charge whereof he was to giue account to God that matter did specially belong I answere that the Emperour hauing taken the matter into his handes by the importunate sute of the Donatists and by the consent of the other party was afterwardes bound in honour and conscience to see it throughly sifted out and most vprightly determined But this furthereth nothing M. Abbots pretence of the Emperours supremacy vvhen first the Emperour himselfe acknowledgeth most ingeniously and perspicuously that he judgeth in such cases against his wil and as it were vnder the correction of the Bishops And S. Augustine as manifestly teacheth that neither Foelix nor any other Catholike Bishop required the Emperour for their judge of their owne free choise but that being thereunto constrained by the impudency and head-strong wilfulnesse of the Donatists who would be judged by no other Neither yet vvould they finally yeelde to the Emperours owne judgement which they so earnestly sued for against the Canons of the Church Were not these head-strong Donatists a most perfect patterne of heretical obstinacy and fit men to be propounded for an example to follow by M. Abbot if any man desire to see more of S. Augustines minde in this matter let him reade his 48. and 166. Epistles and the first Chapter of his third booke against Iulian the Pelagian vvhere he cutteth those Pelagian Heretikes short who hauing beene once condemned by a Councel of Bishops in Palestine vvould haue appealed to the Emperour and did then alleage the Example of the Donatists for their President Lib. 3. cont Iulian. cap. 1. as M. Abbot now doth Not so saith S. Augustine your cause hath bad a competent and sufficient trial before many Bishops neither are you to be dealt withal any further concerning the right of examination and trial it only now remaineth that you quietly accept of the sentence pronounced of this cause so that in S. Augustines judgement the competent lawful and ordinary trial of Ecclesiastical causes is before Bishops from which none but Heretikes doe appeale and flie And touching the Donatists whose example the other Heretikes alleaged Ibidem this holy Father saith They were so violent and withal so stronge that we were forced to follow them appealing to the Emperour for they ranged and raged with such fury almost al Afrike ouer that they would not suffer the Catholikes to preach or to liue in peace by them but by fire sword and forrage put the whole country in garboile and combustion wherefore the Bishops were compelled for the suppressing their fury and for to bring them to reason to conferre with them before the lay Magistrate Thus much of M. Abbots former instance of the Donatists Now to his other borrowed from the Arrians who were assembled in a very wicked conuenticle at Tyre to condemne the most innocent Prelate and Saint of God Athanasius vvho besides also was Patriarke of Alexandria the chiefe seate of al the East and therefore rather to judge ouer them then to be judged of them yet those most malitious Arrians to wreake their teene on him inuented most strange crimes of Rape Murder and Treason against the man of God and had false vvitnesses in readinesse to testifie vvhat they would desire yet were they so prudently encountred and al their most wicked plots so plainly discouered by the grace of God and S. Athanasius most vigilant industry that they fel at last to conspire his death by open violence Al which being related to the Emperour he wrote a most sharpe letter to those bloudy conspiratours and willed them to come to the place where he then made his abode there in his presence and hearing to shew whither that which they had done there were equal and just He doth not say as M. Abbot falsly reporteth that the Bishops were to giue him account of that they had done but according to Athanasius request Socrat. lib. 1. Histor c. 22. vvhich was as it is set downe in the same letter Vt eo accederetis quo nobis praesentibus de injuria qua passus fuerit necessitate coactus posset expostulare That the Councel might be remoued to the Emperours Court to the intent that Athanasius compelled by necessity might expostulate and complaine in the Emperours presence of the injury done vnto him First note that the holy Patriarke compelled by necessity of the Arrians fury repaired to the Emperour Secondly that he desired the matter might be heard though in the Emperours presence yet by the Bishops assembled in that cōuenticle for he had reason to thinke that they vvould not for very shame suffer the matter to be so partially and furiously handled if that good Emperour were present and did but looke on them Thirdly note that there vvas no matter of faith in question but capital crimes and temporal affaires of the state objected against Athanasius wherein the lay Magistrate hath more special interest Briefly here is no mention of the Emperours judging ouer Bishops but only of a sending for them to come to him to handle so waighty a matter before him which any temporal Prince for aught I see may demand and also command of Bishops that be his owne subjects vvhen cause of the temporal state is touched Out of the premises it followeth most euidently that M. Abbot hath not one plaine word to proue the Emperour Constantine to be supreme judge in Ecclesiastical
shal speake more at large presently This therefore may suffice to satisfie any indifferent reader how the first Christian Emperours were Presidents at Councels that is as may be gathered out of their owne wordes first to honour that assembly with their presence then to see that al things there be peacibly and orderly handled thirdly to learne the true Catholike faith by the definitions of those learned Bishops there assembled fourthly to recommend the same to al their faithful subjects and lastly to defend it against al obstinate Heretikes Al vvhich put together doth not come neare any probable proofe that they are supreme gouernours in Ecclesiastical matters but rather that they are in them to be gouerned For they neither argue determine nor define them but only doe receiue approue and defend them being before decided and defined by the Fathers assembled in the Councel by the Bishop of Rome Indeede Constantius an Arrian Emperour vvas perswaded by the Arrians to take vpon him the supreme judgement in Ecclesiastical causes but he vvas very sharply reprehended therefore by that most valiant champion of Christs Church Athanasius Patriarke of Alexandria If saith he the judgement of these matters belong to Bishops In Epist ad Solitar vitam agentes what hath the Emperour to entermeddle with them vvhere he relateth what that blessed Father Hosius vvho was Pope Siluesters chiefe Legate in the first Councel of Nice spoke of that vsurpation of Constantius Who saith he seing the Emperour Ibidem prope finem in decreeing to make himselfe Prince of the Bishops and President ouer their Ecclesiastical judgements may not worthily affirme him to be that abhomination of desolation which is foretold of Daniel In a word then the Protestants treading in the steps of the condemned Arrians vvould haue the lay Magistrates such Presidēts of Councels as haue supreme authority ouer the Bishops judgements vvhich we Roman Catholikes with the consent of al ancient and holy both Bishops and Emperours doe thinke to be very preposterous incommodious and intollerable Now to that trash vvhich M. Abbot chops in by the way by broken and halfe sentences the same Leo saith he professeth his obedience to the Emperours appointment and wil to Theodosius and Martianus for proofe he quoteth Leo vvhere we may gather that a false marchants fingers are to be looked vnto For in the first place there is expresse signification of S. Leo Epist 16. 17. not fulfilling the Emperour Theodosius request vvhich was to haue him present at the second Councel of Ephesus and there was no reason for it these be his owne wordes Albeit no reason doth permit me Epistola Leon. 16. t◠meete at the Episcopal Councel appointed by your piety because I haue no president for it by the example of any of my predecessours and the necessity of the time wil not suffer me to leaue the citty c. yet so farre forth as our Lord wil vouchsafe to helpe I haue applied my endeauour that the decree of your clemency may in some sort be obeied by sending hence some of my brethren who shal supply my place c. Doe you see what profession of obedience S. Leo made to the Emperour Theodosius vvhom he telleth plainly that no reason vvil permit him to obey his appointment and vvil Is not this trow you honest dealing deserues not this man to be wel credited vvhen he citeth the Fathers vvhen as he blusheth not to alleage them and to quote the place distinctly vvhich if you wil but turne vnto you shal finde him to be a man that hath a seared conscience and cares not what he saith so he may deceiue his simple reader Now to the second place there indeede S. Leo hath that the Emperours piety and most religious wil Epistola 57. is to be obeied by al meanes but he doth not make profession of his owne obedience to the Emperour but speaketh indefinitely obediendum est and that not to his appointment and wil as M. Abbot fableth but vnto his Godly and most religious wil that is vvhen he commandeth or desireth any thing according vnto the wil of God Now if you wil but looke into the circumstances of this obedience you shal yet further discouer the deceit of M. Abbot for the Emperour Martianus did write vnto Pope Leo that he would confirme the Councel of Chalcedon with his owne sentence vvhich was before subsigned by his Legates present thereat and that in the first place the Emperour being perswaded as it is set downe in the same Epistle that the Councel should haue greater force to suppresse al Heretikes if it might be taught throughout al Churches that the definition there of did please the See Apostolike Here you may see that the Emperour demanded no obedience of S. Leo but shewed himselfe to haue so great opinion of his judgement authority that it would greatly countenance and commend that general Councel which vvas by al the Bishops and the Emperour himselfe before subsigned A reasonable man can desire no more to proue S. Leo his supremacy in Ecclesiastical causes then the testimony of this godly Emperour Martianus Tom. 1. Concil in Prolog Concil Chal. epist 1. Martian ad Leo. For first he acknowledgeth him to hold the principality among al Bishops Secondly he acknowledgeth him to be the authour of calling general Councels these two points haue beene before rehearsed Thirdly he promiseth S. Leo to assemble the Bishops of the East that they might declare those thinges that be agreable vnto the Catholike faith and Christian religion euen as your Holinesse hath according vnto the Ecclesiastical Canons defined Ibid. epist 2. Sicut sanctitas tua secundum Ecclesiastic as regulas definiuit And lastly al thinges being so defined he doth send vnto S. Leo to confirme the general Councel Doth not this acknowledgement of the Emperour that the Pope is the authour of calling general Councels that he is to direct and instruct them assembled what they are to define and lastly to confirme and ratifie that which is defined euidently proue that the supreme managing and authorising of the highest Ecclesiastical affaires doe belong vnto the Bishop of Rome Now to returne to M. Abbot he shewes the like wordes of Pope Agatho his due obedience to Constantius the fourth I finde no such wordes in that place quoted by him true it is that I haue not his whole letter but the abridgment of it as is standes in the Summe of the Councels Epist Agath ad Constant in Synod 6. art 4. where he thus beginneth That we may briefly intimate to your piety what the vigour of our Apostolike faith doth containe which we haue receiued by tradition from the Apostles Apostolike Bishops and holy Councels by which the foundations of the Catholike Church of Christ are fastned and fortified c. Out of which wordes we may gather that Pope Agatho was ready to satisfie the Emperours request in certifying and instructing him vvhat
excelling in integrity of life in sound doctrine and charity towardes al we ought truly to rejoice but if any man among you be so hardy and audacious that he shal enterprise to commend and praise those plagues of the Church Eusebius Theognis his insolency shal presently be punished by the worke and diligence of Gods seruant euen by me This is vvord for word out of the Authour so that the Emperours threat of punishment was only to the citizens of Nicomedia not to any Bishop or Clergy-man Which if it be compared with M. Abbots corruption either you must take him for a very grosse pate and more then poore-blinde that could not discerne to whom or of whom the Emperour spoke or else so feruently set to deceiue others that he cared not to straine courtesie with his Authours and to belie them a little so that he might for a vvhile til it were discouered be taken for one that had found out some special proofe that made much to the purpose ROBERT ABBOT Page 192. THEREFORE Constantine accepted of Appeales vvhen they were made to him from the judgement of Bishops and either heard matters himselfe or appointed those that should heare them And so we find that Foelix a Bishop August Epist 162. By the commandement of the same Emperour had his cause heard and was acquited before his Proconsul or Lieutenant And where the Donatists said That a Bishop should not haue his purgation before the Lieutenant S. Augustine answereth As if saith he the Bishop himselfe had so taken course for himselfe and the Emperour had not commanded that the matter should be inquired off to whose charge whereof he was to giue account to God that matter did specially belong And so doth he send for the Bishops Socrat. lib. 1. Hist. cap. 22. Zozom lib. 2. cap. 27. Ruffin lib. 1. cap. 2. that by his commandement were assembled in a Councel at Tyrus to giue account to him of that they had done there and in his hearing to shew him how truly and sincerely they had carried themselues in their judgement whereby as by many other arguments it is manifest to al men that Constantine held himself to haue a supremacy ouer Bishops and to be Iudge of their judgements and that M. Bishop seeketh meerely to abuse his Majesty in alleaging the example of Constantine against him WILLIAM BISHOP LIKE vvil to like quoth the Deuil to the Colliar as it is in our old Adage M. Abbot is so blindly bent to his errours that for vvant of more worthy Presidents he wil not sticke to flie for succour to both Donatists and Arrians old rotten and reprobate Heretikes Who were they that appealed from the judgement of Bishops to the Emperour Constantine vvere they honest Godly men whose example a good Christian may follow nothing lesse Heare S. Augustine August Epist 166. out of whom you craftily cul certaine wordes to deceiue your reader Your Ancestours saith S. Augustine to the Donatists brought the cause of Cecilianus before the Emperour Constantine put vs to proofe of this and vnlesse we proue it doe with vs what you can The Donatists then were the men that appealed from the Bishops judgements to the Emperour but though they vvere otherwise wicked Heretikes yet in this point perhaps they did not amisse saith M. Abbot a deare child of the Donatist Yes marry did they witnesse first Constantine himselfe who hearing of the Donatists appeale was maruailously moued with it as testifieth Optatus Bishop of Mileuitan that liued in the middest of them these be his wordes Lib. 1. cont Parmen Donate the fire of the Donatists thought good to appeale from Bishops to the Emperor c. to which appeale the Emperor Constantine answereth thus O rabida furoris audacia sicut in casu Gentilium fieri solet appellationem apposuerunt O madde pange of fury they haue put in an appeale as the Heathens are wont to doe Obserue how this good Emperor liked of their appeale esteeming them madde men and like to the Pagans that did make it Another vvitnesse shal be S. Augustine and in that very Epistle out of which M. Abbot doth sucke his poison for he doth most sincerely deliuer the whole circumstance of this matter Epist 162. these be his wordes Constantine the Emperour gaue the Donatists another hearing or judgement at Arles in France not that it was then needeful but condescending to their peruerse stubbornesse and coueting by al meanes to suppresse their impudency Neither durst the good Emperour so admit of their seditious false complaints that he himselfe would judge of the sentence of those Bishops who sate at Rome but assigned them other Bishops as I said from whom they yet againe appealed to the Emperour himselfe Wherein how be detested them you haue heard and I would to God they had at last vpon his judgement made an end of their most outragious animosities And as he yeelded to them so farre forth as to judge of that cause after the Bishops a sacris Antistibus postea veniam petiturus minding afterwardes to aske pardon of the holy Bishops because he did it that the Donatists might haue no excuse left them if they did not obey vnto his sentence vnto whom they themselues appealed so they would once at the lenght yeeld to the truth There you see first how the Donatists contrary to law and custome appealed to the Emperor which S. Augustine doth in other places also most formally teach Secondly that the Emperour did vehemently dislike of their appeale and put it off from himself to Bishops of whose causes and after whom he knew did professe that it did not appertaine to him to judge Yet finally to stoppe the impudent mouthes of the Donatists and to leaue them cleane vvithout al excuse of their obstinate stubbornesse he cōdescended to heare the cause himselfe after the Bishops not that he thought himselfe to haue any right so to doe but meaning to craue pardon of the sacred Bishops for that he had intermedled in their matters further then he ought to haue done Al this is taken out of S. Augustine vvord by word in that very place vvhich M. Abbot alleageth for himselfe Is not he then a very conscienslesse and most perfidious man that would thus vnder the colour of some broken wordes beare his reader in hand that the Emperour Constantine tooke himselfe in his owne right to be the supreme judge of Bishops and that euen by the testimony of S. Augustine who so plainly in the same place relateth the cleane contrary But Foelix saith he a Bishop by the commandement of the same Emperour had his cause heard and was acquited before his Lieutenant True but how came it to passe that the good Bishop was cōuented before them not by any his owne seeking or liking but through the most important sute of the Donatists August ibid. Epist 166 Qui quotidianis interpellationibus taedium Imperatori fecerunt dicentes
causes but relieth vvholy either vpon the example of reprobate Heretikes or vpon his owne inferences and enforcements drawne out of some darke sentences so shamelesly alleaged for the most part that they are cleane contrary to the plaine testimony of his owne authors in the very same place vvhereas we haue that most renowmed Emperours owne formal and expresse wordes professing himselfe to haue no power to judge ouer Bishops and Church affaires and that also fortified by the sound record of most graue holy and learned Fathers who liued some in his owne daies and some very neare thereunto Let then any man judge if he be not too too partial vvhether I gaue his Majesty wrong to vnderstand when I enformed him that Constantine the great that glorious ornament of our country vvould not take vpon him to be supreme gouernour in causes Ecclesiastical Or vvhether M. Abbot doe not goe about exceedingly to abuse his most excellent Majesty that with such bables foule shifts and manifest lies would perswade him the contrary Hitherto of the Emperours authority in calling of Councels and ouer Bishops so farre forth as M. Abbots objections out of S. Leo ministred just cause Now ere I passe vnto the next Successor of S. Peter and S. Paul which M. Abbot would force to speake in defence of their new Gospel I must according to custome shew in part what this Authour of his S. Leo doth teach in fauour of the Catholike cause that the indifferent reader may judge whether he were rather a Protestant or a Papist as they tearme vs. And because S. Leo is both ancient for he liued about 1200. yeares past and was also a most holy man by whom God did miraculously vvorke euen in his life time Againe for that he was very skilful both in the holy Scriptures and al learned Antiquity Greeke and Latin as may be seene by his Sermons and Epistles specially by the last Epistle written for the instruction of the Emperour called also Leo where he citeth S. Hillary S. Ambrose S. Augustine Latines S. Athanasius Theophilus Cyrillus Patriarkes of Alexandria Gregory Nazianzene S. Basil and S. Iohn Chrysostome Greeke Doctors And finally for that his workes be without al exception euen by the consent of the Protestants yea of such credit vvith them that they are gladde vvhen they can snatch a broken sentence out of him in fauour of their doctrine I wil therefore somewhat more largely cite his sentences in defence of the present Roman religion because they cannot choose but be of great value with al euen-minded men And the better to satisfie M. Abbots demandes I wil frame the order of S. Leos testimonies much thereafter Of the Pope and his Pardons S. Leo taught very much and most plainely as hath beene related in the beginning of this matter Of the Masse and of Transubstantiation he speakeh as perspicuously in very formal tearmes commanding Epist 79. ad Dioscor n. 2. That two Masses be said euery festiual day in great parishes where the people cannot conueniently meete al together at one Ne quaedam pars populi sua deuotione priuetur si vnius tantum Missae more seruato sacrificium offerri non possit nisi qui prima diei parte conuenit Lest some of the people be depriued of their deuotion if the custome of one Masse a day be obserued and the sacrifice may not be offered but at their meeting that come first in the morning In those daies when al men were so deuout to heare Masse that no body would willingly omit to heare one Masse at least euery holy day there was I weene no hundred markes to be forfeited for euery Masse they heard And were they then true Protestants thinke you who so zealously coueted to be present at the sacrifice of the Masse Moreouer S. Leo was so wel assured of the Real presence of Christes blessed body in the Sacrament and knew it to be so clearely acknowledged euen of the vulgar and common sort in those daies that he tooke it for a ground to confute the Eutichian heresie For hauing first declared that those Heretikes by affirming our Sauiour not to haue taken the true flesh of man did destroy his passion and resurrection he adjoineth Epist 22. ad Clerum In what darkenesse of ignorance in what drowsinesse of slouth haue these Eutichians I might as wel say Protestants lien that they could neither by hearing learne nor by reading vnderstand that which in the Church of God is so vniformely voiced and spoken off by euery man that it is not with-holden from the tongues of Infants to wit the truth of the body and bloud of Christ among the Sacraments of the Christian faith c. the substance and summe of S. Leos reason is that our Sauiour gaue his true flesh in the holy Sacrament to be eaten of vs therefore he tooke the true flesh of man otherwise he could not haue giuen it vs to eate ergo Eutiches was deceiued who denied Christ to haue taken the true flesh of man affirming him to haue taken only some shadow or similitude of it And because I am in the matter of Sacraments I vvil joine S. Leos testimony for the vertue of Baptisme In quo saith he foluitur quicquid peccati est Epist 84. ad Aquileiensem Episcopum cum quo nascitur Therefore is one baptised that whatsoeuer there is of sinne in him it may be loosed And after in the same Epistle Infants doe die to original sinne and elder folkes to al manner of sinne in Baptisme vvhich confutes the Protestants opinion that original sinne liueth and raigneth in al men after baptisme Now for the Sacrament of Confession and Satisfaction he is so formal that he hath left no euasion to the most nimble-witted Protestant Publike confession by reason of some inconueniences that thereupon ensued he prohibited but priuate and that which the Protestants cal auricular confession he alloweth and commendeth Epist 78. nu 2. ad vniuersos Episcopos Campaniae these be his wordes I decree that this manner of penance which is so exacted of the faithful that a prefession of euery kinde of sinne be written in a role and rehearsed publikely be wholy abrogated when as it is sufficient that the guilt of consciences be in secret confession declared to Priests alone For albeit that fulnesse of faith seeme laudable which for feare of God doe not stagger to blush before men neuerthelesse seing that some mens sinnes be such that it is not expedient they should be published least their enemies should take hold on them and prosecute them in law let that custome be abolished least many be thereby frighted from the remedies of penance for that confession is sufficient which is tendered first to God then also to the Priest c. Againe in another place Epistola 89. The manifold mercies of God doth so succour mans frailty that not only by the grace of baptisme but by the medicine of penance also
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
alleage the ancient Fathers sentences most perfidiously and so to pester and infect the world with lies That no man I weene can deeme him to proue faithful to his Prince that is found to deale so perfidiously both with God and man Now to that rule of Bias which being vvel vnderstood cannot be much misliked For such is the vncertainty and mutability of our corrupt and fraile nature that he whom this yeare we loue most intirely may the next yeare deserue to be misliked of vs as extremely for of a most excellent and vertuous man he may become bad without measure but of his Majesty I haue alwaies had a farre better opinion and doe daily pray to God to preserue him from al such extremities And howsoeuer it shal happen I acknowledge my selfe bound and stedfastly purpose God willing to beare towardes his Highnesse the loial hart of a true subject and the charitable affection of a louing Christian neither is there any thing in the end of my booke to the contrary That which he so often graceth vpon is already cleered and shal be more fully handled in due place Now to that which M. Abbot here deliuereth for very certaine to wit That neither I nor any of my minde meant his Majesty any good vnlesse we could gaine him to our religion vvhich not only to be very vncertaine but also false I may vvithout more adoe proue euen by his owne confession in the next passage vvhere he saith That the secular Priests vnder an vncertaine hope of his Majesties fauour acknowledged and maintained his just title to the crowne of England and would haue offered him their helpe at the Queenes deceasse therefore by his owne verdict vve vvished and meant his Majesty much good no lesse then the crowne of England before we had gained him to be as vve vvould haue had him for being vnder an vncertaine hope of his fauour as he vvriteth vve vvished that inestimable treasure to his Majesty Now vvhen his owne sayings wil serue to confute himselfe I may spare my further labour I hope that his Majesty hath found contrary to this mans fond assertion many good offices of both loial subjects and affectionate seruants performed to his Highnesse by men of our religion Sure I am that other mighty Monarks doe employ in places of great charge men contrary to themselues and the state in religion and haue thereby giuen great contentment to others and reaped no smal profit to themselues Now to M. Abbots disproofe of my reason ROBERT ABBOT BVT vvhat is the proofe of that his sincerity which he alleageth forsooth in time of vncertaine fortune vvhen assured friendes are most certainly tried he both suffered disgrace and hinderance for his loue towardes his Majesty being stiled in print A Scotist in faction vvhere vve see that a false marchant needes no broker how cunningly he gloseth the matter to make shew of great loue where none vvas What vvas it for his Majesties cause that those hard fortunes that disgrace and hinderance did befal you nothing lesse the Iesuites forsooth and the secular Priests whilest each seeke superiority ouer other fal together by the eares The Iesuites procure an Arch-priest one that should be at their deuotion to be set ouer the Seculars the Seculars refuse to yeeld him subjection and by appeale referre the matter to the Pope for the prosecuting of which appeale M. Bishop with another in his company are sent to Rome there by procurement of Parsons both â—e and his fellow vvere clapt vp in prison and continuing there for many weekes were at length by the sentence of their Protectour banished England and the one of them confined to Lorraine the other to France This is now the maine tragedy of M. Bishops misfortunes not concerning the cause of the Kinges Majesty any whit at al only in the managing of these matters it came to passe according to the prouerbe that vvhen theeues fal out true men come by their goodes for vvhilest euery part sought to prouide the better for themselues here in England for the time to come the Iesuites for their aduancement laboured to intitle the Lady Infanta of Spaine to the succession of the crowne of England but the Seculars presuming that if the Infanta were set vp they must certainly goe downe and choosing rather to aduenture themselues vpon vncertaine hope then to giue way to certaine despaire shrowded themselues vnder the acknowledgment of his Majesties just title not for any loue to his Majesty but for hatred to the Iesuites and for the preferment of themselues For imagining that thinges vpon the death of Queene Elizabeth would grow troublesome and intending to make offer to his Majesty of their help forsooth for the obtaining of the crowne they thought by capitulations and conditions his Majesty preuailing to make al sure for their part thinking that the Iesuites by their traiterous practises had set a sufficient barre against themselues and should be no let vnto them Hereupon they fal a vvriting one against another and M. Bishop is stiled A Scotist in faction and to picke a thanke with his Majesty writeth his twofold discourse One for the defence of his Highnesse honour the other for his title to the crowne of England a vvorke of supererogation for his part for his Majesty needed no such Proctours as he neither vvas the wrangling of a company of base fugitiues sufficient to question either his Majesties honour or his title to the crowne WILLIAM BISHOP HERE is such a tedious tale so impertinent so improbable that I could scarce endure the vvriting of it out yet that he should not complaine that any thing is omitted I haue put it al downe That part of it concerning M. Archpriests ordination is wholy besides the purpose and therefore I omit it wholy though it be mixed with many vntruths which would giue me aduantage against him if I were disposed to stand about them To the other of titles M. Abbot acknowledgeth that we secular Priests stoode in defence of his Majesties just title against the pretensions made in behalfe of the Lady Infanta And therefore any man of meane intelligence of the state of those Catholike countries vvhere we then liued may easily conceiue that we could not but suffer disgrace and hinderance by standing for a Prince that was not Catholike especially when we wanted not others to amplifie vrge and enforce the matter against vs. But our kinde friend M. Abbot saith we stood for his Majesty not for any loue to him but for hatred of the Iesuites and for our owne preferment I answere that in true Christianity when good offices be performed they must be interpreted wel vnlesse there be apparant proofe to the contrary as al good men doe agree from which general rule the Ministers perhaps are to be excepted and so they may vvhen al other reasons faile them aime at the secret intentions of men and judging them after their owne inward dispositions say though they did neuer so
out of diuinity for his Majesties title For it is but by the law of man that we haue this or that man to be our King but by the law of God no man is to be made King that doth not truly serue God then the law of God being to be preferred before the law of man it followeth that whosoeuer wil not truly serue God is not to be made King M. Abbot should haue done wel to haue solued this argument vvhich is not vnworthy the maker and taken as he meant it insoluble and may happen to trouble many of his readers but he loueth not this fight at the short sword but to range a loofe off and to defend his part vvith foule vvordes rather then vvith any sound reasons I vvil helpe him out of the briars this once and say that in case of free election of a King that argument of Cardinal Bellarmines is most sound for no good Christian ought to make choise of him for a King or to yeeld their consent to him whom he knoweth vnlikely euer to serue Iesus Christ the Soueraigne King of heauen earth Marry vvhen the Kingdome goeth not by free choise and election but by ordinary succession then the subjects must accept of him whom it pleaseth God to giue them For our diuinity teacheth vs that God sometimes giueth Kinges in his wrath and not alwaies such as wil serue him as they ought to doe vvhich are notwithstanding their vndutifulnesse to God to be receiued and obeied of their subjects dutifully in al ciuil causes And although God at the first left it to the free liberty of euery country to make choise of vvhat kinde of ciuil gouernement they liked best vvhereof it proceedeth that it is by the law of man that vve haue this or that man to be our King yet when such a succession is once established by the law of man and confirmed by long custome then the law of God doth binde al men to the keeping of that just and good law of man Thus much briefly to shew how I could very wel by the rules of our diuinity defend his Majesties title to the crowne and to certifie them that are in greater jealousie of our obedience then they haue just cause that vve take our selues bound aswel by the lawes of God as of man to obey his Majesty and dutifully to serue him in al temporal affaires howbeit we take the religion professed by his Majesty and his proceedings therein not to be according to the good wil and pleasure of God and therefore doe daily pray vnto the diuine Majesty to send him grace to see and amend it and to giue vs perfect patience in the meane season to endure vvhatsoeuer shal be laid vpon vs for the constant profession of his only true and sincere religion As for my skil either in this point or in any other part of diuinity I know it to be very meane in comparison of thousands among the Catholikes and am very wel content that it be put to the proofe Only I require an indifferent reader and one that wil not take vaine wordes for good paiment but waigh diligently our arguments together and try out by seing the places who citeth his testimony both of holy Scriptures and ancient Fathers more truly and pertinently SECT 2. W. BISHOP WHEREVNTO I may conueniently enter with that golden sentence with which your Majesty beganne the conference c. A loue principium conformable to this in holy writ Apocal. 1. vers 8. I am Alpha and Omega the beginning and end saith our Lord and applying it to Princes I may be bold to say that nothing is more expedient and necessary for Kinges nothing more honourable and of better assurance for their estate then that in the very beginning of their raigne they take special order that the supreame and most puisant Monarke of heauen and earth be purely vprightly serued as wel in their owne examplar liues as through their Dominions for of almighty God his meere bounty and great grace they receiue and hold their Diademes and Princely Scepters and cannot possesse and enjoy them their mighty forces and prudent counsailes notwithstanding one day longer then during his diuine wil and pleasure Which the wisest King witnesseth speaking also in the person of Gods wisdome Prouer. 8 15. Per me Reges regnant By me Kinges doe raigne and Dan. 4. Nabuchodonoser sometime King of Babilon was turned out to grase with beastes for seauen yeares and made to know and confesse that the highest doth command ouer the Kingdomes of men and disposeth of them as pleaseth his diuine wisdome but I neede not stand vpon this point it being so wel knowne and acknowledged by your Majesty ROBERT ABBOT PLVTARCH reporteth that the Nobles of Lacedemon approuing a speech that vvas deliuered by a man of euil behauiour De auditione caused the same to be vttered by another of honest life and conuersation that it might carry the greater waight vvhen it proceeded from a man whose doings were answerable to his wordes M. Bishop hath vttered a goodly speech but it soundeth not effectually from his mouth or pen it vvere fit that some other man of other profession and comportment should be the writer and speaker of this matter for he denieth to his Majesty that supreme gouernement in causes Ecclesiastical whereby he should take vpon him to doe that that he perswadeth him and being sworne to the Pope he cannot but maintaine those lawes of his Distinct 96. Si Imperator vvhereby he inhibiteth Kinges and Princes to meddle with matters of religion and of the Church and reserueth the same wholy to be decreed by himselfe and his Prelates and as for Princes they must receiue and practise the same according to his order WILLIAM BISHOP HERE commeth to my memory that vvorthy obseruation of the diuine Preacher Eccles 13. vers 28. The rich man spake and al men held their peace and did extol his wordes vp to the skies but when a poore man spake they said who is this It becommeth not a Diuine saith our new gospeller to discourse of matters of diuinity but Princes doe them brauely To M. Abbot I answere first that his prophane story is besides the purpose for the Lacedemonians tooke exception against that persons speech because his life vvas not answerable but he cauilleth at my discourse not for default of my manners but for other points of doctrine Belike he thought it not expedient notwithstanding his example of the Lacedemonians did leade him thereunto to put mens doctrine to be tried by their life and conuersation least their new Gospel should by that rule be condemned and rejected because their Preachers and Ministers liues be not conformable to the precepts of Christes Gospel Besides the disproportion of this example that is also very false which he inferreth against me That I doe deny his Majesty to haue authority to doe that which I perswade him to doe to
the Church of Rome so cruelly surely there was no agreement betweene them Wherefore as the Catholikes of Africa then so they that were taken into the communion of the Church of Rome cared little for the Donatists as witnesseth S. Augustine saying of Cecilianus Bishop of Carthage August Epistola 162. He neede not to care for the multitude of his conspiring enemies the Donatists when he saw himselfe by communicatory letters joined with the Roman Church in which alwaies the principality of the Apostolical chaire flourished c. So we at this time neede as little to care for the bitter reproches and deceitful arguments of the Protestants so we stand stable and firme in the like society of faith and religion with the same Church of Rome ROBERT ABBOT Cont. Epist. Fund cap. 4. THERE vvas reason why Augustine should be moued with the name of Catholike vvhen they that were called Catholikes had testimony of their faith from the communion society of the Church throughout the vvhole vvorld and were therefore so called Breui collat diti 3. cap. 2. Quia communicant Ecclesiae toto orbe diffusae Because saith S. Augustine they communicate with the Church spread ouer al the whole world But most sottishly it is alleaged for a motiue to vs being now Donatistically applied to one particular Church of Rome and to men bearing the name of Catholikes only for communicating vvith that Church Surely as the name of Iewes was of old a name of honour and the proper title of the people of God but afterwardes by their Apostacy who bare it was left for Esai 65. vers 15. a name of curse and reproch so the name of Catholike was an honourable name and the peculiar title of the true children of the Church but now by their abuse who haue vnjustly taken that name vnto themselues it is become a name of curse and shame vvith the people of God and the proper badge of Apostataes and Heretikes And as the Apostle Rom. 2. v. 28. denieth the name of Iewes to them vvho yet according to the letter were so called because of the circumcision of the flesh and applieth the truth of the nam◠to them vvho vvere so according to the spirit albeit according to the letter they were not so named so the name of Catholikes in deede belongeth not to the Romish faction who according to the letter take vpon them to be so called but the true meaning thereof belongeth to them vvho although they joy not in the litteral name c. yet doe follow the same faith vvhich they followed vvho first were called by the name of Catholikes Let them haue the shel so that we haue the kernel c. the name in his true vse importeth them that imbrace the faith of the Catholike that is the vniuersal Church that hath beene from the beginning of the world that is through the vvhole vvorld and shal be to the worldes end WILLIAM BISHOP S. AVGVSTINE indeede was so much moued with the name of Catholike that he alleageth it to haue beene one principal cause Cont. Epist Fund cap. 4. De vera relig cap. 7. which kept him in the lappe of the Church And else where very often exhorteth al Christians To hold the communion of that Church which both is Catholike and knowne also by that very name not only to her owne followers but also to others And the self◠same reason alleaged by M. Abbot himselfe vvhich caused that most holy vvise and learned Father to esteeme so highly of that title Catholike is now of great force to perswade al reasonable men to make themselues members of the Roman Church for by joining in society of faith with the Church of Rome they shal cōmunicate with the Church spred ouer the whole vvorld because the faith and religion of the Church of Rome hath beene generally receiued al the world ouer as our aduersaries themselues doe confesse The name Catholike is by the Protestants Donatistically applied to their Schismatical congregation that neither are nor euer were scattered al the world ouer but be inclosed and confined vvithin certaine countries of Europe as the Donatists were within the boundes of Afrike Most sottishly then to vse his owne wordes doth M. Abbot affirme the name Catholike to be applied by vs of the Roman religion vnto the particular Church of Rome when as we cal al other Churches of what country soeuer that with the Church of Rome keepe intirely the same faith Catholike And men of al other nations doe we cal Catholikes as vvel as those vvho are Romans borne because they al beleeue and confesse the same one Catholke faith that is extended ouer al the world Secondly M. Abbot is much mistaken in his comparison of the name of Iewe with the name Catholike for to omit first that such examples proue nothing but doe only serue for shew or explication and moreouer that it can hardly be shewed that the name of Iewe was a name of such honour at any time for that peoples honourable name vvas Israelites and vvere not called Iewes til towardes the declination and wane of their estate Neither was it euer any peculiar and proper title of the people of God for God had many good seruants that were neuer called Iewes as may be gathered by Iob the Husite Naaman the Sirian the widow of Luc. 4. vers 26. Sarepta a Sidonian and by a great number of Prosilites and finally by that which the Apostle teacheth Rom. 2. vers 14. Many Gentils were saued without the law Lastly most vncertaine it is of what name the Prophet Isay speaketh when he saith Cap. 65. vers 13. It shal be left for a name of curse Al these impertinencies of his example being too too many I doe remit him but cannot pardon his grosse fault in the maine point of the comparison for the name Iewe according to the vsual signification of the word being the name of a certaine people of one race and kindred and hauing a law giuen them by Moises which should continue only for a prescript time and end at the comming of Christ is not like the name of Catholike which is no special name of the people of any one country but is attributed and doth agree to al sortes of men of what country or nation soeuer that doe embrace the true Christian faith And is inseparably linked and so fast joined and riueted with the Christian profession and religion that it shal neuer faile fal or be separated from it so long as Christs faith standeth nor euer be contemned of the faithful whiles Christs true religion flourisheth vvhich is proued inuincibly out of the very Etimology of the name Catholike and that according to M. Abbots owne interpretation in the same place who doth expound it to signifie that Church which is through the whole world and shal be to the worldes end If the name Catholike shal continue to the worldes end the true title of
in steede of God WILLIAM BISHOP WHAT a worthy graue Preface he vseth to assure men that vve wil not deny S. Paul nor his Epistle to the Romans vvhich neuer were called in doubt by any man But good S ir vvhiles you muse and busie your head so much vpon bables you forget or wilfully mistake the very point of the question Was the Church of Rome at her most flourishing estate when S. Paul wrote that Epistle to the Romans was her faith then most renowmed ouer al the world as you write nothing lesse for not the tenne thousand part of that most populous Citty was then conuerted to the faith and they that had receiued the Christian faith were very nouices in it and stoode in great neede of the Apostles diuine instructions Any reasonable man would rather judge that the Church of Rome then came first to her most flourishing estate when Idolatry and al kind of superstition was put to silence and banished out of her vvhen the Christian religion was publikly preached countenanced by the Emperours authority which was not before the raigne of Constantine the great our most glorious country-man vvherefore M. Abbots first fault is that he shooteth farre vvide from the marke vvhich he should haue aimed at principally The second is more nice yet in one that would seeme so acute not to be excused It is that he taketh an Epistle written to the Romans for their instruction and correction as if it were a declaration and profession of their faith vvhen as al men know such a letter might containe many thinges vvhich they had not heard off before Further yet that you may see how nothing can passe his fingers vvithout some legerdemaine marke how he englisheth Theodorets wordes Dogmatum pertractationem The handling of opinions is by him translated al points of doctrine vvhereas it rather signifieth some then al opinions or lessons But I wil let these ouer-sights passe as flea-bitings and follow him whither he pleaseth to wāder that euery man may see when he is permitted to say what he liketh best that in truth he can alleage out of S. Paul nothing of moment against the Catholike faith S. Paul saith he is wholy against you and for vs. Quickly said but wil not be so soone proued First he condemneth the worshipping of Saints and Saints Images in that he reproueth the Heathens for changing the glory of the incorruptible God into the similitude of the Image of a corruptible man O noble disputer and wel worthy the whippe because we may not make false Gods or giue the glory of God vnto Idols may vve not therefore yeeld vnto Saints their due vvorship might not S. Paul whiles he liued as al other most Godly men be reuerenced and vvorshipped for their most excellent spiritual and religions vertues with a kinde of holy and religious respect euen as Knights and Lordes and other worldly men are vvorshipped and honoured for their temporal callings and endowments with temporal worship vvithout robbing God of his honour Is the Lord or Master dishonoured and spoiled of his due reuerence and respect if his seruants for his sake be much made off and respected yet with such due regard only as is meete for their degree This is so childish and palpable that if the Protestants were not resolued to sticke obstinately to their errours how grosse soeuer they be they vvould for very shame not once more name it To the next ROBERT ABBOT PAVL saith and we say the same that Ibid. vers 17. the righteousnesse of God is from faith to faith you say otherwise that it is from faith to workes that faith is but the entrance to workes and that in workes the righteousnesse of God doth properly consist WILLIAM BISHOP THE sentence of S. Paul is mangled his wordes are for the justice or righteousnesse of God is reuealed therein in the Gospel by faith into faith which are obscure and subject to diuers expositions The most common is that Christ the justice of God is reuealed in the Gospel by conferring the faith of them that liued before the Gospel vvith their faith that liued vnder it the faith of them who liue in the Gospel giuing great light for the cleerer vnderstanding of such thinges as were taught of Christmore darkely in the law and Prophets This being the literal sence of this place what is here for mans justification by only faith where only mention is made of Gods justice and not one vvord of the imputation of it to man but of the reuelation of it in the Gospel What a foule mistaking is this alas his pouerty of spirit and want of good armour compelleth him to lay hand on any vveapons how simple and weake soeuer In the next verse it is plainly shewed that God did grieuously punish al them vvho liued wickedly notwithstanding they held the right faith for saith S. Paul Rom. 1. v. 18. the wrath of God from heauen is reuealed vpon al impiety and vnrighteousnesse of those men that retaine or hold the truth of God in injustice Whence it followeth first that men may haue a true faith without good workes for they held the truth of God being themselues wicked Secondly that the same faith would not auaile them aught nor saue them from the just wrath of God if it were not quickned by good workes ROBERT ABBOT THE Apostle in expresse termes affirmeth Rom. 4. v. 6. imputation of righteousnesse vvithout vvorkes We doe the same but you professedly dispute against it WILLIAM BISHOP WE hold with the Apostle that vvorkes be not the cause of the first justification whereof he there treateth nor to deserue it though inspired with Gods grace they doe prepare vs and make vs fit to receiue the gift of justification neither doe the Protestants wholy exclude workes from this justification vvhen they doe require true repentance which consisteth of many good workes as necessary thereto We hold that justice is increased by good workes which we cal the second justification against which the Apostle speaketh not a vvord but doth confirme it vvhen he saith in the same Epistle Rom. 2. v. 13. Not the hearers of the law are just with God but the doers of the law shal be justified Marke how by doing of the law which is by doing good workes men are justified with God and not only declared just before men as the Protestants glose the matter Now touching See the place Rom. 4. v. 6. imputation of righteousnesse the Apostle speaketh not like a Protestant of the outward imputation of Christs justice to vs but of inherent justice to wit of faith vvhich worketh by charity which are qualities Rom. 6. powred into our harts by the holy Ghost so that there is only a bare sound of wordes for the Protestants the true substance of the Text making wholy for the Catholikes ROBERT ABBOT PAVL teacheth that Rom. 6. v. 23. Page 98. eternal life is the gift of God through IESVS
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
be referred vnto the See Apostolike Because the Apostles by the commandement of our Sauiour haue ordained that questions of greater difficulty shal alwaies be referred vnto the Apostolike See vpon which Christ built the whole Church saying vnto blessed Peter the Prince of the Apostles thou art Peter vpon this rocke wil I build my Church c. Anacletus his immediate successor Euaristus Pope Martir writing vnto the Bishops of Africke Epistola 1. ad Eccles Africanam speaketh thus Truly your charity following the rule of the wise hath chosen rather to referre vnto the See Apostolike as to the head what ought to be obserued in doubtful matters then to presume your selues by vsurpation and writing to the brethren in Aegipt Epistola 2. doth command certaine Bishops whom he resembleth to adulterers because they had intruded into other Bishops Citties to be cast out of those places and to be made infamous and depriued of al Ecclesiastical honours adjoining That if after these thinges so dispatched they should haue further complaint against them that matter were to be enquired out and to be determined by the authority of this holy See Note how these holy Popes that vvere so nigh vnto the Apostles taught it to belong vnto the See of Rome to determine of the causes of the Bishops of Afrike and Aegipt most remote from them And because the Apostle S. Paul willeth 2. Cor. 13. vers 2. euery word to stand in the mouth of two or three witnesses I vvil take for the third Alexander the first Pope and Martir who succeeded vnto Euaristus he is as plaine and formal in this cause as any of the rest these be his wordes Epist 1. omnibus orthodoxis It is related vnto the primacy of this holy and Apâ—stolike See vnto which the disposition of the highest cases and the affaires of al Churches are by our Lord committed as to the head c. and a little after Our Lord here appointed this holy See the head of the whole Church I omit here the verdict of al others herein because this very matter must be spoken off hereafter againe and againe these three most ancient graue and Godly Martirs al successours of S. Peter and S. Paul vpon whose authority M. Abbot here only insisteth vvil suffice to certifie the indifferent reader that euen from the Apostles daies the Bishop of Rome hath beene taken for supreme judge in al Ecclesiastical causes aswel in the East as West Church To finish this passage thou maist gentle reader by this little see what shamelesse shifts M. Abbot is forced to vse to make any coulourable shew out of antiquity for the lay Magistrates superiority in spiritual causes He is first driuen to cite an vnlearned an vnlikely and an Apocriphal letter of 1400. yeares old vpon the credit of men of our owne age and those most partial too on his owne side the letter bearing date also many yeares after the death of him that is supposed to be the authour of it and when al is done in the same vvorshipful letter there is not one pregnant proofe for any part of their doctrine lastly that his owne chosen witnesses doe deliuer vp most cleare euidence against himselfe he therefore that vvil giue judgement on his side must needes shew himselfe exceeding partial ROBERT ABBOT ANACLETVS Bishop of Rome Dist 1. Episcopus 2. peracta and after him Calixtus ordained that consecration being done al should communicate or else be excommunicated For so say they the Apostles did set downe and the holy Church of Rome obserueth But the Church of Rome that now is maketh it lawful for the Priest to receiue alone the people in the meane time standing gazing and looking on and the fight only must suffice them WILLIAM BISHOP HERE is nothing in manner worth the answering only the cosening deceitfulnesse of the man is to be displaied First Anacletus hath only De consecrat dist 1. Can. Episcopus that Deacons Subdeacons and other Ministers that in solemne feasts attend in holy vestiments vpon the Bishop whiles he doth sacrifice vnto God should in the same solemne feasts communicate or else be debarred of their Ecclesiastical places where is not one word of the lay peoples communicating And therefore that Canon is wholy besides the purpose sauing that it doth teach that then Bishops vsed to offer sacrifice vnto God and that the Clarkes did in holy vestiments serue them at Masse See the Canon and vvonder at the folly of the man In like manner doth the second Canon of Calixtus speake of Ecclesiastical persons that serue at Masse for so saith the Collector De consecrat dist 2. Can. peracta Ecclesiasticis liminibus careat Minister Let the Minister or he that serueth want Ecclesiastical place With which agreeth the glosse vpon the same Canon vvhich also is euident by the very Text for the punishment set downe is Ecclesiasticis carere liminibus To be shut out of the Ecclesiastical mens seates and places vvhich vvere no punishment to a lay man that was not before admitted into any such roome And as it may be seene in the said distinction Cap. Etsi non frequentius De consecrat dist 1. and Cap. Secularis Lay men were commanded about those times to communicate but thrife in the yeare at Easter Whitsontide and Christmasse Briefly here is nothing against the moderne practise of the Church of Rome for both they that solemnely serue at Masse on festiual daies doe receiue and no lay man is denied to communicate on any day either on those feasts or at any time else vvhen he vvil prepare himselfe thereto But to debarre Priests from seruing God in that most high degree be their deuotion and preparation neuer so good vntil they can get some company of the laity to communicate with them is without just cause to robbe God of his soueraigne honour to extinguish the working of his holy spirit in deuout soules and to defraude the whole flocke of the benefit of many most holy and effectual praiers not only of the Priests but also of the people vvho doe not with vs stand gazing on at the time of communion as M. Abbot prophanely conceiteth but humbly kneeling doe then pray most deuoutly and doe in spirit and desire communicate also Briefly there is not one sillable in those Canons sounding to the Protestant sence that Priests should not coÌ„municate if the Clarke or people joine not vvith them but only that the indeuout and slugglish Clarkes should be depriued of their places if vpon high feasts they did neglect to communicate with the Bishop or Pastor ROBERT ABBOT IVLIVS the Bishop of Rome disallowed intinctam Eucharistiam De consecrat 2. cum omne the dipping of the Eucharist the Sacrament of Christs body in the cuppe Because no witnesse thereof was brought out of the Gospel but there is mentioned the commending of the bread by it selfe and the cuppe by it selfe but
sute of diuers Bishops of the East he did solemnely summon S. Athanasius that most learned and valiant Patriarke of Alexandria to appeare at Rome before him there to answere vnto such crimes as were indeede most vvrongfully objected against him Lib. 4. hist Tripart c. 6. Nicephor lib. 9. cap. 6. thus saith the holy History The Pope following the law of the Church commanded them also to come vnto Rome and according to the rule of the Canons cited the venerable Athanasius to judgement Athanasius obediently appeared but his aduersaries knowing that their lies in that place vvould soone be discouered durst not appeare vvhereupon Athanasius was purged of those imputations Ibid. cap. 12. and restored to his Bishoprick Vnto the same Iulius not long after Athanasius being pittifully abused by the Arrians repaired the second time for aide vvhere he found diuers other Bishops of the East namely Paulus Bishop of Constantinople Marcellus Bishop of Ancony Asclopas Bishop of Gaya and Lucianus Bishop of Adrianople al Easterne Bishops and yet appealing to Iulius Pope of Rome for remedy of the wrongs done them by the Arrian Heretikes which doth most manifestly testifie that in the primitiue Church al other Bishops acknowledged the Bishop of Rome for the supreme Pastour of Christes Church vvhich also Zozomenus doth confirme shewing how Iulius restored them al Tanquam omnium curam gerens Zozom l. 3. hist. cap. 8. propter propriae sedis dignitatem As one that had care ouer them al for the dignity of his owne See And Iulius his owne wordes recorded by no meaner a man then S. Athanasius doe declare the same for blaming the Bishops of the East he saith Athanas in Apolog. 2. Why did you not write vnto vs especially you of Alexandria are you ignorant that the custome is that we should first be written vnto that from hence it might be defined what was right therefore if you haue any quarrel against any Bishop you ought to haue referred it hither to our Church c. And shortly after I signifie to you such thinges as were receiued from the blessed Apostle S. Peter c. vvhere M. Abbot may see that one of S. Peters successours of great worth and authority doth tel the Bishops of the East Church that by order set downe by S. Peter himselfe Bishops causes of al countries ought to be referred vnto the definition of the Bishop of Rome he therefore is their superiour I adde hereunto because it belongeth both vnto Pope Iulius and this present purpose of their supremacy in Ecclesiastical causes this sentence taken out of the Ecclesiastical history The Councel holden at Antioch was not good Hist Tripart lib. 4. cap. 9. for that Iulius Bishop of Rome was not there present nor sent any Legate in his place because the Ecclesiastical Canons doe command that Councels ought not to be celebrated without the sentence of the Bishop of Rome ROBERT ABBOT GELASIVS Bishop of Rome saith as we say Gelas cont Eutich Nestor That in the Saâ—rament is celebrated the Image or resemblance of the body and bloud of Christ and that there ceasseâ—h not to be the substance or nature of bread and wine But now the Romish religion maketh them Heretikes that say the Sacrament is the Image or resemblance of the body bloud of Christ and not the body and bloud of Christ it selfe or wil not beleeue that the bread and wine are substantially and really turned into the same body and bloud Albeit they beleeue with the same Gelasius that the Sacrament is a diuine thing and that thereby we are made partakers of the diuine nature euen of Christ himselfe really and substantially but yet spiritually vvith al his riches becomming ours and being eaten of vs not by our teeth into our bellies but by faith into our harts vnto life euerlasting WILLIAM BISHOP FIRST I say that M. Abbot hauing his eie-sight sore troubled with a grosse defluxion of salt rhewme taketh a Rowland for an Oliuer that is one Gelasius an vnknowne Grecian for Gelasius an African borne yet Bishop of Rome That he was not Gelasius the Bishop of Rome appeareth plainly out of that very treatise cited by M. Abbot for that Gelasius professeth to alleage the testimony of al the learned Fathers who wrote before him yet he maketh no mention of the most renowmed authours in the Latin Church as of S. Hillary S. Augustine S. Hierome and of Pope Leo al vvhich wrote before Gelasius the Bishop of Rome and were had in very great estimation by him as may be seene by his declaration of the Canonical Scriptures of the most approued fathers workes Dist 15. SaÌ„cta Romana Ecclesia Ibidem Againe that Gelasius citeth often and relieth much vpon the authority of Eusebius Bishop of Caesarea vvhereas Gelasius the Pope hath noted his vvorkes for little better then Apocryphal so that nothing is more like then that the good man hath mistaken his marke and is fallen from the successours of S. Peter and S. Paul vpon I cannot tel whom yet because he is an old writer though of what credit it be vncertaine I wil not refuse him And to the former part of his sentence that in the Sacrament there is an Image or resemblance of Christes body I answere that vve Catholikes doe say as much in effect for euery Sacrament is a visible signe of an inuisible and holy thing and so Christs body vnder the forme of bread and wine is a resemblance of his body parted from his bloud on the Crosse and the body of Christ vnder the formes of bread and vvine as it is in the Sacrament is a picture also or resemblance of the vnion of his mistical body in faith and charity euen as the bread is made of many graines of corne and the vvine pressed out of many clusters of grapes The later part of his sentence may also haue a good meaning and stand wel with our doctrine for the nature of bread doth not wholy ceasse to be in the blessed Sacrament because the forme sauour and tast of bread which be natural qualities thereof doe stil remaine though the whole inward substance be turned into the body of Christ which that Gelasius doth in the same place signifie when he there saith The same bread to be changed into the diuine substance that is into the substance of Christ by the operation of the holy Ghost whereby the receiuers are made partakers of the diuine nature And M. Abbots glosse vpon these later wordes is very extrauagant for we cannot in property of speech be said to be partakers of Christs nature really by being made partakers of his riches for it is one thing to be partaker of a mans nature really another farre different to be partaker of his goodes and benefits And as for the receiuing of Christ spiritually by faith that may be done vvithout receiuing any Sacrament at al but Gelasius either speaketh of receiuing Christ in the
Sacrament or else M. Abbot doth fondly alleage his wordes against the real presence wherefore his later paraphrase is a meere trifle and a vaine shift See more of this man and matter in the question of the real presence Let vs proceede ROBERT ABBOT De consecrat dist 2. comperimus THE same Gelasius when he vnderstood that some receiuing only the portion of the sacred body of Christ did forbeare the cuppe of his sacred bloud did forbidde that superstition and willed that either they should receiue the Sacrament whole or be kept from the whole because the diuiding of one and the same mistery cannot come without great sacriledge But now the Church of Rome is so farre off from acknowledging the diuiding of that mistery to be sacriledge as that shee pretendeth to be moued with just causes reasons Concil Trid. Sess 5. Can. 2. such as Christ and his Apostles and the primitiue Church had neuer the vvit to consider off to administer the Sacrament to the people only in one kinde and pronounceth them accursed that say shee erreth in so doing WILLIAM BISHOP NOW we come to Gelasius the Pope indeede and by his very phrase related by M. Abbot you may plainely perceiue that he beleeued firmely the sacred body of Christ and his pretious bloud to be really present in the blessed Sacrament for thus he speaketh We haue found that certaine men hauing receiued the portion of the sacred body doe abstaine from the Chalice of the sacred bloud Neither doe his wordes fit M. Abbots turne for the peoples receiuing vnder one kinde for he speaketh of Priests that doe consecrate both together vvho therefore must receiue both together that he may be partaker of the sacrifice which he himselfe hath offered For as it is said in the Canon next before De consecrat dist 2. relatum est Quale erit illud sacrificium cui nec ipse sacrificans particeps esse dignoscitur what kinde of sacrifice is that whereof he that sacrificeth doth not participate Wherefore it is by al meanes to be obserued that how often the Priest doth sacrifice the body and bloud of our Lord IESVS Christ vpon the Altar so often he exhibite himselfe a partaker of the body bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ. These wordes taken out of the Councel of Toledo goe immediately before those wordes which M. Abbot citeth and doe euidently shew that they are to be vnderstood of the Priest only that consecrateth the Sacrament as also the very title would haue told M. Abbot if he had beene disposed to take them right It is that the Priest ought not to receiue the body of Christ without his bloud So that here is not a vvord against the giuing the blessed body of Christ alone to the people But M. Abbot is forced like an euil Apothecary to take quid pro quo as they say one thing for another or else he should not be able to furnish his poore erring customers vvith any sort of pleasing drugges to feede their corrupt tast and grosse humours He doth by a parenthesis enterlace That Christ nor his Apostles nor the primitiue Church had euer the wit to consider any just cause of giuing the Sacrament in one kinde to the people vvhich is spoken too too like a blasphemer to touch our Sauiour Christ Iesus with lacke of vvit skil or due consideration who as diuers ancient Doctors doe testifie ministred the blessed Sacrament himselfe to two of his Disciples at Emaus vnder one only kinde of bread Luc. 24. vers 30. He tooke bread and blessed and brake and did reach it to them and their eies were opened and they knew him and he vanished out of their sight vvhere the circumstances August lib. 3. De consensu Euang. c. 25. Epist 59. ad Paul q. 8. Hier. in Epitaph Paulae of blessing breaking and giuing bread as he did at his last supper and the maruailous operation of it doe very probably proue it to haue beene the blessed Sacrament after which giuen in one kinde IESVS vanished out of their sight * Isichius lib. 2. in cap. 9. Beda in Theophil in eâ—m locum Lucae Opus imperfectuÌ„ in Mat. homil 17. In the Apostles time also very vsually the Sacrament vvas administred in one kinde They were perseuering in the doctrine of the Apostles and in communication of the breaking of bread and praiers vvhere breaking of bread being joined with preaching and praier doth conuince it to be spoken of the blessed SacrameÌ„t Againe saith S. Luke In the first of Sabaoth when we were assembled to breake bread Paul disputed with them c. This assembly vpon a Sonday furnished with S. Paules sermon must needes be to be made for the receiuing of the blessed Sacrament as a August Epist 86. Beda in illum locum S. Augustine and venerable Bede doe testifie In al which places following the expresse letter of the Scripture and the interpretation of many holy Fathers we haue warrant for the administration of the Sacrament to the people vnder one only kinde they then I hope vvanted not wit to know a cause of giuing the Sacrament in one kinde Lastly that in the primitiue Church the Sacrament was receiued vnder one kinde is most manifest by the testimony of b Tertull. lib. 2. ad Vxorâ—m Cyprian sermone de lapsis Ambros de obitu Satyri Tertullian S. Cyprian S. Ambrose and many others who declare how the Christians in those times of persecution carried to the sicke and reserued in their owne houses the blessed Sacrament viz. vnder the forme of bread to receiue it when they were in danger of torments or death for their more comfort and strengthning against those assaults Thus much by the way of administring the Sacrament vnder one kinde vnto the laity out of the practise of the primitiue Church the Apostles and our Sauiour himselfe in answere vnto M. Abbots parenthesis Now ere I take my leaue of this holy and most reuerend Pope Gelasius I vvil note briefly some branches of the Catholike faith which he doth formally deliuer to counterpoise those friuoulous objections vvhich M. Abbot haleth in obtorto collo as the Latin phrase is by the heeles out of his writinges First I haue declared out of him already Epist. ad Anast Imperat. In Epist ad Episcopos Daâ—daniae how that Bishops haue power and authority ouer Kinges and Emperours in Ecclesiastical causes so farre forth as to excommunicate them when vrgent cause so requireth He saith further That the Canons of the Church doe ordaine that from any part of the world appeale may be made to the See of Rome and that from it no man is suffered to appeale Againe That euery Church in the world doth know that the See of blessed Peter the Apostle hath right and power to loose and vnbinde that which is bound by the sentences of what Bishop soeuer as that See which hath lawful authority to judge
of al Churches Item In decreto de libris sacris Ecclesiasticis tom 2. Concil Distinct 15. Sancta Romana c. That the See Apostolike takes great heede that it be not stained with any touch of peruersity or any kinde of contagion Finally Gelasius assisted with seauenty other B shops doth declare the bookes of Wisdome Ecclesiasticus Tobias and of the Machabees to be Canonical Scripture and the Epistles Decretals of the ancient Bishops of Rome to be of sacred and sound authority and to be receiued vvith reuerence al vvhich the Protestants deny ROBERT ABBOT LEO Bishop of Rome speaking of the Martirs saith Epistola 81. That although the death of many Saints hath beene pretious in the Lordes sight yet the death of no innocent person hath beene the propitiation of the world that the righteous receiued crownes but gaue none and that the fortitude of the faithful haue growne examples of patience not gifts of righteousnesse that their deaths as they were seueral persons were seueral to euery of themselues and that none of them by his death paide the debt of any other man because it is only our Lord Iesus Christ in whom al were crucified al dead al buried al raised againe from the dead But now the Church of Rome hath changed that language and telleth vs that there are superabounding passions and satisfactions of the Saints Bellar. de Indulg l. 1. c. 2. Rhem. Annot. in col 1. v. 24 wherein they haue suffered more then is due for their owne sinnes vvhich doe serue to supply the necessity and want of others and that they doe thereby pay the debt of other men that hereof is growne a treasure in the Church of Rome which is to be dispensed and disposed by the Pope and that hence his Indulgences and pardons haue their ground WILLIAM BISHOP HERE are many vvordes of a right reuerend Father cited to smal purpose for the Church of Rome hath not yet changed one sillable of the same her old language Shee doth maintaine with S. Leo That no man how holy soeuer he were hath by his death or otherwise paid the ransome of any other mans sinnes or satisfied God for any one mortal sinne either of his owne or of any other mans but that it is Christ alone who with the price of his pretious bloud hath fully satisfied his Fathers justice for al and euery such deadly offence and for the eternal punishment which was due to the same and this is al that S. Leo teacheth Neuerthelesse we hold and that vvith S. Leo that after the guilt of such sinnes is through Christ released vs yet are we on our owne partes to endure some temporal punishment for the same offences by Christes order and appointment both to apply vnto vs the vertue of his owne sufferinges as also to make vs that are members of his body like vnto him our head Whereupon the Apostle saith Rom. 8. v. 17. That we be the sonnes of God and coheires with Christ Si tamen compatimur vt conglorificemur If yet we suffer with him that we may be glorified with him of this matter see more in the question of satisfaction This to be our doctrine M. Abbot could not be ignorant Page 118. because it is word by word deliuered euen by M. Perkins himselfe in that place Now that S. Leo vvas wel acquainted with such satisfactions as we on our partes are bound to make his learned workes doe yeeld plentiful testimony I wil cite but a place or two thus he answereth vnto Nicetus vvho did write vnto him to know how he should deale with some Christians vvho being taken prisoners of the Infidels had there among them polluted them selues with eating of meates offered vp to Idols Epist 77. c. 5. Let them saith Leo be purged with satisfaction of penance which is not so much to be weighed by length of time as by compunction of the hart And againe speaking of certaine Priests that were doing of penance he saith Wherefore such men as these who haue fallen Epist 99. ad Rusti cap. 2. must relieue themselues in priuate Ad promerendam misericordiam Dei To deserue the mercy of God Vt illis satisfactio si fuerit digna sit etiam fructuosa That the satisfaction may be fruitful to them if it be worthy that is if it be correspondent to their faults alluding to that of S. Iohn Baptist Math. 3. Doe fruites worthy of penance so that by the judgement of S Leo and the ancient practise of his time men that truly repented them of their sinnes vvhereby the guilt and eternal punishment was abolished were afterwardes put to penance and to doe worthy satisfaction and that not only to satisfie the cōgregation or other men as the Protestants fable vvho haue a greater care to please men then God but to be purged of their fault and to deserue mercy at Gods hand as S. Leo doth plainly teach Now that this temporal punishment which is due to euery Christian after the eternal is through Christ forgiuen him may be released and pardoned by the gouernours of the Chuch and principally by the Pope as chiefe Pastor thereof vnder Christ and that through the superaboundant sufferings of some others is a matter so wel knowne to Antiquity that he must needs confesse himselfe a very puny therein that thinketh it to be a new deuise of the late Church of Rome For that S. Gregory the great who liued aboue a thousand yeares past D. Tho. alij in 4. sent dist 20. instituted Stations to diuers Churches in Rome and granted great Indulgences and Pardons vnto al that with due preparation visited the same is so wel knowne that few learned Protestants doe doubt of it or dare deny it S. Leo himselfe vvho vvas S. Gregories Ancestor more then an hundred yeares in the said Epistle to Nicetus doth plainely signifie as much for he leaueth that enjoined penance of the conuerted party Epistola 77. numer 6. to the discreet moderation of the Bishop to be shortned and released as he shal see cause which is properly a Pardon or Indulgence Moreouer Pope Siluester vvho vvas S. Leo his Predecessour by more then an hundred yeares Antiodor l. 4. summae cap. de relaps at the request of S. Helen Constantine the great his mother consecrated a Chappel in Rome called Sancta Croce in Hierusalem the vvhich he did both beautifie and enrich with diuers Relikes of Saints and granted large Indulgences to al that should with deuotion visit the same as the ancient Records of the same place doe testifie And that the Pastours of other Countries yet more ancient then the former were very wel acquainted with this language of this superaboundant passions and satisfactions of some Saints let that most learned Archbishop of Carthage in Afrike glorious Martir S. Cyprian beare witnesse He instructing the Christian prisoners and most noble Confessours for vvhose triumphant sufferinges the vse
proofes for the Princes supremacy the Emperours some times called general Councels ergo they were supreme gouernors in causes Ecclesiastical a doubty argument as you may perceiue by the like A Lord calleth for his tenants being carpenters to build him a house ergo that Lord is the chiefest carpenter in the country If that Lord be not taken for supreme judge in the carpenters occupation though he had ful power to assemble the carpenters together vvhy shal the Emperour be esteemed chiefe gouernour in Ecclesiastical causes for that he hath authority to cal Ecclesiastical persons together Againe al men know that Ecclesiastical persons are in al temporal causes subject vnto temporal Princes who therefore may command them to meete together to compose contentions risen about spiritual causes vvhereby the temporal peace of his country is also much hindred and this may be wel done vvithout any pretence vnto soueraignity ouer them in spiritual matters so that if it were graunted that the Emperour had authority to cal general Councels yet it vvould not follow thereof that he were supreme head in Ecclesiastical causes much lesse can he be taken for supreme gouernour because the Popes gaue vnto the Emperours the cōmon and vsual wordes of courtesie as M. Abbot afterward very childishly reasoneth But let vs come to the ground-worke of the question I affirme then that though Emperour or King for the temporal command he hath ouer his spiritual subjects may cal them together vvhen there is just cause yet the soueraigne summoning of al Bishops Ecclesiastical persons to a general Councel doth not properly or principally belong to the Emperours but vnto the chiefe Pastour among them for very reason teacheth euery judicious man by induction through al societies it is most manifest that the chiefest member of any corporation or assotiation hath by instinct of nature that priuiledge of calling together the rest of that cōpany and corporation wherefore the lay Magistrate that is no proper member of the Ecclesiastical congregation cannot in natural reason and equity haue that power of assembling the Clergy together Besides no Christian Emperor had euer yet so much as temporal dominion ouer al Christendome those Christians then that were not his subjects at al could not be called together by his authority That their Empire vvhen it was at the largest vvas not so large as the bounds and limits of Christian religion S. Leo himselfe is witnesse in these wordes Sermon 1. in Natiuit SS Apost Petri Pauli Rome being made head of the world by the Chaire of S. Peter doth rule ouer more Countries by heauenly religion then by earthly dominion Againe since the Emperours became Christian not one hundred yeares together scarse did one Emperour command ouer al the Empire but lightly one gouerned in the East another ouer the West I would then gladly know to whether of them it belonged to cal general Councels or whether the Church of God must be destitute of such Councels vntil that matter were agreed vpon Further the calling of national prouincial Councels doth according vnto S. Augustine and Antiquity Aug. Ep. 217. Cal. lib. 4. Instit c. 7. n. 8. allowed therein by M. Caluin and the great hundred of * Centur. 4. c. 7. col 534. Magdeburge appertaine vnto the Primates and Metrapolitans of the same nation and prouince therefore by the like proportion it doth not appertaine to the Emperors but vnto the chief Patriarke of the Church to cal a general Councel That S. Leo on vvhose authority M. Abbot here doth stand tooke S. Peter first and after him the Bishops of Rome to be such I wil briefly proue thus he vvriteth Out of the whole world one Peter is chosen Serm. tert de Assumptione sua to haue chiefe charge of the vocation of the Gentils and is placed ouer the other Apostles and al the Fathers of the Church so that albeit there be among the people of God many Priests and many Pastours yet doth Peter peculiarly gouerne them ouer whom Christ doth principally raigne so that al temporal Princes who vvil not deny Christ to raigne ouer them must by S. Leos verdict acknowledge themselues subject in spiritual cases to S. Peter and his successours The same he doth confirme at large in an Epistle to the Bishops of the prouince of Vienna where he concludeth in these wordes To which S. Peter whosoeuer doth deny the primacy Epistola 87. he cannot in any sort diminish his dignity but puffed vp with the spirit of pride he doth drowne himselfe in the gulfe of hel Now least any man should take exceptions against S. Peters successours the Bishops of Rome though he vvould graunt the supremacy vnto S. Peter I adde that S. Leo in that second place doth rather speake of his owne authority vnder the name of S. Peter impugned then by Hilarius Bishop of Vienna then of S. Peters owne time Yet for more cleare demonstration of it Sermon 2. de anniuersario Assumptionis suae take these his wordes The disposition and order of truth doth continue and blessed Peter perseuering in the fortitude of a rocke hath not forsaken the gouernement of the Church which he vndertooke Peter I say doth to this day hold on and continue stil and liueth in his successours which he confirmeth in an hundreth places of his Epistles by me for breuities sake omitted contenting my selfe vvith that which he vvriteth in one letter vnto Anastasius Bishop of the Thessalonians to whom you shal see what authority he giues Epist 82. ad Anastasium Like as saith he my predecessours haue giuen to your predecessours euen so doe I following their example delegate vnto your charity the roome or charge of my gouernement that you imitating our mildenesse may helpe vs in the care which we owe vnto al Churches by the institution of God principally and that you may in a sort represent the presence of our visitation vnto prouinces farre distant from the Apostolical See of Rome For by reason of your nearenesse to them you may more readily see what matters and in what manner either you your selfe may by your diligence compose or else reserue vnto our judgement vvhere going on according to the Canons of the holy Fathers made by the spirit of God to vse his owne wordes he giues to that Bishop of Thessalonia dignity and authority ouer many Metrapolitanes of diuers prouinces That none be chosen without his priuity but al confirmed by his authority Canon 6. Item That if among the Prelates there happen to be question of greater affaires which God forbidde that cannot be ended by the prouincial Synode the Metrapolitan shal then prouide to instruct your brother-hood of the state of the whole businesse and if the parties being present it cannot be appeased by your judgement let it whatsoeuer it be be referred to our knowledge Canon 7. vvhere he giueth him Authority to cal Bishops before him and a Councel also if
any greater cause arise and diuers such other plaine and cleare markes of superiority that euen M. Abbots badde eies may easily serue him to discerne them Seing then S. Leo thought himselfe and his predecessours to haue ful authority and that by the holy Canons made by diuine inspiration to delegate ouer the Churches of the East vvhere was most doubt of his authority such power vnto others Can it be doubted but that he vvas most certainly perswaded that the Bishop of Rome hath and alwaies had supreme command in Ecclesiastical causes al the world ouer And that you may see that S. Leo vvas not only of that opinion but that the best most learned of the East Church of that time were also as fully perswaded of the Church of Romes authority ouer al the world I wil adjoine hereunto the sentence of Theodoretus one of the soundest Catholikes and one of the most learned and famous authours of those daies He being Bishop of Cyrus in Asia doth write vnto Renatus a Priest of Rome thus Theodoret. Epistola 2. The Heretikes haue spoiled me of my Priestly function and seate they haue cast me out of the citties hauing no respect vnto my gray haires nor regard of my time spent in religion wherefore I pray you that you wil perswade the most holy Archbishop Leo that he wil vse his Apostolike authority and command vs to come to your Councel for that holy See doth hold the sterne of gouernement ouer al the Churches in the world Another Epistle this holy Father did write vnto Leo himselfe wherein he saith I doe expect the sentence of your Apostolike See and doe humbly beseech your Holinesse to succour me appealing to your just judgement c. And that you may yet further perceiue that S. Leo his sentence was of force to restore him being a Bishop in Asia to his former dignity and seate these few vvordes out of the Councel of Chalcedon wil sufficiently proue thus speaketh the Councel Actione 1. Let the most reuerend Bishop Theodoret enter in that he may be partner of the Councel because the most holy Archbishop Leo hath restored him to his Bishopricke Now I come to answere M. Abbots goodly proofes and vvise glosses to the contrary S. Leo saith he would not take vpon him to cal general Councels That is false for he did cal a general Councel in the West witnesse these his wordes vnto Tuilius the Bishop of Asturicensis Epistola 91. numer 17. I haue sent letters to our bretheren and fellow Bishops of Carthage in Afrike Tarragone in Spaine Portugal and France Eisque concilium Synodi generalis indiximus And haue summoned them to meete at a general Councel And that could not escape S. Leo his knowledge vvho vvas most skilful in al Antiquity which by tradition descended vnto one of his successors Pelagius the second who was S. Gregory the great his predecessor to wit Epistola 1 ad Orientales that the authority of calling general Councels was through the priuiledge of S. Peter giuen vnto the See Apostolike But he made request saith M. Abbot vnto Theodosius first and after vnto Martianus the Emperors that they would command a general Councel to be holden in Italy which they would not doe but chose rather another place Be it so for sometimes such mighty Monarkes take more state vpon them then Christian dutie doth permit And as for Theodosius the younger though he were a good Emperour at the first yet afterward it is euident that he assisted the Heretike Eutiches his Patron Dioscorus too farre in that wicked assembly at Ephesus See Actionem primam Concil Chalced. Liberatus cap. 12. the place by him assigned for that general Councel The reason that moued S. Leo to request those Emperours to cal a Councel was not for that he doubted of his owne authority therein but for diuers other good respects First because as I before signified the Bishops to be assembled vvere for the most part the Emperours subjects in temporal affaires and therefore were not vvithout his priuity to be called so farre from their residences And for this cause the Kinges of euery country being aduertised by the Popes Holinesse of a general Councel doe to this day as it appeared in the last general Councel of Trent summon the Bishops of their Realmes to the said general Councel and command them to make choise of some to send thither vvhich doth nothing derogate to the Popes general summoning Besides the Heretikes of those times vvould not obey the Pope nor their lawful Pastours command no more then these of our time wherefore the Emperours power vvhich they dreadded and stoode in more awe off vvas to be joined with the Popes authority wherefore he had good cause to request it Yet that the vnderstanding reader may perceiue how S. Leo euen then did fore-see that some inconuenience might happe to follow of his condescending so farre vnto the Emperours pleasure about the place and time of that Councel he as it were to preuent it doth yeeld his consent in such sort that no great aduantage can be taken of it Epist 41. ad Martian thus he vvriteth to the Emperour Martian I required indeede of your most gratious clemency that the Synode which you thought necessary to be assembled as we also required for the restoring of vnity in the East Church might be for a time deferred that the mindes of men being more settled those Bishops which for feare of enemies are staied at home might also meete but for that you doe zealously preferre Gods cause before the affaires of men and are wisely and Godly perswaded that it wil further the wealth of your Empire to haue the Priests of God in vnity and the Gospel preached without dissention Ego etiam vestris dispositionibus non renitor I doe not withstand or striue against this your ordinance Here you may see that he did not yeeld vpon obedience vnto the Emperours order but moued vpon good consideration would not contend against it his very wordes yet giuing that he might haue withstoode him if he had thought it more expedient for the common good Againe in his letters to the same Councel of Chalcedon he putteth in a caueat by vvhich they might vnderstand that this his condescending to the Emperour should not be taken for a prejudice against the authority of the See of Rome for calling of Councels these be his wordes Epistola 45. ad Synod Chalced. I had wished indeed most dearely beloued that al the Priests of God did agree in one profession of the Catholike faith c. but because many thinges are done of which we often repent c. the religious aduise of our most gratious Emperour is to be embraced mouing your holy brother-hood to assemble your selues together for the ouerthrowing of Sathans sleights and for the restoring of vnity in the Church Beatissimi Apostoli Petri sedis jure atque honore seruato the right
was the true Apostolike faith about the questions then handled But forsooth because he did belike vse these curteous vvordes of obedience M. Aâ—bot that lieth at the catch and wants better stuffe is constrained to lay hold on them by which manner of arguing he might proue euery Pope to professe due obedience to euery priuate seruant of God because his ordinary stile is Seruus seruorum Dei The seruant of Gods seruants Now if one had so little wit as hence to argue and gather that the Pope professed obedience or were inferiour to al other seruants of God for if he be their seruant he is bound to obey them would not al the vvorld wonder at his folly And yet this admirable combatant and champion of the host of Ismael is faine to fly to the like miserable shifts and to imploy perforce vvordes that are vttered of custome and curtesie in al Countries for sound proofes If al Italians and French men that vvil say they are your seruants Seruitore di vostre Signoria Monsieur je suis vostre treshumble seruiteur should be taken short at his word and thereby be pressed to your obedience seruice you might soone become a great Signiour ouer many stately seruants that vvould doe what they list But that you may see how M. Abbot can scarsly borrow one weapon out of the true armory of Antiquiry vvhich vvil not serue to wound himselfe I wil here acquaint you vvith some wordes out of the very same Epistle of Pope Agatho to the Emperour Constantius the fourth vvhich doe demonstrate the Church of Rome neuer to faile in matter of faith Did you marke before in those few wordes how he esteemed Apostolike tradition and the definitions of Councels and of the See Apostolike to be the firme foundation of the Church of Christ which alone is sufficient to batter and beate flat to the earth that chiefe fortresse of the Protestants of the al-sufficiency of the vvritten word then hauing deliuered the true faith of the blessed Trinity he annexeth these wordes This is the Apostolical and Euangelical Tradition which the Apostolike Church of God the Mother of your most happy Empire doth hold this is the pure confession of piety this is the rule of the true faith holden aswel in prosperity as in aduersity by the Apostolike Church of Christ which is proued by Gods grace neuer to haue straied from the path of Apostolical Tradition nor euer was corrupted with Heretical nouelties because it was said to Peter I haue praied for thee that thy faith faile not and thou being conuerted confirme thy brethren Here our Lord promised that the faith of Peter should not faile and willed him to confirme his brethren which the Bishops my predecessours as is wel knowne to al men haue alwaies done confidently and I though much inferiour to them yet for the person that by Gods goodnesse I sustaine doe desire to follow them at the heeles this out of Pope Agatho by the way in fauour of our cause because M. Abbot would haue gladly begged an almesse of him to relieue his miserable want Now that which followeth in him out of Tertullian That the Emperor is honoured according to the ancient doctrine of the Church as next vnto God inferiour vnto God only If the good man would haue bethought himselfe a little vvhat kinde of men the Emperours were in Tertullians time and before he vvould not I thinke for very shame haue once offered to proue those Emperours supreme authority in causes Ecclesiastical for they were al of them Heathen Idolaters and professed enemies to the Christian religion If then they vvere next vnder God supreme gouernours of Ecclesiastical causes it would follow thereof see the good effect of M. Abbots argument that the Christian religion vvas to be forsaken of al men and Idolatry to haue beene imbraced for that was these Emperors supreme judgement in spiritual matters What meant M. Abbots a Gods name to perswade Christians that Heathen and Idolatrous Emperours such as those were in Tertullians time vvere to be honoured followed in matter of religion before Bishops and Archbishops and next vnto God If those be Tertullians wordes euery man can apply them better then M. Abbot doth to wit that Emperours in temporal causes and in the ciuil gouernement of the common weale are vnder no man but next vnto God but in Ecclesiastical causes those Emperours had nothing at al to doe Now to those wordes which he proposeth as very odious That how much the Moone is lesse then the Sunne so much is the Emperour inferior to the Pope They be not precisely the wordes of the Canon but these That how much difference there is betweene the Sunne and the Moone so much is there betweene Bishops and Kinges The sence he doth not much alter but only sets it out more disdainfully vve allow of the sence being rightly taken to wit that the authority of Bishops is properly to be compared to the brightnesse of the Sunne because it is wholy conuersant in spiritual causes vvhich depend vpon the brightnesse and light of faith and doe formally appertaine to the heauenly Kingdome of the Sunne Christ Iesus Now who sees not that the Emperours power being properly to gouerne the temporal state by the light of natural reason which is very dimme and obscure if it be conferred vnto the light of grace may aptly be resembled to the Moone light the light of heauenly affaires as farre passing in clearenesse the light of vvorldly businesses as doth the brightnesse of the Sunne at noone daies passe the Moone-shine at mid-night Now if vve would search higher towards the most pure Antiquity we shal finde farre greater comparisons betweene the spiritual power of Bishops and the temporal of Emperours I vvil for a tast cite only the sentences of two most authentike Doctors S. Ambrose an ancient and most graue Father saith Bretheren the honour and sublimity of a Bishop Ambros initio sui Pastor citatur dist 96. cap. Si duo Greg. Oratio ad populum perturb cannot be equalled with any comparison The Majesty of Kinges and Diademes of Princes if they be compared to it are farre more inferiour then if the mettal of leade should be compered with gold And S. Gregory Nazianzene maketh no lesse difference betweene them two then there is betweene the soule the body the spiritual power of Bishops as much in his judgement excelling that of Princes as the soule in dignity doth surmount the body so that the Popes comparison alleaged by M. Abbot is very temperate in respect of these of the auncient Fathers vvhich notwithstanding vvere made vpon great judgement The lies and toies that ensue in M. Abbots text are not worth the answering First Catal. TestiuÌ„ he that reportes the Emperour to be the Popes man is an heretical and lying companion and therefore no sufficient vvitnesse Secondly if any Emperour or King out of his owne profound humility or aboundance of zeale towardes
passing through the middest of the assembly he came to the vppermost place of it where he stood on his feete and when a little seate of gold was set for him he would not sit downe before the Bishops beckned to him so to doe Where Eusebius saith indeede that he passed vnto the vppermost end of the Hal but doth not say that vvhen he came thither he was placed in the highest seate and one may wel sit in the highest end of a large Hal and not in the highest place thereof But in the vppermost part of the Hal a little chaire vvas placed for him beneath the benches whereon the Presidents of the Councel and chiefest Patriarks did sit for so the other Ecclesiastical historiographers doe intimate Further hauing after one of the Bishops made an Oration to the Councel Ibidem As a most louing Sonne vnto the Bishops and Priests his Fathers as Theodoret vvriteth not as a President of a Councel to his inferiours Euseb de vita Constant lib. 3. cap. 13. Moreouer hauing finished his said speech Sermonem omnem Concilij Praesidijs reliquit as testifieth Eusebius he left al the communication and discussings of matters vnto the Presidents of the Councel Out of vvhich vvordes we gather euidently that the Emperour was not the President of the Councel but there were other Presidents thereof vnto vvhom the Emperour referred the decision of the questions then in controuersie Finally the Emperour Bazilius deliuereth in the end of the eight general Councel That Constantine subscribed the Councel after al the Bishops there assembled vvhereas the President and chiefe Iudge of the Councel subscribeth in the first place Seing then that Constantine the great confessed that it appertained not to him to judge Bishops but to be judged of them and that therein he is seconded by Hosius Athanasius S. Ambrose and others al most ancient and renowmed Prelates of Christes Church And being most probable that he had no place in that Councel but by permission of the Bishops at whose beck he sate downe in a little seate a part and did not speake to them in other manner then a child doth to his Father leauing vnto the Presidents of the Councel the discussion of the matters there proposed what vpright weigher of such serious affaires can doubt but that he was nothing lesse then the chiefe President and moderator there True it is that he out of his owne zeale graue vvisdome did first attentiuely heare them then sometimes spake himself specially to appease the contentious wranglings of the Arrian Heretikes and their fauourites of whom many were there present and the ouer forward and feruent zeale of some Catholikes but this argueth no superinteÌ„dency or presidency but only Christian discretion and charity to helpe forward an orderly examination and peacible determination of those controuersies But saith M. Abbot the Bishops acknowledged him to be their supreme judge in that they referred their controuersies and quarrels to be ended by him Nothing lesse for vve referre many babling matters to be ended vnto our honest neighbours And as M. Abbot himselfe rehearseth out of Eusebius about the Bishops of Aegipt That Constantine interposed himselfe as an arbitratour of their controuersies not as Iudge euen so did some of the Councel referre their quarrels to him as an Arbitratour And most like that they who so did vvere vnruly Arrians or very vndiscreete Catholikes whereof who but an indiscreet person or wrangling Heretike can take hold Againe vvhere Eusebius reporteth that Constantine did as an arbitratour seeke to make attonement betweene the Aegiptian Prelates he addeth that he did it with very great respect Eos vt Patres imò vt Dei Prophetas omnino honorifice reuerens Reuerencing them very honourably as his Fathers yea more as the Prophets of God not domineering ouer them as his inferiours and prescribed to them some such thing as did belong to the good of Gods Church to wit that they would leaue off their dissention and quietly obey vnto the decrees of the Nicene Councel Lastly M. Abbot perceiuing very wel that he had hitherto but trifled and spoken little to the purpose he addeth And that M. Bishop may know that Constantine held himselfe the supreme judge ouer Bishops let him heare Constantine himselfe concerning them Theodor. lib. 10. cap. 19. If we haue holy Bishops of right beliefe and men indued with humanity we shal be gladde but if any audaciously and vnaduisedly shal grow vnto the commending of those pestilent heresies his insolency shal be repressed by the execution of Gods seruant euen by me These vvordes of the Emperour supposing them for the time to be spoken to Bishops though they come nearer to a probable shew of some kinde of supremacy then his sitting in the vpper end of the Hal in a golden Chaire and his curteous exhortation to peace and now and then helping out this man or that man with his matter yet doe they not reach home For the execution of punishment inflicted vpon Bishops by the decree of Councels or the Ecclesiastcal Canons may be and to this day is committed vnto the lay Magistrate without any feare of making him thereby the supreme judge in causes Ecclesiastical It rather proues him to be the minister or seruant of the Church in those cases But what wil you say if those threats of the Emperors were not giuen out against Bishops or any Clergy-men at al but only against lay-men then M. Abbot must needs confesse that he giues not M. Bishop to vnderstand that the Emperor is supreme judge ouer Bishops but that M. Abbot is one of the most audacious perfidious and cosening vvriters that euer set pen to paper vvho blusheth not euen thereto vaunt of his forces and to assure euen his aduersary of an inuincible argument where is no shadow in the world of any probable proofe for his part let any indâ—fferent man but turne to the place and he shal finde without any doubt those vvordes of threat to be spoken only to the cittizens of Nicomedia Their Bishop Eusebius and Theognis Bishop of Nicea were for being though wily yet obstinate Arrians by the decree of the Nicene Councel deposed from their Bishopricks and other chosen in their places wherevpon the most Christian and wise Emperor vvriteth vnto his subjects the cittizens of Nicomedia vvhom he heard to be too much addicted to their Arrian Bishop and his heresies to beware of him and hauing touched his faults and just punishment inflicted vpon him therefore by the Councel coÌ„meth to the wordes which M. Abbot peruerteth The wordes of the Emperour are these I am vestrum est ea fide in Deum aciem mentis vestiae intendere in qua vos semper mansisse constat c. Now it is your parts O yee cittizens of Nicomedia to serue God in that faith in which you haue alwaies continued and to performe al offices of Godlinesse And if it so happen that we may alwaies haue Bishops
the hope of eternal life is recouered that they who had lost the gift of regeneration condemning themselues by their owne judgement might attaine vnto remission of their sinnes the aide of Gods goodnesse being so disposed that pardon from God cannot be obtained but by the supplication of Priests For the Mediatour of God and Man the man IESVS Christ hath giuen this power vnto the Prelates of the Church that they may both enjoine satisfaction to the penitent and that they may also admit them being by the same holesome satisfaction purged through the gate of reconciliation vnto the communion of the Sacraments Where he further teacheth That they who die without this gift of pardon shal neuer be saued and doth also greatly blame them who deferre their confession til toward the point of death when saith he there is scarce space either for the confession of the penitent or for the reconciliation of the Priest It vvas not then vndoubtedly treason in S. Leos daies to be reconciled by a Priest seing he so often and so much recommended it to al Christian people and held it the only gate to re-enter into Gods fauor for al such Christians as were fallen from the grace they had before receiued in the Sacrament of Baptisme That Bishops Priests Deacons yea and Subdeacons should not marry and if any married man vvere chosen a Subdeacon that he should refraine from the company of his wife S. Leo is very plaine thus he decreeth Epist. 82. ad Anastasium Thes num 4. It is free for men that be not of the Clergie to marry but to shew the purity of perfect continency carnal copulation is not graunted so much as to Subdeacons that they who haue wiues be as though they had them not and they who haue them not doe continue single And if in this order which is the fourth from the head with the Protestants it is no order at al it is meete that chastity be kept how much more is it to be obserued in the first second and third that no man be esteemed worthy either of the place of a Deacon or honour of a Priest or excellency of a Bishop who is discouered not to haue yet bridled himselfe from the pleasure of wiuing This of the continency of Priests Wil you heare S. Leos opinion of the Vowes of religious men and women which the false Father Abbot scornefully tearmeth Monkish Epist 90. ad Rusti Norb. cap. 12. The profession of a Monke saith he vndertaken by a mans owne free choise and desire cannot be forsaken without sinne because that must be performed which we haue vowed to God Wherefore he that forsaking the profession of a single or solitary life is turned souldier or fallen to marriage is to be purged publikely by the satisfaction of penance for albeit warre-fare may be harmelesse and marriage honest yet is it a transgression and offence to haue forsaken the better choise It followeth in the next number Ibid. ca. 13.8 Maidens who not constrained by their parents command but of their owne accord haue made profession of Virginity and receiued the habit if afterwardes they desire to marry they doe sinne though they were not yet consecrated Ibidem 14. but if after both profession and consecration they should fal to marry it cannot be doubted but that they should commit a very hainous crime For if mans decrees cannot be infringed without punishment what shal light vpon them who haue broken the couenants of the diuine mistery How forcibly doth this chast doctrine of S. Leo batter and beate flat to the earth the voluptuous loosenesse of runnegate votaries and giues checkmate to the Protestants for vpholding the same as wel done That you may yet further perceiue what an euil Protestant and a perfect Papist S. Leo was he commendeth highly the Emperour Martianus his vertue and Godlinesse for receiuing with worthy honour the holy Relikes of blessed Flamianus departed who a little before was Patriarke of Constantinople And for praying to Saints you haue heard before Serm. 5. de Epiphania how he encouraged al men Eorum ambire suffragia earnestly and as it were ambitiously to sue for the aide of their praiers Againe he exhorteth his auditours to celebrate vvith him the Saturday following the Vigils of the most happy Apostle S. Peter Ser. 8. de Iejunio decim Who saith he with his praiers wil vouchsafe to helpe our praiers fastings and almes-deedes Behold he made no question but that S. Peter both knew their desires and deserts and would also further them vvith the aide of his effectual praiers In briefe then we haue that the most learned and holy Pope S. Leo the first taught praying to Saints and worshipping of their Relikes the vowes of Monkes and professed Virgins that Priests and al in holy orders should not marry but liue continently that Priests haue power to reconcile and to forgiue sinnes and that euery man who hopeth for any pardon of his sinnes at Gods handes must particularly confesse them in priuate to a Priest and by due satisfaction purge himselfe from them that in the Sacrament there is the same true flesh of Christ which was crucified and did arise from death that Masse is to be said euery holy day wherein the sacrifice of Christs body is offered that S. Peter was the supreme Pastour of Christes Church and that the Bishop of Rome is his lawful successour therein hauing supreme authority ouer both East and West Church These with such like points which may by diligent perusing his most eloquent and diuine workes be gathered doe most perspicuously demonstrate the Church of Rome in his time vvhich vvas neare 1200. yeares agoe to haue held the selfe same language concerning matters of faith vvhich the same Church of Rome at this day speaketh And that M. Abbot in seeking to proue the contrary did but shew himselfe either very ignorant in his workes or ouer studious not to take his Author right as his manner is but to picke some matter of cauil out of him thereby to blinde and deceiue the simple reader Now to the next ROBERT ABBOT PELAGIVS the Bishop of Rome the first of that name admitted a married man to be Bishop of Syracusa only putting in a caution that he should not dilapidare the Church goodes and transferre the same to his wife and children Dist. 28. de Syracusana The danger whereof he signifieth was the cause of that constitution which did forbidde a man hauing a wife and children to be preferred to a Bishopricke otherwise a man is not repelled for hauing wife children saith the Glosse because the Apostles permitted the same But now the Church of Rome Glossa ibidē wil by no meanes admit men to be Bishops or Priests not for that they would auoide the dilapidating of the Church goodes for that is a thing common with the Popes themselues Platina in vita Iohan. 16. To apply al to satisfie the
greedinesse and couetousnesse of their familiars their bretheren their nephewes vnder which name commonly goe their bastards but because they asscribe to marriage as the old Heretikes did Bellarm. de Cler. lib. 1. cap. 19. pollution and vncleanenesse which cannot stand with the sanctity and holinesse of the Priestly function WILLIAM BISHOP IF M. Abbot did not euery vvhere almost shew himselfe to be a shamelesse man and one that careth not how corruptly so he may somewhat colourably cite the ancient Fathers sentences this passage were alone more then sufficient to proue him to be no better then a cosening counterfeit In these few lines there are foure euident vntruthes vttered by him The first is that a man is not repelled from being a Bishop for hauing wife children but only for feare of dilapidation of the Church goods This is most euidently false for though the feare of spending the Church goods vpon prophane vses be one cause vvhy it is not expedient that a Bishop or Priest should be maried yet the more principal reason thereof is the purity of the single life and the freenesse of it from al such vvorldly affaires and temporal troubles as are necessarily linked vvith the care of prouision for wife children This you heard before out of S. Leo who was predecessor to Pope Pelagius the first by more then an hundred yeares These be also the reasons of S. Augustine and S. Hierome vvho vvrote thereof vvhole volumes against the Heretike Iouinian and were giuen first by S. Paul himselfe when he teacheth that 1. Cor. 7. vers 31. he who is without a wife is careful for the thinges that pertaine to our Lord how he may please God but he that is with a wife is careful for the thinges that appertaine to the world how he may please his wife and is diuided And Vers 32. Vers 34. the woman vnmaried and virgin thinkes on the thinges that pertaine to our Lord that shee may be holy both in body and spirit See the more special groundes of the single life of clergy-men wherevpon euen by the confession of M. Abbot himselfe Page 42. A law was made in the Church of Rome by Pope Siritius who was 150. yeares before Pelagius that al Priests and Deacons should either be chosen single men or else promise to abstaine wholy from the company of their wiues which is also decreed in the second Councel of Carthage holden about the same time where the holy Bishops there assembled doe say Canon 2. That we may keepe that which the Apostles did teach and Antiquity herselfe obserued giuing al men to vnderstand that the single and chast life of the Clergy vvas taught by the Apostles and obserued in most pure Antiquity It being then so notorious and wel knowne a thing that whosoeuer would be a Bishop must needs refraine from the company of his wife no caution was required for that by Pope Pelagius because there was no question or doubt of it And M. Abbot dealeth deceitfully to argue out of the not mentioning of that vvhich was vnderstood of al men as necessary to be presupposed and is in most of the Canons of the very same distinction Distinct 28. expresly deliuered and also in two other vvhole distinctions going next before His second false tricke is in the citation of the glosse and that a very foule one for he chops it off in the middest leauing out that which wil marre al his market The glosse saith vpon that caution against dilapidations that it is to be vnderstood when be that is chosen to be a Bishop doth loue his wife and children so tenderly that it is to be presumed he would for their sakes dilapidare the Church goods c. otherwise a man is not repelled for wife and children to wit for that point of dilapidations whereof the glosse there speaketh This to be the sence any vnderstanding man vvould easily perceiue if the glosse had gone no further But it addeth as it were to meete with M. Abbots cauil Dum tamen longa continentia praecesserit A man that hath a wife may be admitted to be a Bishop putting in good surety that he wil not dilapidare the Church goods yet with this prouiso That he hath long before liued continently that is refrained wholy from the company of his wife as it is before said in the Canon Priusquam of the same distinction See how expresly the glosse excepts that which M. Abbot auoucheth it to affirme His third false tale is That the Church of Rome now wil by no means admit maried men to be bishops priests which is not true for in those very cases vvherein they vvere at any time admitted before they vvould be admitted now that is If there were want of other able men and some such eminent learning and vertue in a maried man as were not to be found in a single then he might be made both Priest Bishop so that he and his wife would liu◠continently for there is no Canon of the Church to the contrary His fourth lie is a luculent and bright one That we forsooth asscribe pollution and vncleanenesse to marriage as the old Heretikes did for neither Cardinal Bellarmine vvhom he quoteth nor any other Catholike doth teach the act of matrimony to be the worke of the Deuil or damnable sinne as the Manichees and some other Heretikes did Nay he declareth there plainly that it may be without any sinne at al though most commonly concupiscence beare to great a sway in it both preuenting the rule of reason and somewhat exceeding the measure of it as a Lib. 14. de Ciuitat c. 17. Item lib. 5. cont Iulian. cap. 8. 10. S. Augustine testifieth and doth make a man more dul and heauy to spiritual exercises and not so pure holy as the office of a Priest doth require as b Hier. lib. 1. cōt Iouinian S. Hierome and c Chrysost l. 6 de Sacerdot S. Chrysostome doe witnesse And that a man thereby is made lesse holy and pure both in body and spirit S. Paules owne vvordes doe intimate ¶ 1. Cor. 7. vers 34. The woman vnmarried thinketh how shee may be holy both in body and spirit so that within the compasse of not many lines M. Abbot le ts flie two cast of lies and yet as it were not content vvith so few he interlaceth three other lies to furbish and smooth vp the rest The first is that now a daies married men are not repelled from Bishopricks to auoide dilapidations which is false For that is one cause as I shewed before and is also touched euen by that most renowmed Father Bellarmine euen in the same place cited by M. Abbot De Clericis lib. 1. cap. 19. in his fifth reason vvhere he teacheth That the marriage of Bishops and Priests doth hinder much that hospitality and tender care of the poore which men of the Church ought to haue for the
beene supreme gouernour of Christes Church To vvhich fallacy it is most easie to answere First that albeit the Patriarke of Constantinople could not so cal himselfe in a lawful good meaning but proudly and wickedly because he had his jurisdiction limited vvithin the boundes of his owne Patriarkship had nothing to doe with any other churches that vvere vvithout it so that his power was in no sence vniuersal that is spred ouer al the world yet this name might in some good sence notwithstāding haue beene giuen vnto the Bishop of Rome as S. Gregory himselfe in one of the same Epistles vvhich M. Abbot citeth doth intimate For vvriting to the Patriarke of Alexandria he saith Lib. 4. Epist 36. Your Holinesse knoweth that by the Councel of Chalcedon vvhich vvas one of the foure first general Councels most highly esteemed off by S. Gregory this name of vniuersallity was offered to me as Bishop of the Apostolike See for as he testifieth Epist 32. of the same booke that name was in honour of S. Peter Prince of the Apostles attributed by many in that Councel vnto the Bishop of Rome yet saith he none of my Predecessours consented to vse it because verily if one Patriarke be called vniuersal the other are made no Patriarkes at al. Briefly then to dispatch this great matter that name vniuersal as it was challenged by Iohn Patriarke of Constantinople who had no right to it in any good sence was presumptuous peruerse and prophane in vvhich consideration S. Gregory so tearmed it Neither vvould he nor any of his predecessours vse that name though in that sence that they had charge and command ouer the vniuersal Church it might haue beene attributed to them yet because it was subject to another construction to wit that the Bishop of Rome was the only truly proper Bishop of euery Diocesse and other named Bishops were not true and proper Bishops there of but the vniuersal Bishops Vicars Suffraganes and Substitutes therefore they vtterly auoided that name as matter of jealousie and scandal choosing the humble stile of seruus seruorum Dei The seruant of Gods seruants For the further satisfaction of the learned reader I wil proue out of S. Gregory in the very same place quoted by M. Abbot both that he wrote against the name of vniuersal Bishop in the later sence And that notwithstanding he refused that name yet that he acknowledged and taught the Bishop of Rome to haue supreme authority ouer al the Church of Christ Touching the first the wordes before alleaged out of his 36. Epistle Lib. 4. Epist 36. doe demonstrate so much to wit If one Patriarke be called vniuersal the other are made no Patriarkes at al vvhich can haue no other sence then that the calling of one Patriarke or Bishop Vniuersal doth signifie him so to be a Bishop in euery place that no other besides him can be truly and properly called Bishop but must be his Vicar and Subdelegate The like saith he in his 34. Epistle to the Emperesse Lib. 4. Epist 34. That his brother and fellow Bishop Iohn striued to be called Bishop alone And in the 7. booke and 69. Epistle to Eusebius he saith Si vniuersalis est restat vt vos Episcopi non sitis If one Bishop be vniuersal it remaineth that you be no Bishops This then is most certaine that S. Gregory spake against the name of Vniuersal Bishop taken in this sence that he was so a Bishop as no other but he could be Bishop in any place Marry if we vnderstand by it one man to haue the general charge of al the Churches in the vvorld yet so as there be also Bishops and Archbishops his brothers who haue the particular and proper gouernement of their seueral Diocesse then S. Gregory telleth vs plainely that S. Peter and his Successours the Bishops of Rome were such these be his wordes Lib. 4. Epist 76. It is manifest to al that know the Gospel that the charge of the whole Church was by our Lordes owne mouth committed to S. Peter Prince of al the Apostles And againe in the same Epistle Behold Peter receiued the keies of the Kingdome of heauen the power of binding and loosing is giuen to him the charge and principality of the whole Church is committed to him vvhich is also repeated in one of the Epistles cited by M. Abbot Lib. 4. Epist 32. And that by S. Peter this vniuersal charge and authority was left vnto the Bishops and See of Rome no man can vvitnesse it more manifestly then S. Gregory hath done First hauing proued out of the word of God S. Peters supremacy he adjoyneth Lib. 6. Epist 201. Therefore though there were many Apostles yet for the principality it selfe the only seate of the Prince of the Apostles hath preuailed in authority As farre as the See Apostolike is euidently knowne to be set ouer al Churches by the authority of God So farre amongst other manifold cares that doth greatly occupy vs when for the consecration of a Bishop our sentence is expected Againe Lib. 2. Epist 69. Lib. 7. Epist 64. For whereas he the Patriarke of Constantinople acknowledgeth himselfe to be subject vnto the Apostolike See of Rome I know not what Bishop is not subject vnto it Moreouer What thing soeuer shal be done in that Councel without the authority and consent of the See Apostolike it is of no strength and vertue Whereas on the other side he saith Those thinges that are once ratified Lib. 7. Epist 69. by the authority of the See Apostolike neede no further strength or confirmation If any man desire to see how S. Gregory himselfe practised that soueraigne authority ouer al the parts of the Christian world let him but reade his Epistles and he shal finde it most perspicuously Magdeburg Centur. 6. In Indice verbo Gregorius euen as their owne great writers of the Centuries doe testifie directing them to the places in his workes where they shal finde the same How devoide then was M. Abbot of al good conscience and honest dealing that vvould vnder the colour of his writing against the name of vniuersal in that sence perswade the simple that S. Gregory vtterly misliked of the supremacy of the Bishop of Rome Now because that S. Gregory hath beene alwaies highly esteemed and greatly respected of both Latin and Greeke Church for his singular holynes and learning and was besides the principal cause vnder God of the conuersion of vs English-men vnto the Christian faith I wil note out of his workes summarily what was his opinion of many of the questioned points of faith betweene the Protestants and vs because M. Abbot citeth him against vs that euery one may see vvhat religion was first planted amongst vs English-men and continued for a thousand yeares Of the Supremacy and Merit of good workes hath beene spoken already Concerning the sacrifice of the Masse it was daily offered vp to God in his age
handes and by which many miracles were wrought if with filing be could get off any thing For when many that come hither doe craue that blessing that they might haue of that dust which is filed off those chaines the Priest comming with the file◠doth for some presently get off something whereas for other he drawing the file on the chaines a long time nothing at al wil off it Further to a Noble man of France he sent the blessing of S. Peter and a little Crosse within the which was inclosed some such filing of S. Peters chaines Which for a time saith he bound S. Peters necke Lib 2. Epist 72. but shal loose your necke from sinne for euer Some relikes also of S. Laurence Grid-yron were inclosed in the foure corners of that same Crosse That by the helpe of that whereon his body was broiled your minde saith he may be kindled in the loue of God Touching the Images of Saints he not only approueth them to be made but teacheth them to be set in Churches Lib. 7. Epist 119. that they who cannot reade may by beholding of them learne to imitate some of their vertues Moreouer he exhorteth al men to worship them by kneeling before them yet with this caueat that they doe not yeeld them any such adoration as is proper to God What a protectour he was of Purgatory praier for the dead Lib. 7. Epist ad Secundin Lib. 4. Dialog cap. 20. may be seene in these places vvhere he saith that we must beleeue that there is a Purgatory fire to cleanse lighter offences after this life before the day of judgement And proues it both by Christes wordes ¶ Math. 12. vers 32. If any man blaspheme against the holy Ghost it shal not be forgiuen him neither in this world nor in the world to come And out of S. Paul 1. Cor. 3. vers 15. He shal be saued yet so as by fire And in the beginning of the third penitential Psalme expounding these wordes of the Prophet O Lord rebuke me not in thy fury neither chastise me in thy wrath he adjoineth This is as much as if Dauid had said I know that after this life some shal feele the fire of Purgatory others shal receiue the sentence of eternal damnation But because I esteeme that transitory fire of Purgatory to be more intollerable then any tribulation of this life I doe not only wish not to be reproued in the fury of eternal damnation for I feare also to be purged in the wrath of thy transitory correction In this exposition he agreeth vvith S. Augustine vpon the same Psalme euen as he did in the first with the same profound Doctor Lib. 21. de Cinit cap. 24. Et lib. 6. contra Iouintanum cap. 9. Further he teacheth to pray for the soules departed Lib. 4. Dialog cap. 50. And to offer sacrifice for them Ibid. cap. 55. and else where in many places To speake a word of the single and chast life of the Clergie S. Gregory saith None ought to be admitted to the ministry of the Altar Lib. 1. Epist 42. L. 12. In fine In decretis sauing such whose chastity hath beene approued before they were made Ministers Againe If any Priest or Deacon doe marry accursed be he How wel he liked of the vowes and holy profession of Monkes and Nunnes may appeare by that that he himselfe was one of them And he relateth Homil. 11. in Ezechiëlem Hom. 40. in Euangel that there were 3000. Nunnes of name in his time within the walles of Rome whose life was so holy and so much exercised in fasting praiers and teares that he did beleeue had it not beene for them none of the rest had beene able to haue subsisted so many yeares amongst the swordes of the Longobardes He then did not as the Protestants doe thinke religious persons vnprofitable members of the common weale by whose holy liues and deuout praiers he esteemed the Citty to haue beene preserued For the sprinckling of holy Water in Churches erecting of Altars placing thereof Relikes of Saints see Lib. 9. Epist 71. For Pilgrimage to holy places Lib. 4. Epist cap. 44. Homil. 37. in Euang. Lib. 2. Dialog cap. 17. Finally if I would stand to rehearse al that S. Gregory hath vvritten in the defence of the Catholike Roman faith I should make a vvhole volume And this briefe extract out of his owne authentike workes vvil suffice I hope to demonstrate what a jolly patron he was of the Protestants doctrine and vvith vvhat good conscience M. Abbot and his fellowes doe alleage him as a fauourer of their errours which he disproued confuted and condemned so fully and particularly little lesse then a thousand yeares before they vvere hatched and thrust into the world And must it not needes vvorke in al considerate English-mens harts a very vehement inclination to imbrace the now professed Roman religion to see the same point by point professed taught and practised a thousand yeare gone by so wise holy and learned a Bishop vvho was also as I noted before the chosen instrument of God principally to procure our reclaiming from Idolatry and the seruing of false gods vnto the true and sincere faith of IESVS Christ That faith which he taught was planted first amongst vs English-men See the Catholike Apologie out of Protestants as the most learned among the Protestants doe confesse the same hath also euer since vntil of late beene wholy retained of al our most holy Ancestours is it not then a great shame for vs to degenerate so farre and to fal so fondly from it I trust in the mercies and goodnesse of God that we shal once haue grace to perceiue vnderstand and amend it ROBERT ABBOT GREGORY the ninth Bishop of Rome though liuing in later time of great corruption yet by the ancient doctrine of the Catholike Church could say that * Greg. Ep. ad Germ Archi-Episc Cōstat apud Math. Paris in Henrico tertio the not knowing of the Scriptures by the testimony of the truth it selfe is the occasion of errours and therefore that it is expedient for al men to reade or beare the same But now the doctrine of Rome is that it is pernitious for the people to meddle vvith the Scriptures that reading and knowledge thereoff is the breeding of error and heresie and as dogges from holy things so the people must be secluded from the reading and vse of them WILLIAM BISHOP M. ABBOT seemes to be fallen into a dangerous consumption and to draw fast vpon a desperate estate or else he vvould neuer vse such silly salues as this to prolong the life of his forlorne cause From Gregory the first he leapeth ouer the heades of an hundred Popes his Successours and lighteth next vpon Gregory the ninth that liued aboue six hundred yeares after him whom also he citeth not out of his owne workes but from the report of another and when al is done he hath
censure and touch of reproach vpon the same his worke called Bibliotheca Patrum Lastly concerning the doctrine of Predestination I reade not that the Pelagians were called in question about it nor yet for Satisfaction vvherefore M. Abbot must first out of some good Authors shew their errours therein before he goe about to slander vs vvith the imitation of them but as I am vvel assured of the later so I thinke he wil not in hast performe the former ROBERT ABBOT I Omit many other matters that might here be added perswading my selfe that I said enough to trouble M. Bishop in the prouing of that that he hath so propounded that the principal pillars of the Church of Rome in her most flourishing estate taught in al points of religion the same doctrine that now shee holdeth c. only for conclusion let me aske him what Bishop of Rome there was for the space of a thousand yeares that practised or taught that concerning Pardons which is now practised and taught in the Church of Rome that the Bishop of Rome hath any authority to giue such libels of pardon or that it is in him to giue faculties and authority to others to graunt the like vvith reseruation of special causes to himselfe or that he can for saying such and such praiers or for doing this or that release a man from Purgatory for so many hundred or thousand yeares vvhat Bishop of Rome was there that did proclaime a Iubilee vvith promise that al that would come to Rome to visit the Churches that yeare should haue ful and perfect forgiuenesse of al their sinnes or that did charge the Angels as did Clement the sixt that vvhosoeuer should die in his journey thitherward they should bring his soule into the glory of Paradise Balaeus in Clem. sexto which of them did take vpon him to Canonize a Saint vvho euer beleeued or taught as it is now receiued in the Church of Rome that the Bishops blessing is the forgiuenesse of venial sinnes Sextus in proem in glossa Rhem. Test in Math. 10. vers 12. Other innouations I wil passe ouer to further occasion but concerning these matters in this place I would pray M. Bishop to let vs be satisfied how the principal pillars of the Church of Rome haue in al points taught the same that the Church of Rome teacheth now The truth is that as the name of Theseus shippe continued a long time vvhen as it was so altered by putting in of new plankes and boordes as that it had nothing left of that that was in it when it was first built by Theseus so the Church of Rome stil continueth her name and would be taken to be the same albeit by chopping and changing shee is come to that passe that shee hath in a manner nothing left of that doctrine for vvhich shee vvas first called the Church of Rome But M. Bishop taketh vpon him to proue the contrary let vs now examine what his proofes are WILLIAM BISHOP YOV doe wisely to omit many other matters that you might haue added if they be like vnto these vvhich you haue already put downe for they are proued to be nothing else in manner but falsifications of the ancient Fathers vvritinges or fond illations of your owne bolstered out with a huge and shamelesse troupe of vntruthes the more one omitteth of such baggage and paultry stuffe the more it maketh for his credit Wherefore if M. Abbot had let al this alone no doubt but he should haue saued much of his reputation which by such vnchristian like and vnhonest dealing he is like to leese with the indifferent juditious reader If he perswade himselfe that he hath put me to some paines and trouble to trace out the vntruth of his allegations he is not deceiued for he produceth them so corruptly with such additions substractions misconstructions and euil applications that euery place he cites must needes be turned vnto in the Authours owne workes before a man can repose any trust in him or shal know what answere to make I pray you good Sir if there be any sparke of Christian sincerity left in you let this admonition serue to intreate you not to put your aduersary or reader to such trouble any more Either for loue of the truth or for feare of Gods judgements and rebuke of honest men forbeare to misreport your Authours If it be a shame to bely the Deuil vvhat impudency and impiety is it to bely most reuerend holy and learned Doctors and which much increaseth that hainous crime thereby to blinde Christian people and to draw them along with him to the bottomelesse pit of hel It hath I willingly confesse more troubled me to spend my spare time in discouering vntruthes and dishonest shifts trickes then it should haue done to haue bestowed it in substantial arguing and in round debating of questions in controuersie with short and sound arguments But I hope by this the vpright reader hath seene that M. Abbot was so farre off from troubling me to proue The principal pillars of the Roman Church in her most flourishing estate to haue taught the same doctrine that the present Church of Rome no teacheth that he hath rather furthered it by ministring vnto me so fit an occasion yea omitting others which I could choose my self for my better aduantage I haue not refused to verifie and make good the present doctrine of that Church euen by the testimony of those very authours of vvhich M. Abbot himselfe made choise as of men that spake most against it If then by their verdict who are thought by our aduersaries to be most estranged from vs our cause is confirmed and proued to be most just and veritable vvho is so carelesse of his owne saluation that had rather follow a lying Master leading to perdition then to imbrace so manifest a truth drawing towardes saluation May I not here justly exclaime with the holy King and Prophet and say Psalm 4. O yee Sonnes of men how long wil you be so heauy harted why are you so farre in loue with vanity and seeke after leasing he that is the true light Iohan. 1. who doth illuminate euery man that commeth into this world of his infinite goodnesse and mercy lighten your vnderstanding and incline your harts that you may perceiue and receiue that ingrafted word that truth of Christ preached by his Apostles approued by the most honourable Senate of the ancient Fathers beleeued al the world ouer that hath also continued euer since inuiolably vvhich only and none other can saue your soules Now for a conclusion and vpshot of this matter M. Abbot would faine know What Bishop of Rome for a thousand yeares after Christ had authority to giue any such libel of pardons as are now giuen or that could graunt to others any such faculty with reseruation of special causes to himselfe c. I answere if these be the greatest difficulties that with-hold him from approuing the doctrine
of the present Roman Church he may vpon very smal consideration be reclaimed and brought to reforme his errours For to S. Peter himselfe who was afterwards Bishop of Rome was giuen euen by our Sauiour Christ IESVS ful power and authority to pardon whatsoeuer he saw fit to be pardoned Math. 16. vers 19. To thee I giue saith he the keies of the Kingdome of heauen whatsoeuer thou loosest or doest pardon vpon earth shal be pardoned in heauen And if S. Peter might loose any sinne how hainous soeuer much more might he release some part of the temporal paine which was due to sinne vvhich is properly to giue a libel of pardon the like power had S. Paul who did in the person of Christ 2. Cor. 2. vers 10. Cyprian l. 3. Epist 15. Pardon the incestuous Corinthian by cutting off some part of his penance vvhich otherwise he had beene to suffer for his former sinnes vvhich were then forgiuen S. Cyprian and the Bishops and Clergy in those auncient daies of the primitiue Church did vse to pardon and release the penance injoyned to grieuous offendours after their repentance at the intercession and request of the Confessors and designed Martirs as hath beene before declared The most authentike Councel of Nice doth declare Cōcil Nicen. cap. 12. that it is lawful for Bishops to deale more mildly and fauourably vvith them vvhom they saw to performe their injoyned penance seriously vvhich was to graunt them a pardon Leo. Epist 77 ad Nicetum num 6. The very same doth Leo the great vvho was Bishop of Rome aboue 1100. yeares past teach most plainly willing the Bishop to release of the due penance injoined what he thought good which is properly to giue indulgence or pardon I omit here Pope Siluester his predecessour and S. Gregory the great one of his successours because I haue before alleaged them not doubting but that these few so auncient so graue so learned vvil suffice to satisfie and instruct him that is willing to learne And as for communicating the same authority to others vvho can reasonably doubt of it considering that the power of absoluing from sinne which is farre greater then the other is imparted to al both Bishops and Parish Priests I haue also before proued most manifestly Leo. Epist 82 ad Anastat Gregor lib. 4. Epist 6. ad Episcop Arelat that both S. Leo and S. Gregory most worthy Bishops did as delegate their authority vnto other Bishops so reserue vnto their owne hearing and judgement the causes of greatest difficulty vvherefore M. Abbot if he wil hearken vnto reason cannot choose but hold himselfe therein fully satisfied He recuiles backe to Indulgences and multiplieth his demands about one and the same matter like to a Cooke that hauing but one sort of meate to serue in doth mince it into many mammocks and then make thereof sundry dishes Can the Pope saith he for saying such or such praiers or for doing this or that release a man from Purgatory for an hundreth or a thousand yeares What a question is this if the Pope can distribute indulgences as hath beene before proued no doubt but he can the rather doe it by injoyning the party that receiueth them to say vvithal some praiers or to doe some other good vvorkes for thereby the party doth the better deserue to be made partaker of the other grace But can he release a soule out of Purgatory for a thousand yeares Yes marry can he and that too not for some certaine number of yeares but for euer and euer The reason is for that the soules there are members of the same body that we are and there capable of the same graces of pardon vvhereof also they stand in very great neede according to the truth of Christian doctrine howsoeuer the Protestants doe erroneously thinke the contrary reade the Question of Purgatory And touching the present purpose among many other pardons graunted by S. Gregory the great there is to be seene vntil this day one Altar by him erected in the Monastery of S. Andrewes in Rome where he was himselfe first Nouice and afterwardes Abbot where at vvhosoeuer said Masse for a soule in Purgatory shal deliuer one there-hence Concerning the Iubilee which is free and ful pardon graunted once in fiue and twenty yeares vnto euery one that shal visit seauen Churches in Rome that yeare some fifteene times or thereabouts what new difficulty can there be about that yea it is as the most renowmed pardon that is graunted so the most reasonable for it can be obtained but once in fiue and twenty yeares and then exceeding hardly by vnder going a long costly and painful journey to the citty of Rome and by exercising there al the workes of piety and mercy as fasting praying and giuing of almes making general confession and receiuing the blessed Sacrament and often visiting of many Churches and Altars Those most godly meanes of training men to true repentance and satisfaction for their former faults and amendmēt of their liues if the Protestant religion were acquainted withal there would be among them some checke and stoppe of their vvicked courses But if they vvil needes sinne on themselues and neuer giue ouer nor amend vntil Gods judgments fal vpon them yet let them not be offended at vs that doe aduise al men to labour in time for such indulgences that they may escape the due punishment of their sinnes either in this vvorld or in the next Is it not also most probable and likely if those good soules vvho to doe some satisfaction for their former euil liues and to serue God more deuoutly in those holy places where some of the holy Apostles and an innumerable company of valiant Martirs and holy Confessors liued and died doe die by the way in that Godly purpose that they are carried by Angels to heauen as Lazarus was into Paradise we pray to God to command such by his holy Angels to be brought into Abrahams bosome as may be seene in the Masse for the dead But Balaeus in Latin and Bale the Irish Apostata in English M. Abbots worthy authour reporteth that Clement the sixt himselfe did command the Angels to carry them into Paradise No great regard is to be had vvhat such a lying lewd fellow relates and so I thinke him vnworthy any other answere Touching Canonization of Saints we hold that the Bishops of the prouinces vvhere their vertuous liues and most godly deathes cōfirmed by miracles are best knowne did alwaies from the beginning of christian religion declare and testifie to the Church that they were to be esteemed of al men for Saints Since it hath beene found most expedient that the vvhole course of the life and death of such being by most diligent inquisition tried out and taken in the places of their aboade be afterwardes sent to Rome there to be also throughly examined first and then accordingly to be declared Saints by the highest Pastor of the Church that