Ben Beirdh the chiefest of the wisemen which seeme in all likely hood to tax Austin as a procurer of that slaughter For although he mention the said Taliessin as hauing beene a writer in the yeare 540. yet because there can be imagined no occasion of those words before Austins comming in I conceiue that either there is some errour in the notation of the time or that liuing perhaps to great yeeres as in those daies was no rare thing he wrot the Ode whence those verses are taken in his last time I will define nothing heereof but leaue it to the iudgement of the Reader to conceiue as he seeth cause The verses then he first setteth downe in the Welch tongue as they were written by him that made them a History of Wales by Doct. Powel Gwae'r offeriad byd Nys angreifftia gwyd Ac ny phregetha Gwae ny cheidw ye gail Ac efyn vigail Ac nys areilia Gwaeny theidw ei dheuaid Rhae bleidhi Rhufeniaid A'iffon gnwppa These he repeateth in English thus Wo be to that Priest yborne That will not cleanly weede his corne And preach his charge among Wo be to that shepheard I say That will not watch his fold alway As to his office doth belong Wo be to him that doth not keepe From Romish woolues his sheepe With staffe and weapon strong Where when he nameth Romishwolues we cannot doubt but that he alludeth to some cruelty caused or practised by some that came from Rome which because it can haue no application in those times but only to the slaughter of the Monkes aforesaid therefore I doubt not but that it hath reference to Austin the Monke who came then from Rome as the cause of that slaughter Now because we are in hand with falsifications and misconstructions I hold it not amisse to reduce hither two other taxations of his of the same nature as most properly belonging to this place The first by order of my booke is a place of Mathew Paris by whom I say it appeareth that a Answer to the epistle sect 3. pag. 20. for the space of twelue hundred yeeres after Christ the Popes authoritie could gaine no acknowledgement in Scotland for that in the time of King Henry the third the one and twentith of his raigne when the Popes Legate would haue entred into Scotland to visit the Churches there the King of Scots Alexander the second forbad him so to do alleaging that none of his predecessours had admitted any such neither would hee suffer it and therefore willed him at his owne perill to forbeare Concerning this allegation M. Bishop setteth downe a postscript in the end of his booke when all the rest was finished in this curteous maner Curteous Reader I must needs acquaint thee with a notable legerdemaine which by perusing the authour I found out after the rest was printed Now gentle Reader I know thou lookest for some speciall great matter which he was thus carefull to adde after all the rest was printed but what is it I pray M. Abbot saith he to prooue that the Pope had no authoritie in Scotland twelue hundred yeeres after Christ auerreth that Alexander the second vtterly forbad the Popes Legate to enter within his kingdome which is not true No is Surely then M. Abbot dealt very vndutifully with his Prince to delude him with a false tale But I pray you M. Bishop tell vs what the truth is For his authour Mathew Paris declareth saith hee that the King indeed did at the first oppose himselfe against that visitation of his kingdome to be made by the said Legate not for that he did not acknowledge the Popes supreme authoritie in those ecclesiasticall causes but because it was needlesse the matters of the Church being as he said in good order and for feare of ouer-great charges And is this all M. Bishop that you could finde perusing the authour so diligently as you haue done But I pray you put on your spectacles once more and turne ouer your booke againe Thou shalt vnderstand gentle Reader that the impression of Mathew Paris which I follow is that b Tiguri in officina Froschoviana 1589. at Tigure in officina Froschouiana anno 1589. There in the one and twentieth yeere of Henrie the third being the yeere of our Lord 1237. pag. 431. which in the edition cited by M. Bishop I take by some notes of mine to be pag. 597. thou shalt finde Mathew Paris set downe this matter in these words c Math. Paris in Henrico 3. anno 1237. pa. 431. Volenti autem domino Legato intrare reguum Scotiae vt ibi de negotijs ecclesiasticis tractaret sicut in Anglia respondit rex Scotiae Non me memini Legatum in terra mea vidisse nec opus esse aliquē esse vocandum deo gratias nec adhuc opus est omnia benè se habent Nec etiā tempore patris mei vel alicuius antecessorū meorum visus est aliquis Legatus introitū habuisse nec ego dum mei compos fuero tolerabo Veruntamen quia fama te sanctum virum praedicat moneo te vt si fortè terram meam ingrediaris cau tè progrediaris nequid sinistri tibi contingat c. The Lord Legate being desirous to enter into the kingdome of Scotland there to deale in Ecclesiasticall matters as he had done in England the King of Scotland answered him I remember not that I haue seene any Legate in my countrey nor that there hath beene any need thanks be to God that any should be called neither is there yet any need all things are well No nor in the time of my Father or of any of my predecessours hath any Legate beene seene to haue had any entrance there neither wil I suffer any so long as I am in my right wits Notwithstāding because by report you are a holy man I warne you that if yee doe goe into my countrey yee goe warily lest any thing befall amisse to you For vnruly and sauage men are there dwelling which thirst after mens bloud whom I my selfe cannot tame nor hold them backe from me if they fall vpon you These are the words of Mathew Paris now aske M. Bishop I pray thee wherein standeth that notable legerdemaine which he would acquaint thee with Aske him what it is wherein I haue varied from my authour I said that the king forbad the Legate to enter so saieth the storie I said that the King alleaged that neuer any Legate in the time of any of his predecessours had beene admitted there the storie saith the same I said that this was twelue hundred yeeres after the time of Christ the story noteth it to haue beene in the yeere 1237. Wish him now to tell thee where the legerdemaine is or whether it be rather some policie of his thus to talke of legerdemaine But this place he would not see yet the latter place he saw he quoteth the page 667. iustly agreeing with the
thought that by workes of nature they had obtained the election of grace Againe that shift of theirs is so much the worse for that the works of which M. Bishop speaketh are not totally the effects of grace but arise in part from the free will of man For although he tell vs that grace is the principall and more potent yet he will not grant vs that it is the whole agent which not being so looke what is attributed to the free will of man falleth out to be the impeachment of the grace of God so that eternall life being ascribed to our good works shall not be ascribed wholly to grace because those good works proceed not wholly from grace but partly from our owne free will Neither is hee any whit helped by that whereon he insisteth againe in the end of this diuision that albeit the works bee partly of our free will yet the dignitie and worthinesse of the workes ariseth wholly of the grace of God for howsoeuer he wholly referre the dignitie of works to grace going before yet he thereby taketh away the nature of grace from that that foloweth after because the latter grace cannot be said to be freely giuen if it be due to the merit of any worke that is gone before Albeit the vaine man should see that heereby he quite ouerthroweth all merit of man because if the value and woorth of the worke grow wholly and onely on Gods part then can it not be that man may be saied to merit or deserue any thing thereby for what should I deserue of God by that that is wholly Gods and none of mine or if man doe truely merit then doth not merit arise wholly from the grace of God As touching the second point whereas he saith the infinite iustice of God is no other way appeased but by the infinite satisfaction of Christ and yet that there are temporall punishments due besides for which we are afterwards to satisfie by our selues he ignorantly crosseth himselfe and by one part of his speech giueth checke to the other For by what other iustice of God doe these temporall punishments fall vpon vs but by his infinite iustice what are they else in their owne proper nature but the first fruits of his eternall wrath and indignation against sinne And if there can no other be imagined but p See heere of the question of satisfaction sect 3. only his infinite iustice from which they proceed then it is not in vs to pay satisfaction to God for them because by M. Bishops owne confession the infinite iustice of God is no other way to be appeased but by the infinite satisfaction of the blood of Christ Now if he will say that finite and temporall effects cannot proceed from an infinite cause he is controlled by the whole course of this world because all the proprieties of God which are infinite as they are immanent in himselfe yet in their transitiue and foren effects are stinted and limited to the modell and state of the creature wherein the same effects are wrought In the third point it appeareth that hee vnderstood not what M. Perkins said Gods infinite mercy shewed it selfe in prouiding for vs an infinite satisfaction in the person of Iesus Christ whereby to exhaust and empt the most bottomlesse depth of all our iniquity and sinne This the Scripture euery where nameth as the effect of q Ioh. 3.16 Rom. 5.8 Eph. 2.4 the loue and mercy of God and therefore M. Perkins did not amisse to refer it accordingly Now M. Bishop tooke it that M. Perkins had named Gods mercy as requiring satisfaction not as prouiding and yeelding the same to vs in Christ and therfore for an answer sendeth vs a dreame that if Christs infinite satisfaction may stand with the mercy of God much more easily may ours But let him consider better of the matter and tell vs at more leasure how the mercy of God can bee said to be infinite in the satisfaction of Christ if it bee so limited and restrained as that in respect of temporall punishments the same is wholly frustrate and leaueth vs still to make satisfaction for our selues If the satisfaction of Christ be infinite it must necessarily bee extended to all that is to be satisfied for If it extend not to all that is to bee satisfied for it cannot be called an infinite satisfaction But of this enough in the question of satisfaction He goeth on and telleth vs that their doctrine of merits and satisfactions is so farre from Atheisme or derogating from Gods glory as that it doth much magnifie and aduance the same Of Atheisme I will say nothing but it is vntruth which he saith that their doctrine doth not derogate from the glory of God and a greater vntruth that it doth magnifie and aduance the same The glory of God appeareth not in the pride of our merits but in the forgiuenesse of our sinnes For howsoeuer he colour the matter in saying that the value and estimation the dignity and worthinesse of our merits and satisfactions ariseth wholly from the grace of God yet manifest it is that there is still somewhat left for vs to reioice in for that we by our freewill as they teach are the doers of the work Therefore the Apostle saith that r Rom. 3.27 reioicing or glorying is excluded not by the Law of workes wherein wee haue our part but by the Law of faith whereby we beleeue that God doth all according to his free promise for his owne mercies sake So in another place hauing said that f Eph. 2.5.6 wee are saued by grace through faith not of our selues it is the gift of God he addeth not of workes lest any man should boast still importing that boasting cannot be excluded so long as the title of saluation is assigned to our workes Therefore God though hee could haue made vs fully perfect and wholly free from sinne yet chose rather as S. Austin well noteth t August con Iulian. Pelag. l. 4. c 3 Ideò factum est in loco infirmitatis huius ne superbè viueremus vt sub quotidiana peccatorum remissione viuamus that wee should liue vnder daily remission of sinnes that wee may not be proud u Idem de spir lit c. 36. vt etiam iustorum emus os obstruatur in laude sua non aperiatur nisi in laudem dei that euery mouth of man may be stopped in their owne praise and may not bee opened but to the praise of God x Bernard in Cant. ser 50. sciemus in diâ— illa quia non eâ— operibus iustitiae quae fecimus nâ—s sed secundum miserecordiam suam saluos nos fecit that we may know at that day as Bernard saith that not for the workes of righteousnesse which wee haue done but of his owne mercy he hath saued vs. Why will M. Bishop goe about to rob God of this honour by such fantasticall speculations of the value and estimation
going about to discouer impiety in vs bewraieth exceeding great ignorance in himselfe not hauing yet learned to put a difference betwixt reprobation damnation We say and we therein say the truth that there is no cause of damnation but only sinne and yet we say as truly that there is no cause of reprobation The will of God the true cause of reprobation but only the wil and pleasure of almighty God Damnation is Gods sentence of iudgement whereby he assigneth the reprobate to eternall punishment for sinne Reprobation is the counsell and decree of God whereby he leaueth men in the state of sinne wherein he found them that they may iustly be condemned a Bernard de aduent dom ser 1. Omnes in Adam peccauimus in eo sententiam damnationis accepimus omnes We haue all sinned in Adam saith Bernard and in him we haue all receiued the sentence of damnation From this state of damnation God freeth some the rest he leaueth and forsaketh What is the cause hereof M. Bishop we would gladly heare it of you If you looke to sinne both sorts are sinners alike there is no more cause to condemne the one than to condemne the other no more cause to saue the one than to saue the other Tell vs M. Bishop what it is whereby God is mooued to make so great difference betwixt them betwixt whom according to themselues there is no difference at all Surely we in our learning can find no other reason hereof but that which the Apostle setteth downe b Rom. 9.18 so then he hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardeneth And what did M. Bishop neuer read these words of the Apostle If not how came he I maruell to be a doctor of Diuinity If he euer read them why then doth he here blame M. Perkins for speaking so directly according to those words that it proceeedeth from the very will of God that he sheweth mercy to some and forsaketh others But let him yet further heare the Apostle more fully cleering this matter by example as namely of Iacob and Esau two brethren borne of the same parents begotten at the same time brought foorth at one birth c vers 11. Before the children were borne when they had yet done neither good nor euill that the purpose of God according to election might stand not of works but of him that calleth it was said The elder shall serue the yonger I haue loued Iacob and hated Esau Looke to them in nature they are both men looke to them in condition they are both sinners Whence ariseth the difference If M. Bishop will say that God dealt herein according to foresight of the workes that they should doe the one good the other bad S. Austen derideth him saying d Aug. ep 105. Quisistum acutissimum sensum defuisse Apostolo non miretur Who would not wonder that this sharpe conceit should bee wanting to the Apostle Nay e Idem Enchir. c. 98. Qua in re si futura opera vel bona huius vel mala illius quae vtique deus praesciebat vellet intelligi nequaquam diceret Non ex operibus sed diceret Ex futuris operibus eoque modoistam solueret quaestionem immò nullam quam solui opus esset faceret quaestionem if the Apostle would haue had vs to vnderstand future workes either the good of the one or the euill of the other he would not haue said Not of workes but would haue said because of their workes to come and thus would he haue cleered the question or rather haue made no question that should need cleering It remaineth then that there is no other reason to be giuen as f Bell. de Amiss grat stat percati l. 2. c. 12. Huius discretionis nulla causa assignari potest nisi dei voluntas Bellarmine also confesseth but only the pleasure of him who sheweth mercy to whom he will and whom he will he hardneth that is g Aug. de praed grat c. 6. quasi diceretur cui vult donat à quo vuit a debitum poâ—â—it remitteth the debt to whom he list and where he list requireth it And surely if this matter of election and reprobation were to be decided out of the difference of workes there were no cause for the Apostle to sticke vpon the difficultie thereof whereas now to humane iudgement he stutteth and stammereth and knoweth not what to say to giue reason of that he saith He is content to rest vpon this that h Rom. 9.14 there is no iniquity with God To them that will not be satisfied herewith but go forward contentiously to wrangle he answereth i vers 20. O man who art thou which pleadest against God shall the thing formed say to him that formed it why hast thou made me thus In the end of all that discourse as it were a man amased he crieth out k Rom. 11.33 O the deepnesse of the riches of the knowledge and wisedome of God how vnsearchable are his iudgements and his waies past finding out What needeth all this a-doe if all might so easily be dispatched as M. Bishop pretendeth by allegation of the free will and workes of men But the Apostle well vnderstood that this would not serue the turne he saw a depth which he could not diue into a secret which he could not search and therefore by checking and admiring he represseth the curiosity and presumption of them whom by answering he cannot satisfie Yet in a word this is enough to stop the mouthes of all men that all being in Adam lost and cast away it was free for God to saue out of this condemned multitude whom it pleased him and to leaue the rest at his will to be disposed to other vse Albeit if M. Beza and some other doe rest this point of reprobation vpon a prime and absolute decree of God to which the fall of Adam is not in order precedent but subsequent will M. Bishop dare to say that the iustice of God is hereby impeached or attainted will he say that God dealeth vniustly therein if that be supposed to be true Surely S. Austin was of another mind and acknowledgeth in this behalfe Gods absolute soueraignty ouer his Creature to doe therewith whatsoeuer it pleaseth him l Aug. de praedsi grat c. 16. humanum genus quod creatum primitus constat ex nihilo non cum debita mortis et peccati origine nasceretur tamen ex eis creator omnipotens in aeternum noâ—nullos damnare vellet interitum quis omnipotenti creatori diceret Quare fecisti sic Qui enim cum non essent esse donauerat quo fine essent habuit potestatem nec dicerent caeteri cur paribus omnium meritis diuinum discreparet arbitrium quia potestatem habet figulus luti ex eadem massa facere aliud quidem vas in honorem aliud veròin contumeliam If mankind saith
well be taken to imply the contrary sounding as Origen expoundeth them d Origen in Mat. tract 35. si possibile est vt sine passione mea illa omnia bona proueniant que per passioneÌ„ meam prouentura sunt transeat à me passio ista If it be possible that those benefites which shall come by my passion may be effected without it let this cup passe from me But if Christ had at that instant actually and fully weighed the vnremoueablenesse of Gods decree in this behalfe and that it was vnpossible that it should be otherwise how is it likely that he should pray in this sort If it be possible let this cup passe froÌ„ me Which is the same as to make him say I know well that it is not possible that this cup should passe from me but if it be possible let it passe so to make an if of that which at once he knoweth to be absolute without if or and. It remaineth therefore true which Caluin saith that oppression of griefe according to sense of nature wrested this if from our Sauour Christ not attending for the instant to the irreuocable decree of God that thus it should be and no otherwise Now in the third point M. Bishop dealeth yet more grossely because hee alleageth that for an assertion which Caluin setteth downe by way of obiection He mooueth the question if the affections of Christ were well and orderly caried how then he correcteth himselfe and subdueth his desire to the obedience of God as if he had gone beyond compasse Surely saith hee there appeareth not in the first request that moderation which we haue spoken of because so much as in him lieth he refuseth and shunneth to doe the office of a Mediatour Now hauing answered the first part of this obiection hee repeateth the latter againe and answereth it e Calu. vt supra siquis excipiat primum motum quem sranari oportuit antequam longiús excurreret non fuisse temperatum â—t decebat respendemus non posse in hac naturae nostrae corruptione perspici affectuum feruorem cum temperie qualis in Christo fuit sed hunc danduÌ„ honorem filio dei ne eum aestimemus ex nobis Nam sic in nobis aeftuant omnes carnis affectus vt prosiliant in contumaciam aut saltem aliquid faecis admixtum habeant sic autem metus doloris seruore aestuauit Christâ—s â—se tamen continuerit in sua mensura Immò sicuti varij cautus inter se discrepantes ade◠〈◊〉 dissonum habent vt potiùs concinnam suauemque harmoniam conficiant ita in Christo insigne extitie symmetriae exemplar inter dei hominis voluntates vt absque conflictu est repugnantis inter se differant If any man except that the first motion which was to be restrained before it went any further was not of that temper and moderation as it ought to be I answer that in this corruption of nature we cannot see the heate of affection with the due temper thereof as it was in Christ but that we are to giue this honour to the sonne of God that we doe not esteeme him by our selues For all affections of the flesh doe so boile in vs as that they breake foorth to rebellion or at least haue some dregges mingled therewith but Christ was so affected with the feruour both of feare and griefe as that notwithstanding he conteined himselfe within his bounds Yea as notes of song being sundry and different ech from other yet haue no dissonancie or discord but doe make a goodly and pleasant harmony so was there in Christ a notable patterne of concord betwixt the wils of God and man so as that they differed without any conflict or repugnancie betwixt the one and the other In which words when we see how holily Caluin accordeth those differences which through agonie and anguish seemed to bee in Christ so as that though they seemed by his praier to draw backe from that whereto the Father had sent him yet indeed there was nothing in him repugnant to the will of God what euill spirit may we thinke it was that led M. Bishop to report out of the same Caluins obiection that he affirmeth that Christ withstood so much as in him lay and refused to execute the office of a mediatour By this that hath beene said we may discerne what cause there was for Caluin to say that which M. Bishop alleageth out of the other place that Christ was so stricken with feare and so pinched on euery side with perplexed pensiuenesse that hee was forced through these boisterous waues of temptations to waue and fleete too and fro in his praiers and petitions Hee corrupteth Caluins words for Caluin saith nothing of forcing but acknowledgeth the contrary that Christ f Calu. in Ioan. 12.27 fuerunt voluntarij isti in eo affectus quia non coaclus timuit sed timori sponte subiccerat did not feare as being forced to it but because voluntarily he did submit himselfe vnto it and so that other affections were voluntarie in him Neither doth he make Christ to wauer as an vnsetled man doubtfull what to doe but describeth him though by sense of nature tending one way yet by firme and constant obedience subduing all passions of nature and yeelding himselfe another way And doe not M. Bishops eies see him in this sort fleeting too and fro By sense and affection of nature he saith Father saue me from this houre and yet by obedience he addeth But therefore came I into this houre By sense of nature he saith Father if it be possible let this cup passe from me but by obedience hee yeeldeth Neuerthelesse not what I will but what thou wilt bee done Now though this be as cleere as the light yet this wisard like the dogge barking at the Moone crieth out Is not this pitifull impietie and so bewraying his owne pitifull folly hee goeth on to tell vs how all this agonie came to passe And first he telleth vs that Christ of set purpose tooke that feare vpon him and most willingly suffered that bloudie agonie But this is none of M. Bishops note he borrowed it of Caluin for Caluin saith as much as wee haue seene before onely let it be remembred that heere hee acknowledgeth that Christ did feare Then he telleth vs that Christ caused to himselfe that bloody agony and conflict by representing vnto himselfe the shame and paine of his dolorous passion But when we see the martyrs with so admirable patience and resolution to haue endured so exquisit tortures and farre beyond the bodily sufferings of Christ can wee imagine that the very conceit of his passions could driue Christ himselfe into so great anguish and perplexity as in the Gospell is described And what did Christ neuer before represent vnto himselfe the dolours of his passion not when he so often forewarned his Disciples thereof not when g Luk 9.31 Moses and Elias talked with
him of his departure which he should accomplish at Ierusalem If he did how came it then to passe that hee was not feized with the same sorrows We doubt not but the bodily passions of Christ were exceeding great and yet we doubt not but that M. Bishop therein alleageth too slender a cause of so great an agonie Well somewhat to enlarge this hee addeth that he represented to himselfe the causes of his passion which were the innumeral le most grieuous sinnes of the world But I aske againe is it likely that Christ h Ioh. 2.25 who knew what was in man did neuer before represent to himselfe the sinnes of men Or shall we thinke that the bare representing of mens sins to himselfe could cause him so great affliction and distresse Yea and we would gladly know how to this representation of mens sins he will fit the praier that Christ vseth Father if it be possible let this cup passe from me Hee saith that heereby Christ would in euery part both of minde and body endure what he possibly could for the time But what a vaine dreame is he in that will talke of so great a passion in Christ and yet make the ground thereof to be onely imagination Yea but he telleth vs further that Christ would shew how naturally hee as all other men did abhorre such a cruell and ignominious death What and was the cause of his agony then no other but what other men might haue as well as he And did Christ so greatly shrinke backe from death who knew that within three daies he should rise againe Surely S. Austin though hee expresse not the true cause thereof yet wholly disclaimeth this willing them to whom he spake i August in Psal 21. Nist sortè tutatis fratres quiae quando dixit dominus pater c. mori timebat Non est fortior miles quà m Imperator sufficit seruo vt sit sicut dominus eius Paulus dicit miles regis Chrisli concupiscentiam habens dissolui c. Ille optat mortem vt sit cum Chrisio Chrisius ipse timet mortem not to thinke that Christ was afraid to die when he said Let this cup passe from me The souldiour saith he is not of greater courage then the captaine It sufficeth the seruant to be as his master is Paul saith I desire to be loosed and to be with Christ He wisheth to die that hee may be with Christ and is Christ himselfe afraid of death No no a greater mater it was that when no bodily violence was yet offered to him did so oppresse his soule to the verie gates of death and drew from him blood in steed of sweat and made him so earnestly againe and againe to pray that he might escape drinking of that cruelly distastefull and bitter cup. It was not death but the wrath of God in death not the conceit of our sinnes but k Esa 53 12. the bearing thereof and l 2. Cor. 5.21 being made sinne for vs that caused the Sonne of God that great agonie and feare But of this shall be spoken further in the next section where it shal appeare God willing that the ancient holy fathers gathered out of the Gospel this selfsame for wholesome doctrine and godly instruction and therefore that Caluin did not play the venemous Spider to sucke poison from thence vnlesse M. Bishop meane poison to poison as Christ was a Serpent to the serpent and as a poison to him that poisoued vs for as the spider they say is poison to the toad and killeth him so the saith and religion of Christ which Caluin hath taught out of the Gospel hath beene and shall be a poison to the poison of the church of Rome to bring it to nought as hitherto it hath done He goeth on with diuers idle questions onely to find his Printer worke but to doe his aduersarie no harme If Christ so wauered where was his constancie I answer him Christ wauered not but by inuincible constancie of obedience ouercame that drawing backe which the pure affection of vndefiled nature motioned vnto him If he were so frighted where was his fortitude But the greater his feare was the greater his fortitude appeareth in ouercomming that feare because great fortitude is not mooued with small feares but passeth them with contempt and M. Bishop should know that vertue consisteth not in being void of passions as Stoickes held but in the subduing conquering of them And doth not hee himselfe tell vs before that Christ tooke vpon him feare If he thinke that Christ did so indeed why doth he not put the same in question to himselfe where then was his fortitude If he thinke this feare to be some light matter what place leaueth he for those words of the Apostle m Heb. 5.7 who in the daies of his flesh did offer vp praiers and supplications with strong crying and teares to him that was able to saue him from death and was heard in that which he feared Hee will say that wee translate amisse in that which he feared Yet Gregory Nazianzen so vnderstood it reckoning out of this place n Greg. Nâ—zi de filio orat 2. Ad hanc considerationen pertinet quò obedientiam ex ijs didicit quae passus est item clamâ—r lachrymae supplicationes exauditiones metus c. Christs crying his teares his supplications the hearing of him and his feare But leauing that to his selfe-wit and wil the text it selfe doth otherwise sufficiently confirme what wee say because they must needs be euen whole armies of terrors and feares that must wrest from him those praiers with strong crying and teares Yea and when it is said that in those praiers he looked vnto God as able to saue him from death manifest it is that out of horror and feare it was that he so praied Feare I say still as a passion of nature not any distrust of vnbeleefe not whereby he was dismaied but yet whereby he was in the highest degree affected with that dreadfull sight which his eies then were bent vpon Againe he saith If he strugled against his Fathers decree where was his obedience His obedience was in this that o Ambros in Heb 5. Qui non venit facere voluntatem suam sed eius qui misit illum voluntatem paternae dispensatienis praetulit voluntati carnis suae Whereas he came not to doe his owne will but the will of him that sent him he preferred the will of his fat hers ordinance before the will of his owne flesh By the will of his owne flesh then he willed somewhat otherwise then his father had decreed else why doth he say Not what I will yet he doth not by this will of his flesh struggle against his fathers decree but submitteth this will with all patience to his fathers wil. And heereby appeareth what a friuolous question he mooueth in the next words if he refused to redeeme vs what was become of his charitie
appeareth that the sending and giuing of Christ is deriued from the loue of God as from a precedent and former cause What is the matter then of M. Bishops quarrell Marrie whereas Caluin and Beza by the good pleasure and grace of God doe meane in that sort a precedent cause of the giuing of Christ to merit for vs and doe expresse it by other termes of the ordinance of God of his appointing Christ to be our mediatour of appointing vnto vs this meanes of saluation and such like M. Bishop maliciously wresteth the same to a posterior cause of the acceptation of the merit of Christ as if they had said that God of his good pleasure and grace had accepted for merit that which Christ did when indeed there was no merit and so falleth to his termes of a faire reckoning and that so any other man endued with grace might haue redeemed all mankind as well as Christ woonderfully bestirring himselfe with his woodden dagger and though hee fight but with his owne shadow yet being strongly perswaded that hee hath killed a man And yet to see the arrogancie of this vaine-glorious wisedome he taketh vpon him here by the way to helpe Caluin that could not vnderstand how we were saued by the mercies of God if the merits of Christ in iustice deserue our saluation whereas Caluin purposely there disputeth against them who could not vnderstand that accord betwixt the mercies of God and the merits of Christ and telleth them that which this silly Sophister will seeme to teach him that r Ibid. Inscitè opponitur meritum Christi misericordiae dei Regulaenim vulgaris est quae subalterna sunt non pugnare ideoque nihil obstat quominus gratuita sit hominum iustificatio ex mera dei misericordia simul interueniat Christi meritum quod misericordiae dei subijcitur it is ignorantly done to oppose the merit of Christ to the mercy of God for it is a common rule saith he that things subordinate are not repugnant one to the other and therefore nothing hindereth but that the iustification of men may be free by the meere mercy of God and yet the merit of Christ may come betweene as being conteined vnder the mercie of God Learne more wit M. Bishop though you will not learne more honesty yet learne more wit for there is none of your owne fellowes that shall examine these things but must needs take you for a leud man but that Å¿ Bernard de Consider lib. 1. vitiosas conscientias vitiosoruÌ„ non refugit vbi omnes sordent vnius faetor mimmè seâ—titur naught cares not to be knowen of naught and where all stinke alike no one mans stinke is discerned from other 16. W. BISHOP To returne to our purpose and to discouer yet more of the Protestants disgraces offered to our Sauiours mediation Con. Hesh p. 39. Sup. Ioh. pa. 39. In locis fol 361. 1. Ioh. 2. v. 2. Did Christ suffer his passion for the redemption of all mankinde or did he die onely for some few of the elect let Caluin answer you Christs flesh was not crucified for the vngodly neither was the bloud of Christ shed to clense their sinnes With him agreeth brother Bucer Christ by his death did onely redeeme the sinnes of the elect Musculus will beare a part in that consort Christs death is a satisfaction only for the sinnes of the elect all as contrary to the plaine text of Scripture as can be Christ is a propitiation for our sinnes where he spake in the person of the elect and not for ours onely but also for the whole worlds Let vs goe on yet one steppe further What effect doth the bloud of Christ worke in the small number of these elected brethren Doth it clense their soules from all filth of sinne and powre into them the manifold gifts of the holy Ghost whereby they may afterwards resist sinne and serue God in holinesse of life nothing lesse Pag. 31. For in the Regenerat as M. PERKINS with al the rest of them doth teach there remaineth originall sinne which infecteth euery worke of man and maketh it a mortall sinne So that inwardly in their soules these clected Protestants be voide of iustice and full of all maner of iniquity marry they haue created in them the rare instrument of a new deuised faith by which they lay hold on Christs iustice so by reall imputation to vse M. PERKINS words of Christs iustice to them they on the sudden become exceeding iust therefore Frier Luther had some reason to say that whosoeuer was borne againe of this Euangelicall faith was equall in grace vnto both Peter and Paul and vnto the Virgin MARY Mother of God Supra 1. Pet. 1. In actis disput Tigur Fox Act. fol. 1335 1138. Nay it seemes that Luther came to short and Zwinglius stroke home when he said that God the Father did no lesse fauour all the faithfull then he did Christ his owne Sonne And out of the confidence of the same liuely-feeling faith proceeded these speeches of our new Gospellers in England And wee haue as much right to heauen as Christ hath we cannot be damned vnlesse Christ be damned neither can Christ be saued vnlesse we be saued Christ belike could not liue in blisse without their holy company What audacious companions and saucy Gospellers were these Yet their reason seemeth sound in the way of their owne religion for if they were most assured of the benefit of Christs owne iustice to be imputed vnto them they could not be lesse assured of their owne saluation then they were of Christs owne To conclude this point consider good reader how the Protestants who would be thought to magnifie Christes sufferings exceedingly doe in very deede extreamly debase them For as you haue heard they esteeme very little of all the rest of his life besides his passion secondly they make his passion without suffering of hell torments not sufficient to redeeme vs thirdly that all those sufferings put together doe not in iustice merit the remission of our sinnes but onely that of grace and curtesie God doth accept them for such fourthly that when all is done they deserue fauour onely for a few of the elect and that not to purge those few neither from all their sinnes but only to purchase them an imputation of iustice to be apprehended by a strong imagination or rather presumption falsly by them tearmed faith Is not heere a huge great mill-post fairely thwited into a poore pudding pricke as they say by them who after so high exaltations of the all-sufficiency of Christs suffering doe in fine conclude that in a very few persons it worketh onely an imputation or shadow of iustice How Christ died for all but it agreeth very well and hangeth handsomely together that by the merits of Christs sufferings in hell which are meere phantasticall these men should haue created in them a phantasticall faith neuer heard of before
others and therefore commanded them to goe in hand with a new translation about which fiftie of the most learned amongst them in both Vniuersities as it is crediblie reported haue this three yeeres trauailed and cannot yet hitte vpon or else not agree vpon a new sincere and true translation Heere is a large field offered me to exclaime against such corrupters and deprauers of Gods sacred word but I will leaue that to some other time because I haue beene too long already But what a lamentable case is this they hold for the most assured piller of their faith that all matters of saluation must bee fished out of the Scriptures and crie vpon all men to search the Scriptures and yet are the same Scriptures by themselues so peruersly mangled that their owne pew-fellowes crie out shame vpon them therefore whereunto if it please you ioyne that the Protestants haue no assured meanes to be resolued of such doubts and difficulties as they shall finde in the same word of God For they must neither trust ancient Father nor relie vpon the determination either of nationall or generall Councell but euerie faithfull man by himselfe examining the circumstances of the text and conferring other like places vnto it together shall finde out the right meaning of all obscure sentences as they most childishly beare their fellowes in hand Briefly to conclude this point a great number of them hauing Gods word corrupted for the lantcrne to their feete and their owne dimne sight for their best guide no maruaile though they stumble at many difficulties in these high mysteries and fall into very absurd opinions concerning the principall parts of them R. ABBOT It is a true note that Tertullian gaue of heretikes that they a Tertul. de resurrect carnis Haeretici scripturarum lucifagae shunne and flie the light of the Scriptures and like Battes and Owles because the Sunne discouereth them to be vncouth and vglie creatures delight altogether in the darke Amongst the rest the Papists are specially of this humour Our translations of the Scriptures vniustly blamed detesting nothing more than that the people should be at liberty to read the Scriptures Now because they want meanes thankes be to God to pull the bookes out of their hands as heeretofore they haue done therefore they betake themselues to other shifts and by diuers pretences and colourable deuices they seeke to discourage and terrifie so many as they can from the vse thereof but one thing specially they haue laboured aboue others to breed in them a iealousie and suspicion of our translations of the Scriptures as if the Scriptures themselues meant nothing lesse than by our translations they seeme to doe Now as the yoong fox learneth of the old so doth M. Bishop learne of his good masters to take this vp as a special weapon to fight against vs and heere telleth his Reader that it is no meruaile that Protestants fall into many scule absurdities because the very fountaines out of which they take their religion are pitifully corrupted Pitifully corrupted saith he but how doth he know so much for wee are out of doubt that he himselfe neuer made triall of it Forsooth Gregory Martin a Catholike man hath told him so O pitifull proofe Iannes hath told Iambres that Moses doth but delude and deceiue the people Gregory Martin saith he a man very skilfull in the learned languages hath discouered about two hundred of their corruptions of the very text of Gods word We doubt not but Gregory Martin with them was a learned man if he did write for them but yet he must giue me leaue to tell him that Gregory Martins discouery was so discouered as that neither he himselfe nor any other for him had euer any ioy to meddle with it againe His presumptions and ignorances and trifling childish follies were so laid open though I know much more might haue beene done than was done as that his learning failed him to make that good which he would needs haue to be takē for a discouery of our euil Which I do not speak as if there were no faults iustly to be found in our translations but the faults that are to be found are Grammatical not Doctrinal such as wherin the translatours haue erred sometimes by not giuing exactly duly the signification of words not wherby they haue brought in any new points of faith such as translatours themselues finde in the new perusing of their translations as our Iunius hath done and yet see no cause of altering their religion in the amending of those faults Such were the faults of which M. Broughton spake who as M. Bishop well knoweth neuer found any cause by those faults to depart from vs or to ioyne with them a man as he saith singularly seene in the Hebrew and Greeke tongues but it had beene to be wished that he had vsed that learning rather humbly and profitably to doe good to the Church than curiously and proudly to gaine opinion to himselfe They are much distressed we see in the finding of faults when they are faine to seeke testimony thereof from him whose reprehensions are matters of disaduantage to vs but no benefit at all to them And no other was his Maiesties intention when out of his high and Princely vnderstanding hee censured our translations in the conference at Hampton-Court It is true that his Maiestie there b Summe of the Conference pa. 46. professed that hee had neuer seene a Bible well translated in English and the worst of all he thought the Geneua translation to be and therefore wished that by the best learned in both the Vniuersities some speciall paines should be taken that one vniforme translation might be had But why did not his Maiesty thinke our Bibles well translated Was it because hee thought that if they were well translated we should acknowledge some points of Popery which now we reiect or should alter some points of our owne religion which now we hold Surely nothing lesse and therefore M. Bishop doth but vainely spend his breath to talke of that which is no aduantage to him And yet much adoe do these wranglers make hereof and babble of it no lesse than as if a new translation should bee the very copy of the Councell of Trent and with it the Pope with all his trinkets were to be brought into the church Especially a Sophister of the Iesuites a notable dawber taking vpon him so farre as his owne and his fellowes learning would serue him to answer M. Bels challenge for the preparing of his Reader in his preface insisteth vpō this matter where hauing mentioned the order taken for a new translation he speaketh to his Countrimen in this sort What goodnesse can there be in that faith which is builded of an euill foundation as by your owne iudgements your Bibles hitherto haue beene Yea what faith at all can there be in this meane time whilest the old Bibles are condemned as naught and a new not yet
seede of Abraham t cap. 9.28 We be Moses disciples u vers 41. We see x Ier. 8 8. We are wise and the law of the Lord is with vs y ca. 18.18 The law shall not perish from the Priest nor counsell from the wise nor the word from the Prophet and yet they persecuted Christ the sonne of God who only is the Truth How then may we now be assured that the Church of Rome is not the same to the church of Christ as they then were to Christ himselfe How may we poore creatures certainely vnderstand that those rich creatures are not subiect to error and mistaking as well as we Well if we will not beleeue it we may chuse but assurance M. Bishop can yeeld none He can tell vs a discourse what Christ said to Peter but that Christ euer spake either of Pope or Cardinall he can shew vs nothing And yet as if this matter were cleere he telleth vs of this church of theirs that whereas we are subiect to mistaking and errour God hath ordained and appointed the same to be a skilfull and faithfull mistresse and interpreter to assure vs both what is his word and what is the true meaning of it But againe we aske him where hath God so ordained and appointed in what Scripture hath he written it or by what words hath he expressed it that the church which he meaneth should bee our mistresse to tell vs what is Gods word what is the true meaning of it If he haue euidence authority for it let him shew it if he haue not what shall we thinke of him that dareth thus to bely the maiesty of God But if he considered the matter aright he would conceiue that those rich creatures of his haue no other or better meanes to assure what is Gods word and what is the meaning of it than other poore creatures haue By what touchstone they can make triall thereof by the same can we also as well as they Which comparison of the gold-smith and the touchstone which he himselfe vseth if it be rightly explicated serueth notably to set foorth the fraud and falshood of that church for which he pleadeth True it is that the church in this behalfe may rightly bee compared to the Goldsmith Now the Gold-smith for the discerning of true and perfect gold doth not take his owne fingers ends but goeth to the touch-stone and no otherwise can hee either make triall himselfe or giue assurance thereof to other men In like sort therefore the church which is the Gold-smith must vse a touch-stone for the assuring of that which it propoundeth to bee receiued and beleeued Now then whereas M. Bishop saith that we must rely vpon the churches declaration to be assured which bookes of Scripture be Canonicall I answer him that we cannot be assured thereof by the churches declaration vnlesse the church declare it and manifest it by the touch-stone The touch-stone whereby we are to take assurance heereof is the constant and perpetuall tradition and testimony of the former church And this testimony we first deriue from the church of the Iewes z Rom. 3.2 to whom the words of God were committed and to whose Scriptures a Luk. 24.44 the law and the Prophets and the Psalmes and to no other b Aug. cont Gaudent lib. 2. cap. 23. quibus dominus testimonium perhibet tanquam testibus suis Christ himselfe hath giuen testimony as witnesses of himselfe reckoning them for c Luk. 24.27 all the Scriptures and wherof the Iewes in their dispersion giue acknowledgment vntill this day God so prouiding that d Aust in Psa 58. Per omnes gentes dispersi sunt ludaei testes iniquitatis suae veritatis nostrae ipsi habent codices de quibus prophetatus est Chrislus in Ps 56. Codicem portat Iudaeus vnde credat Christianus Christian faith should be prooued out of those bookes which are acknowledged for true by them that are enemies thereto This testimony the Christian church receiued of the Apostles and hath continued the same together with the acknowledgment of those other bookes of the new testament which by the Apostles and Euangelists were added to the former What bookes then haue had this generall and vndoubted auerment and witnesse of the church continued from time to time those and no other are to be holden for Canonicall bookes and this is the true touch-stone for trial of certaine and vndoubted scriptures By which touchstone the church of Rome is found to bee not a faithfull Mistresse but a false harlot bringing her bastards into the Church and forcing men to take them for lawfully begotten And whereas it is the tradition and declaration of the former church which hath beene from the beginning by which both they and we are to be instructed as touching the true bookes of Canonicall Scripture they force vpon vs the tradition of their owne church now deliuered vpon their owne word howsoeuer contrary to that which the church formerly hath declared If we follow the declaration of the ancient church then are no other bookes to be taken for Canonicall but what are now accknowledged and approoued in our Church the same onely being testified concerning the old testament by the Church of the Iewes concerning both new and old by the whole Christian church both the Greeke and Latine the Easterne and Westerne churches as e Of Traditions sect 17. before hath been declared But the church of Rome perceiuing the authorising of some other writings to be likely to gaine credit to some broken wares whence her thrift and gaine ariseth hath taken vpon her very presumptuously as a Mistresse or rather a goddesse to giue diuine authority to those bookes reiecting the testimony of that church which in this behalfe should bee mistresse both to her and vs. In a word whatsoeuer is to be attributed to the church in this respect it is idlely by M. Bishop referred to the church of Rome as if all other churches must rely vpon her declaration we our selues being able by the touchstone to make triall of true Scriptures as well as the church of Rome and therefore there being no cause why we should rely vpon them more than they vpon vs. And as vainely doth he apply to his purpose the saying of Saint Austin that he should not beleeue the Gospell except the authority of the church mooued him thereunto there being nothing therein meant but what may bee applied to the church England as well as to the church of Rome Saint Austin speaking generally of the vniuersall church thorowout the world without any maner speciall intendment of the church of Rome But how leudly they abuse those words of Austin wholly against his meaning and purpose I haue f Of Traditions sect 22. before sufficiently declared and neede not heere to repeat againe As for the churches declaration for vnderstanding the Scripture that is also to be tried and made
trust in our Lady for the sweetnesse of the mercy of her name Because I haue trusted in thy grace thou hast taken away from me euerlasting reproch O our Lady thou art our refuge in all our necessity O Lady saue mee by thy name And whereas M. Bishop saith that our beleeuing in God is the giuing of our whole heart vnto him they yeeld the same to our Lady also saying I confesse vnto thee Å¿ Ibid. Psal 9. Confitebor tibi Domina in toto corde meo Psal 102. Omnia praecordia mea glorificate nomen eius O Lady with my whole heart let all my hartstrings glorifiy her name By these and infinite other such speeches it appeareth that by their beleeuing in Saints they commit idolatry and doe giue that honour to the Saints which belongeth to God onely 4. W. BISHOP He chargeth vs first with the breach of the third article Conceiued by the holy Ghost Which saith he is ouerturned by the transubstantiation of bread and wine in the Masse into the body and blood of Christ for heere wee are taught to confesse the true and perpetuall incarnation of Christ beginning in his conception and neuer ending afterward Answ Heere is a strange exposition of the Creed Is Christs incarnation perpetuall and not yet ended then it is true to say that Christ is not yet incarnate as we may say truely that a man is not borne vntill his birth be accomplished and ended But to the present purpose because Christs incarnation began at his conception cannot bread be turned afterward into his body how hangeth this together Belike he meanes that Christs body was but once conceiued and that was by the holy Ghost in his mothers wombe therefore it cannot afterward be made of any other thing This to be his meaning he declares in the question of the Sacrament but it is too too simple and childish For we hold him not to be so conceiued by bread as he was by the holy Ghost who was the efficient cause of his conception but that the same body that was conceiued by the holy Ghost is made really present in the Sacrament by transubstantiation of bread into it which hath no opposition at all with this article as I haue more largely prooued in the for said question And whereas he saith farther cleane besides the purpose of this article that Christs body hath the essentiall properties of a true body standing of flesh and bone we grant the same but when he addeth that locall circumscription cannot be seuered from a body he is deceiued for the greatest body of all others which is the highest heauen is not circumscribed by any place because there is no other body without it whose extremities might compasse in and circumscribe that body of the highest heauen And when he saith that to be circumscribed in place is an essential property of euery quantity and that quantity is the common essence of euery body he makes himselfe but a common mocking-stocke vnto euery simple Legician who knoweth that no accident such as euery quantity is can be of the essence and nature of a substance such as Christs body is Neither would any man say that cared what he said that to be circumscribed in a place is essential to euery quantity when all numbers that be quantities haue no relation vnto any place neither is it of the essence of any quantity to be actually circumscribed by a place but it is a property flowing out of the essence of one only kinde of quantitie to be apt and fit to be circumscribed and compassed about with a place And naturally all bodies except the highest heauen haue one place out of which they passe as Saint Austin said when they come into another but by the omnipotent power of God any body may be separated from his place or be in as many places at once as it shall please God to seate it because to be circumscribed with a place actually is a meere accident vnto a substantiall body and without the nature of quantity and God may not without blasphemy be disabled to separate a substance from an accident R. ABBOT M. Bishop saue that he was disposed to cauill knew well enough what M. PERKINS meant by the perpetuall incarnation of Christ The truth of Christs body destroied by Popish transubstantiation that whereby he tooke flesh once for all and to continue man for euâ—r Now it is true that because Christ hath but one only body and that body was perfect by that incarnation therefore bread which hath his being after cannot be said to be turned into the body which was before For when one thing is turned into another the latter is not till it be produced of the former neither hath the one beginning but by the ending of the other Aarons rod was turned into a serpent but the serpent was not till of the rod there became a serpent Our Sauiour Christ turned water into wine but the wine was not till of water there became wine And absurd it is that one and the same thing being fully and perfectly made already should yet be said to be made of any other thing As for M. Bishops exception it is childish and impertinent because we doe not charge them to hold that the body of Christ is so conceiued by bread as it was conceiued by the holy Ghost who was the efficient cause of his conception but we say that sith the body of Christ by the power of the holy Ghost was conceiued and made of the substance of the Virgin Mary and thereby became a consummate and perfect body it is therefore absurd to affirme that the same body is now to be made of any other thing But this is not the thing that M. PER. aimed at it is the condition and nature of a true body whereof he argueth which we professe to beleeue that Christ tooke in his conception and incarnation but is ouerthrowen by Popish transubstantiation He saith that Christs body hath all things in it which by order of creation belong to a body which hee namely specifieth in local circumscription which he saith can no way be seuered from a body it remaining a body implying that the Papists affirming the body of Christ without locall circumscription doe thereby destroâ— the truth of his body M. Bishop answereth that M. PER. heerein is deceiued For saith he the greatest body of all other which is the highest heauen is not circumscribed by any place because there is no body without it to circumscribe it Well but yet it hath dimension and position and distance of parts and motion accordingly and therefore quantum inse it is locally circumscribed the only defect is that it hath not a body without it to be circumscribed thereby Yea we may truely say that it hath a kinde of locall circumscription by the superficiall clausure and determination of it owne substance In as much therefore as in it selfe it hath euery way the condition of
ouerthroweth with a distinction taken as he saith from the best authours but hee saith it very falsly and vnhonestly not being able to bring one good authour for the approouing of it The word religious saith he is ambiguous and principally signifieth the worship onely due to God but it is taken some other time to signifie a worship due to creatures And as well he may say that the word mariage is ambiguous and principally signifieth the bond that is betwixt the husband and the wife but yet is with the best authours taken some other time for that affiance that is betwixt the fornicatour and the harlot so that lawfully may the one enioy the other because there is betwixt them a bond of mariage We are told that religion in Ecclesiasticall vse belongeth onely to God and that no seruice of religion is to be done to creatures and he telleth vs that religion belongeth principally to God but that there is religion also belonging to creatures yea euen to vile and abominable idols And what maruell is this whenas wee see the Valentian Iesuit distinguish in like sort of idolatry that because S. Peter nameth l 1. Pet. 4.3 abominable idolatries therefore we should vnderstand that there are idolatries which are not abominable and that m Greg. de Valent de idolat lib. 2. c. 7. Quid attinebat ita determinatè cultus simulachrorum illicitos notare si omninò nullos simulachrorum cultus licitos esse censuisset some idolatrie is lawfull Surely religious worship giuen to creatures is no other but idolatrie but yet forsooth wee must not condemne it because all kinde of idolatrie is not to bee thought vnlawfull These are men of sharpe wits and can if yee will put them to it distinguish God out of heauen and Christ out of the Creed or by a distinction can bring a great number of gods into heauen and a great many Christs into the Creed As for vs wee take the fathers before alleaged to be herein ingenuous and honest as we are and that they did not intend with one breath to appropriate religion vnto God and to blow it from him with another Albeit not onely vnder the name of religion but vnder the name of worship also they haue affirmed the same to belong to God onely as namely u Cypria de exhort martyr ca. 2. Quod Deus solus coiēdus sit that God onely is to bee worshipped o Origen cont Cels lib. 1. Cultus adoratio nulli creaturae concedi potest absque diuinitatis iniuria that worship and adoration can bee giuen to no creature without iniurie and wrong to God p Hieron◠aed Ripar adu Vigilant Ne solem quidem Lunam non angelos non archangelos non Cherubim non Seraphim omne nomen quod nominatur in praesenti seculo in futuro colimus adoramus that we worship neither Sunne nor Moone neither Angels nor Archangels neither Cherubim nor Seraphim nor any other name of any creature that is named either in this world or in the world to come Therefore of the Virgin Marie Epiphanius saith q Epiphan haer 79. Collyrid Sit in honore Maria Pater Filius Sp. Sact adoretur Mariā nemo adoret Let Mary be in in honour elt the Father Sonne and holy Ghost bee worshipped but her let no man worship and Ambrose r Ambros de Sp. Sancto l. 3. cap. 12. Maria erat templum Dei non Deus templi ideo ille solus adorādus qui operabatur in tēplo Marie was the temple of God but not God of the temple and therefore he onely is to be worshipped who wrought in the temple Thus the fathers knew no religion they knew in religion no worship but what belongeth to God alone and M. Bishops distinction both in the one and in the other was wholly vnknowen vnto them But it is woorth the while to note how the said distinction such as it is is applied by him to pictures and images Religious worship saith he doth sometimes signifie a worship due to creatures for some supernaturall vertue or qualitie in them But good Sir tell vs what supernaturall vertue or qualitie is there in your images and pictures If any religious worship be due vnto them you tell vs that it must befor some supernaturall vertue or qualitie in them If there bee no such then how shall religious worship bee due vnto them May we not thinke that you haue sent vs a very naturall distinction that giueth supernaturall vertue and qualitie to stocks and stones But if supernaturall vertue qualitie doe yeeld a title of religious worship how is it that ſ Reu. 19.10 the Angell refused to be worshipped of S. Iohn and t Act. 10.25 the Apostle Peter of Cornelius seeing it cannot bee doubted but that there was a supernaturall vertue and qualitie in them Well hee will tell vs that the next time in the meane while he giueth vs leaue to thinke their Romish fauorites to be very naturally affected that conceiue so supernaturally of the deuisers of such blinde and witlesse tales As for that he saith that they doe not binde God and his hearing of vs to certaine things and places because they hold that God may be worshipped in all places hee saith no more than Ieroboam hath in effect said before for the setting vp of his idols no more than the Pagans and Heathens conceiued that their gods were in heauen and therefore that in all places they might pray and sacrifice vnto them Notwithstanding as they thought that to pray before their Images was a more speciall and solemne deuotion and they had there the heauenly powers more neerely present vnto them so haue they beene affected in Poperie and haue thought those praiers to bee most effectuall which they haue made in the presence of filthy idols and to that end haue taken great paines to goe long iourneies and pilgrimages vnto them But saith M. Bishop the sight of such holy things doth breed more reuerence and deuotion in vs and better keepe our mindes from wandering vpon vaine matters He should haue said if hee would haue spoken as the truth is that they breed superstition and errour rather than reuerence and deuotion that they cause God and his Saints to bee contemned in that stoliditie and blockishnesse of dumbe idols or at leastwise doe hold the minde so intangled heere vpon the earth as that it hath not power and libertie of affection to ascend to heauen as hath beene u Of Images sect 5.8 before sufficiently declared and needeth not heere to bee repeated His coupling of Churches and Images is like x Deut. 22.10 the yoaking of an oxe and an asse because Churches haue their vse for yeelding conueniencie of place and assemblie for praier for hearing of Gods word and ministration of his Sacraments for which vses onely it is that they are holie but Images haue no vse at all to
b Bernard in Cant. ser 23. Omne quod mihi ipse non imputaredecreuerit sic est quasi non fuerit it is as if it neuer had been as Bernard saith there can no satisfaction be required for it What a franticke dreame it is whereby they haue made praier for forgiuenesse of sinnes to be a satisfaction for sinne and that S. Austins words make nothing for their purpose it hath beene c Of satisfaction sect 6. 15. before sufficiently declared and is needlesse here to be repeated 37. W. BISHOP Now to the second downfall Merits are heere also ouerthrown For we acknowledge our selues debters and wee dailie increase our debts now it is madnesse to think that they who daily increase their debts can deserue or purchase any good of the creditors in a word this must bee thought vpon c. And good reason too First then I answer that veniall sins and small debts that iust mendaily incur doe not hinder the daily merit of their other good workes As aseruant hired by the day by committing some small fault doth not thereby lose his daies wages againe though he should commit such a fault that might make him vnworthy of his daies hire yet if his Master did forgiue him that fault his wages were notwithstanding due to him and so the asking pardon for our sinnes doth not ouerthrow but rather establish and fortifie our merits R. ABBOT Veniall sinnes Confession of sinnes is the demall of merit small debts small faults saith M Bishop A vaine man that knoweth neither God nor himselfe and therefore hath so small conceit of the sinnes that he daily committeth agâ—inst God No doubt but hee could plead the matter in Adams behalfe that God did hâ—m wrong to censure him so seuerely for so small a fault What it was but the eating of an apple or a figge and he might by his merits soone haue made amends for it and would God for so light a trespasse adiudge him to death yea and all his posteritie for his sake Well God make him wise to know with whom he hath to doe and then hee will see that his sinallest faults are great enough to blow vp all his merits yea and that in his best merits there is enough to condemne him if God should enter into iudgement with him And let me aske him out of his own wise sawes that he hath here set downe if a hired seruant of his by breach of conenants from day to day haue voided the condition of his wages and yet he be in the end content to remit all and to yeeld him his conditioned hire will he thinke it well that his seruant shall say that he oweth him no thanks because he hath nothing but what he hath merited and deserued Surely M. Bishop would expect that his good will and bountie should bee acknowledged in this case and would thinke it a wrong to be vpbraided with his seruants merit But though his head serue him not to conceiue this yet do thou remember gentle Reader that one forfeiture of a mans estate putteth him wholly vnder the mercie of his Lord and whatsoeuer he can plead for himselfe otherwise it serueth not the turne but he standeth at the courtesie of him whom he hath offended And what shall we say then for our selues whose life is a continuall forfaiture of our estate with God by our trespassing daily and hourely against him Shall we thinke we haue merits to plead shall we not acknowledge and confesse that wee stand meerely and wholly at the deuotion of his mercy And if remitting aliour trespasse hee vouchsafe to remember our seruice otherwise and to reward it shall we say that hee giueth vs but our own desert Do we not see our good deeds whatsoeuer they be to be so drowned and ouerwhelmed with our sinnes as that it is Gods meere mercy that any mention is made of them But when furthermore our good deeds haue in themselues such spots and staines of sinne as doe giue God iust cause to reiect them as hath beene a Of iustification sect 44. c before declared shall wee be so drunke with our owne fancies as that wee will still dreame of merit towards God These things need not to bee strongly vrged because they pretaile mightily in the consciences of all that are not of benummed and dead hearts and more hath beene answered heereof before than that M. Bishop should thinke fit to trouble vs any more with these blinde reasons Hee neuer ceaseth to oppose though when he is answered hee neuer knoweth what to reply 38. W. BISHOP The third opinion imagined to be confuted by this petition is that temporall punishment may bee retained after the crime it selfe and the eternall is remitted but this cannot stand saith he For wee owe to God obedience and for the defect of this paiment wee owe to God the forfeiture of punishment Sinne then is called our debt in respect of the punishment And therefore when we pray for pardon of our sinnes we require not onely the fault to be pardoned but the whole punishment and when debt is pardoned it is absurd to thinke that the least paiment should remaine Answ Heere is a most absurd collection For when we in our Lords praier craue pardon of our debts wee confesse that we are in his debt and that there is paiment of punishment yet due vnto vs the remission whereof we then require now this praier is made by the best men after their conuersion as he confesseth who standing in Gods fauour and therefore free from eternall punishment doe notwithstanding craue pardon and release of some punishment by M. PER. owne interpretation Whereupon it followeth most euidently out of this petition that after eternall punishment is forgiuen vnto the iust there is some other punishment remaining of which they craue pardon and consequently this opinion of ours is by this very petition and M. PER. owne exposition of it much strengthned and confirmed and nothing at all weakened R. ABBOT If M. Temporall punishmeÌ„t remitted in forgiuenesse of sinnes Bishop may be the expounder of M. Perkins exposition we doubt not but he will make some good matter of it M. Perkins meaning is plaine enough and so are his words that after our first conuerting turning vnto God we haue stil cause from day to day to humble our selues before God and to begge of him remission both of temporall and eternall punishments which by our sinnes from day to day wee runne into It followeth not of any thing that Master Perkins saith that the eternall punishment being alreadie forgiuen wee aske heere the forgiuenesse of some temporall punishment but that as our sinnes are daily so wee aske forgiuenesse daily both of the one and of the other a Aug. de vera falsa paenit cap. 5. Quia quotidiana est effensio oportâ—t vt sit quotidiana etiam remissio Because the offence is euery day saith S. Austin therefore wee
Bishop here pretendeth that they haue more cause to complaine of vs than we of them for he saith that wee haue defrauded the poore people of both body and blood of Christ and in lieu of that most pretious banquet doe giue them a cold breakefast of a morsell of bread and a sup of wine Which words hee vseth rather of malice then for that he knoweth not that wee affirme in the due participation of this Sacrament a heauenly riches of grace and of the communion of the body and blood of Christ Tell vs M. Bishop when Gelasius saith that q Gelas cont Eutych Nestor Certè sacramenta quae sumimus corporis sanguinâ—â— domini diuina resest per illa diumae consortes â—fficimur naturae tamen esse non desinit substantia vel natura panis vini the Sacraments which we receiue of the body and blood of Christ are a diuine thing and we are thereby made partakers of the diuine nature yet there ceaseth not to be the substance or nature of bread and wine did hee make the Sacrament to be no more but a morsell of bread and a sup of wine If wee respect the nature of the outward and visible elements it is true that we receiue in the Sacrament a morsell of bread and a sup of wine for these creatures r Theodoret. dialog 2. Manent in priore substantia figura forma c. remaine still as Theodoret saith in their former substance but if we respect them in their vse and effect this bread is heauenly bread and this cup is the cup of saluation and life eternall And as he is a mad man who hauing a rich gift confirmed vnto him by his Princes seale will vilifie the seale and say it is but a peece of wax euen so is he as mad who of the Sacrament of Christ which is Å¿ Rom. 4.11 the seale of the righteousnesse of faith the pledge of the remission of sinnes the meanes whereby grace and life through faith are deriued vnto vs will say either in baptisme that it is but a handfull of water or in the Lords supper that it is but a morsell of bread and a sup of wine But of this and of his fiue other sacraments as he hath spoken before so I haue answered him t Preface to the Reader sect 20. before and I refer the reader to that that is there said where he shall easily see that he hath no cause to account himselfe vnfortunate for following vs but rather to hold them for vnfortunate fooles that yeeld themselues to bee guided by such fancies 56. W. BISHOP Let this be the first The state of the new Testament which is more perfect then the old requireth accordingly Sacraments of greater grace and perfection than the old had they had Manna which for substance and taste far passed our bread and in signification was equall to it Wherefore either we must grant our Sacrament of bread and wine to be inferior to theirs of the old Testament or else acknowledge and confesse it to be the true body and bloud of Christ which doth surpasse theirs exceedingly as the body doth the shadow This argument is confirmed by our Sauiour himselfe who in expresse termes doth preferre the meat that he was to giue to his disciples before that of Manna Ioh. 6.48.49 which their Fathers had eaten in the wildernesse R. ABBOT If this argument be good it prooueth reall presence in Baptisme as well as it doth in the Lords supper If in Baptisme without any reall presence there be greater grace perfection as in a Sacrament of the new testament then there was in the Sacraments of the old then nothing hindreth but that in the Lords supper the like also may bee neither can M. Bishop alleage any reason to prooue it necessary in the one that shall not prooue it in the other also The preeminence of the state of the new testament aboue the old standeth in cleerenesse of light not in difference of faith in the performance of promises not in any diuerse effect of them a 2. Cor. 4.13 Wee haue the same spirit of faith and a little to turne the Apostles words b Act. 15.11 they hoped to bee saued by the grace of our Lord Iesus Christ euen as wee doe c Aug de nat grat cap 44. Ea fides iustos sanauit antiquos quae sanat nos id est mediatoris dei et hominum hominis Iesu Christi fides sanguinis eius fides crucis eius fides mortis resurrectionis eius The same faith saith S. Austin saued the iust of old time that saueth vs euen the faith of the Mediatour betwixt God and man the man Iesus Christ the faith of his bloud the faith of his crosse the faith of his death and resurrection To them he was to come to vs hee is already come he hath stood as it were in the middest betwixt vs they looked vpon him forward we looke vpon him backward but both receiue from him the same grace Accordingly therefore the Sacraments of the old and new testament though in outward forme and administration they differ much yet in inward power and effect they are the same d Aug. ep 118. Leus iugo suo nos subdidit sarcinae leui vnde sacramentis numero paucissimis obseruatione facillimis significatione praestantissimis societatem noui populi colligauit Christ as S. Austin noteth hath laid vpon vs an easie yoke by Sacraments in number very few in obseruation most easie and in signification most excellent they were forced to attend to many types and figures and encumbred with infinite operositie of manifold obseruations and ceremonies Our state therefore is better than theirs for that wee with more ease are partakers of the same effects of grace which with greater labour and difficultie God so disposing they did atteine vnto but otherwise what benefit we receiue by our Sacraments towards eternall life they also receiued by theirs For why doth the Apostle say that the Israelites e 1. Cor 10.2 were baptised in the cloud and in the sea but to signifie that in these types and figures they were made partakers of the same spirituall blessing and grace that in baptisme is ministred vnto vs. And why doth he say that they did eat the same spirituall meate and drinke the same spirituall drinke but to giue to vnderstand that they also did f Ioh. 6.54 eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud that they might liue thereby for if wee respect the outward signes they did not eat the same or drinke the same that we do It must needs therefore bee as touching the spirituall and inward meate and drinke which is the body and bloud of Christ And so the Apostle saith that they dranke of the spirituall rocke which followed them and the rocke was Christ g Amb. de Sp. Sanct lib. 1. in
he hath promised euen as hee who hath receiued a seale presumeth that thereby hee hath in effect the thing that is sealed vnto him And shall a man say that Christ in giuing vs this seale hath bequeathed to vs no other but a figure a signification or representation of somwhat and not the thing it selfe that is represented thereby If it be absurd to say so in humane testaments and wils what meaneth M. Bishop to transferre such an absurditie to those things that are diuine I need not stand vpon this matter I say briefly that it is idle to say that the Sacrament is the chiefest legacie that Christ hath bestowed vpon vs. He hath bequeathed vnto vs himselfe the fruit of his passion the riches of his grace the inheritance of eternall life which hee will vndoubtedly giue to euerie true beleeuer and in the meane time hath giuen his Sacrament to bee to our faith the pledge and assurance thereof And thus M. Bishop telleth vs that he is come at length to the end of his booke wherein I ghesse he hath taken small ioy because he hath quite left out the middle euen whole twelue questions handled by M. Perkins and which he notwithstanding pretendeth to haue answered as hath beene before obserued We are beholding to him for that he giueth vs leaue if any thing heerein bee amisse to impute it partly to his slender skill ouersight or negligence And surely what betwixt his slender skill one way and his ouersight and negligence another way he hath sent vs so many things amisse as that the Reader hath small cause heereby to bee confirmed in that which he by a wrong name calleth the true Catholike faith Thou hast gentle Reader what hee can say on the one side thou hast what I haue had to answer on the other side it is now left to thee to iudge of both which so doe as being thy selfe to giue answer of thy iudgement to Christ the Iudge of all AN ADVERTISEMENT for the time concerning Doctor Bishops Reproofe lately published against a little peece of the Answer to his Epistle Dedicatory to the King With an answer to some few exceptions taken against the same by M. TH. HIGGONS lately become a Proselyte of the Church of Rome 1 THou maiest well remember gentle Reader that it was full three yeeres in February last since I published an answer to Doctor Bishops Epistle to the Kings Maiesty whom he had thereby solicited to entertaine the now-Romane religion pretending many great and waighty reasons that it should be expedient and necessary for him so to doe Wherein how vnfaithfully and vndutifully he demeaned himselfe towards his liege and Soueraigne Lord seeking by false glosses and colours very trecherously to abuse him I was carefull in the said answer to make it plainly to appeare for the satisfaction of all who in that behalfe were desirous to be satisfied With what conscience of fidelity and truth I haue carried my selfe in all that businesse from the beginning hitherto it is knowen to God who shall be both M. Bishops Iudge and mine and doth appeare to them who without preiudice or forstalled opinion doe take knowledge of the cause betwixt him and me That to M. Bishop himselfe it seemeth not so it is no wonder because by ouerstudying himselfe in the schooles of Rome he is growen squint-eied and can see nothing aright or rather hood-winketh himselfe that he may not see that which indeed he doth see By reason whereof it commeth to passe with him as in the like case with the rest of his consort which Saint Augustine said of the Donatists long agoe a August con epist Parmen lib. 1. cap. 7. Cum eos obmutescere compellit veritas tamen silere non permittit iniquitas Though truth compelleth them to be dumbe yet iniquity suffereth them not to be silent They see themselues ouermastred in the cause but a state they haue to maintaine and somewhat they must say for it whether it be right or wrong From this iniquity it hath proceeded that M. Bishop though conuicted in his conscience that the answer aforesaid was such as that howsoeuer in some things he might cauil at it yet in the maine he could not tell by any meanes how to contradict it yet that he might from his Romish masters receiue the thankes which vpon an infamous ouerthrow and losse of a whole army Terentius Varro receiued by the policy of the Romane senat b Liu Decad. 3. lib. 2 in fine Quòd de rep non desperasset For that he had not despaired of the state of their common-wealth he would make shew by writing some kind of reply be it what it might be to carry still a courage and no whit to distrust the quarrell that he had taken vpon him to defend This is the drift of his Reproofe which he hath lately published which goeth abroad amongst his complices vnder a name and with an applause that I am answered I am now answered as if he had made me some great answer whereas if wee respect them aine question and controuersie of religion saue onely that he hath giuen a snatch at one or two points by the way hee hath written whether it may be said he hath answered it resteth further to be considered onely to foure sections of my first booke the second third fourth and seuenth which he hath inched out with enlarging sundry retorsions and matters of discourse and diuers silly excuses and defences of the traiterous speeches and practises of himselfe and his confederates against the King and the State in answering the Epistle Dedicatory and Preface to the Reader and the first and thirty foure sections but the maine substance of the booke concerning the suggestions and motiues by him pleaded to peruert the King he hath by a figure of preterition quite let goe c Reproofe pag. 259. 286. remitting the points thereof to be handled ad calendas Graecas in their proper questions because hee was loth forsooth first lightly to skimme them ouer in hast as I had done and afterward to recoile and turne backe to them againe 2. But hee should haue remembred that hee wrot that Epistle to his Prince and Soueraigne where being charged to haue dealt perfidiously with his most excellent Maiesty and to haue very leaudly attempted to abuse him with many falsehoods and lies with many broken and lame conclusions and that he could not make good that which he had written he should haue thought that whatsoeuer became of the rest of his booke it concerned him in all loialty and duty to yeeld to his Maiesty a speciall and cleere iustification of that Epistle Againe he knew wel that there were many points handled by occasion of his Epistle which belong not to any question after ensuing and that the rest though handled other where yet being heere written to the King were to be answered by me and therefore maintained by him in the same nature wherein they were written
man should answer him in this sort The thing that he reporteth is indeed a very lie and a tale meerely deuised by themselues but yet it goeth for a tradition at Rome and he will heereupon haue it to be beleeued But that which Holinshed setteth downe is a matter of record extant and to be seene in the ancient u Inter leges S. Edwardi cap. 17. Lambert de priscis Anglor legib lawes of our land and therefore hath testimony sufficient to mooue vs to giue credit vnto it And that the matter might not rest vpon the silly poore credit as he speaketh of Holinshed onely of whom notwithstanding I may assure any man that he was a man of much more fidelity and honesty than M. Bishop is I cited also Stow as a witnesse thereof a man knowen to haue beene too well affected to the Romish religion so as that for his partiality that way hee is commonly alledged by themselues as a most authenticke authour specially by Parsons in his three Conuersions of purpose by him to thwart M. Fox the vttermost he can and therefore of whom M. Bishop cannot doubt but that he found it in good record x In lib. Constâ—â— tut London as he professeth to haue done or else he would haue made no such mention of it Now what might be the cause that he could heere see Holinshed and could not see Stow but that he desireth to make some shew of exception where notwithstanding he himselfe knoweth that iustly he can take none 7. Now we see that Stow for countries sake findeth more fauour with him than Polydore Virgil whom I cited as testifying Siricius Bishop of Rome to be y Answer to the epistle sect 8. pag. 60. a noueller in forbidding the mariage of Priests and he saith that I prooue it by the worshipfull verdict of Polydore Virgil Surely Polydore Virgil was no Protestant he was a writer of their own and deserued well of them a man of great learning and knowledge of history one that would write nothing in fauour of vs and therefore his verdict in reason and equity should be strong for vs. Yea that which he wrot he wrot by the warrant z Polyd. Virgil de inuent rer lib. 5. cap. 4. Siricius primus sacerdotibus diaconis vt ait Gratianus dist 82. coniugio interdixit of Gratian the Collectour of the Decrees the founder of their Canon Law and saith no more than the receiued Glosse of the Canon Law mentioneth as a thing commonly receiued a Dist 84. Cum in praeterit in glossa Dicunt quòd olim sacerdotes pâ—terant contrahere antâ— Siricium Men say that of old before the time of Siricius Priests might marry Being then a man of so good worth and speaking vpon so good ground doth M. Bishop with the flout of a worshipful verdict thus scornfully turne him off But it is nothing with him thus to spurne at their owne writers when they stand in his way and therefore telleth vs afterwards that Matthew Paris the Monke who wrot three hundred yeares ago b Reproofe Pag. 2â—9 did ignorantly and saucily reprehend Gregory the seuenth for forbidding men to be present at the Masses of maried Priests whereas c Matth. Paris in Willielm 1. ex Chronico Sigeberti anno dom 1074. Matthew wrot the conceit and opinion of many that liued in that time and borrowed the same from Sigebert the Monke that liued before him 8. I come at length to examine how in the processe he maketh good that horrible crimination which he hath expressed in the title of his booke of my abusing mangling misapplying falsifying both scriptures and fathers Now whereas a man in the entrance of this accusation would expect some great and waighty matter which might worke some impression in the Reader the more strongly to apprehend the rest that followeth see how coldly hee beginneth for want of better matter with a ridiculous and childish cauill that by the very beginning it may be conceiued how idlely he carrieth himselfe in his whole discourse In my Epistle d Epist dedicat to the Answer to D. Bishops epistle to the Kings Maiesty I noted the necessary vse of the course intended by his Highnesse as touching the answering of the dedications and supplications of these Popish Proctours for the discouering of the impudency of the petitioners for the gaining of such as may be gained to the acknowledgment of Gods truth and that as Saint Bernard saith though the heretike arise not from his filth yet the Church may be confirmed by the faith From these words he taketh his example of my misapplying the sentences of the fathers because Bernard meant not thereby e Pag 7. to disswade any man from the Romane faith and doth in that discourse describe those heretikes to be such as denied Purgatory and praier for the dead and inuocation of Saints c. Where I pray thee first to obserue that the words by me alledged import only a phrase of speech no sentence or argument for proofe They serue fitly to signifie the thing by me intended but for any waight they haue one way or other it had beene all one to haue set them downe as mine owne words without adding Bernards name And who knoweth it not to be a thing vsuall to borrow the phrases and speeches of Poets Oratours Philosophers yea of heretikes of schismatikes of Apocryphall bookes or writings without respect what they meant that spake them so long as they fitly expresse the minde of him that vseth them Bernard meant not by those words to disswade men from the Romane religion no more did Aratus the Poet meane to disswade men from Paganisme by those words f Acts 17.28 For we are also his generation the generation of God and yet Saint Paul vseth them to that purpose Neither did Menander by those words g 1. Cor. 15.33 Euill words corrupt good maners intend to reproue them that denied the resurrection of the dead which he himselfe beleeued not and yet the same Apostle forbeareth not to turne them that way and will M. Bishop enter an action against the Apostle for misapplying the Poets words Neither did Petilian the Donatist meane it well and yet who doubteth but that by his words it may be truly said h Apud Aug. cont lit Petil. lib. 2. cap. 8. Laqueo traditor perijt laqueum talibus dereliquit Iudas the traitour perished with a halter and to such as himselfe he left the halter Let M. Bishop take an example of this vsage from M. Higgons their late conuert who alleaging it to be said of him by the Apostles words i Gal. 5.7 He did run well who did let him that he did not obey the truth saith thereto thus k Motiues booke 2. in the preface Vnto these men I returne a louing a faithful and iust answer founded in the demand of an eminent professour of their Gospell Will you be any longer
led by them who thus grosly abuse you and noteth in the margent Doct. Abbot against Doct. Bishop part 2. in fine These words I vsed to withdraw M. Bishop from the Romish religion and yet M. Higgons thought that without offense he might take my words to serue him for an answer why he had now embraced the same presuming it to be the custome of all writers to take words euen out of the aduersaries mouth and to retort them vpon himselfe how ill he hath done it I will not heere say Now therefore in like sort though Saint Bernard had beene mine aduersary professedly writing against me yea though the words had beene M. Bishop words yet nothing could let but that thereby I might thus expresse the benefit of answering their bookes that to vse M. Bishops words though the heretike arise not from his filth yet the Church may be confirmed in the faith But the words as they are deliuered by Saint Bernard doe serue fully and directly to that purpose whereto I applied them He handleth that which is said in the Canticles l Cant. 2.15 Take vs the Foxes where by m Bernard in Cant. Ser. 64. Vulpes haereses vel potius haereticos ipsos intelligamus Capiantur non armis sed argumentis quibus refellantur errores corum ipsi verò si fieri potest reconcilientur Catholicae reuocentur ad veram fidem c. Homo de ecclesia exercitatus doctus si cum haeretico homine disputare aggreditur ille intentionem suam dirigere debet quatenus ita errantem conuincat vt conuertat c. Nec propterea sanè nihil se egisse putet qui haereticum vicit conuicit haereses confutauit verisimilia a vero clarè aperteque distinxit c. nam etsi haereticus non surrexit de faece tamen ecclesia confirmatur in fide Foxes hee vnderstandeth generally all heretikes which annoy and trouble the Church of God whom he will haue to be taken not with weapons but with arguments whereby to refute their errours that so they may be reconciled to the Catholike Church and recalled to true faith He saith that he that disputeth with an heretike should propound to himselfe to conuince his errour that so he may conuert him and thereupon to take away all obiection of losing his labour therein he addeth that though he will not be conuerted yet hee that hath conquered and conuicted him is not to thinke he hath done no good for though the heretike saith he arise not from his filth yet the Church is confirmed in the faith which is fully answerable to the drift of my speech where I vsed the same words What will he tell vs that he is not the heretike and therefore the words are misapplied But then I will deride his folly that chargeth me with misapplication onely vpon his owne conceit of the point in question He saith I am the heretike I say that he is so He saith it only but prooueth it not but he himselfe standeth by me conuicted of many hereticall positions and doctrines deliuered in his epistle and otherwise in his booke so as that he cannot finde how to trauerse the euidence thereof Yea but S. Bernard in that very place describeth those heretikes to be such as denied Purgatory and praier for the dead c. But M. Bishop therein saith vntruly for Bernard in that place speaketh of heretikes in general as I haue shewed and therfore leaueth his words to be applied to M. Bishop who doth patronise and defend so many wicked and damnable heresies True it is that in the two sermons following he speaketh particularly of some heretikes in his time and noteth them for some points by M. Bishop set down as namely Purgatory and praier for the dead but those matters he bringeth in a great way after in the end of the second Sermon and we doubt whether for those onely without greater cause he would haue noted them for heretikes in as much as Petrus Cluniacensis Bernards equall doth testifie as the Centurists haue obserued n Magdeburg Centur. 12. cap. 5. pag. 839. Petrus Cluniacensis ter in ea ipsa epistola fatetur Catholicos quosdam de sacrificijs orationibus pro defunctis dubitare that some Catholikes did then doubt of sacrifices and praiers for the dead and consequently of Purgatory which dependeth thereon He noteth them for other points wherein they are more like to the Papists than to vs as namely first that o Bernard in Cantic ser 65. Firmauerunt sibi sermonem nequam Iura periura secretum prodere noli c. Quod immobili iure sancitū est non peierandum scilicet hoc tanquam indifferens pro sua voluntate dispensant they dispensed with themselues to sweare and forsweare for the concealing of their owne secrets as now the Iesuites and Priests by their equiuocation and mentall reseruation teach their pupils to do They p Ibid. Contubernio faeminarū nemo inter eos qui careat c. Vxornè tua Non inquit nam voto meo istud non conuenit ser 66. In operimentum turpitudinis cōtinentiae se insigniere voto porrò turpitudinem in solis existimant vxoribus reputandam vowed continency but yet would not be without the company of women yea their vow of continency was but for the couering of their filthines thereby forbearing marriage as vncleane but in the meane time committing fornication as Popish Priests and Votaries are accustomed to doe q Ibid. Quidam dissentientes ab alijs inter solos virgines matrimonium contrahi posse fatentur Some of them permitted the first marriage but the second marriage they held vnlawfull and the Church of Rome now denieth to it their sacramentall benediction They also condemned the eating of flesh as a thing vncleane as the Maniches did they thought they might euery day at their owne tables consecrate for themselues the body and bloud of Christ they derided the baptising of infants which things with other like were such as might iustly moue S. Bernard to inueigh against them And these things hee spake as he was aduertised concerning them of whom hee spake but whether hee were truely aduertised it may bee doubted because he himselfe saith that not onely r Ser. 66. in fine Non solum laici principes sed quidam vt dicitur de Clero necno◠de ordine Episcoporum eos sustinent Princes of the laity but some also of the Clergy and of the Bishops were fauourers of them which it is not likely they would haue beene if they had beene men so ill conditioned as he reporteth them howsoeuer he vpon an vnlikely rale impute it to their taking bribes of them As for those matters which M. Bishop nameth it is no wonder that Bernard liuing in a time of so great corruption and declination of Christian faith were somewhat intangled in the superstitions of that time wonder it is rather that in the
edition wherin I haue formerly read the story is in the edition which I now follow pag. 481. We see what he hath made of it now let vs see how Mathew Paris himselfe reporteth it d Math. Paris ibid. anno dom 1239. pag. 481. Eisdem diebus Legatus in Scotiam intrare sestinauit c. Et antequam regnum Scotiae intrasset occurrit ei Rex Scotiae non acceptans ingressum suū Dixit enim quòd nunquam aliquis Legatus excepto illo solo in Scotiam intrauit non enim vt asseruit opus erat Christianitas ibi floruit ecclesia prosperè se habebat Et cùm sermones multiplicarentur rex ferè ad contradicendum erigeretur confectū est scriptum intercedentibus vtriusque regni magnatibus inter eos cuius tenor fuit vt nunquā ratione illius aduentus talis consuetudo in consequentiam verteretur in super in recessu suo scriptum illud signaret hoc procuratum est ne confusus in Angliam quasi repulsus reuerteretur c. Rege verò in interioribus terrae commorante Legatus sine Regis licentia clà m subitò recedens praedictum scriptum asportauit In those daies saith he the Legate hastened to enter into Scotland and before hee was come into the kingdome of Scotland the King met him not liking well of his comming For he said that neuer any Legate beside him had entred into Scotland for there was as he said no neede Christianity flourished there and the Church was in good case And vpon multiplying of words when the King was almost ready to chide there was a writing drawen betwixt them by the intercession of the Nobles of both kingdomes the tenor whereof was that there should neuer any custome grow by reason of his so comming and that at his departure he should seale that writing and this was procured that he might not returne into England with disgrace as hauing receiued a repulse But whilest the King was abiding in the innermost parts of his country the Legate without the Kings licence priuily and suddenly departed and tooke away with him the writing aforesaid Heere we see by both these places that the King of Scotland denied the Popes Legate any entrance into his land protesting that neuer in his time or in the time of his predecessours any Legate had beene admitted there and although he were content the second time vpon intercession to giue him leaue to visit that once to quit him from disgrace yet it was with caution that no custome should grow thereof neither should that example be pleaded to doe the like another time May I not then heere say of M. Bishop as Austin said of Adimantus the Manichee e August cont Adimant cap. 15. O hominem pessimum securum de negligentiae generis humani ad occultandas deceptiones suas c. O leaud man presuming of the negligence of men for the hiding of his owne cosenage and deceit that did not thinke that any man would be so carefull as to take the booke and by searching finde out how falsely and trecherously he dealeth in these things Is this his conuincing of me to be so perfidious and without all conscience in alleging ancient authours as that no man can repose trust in my allegations as he heere of inferreth Ah wretched man that thus maketh hauocke of his owne conscience and setteth his soule to sale for the defense of an vniust and wicked cause As for that which he further alleageth that the said King did afterwards acknowledge the Popes Legate and by his letters professe that hee and his heires were and would be obedient to his iurisdiction and censures though I finde no such matter by his quotation yet though it were so it skilleth not I question not what befell after but what had beene before knowing that the Pope where he had once set in foot was heedy to take all aduantages and opportunities specially of the distresses and troubles of Princes to winde himselfe further in And therefore as little to the purpose is that which he alleageth where by order he answereth this matter that when f Reproofe pag. 122. King Edward the third as he nameth him indeed the first would haue giuen to the Scots Iohn Baliol to be their King they answerd him that they would not accept him without the Popes consent who had their country in protection which was fiue and fifty yeere after the Legates first attempt to enter into that land and therefore no preiudice to that that I haue said 16. The other point that I haue thought fit to touch in this place concerneth the opinion of Proclus the Origenist heretike of whom M. Bishop alledged to the King that he taught as we doe that sinne in baptisme is not wholly taken away but only couered citing Epiphanius as mentioning him for this opinion to be an heritike g Answer to the epistle sect 7. pag. 49. I answered him as the truth is that by this allegation hee had sheathed a sword in his owne side for that vnder the name of Proclus he had by errour cited the opinion of Methodius an ancient and godly Bishop of Tyrus approued also by Epiphanius and therefore had at once produced two ancient witnesses teaching by his owne confession as we doe that originall sinne in baptisme is not wholly taken away but that the filth thereof cleaueth fast to vs so long as we continue in the frailty of this life The matter being cleere and euident by that that I alledged I told him that either he read the place too early in the morning or too late at night or else borrowed it from some of his Masters the Iesuites who make little conscience what they say Now I finde since that as almost in all the rest so in this also h Bellarm. de notis ecclesiae cap. 9. de baptismo c. 13. Bellarmine hath beene his Master and hath shewed as little wit in this obiection as he hath done Yet he hath led himselfe along in a strong opinion that he hath therein great aduantage against me and therefore though he haue cunningly passed ouer all the rest of my answer vnder pretence of handling all things in their proper questions and there follow i Of Originall sinne sect 9. a question afterward where this matter is mentioned and to which it properly belongeth yet not meaning in truth to trouble himselfe with any more questions hee would needes out with that that he had to say of this matter And heerein he mightily bestirreth himselfe he setteth downe opinions noteth diuisions and coherence of speeches examineth circumstances looketh into the Latin looketh into the Greeke taxeth me for shamelesse audacity for simple and shallow wit for carelesnesse of credit in thrusting out such an impudent assertion for grosse ignorance and in a word telleth me that I am past all shame and worthy to be thrust into an Asses skin But what M. Bishop can
authour of that discourse was not Proclus but Methodius which being approoued by Epiphanius my former speech is iustified that these two ancient godly Bishops Methodius and Epiphanius did teach as the Protestants doe that sinne is not vtterly rooted out or taken away by baptisme but continueth in the regenerate so long as this life continueth And now I pray you M. Bishop to tell vs whether you or I be more woorthy to be thrust into the Asses skinne and whether you haue not giuen vs iust cause to doubt that you are so hide-bound therewith as that it will very hardly be pulled from you Surely we shall thinke you are no Asse if you giue vs many more such tokens of your discretion and honesty as you haue done heere 17. To returne now to his preface againe he telleth his Reader that * Pag. 11. if he would make a Catalogue of M. Abbots corruptions falsifications and other odde trickes he should hither reduce the gretest part of his booke but this that I haue heere declared saith he cannot but suffice to discredit him with all indifferent men But in thee gentle Reader the iudgement resteth whether he haue said any thing to cast discredit vpon me or whether he hath not rather heaped shame and confusion vpon his owne head Surely he that thus crieth out with a wide mouth of falsifications and corruptions and in a whole booke can bring no better proofes or examples thereof than he hath heere done doth exceedingly iustifie his aduersary and plainly declare that his outcry is not vpon occasion but onely by deuice If saith he he hath wittingly misreported such woorthy authours of purpose to beguile the credulous Reader then he hath a most seared and corrupt conscience vnwoorthy the name of a Diuine and walking aliue is dead in conscience and consequently in credit with all men that loue the truth for the tongue that lieth killeth the soule Be it so I willingly subscribe the sentence the doome is iust and let it so befall to him that dealeth in that sort His vntruthes saith he are so plaine and palpable that you need no more but compare his reports with the authours words and at first sight any meane scholar shall finde his cosinage and deceit But therefore haue I now set downe the authours words which he hath not done and thereby the Reader shall see where the cosinage and deceit is He professeth to haue read the places if he haue done that himselfe which he imputeth to me he hath pronounced his owne doome if God giue him not grace to repent wo be vnto him and better had it beene for him that he had neuer been borne We are come now he saith to the last kind of abuse offered by me to the sacred Senate of those most renowmed ancient fathers And what is that forsooth to deny their authority flatly to controll and censure them as simple men to accuse them of errour and falsehood yea and to preferre the opinions of old rotten heretikes before them and heerein he saith I do most ingenuously discouer the right humour of a true Protestant But I must tell him that the Protestants make more true account of the ancient fathers and doe yeeld them more honour than the Papists doe The Protestants giue all authority to the ancient Fathers saue where the Fathers are ouer-ruled by the word of God The Papists ouer-rule the Fathers by their owne Decrees and the will and pleasure of a buzzardly Pope or of a few blind Bishops depending vpon him must be with them of more account and reckoning than all the Fathers of the Church They doubt not plainly to say that x 24. q. 1. Quotiescunque contra Papae authoritatem nec Augustinus nec Hieronymus nec aliquis Doctorum suam sententiam defendit neither Austin nor Hierome nor any of the Doctours may maintaine his opinion against the authority of the Pope I haue before noted a speech of theirs generally of the Fathers y Index Expurgat Belg. in censur Bertrami Cum in Catholicis veteribus alijs plurimos feramus errores extenuemus excusemus excogitato commento persaepè negemus commodum ijs sensum affingamus dum opponuntur in disputationibus aut inconflictionibus cum aduersarijs In the old Catholike writers we beare with very many errours but we extenuate and lessen them we excuse and make the best of them by some deuised shift we often deny them or set some good meaning on them when they are opposed in disputations or in combates with our aduersaries What and will a Papist now say that there are errours in the Fathers Yes forsooth where the Fathers speake as the Protestants doe there the Fathers must be said to erre yea in very many things and then their authority must be flatly denied they must be censured for simple men accused of errour and falshood and the opinions both of old and new heretikes must bee preferred before them But let vs see in particular of whom he speaketh The first is Eusebius that most famous Historiographer as he calleth him of whom I vse these words z Answer to the epist sect 26. pag. 177. Let him giue me leaue to censure Eusebius a little because the Canons of their owne Church haue censured him much more And what is the censure whereof I spake No lesse than this that a Gelas 1. Decret de Apocryph dist 15. sancta Romana Historia Eusebij Pamphili apochrypha c. Haec omnia his similia c. non solum repudiata verumetiam ab omni Romana Catholica Apostolica ecclesia eliminata atque cum suis authoribus in aternum confitemur esse damnata his story by Gelasius Bishop of Rome with seuenty other Bishops is pronounced Apocryphall and it selfe with the authour abandoned with the rest out of the whole Romane Catholike and Apostolike Church which censure I noted to haue beene by Gratian also transcribed into their Decrees Now is this iudgement pronounced vpon Eusebius in the church of Rome and doth a Romanist thinke much that I touch Eusebius for an iniudicious presumed application of an act of Constantine and that when he himselfe giueth occasion to touch him therein confessing that Constantine said nothing thereof and declaring that Constantine at his death gaue occasion to conceiue the contrary Thus is Ruffinus charged by Bellarmine b Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. lib. 2. c. 13. falsa est expositio Ruffin with expounding falsely the Councell of Nice Socrates to be c Idem de cultu sanct ca. 10. Dico Socratem haereticum fuisse Nouatiamum neque eius testimonium in dogmatibus vllius esse momenti a Nouatianheretike and his testimony nothing worth in matters of doctrine Zozomen to be d Idem de Clericis cap. 20. ex Greg. l 6. ep 31. Ipsam historiā Sozomeni sedes Apostolica reciperc recusat quoniam multa mentitur c. a lier in many things which Gregory hath
them as many times it is with whoremongers and drunkards who are content to liue otherwise in penury want so that they may haue but to continue them in their beastly and filthy life But M. Bishop we too well see that you and your fellowes haue too little cause to complaine thereof A friend of yours could once familiarly tell an acquaintance of his what base reckoning is made of our Ministers but for them how they were magnified and honoured and where they came had all things at command The trueth is that according to the world it is better with you than it is with many of them whom you enuy for their Bishopricks and Deanries and many other also that are honester than you be As for Tyburne you haue not to feare it for religion but for treason only because you yeeld your loyaltie and fidelity from your Souereigne and naturall Prince to an vsurping forren Priest So long as you doe so whatsoeuer your colours be iustly shall Tyburne belong to you I know how much adoe you haue made both in the beginning and end of your booke to acquit your selfe in that behalfe You shot out your bolt to the King God knoweth what that forcible weapon of necessitie may constraine and driue men vnto at the length You are desirous to perswade vs that that was but a friendly caution against that you feared might come to passe not any threatning of any thing to be done And although the words were vsed when the powder-treason was in hand yet it was not meant therof neither were any of their part consenting or willing to it but a few greene heads some rash vnaduised Catholicks for the greater part decayed in their estates But his disloiall and traiterous minde therein appeareth that he thus dreiueth this matter to a few greene heads when as by course of legall proceeding and by the Kings Maiesties Declaration to forren States it is made manifest that that hellish designment had the priuity and consent of sundry their principall Iesuites and there were then commonly amongst them all prayers for the successe of some speciall enterprise in their behalfe though they knew not what it was For my part concerning all that iustification of his I briefly answer with the words of S. Austin k August in 1. Ioan. tract 3. Opera loquuntur verba requirimus Quis enim malus non benè vult loqui Your deeds speake and shall we listen after your words for who is so bad but he will say well S. Austin sayd to Petilian the Donatist l Idem cont lit Petilian l. 2. c. 64. De vestra mansuetâ—dine non tuae voces sed Circumcellionum fustes interrogentur Of your gentlenesse we will not aske your words but the bats and clubs of the Circumcellions So say I to M. Bishop Of your fidelitie wee will not question your words but the continuall and manifold plots of villanies and treasons that haue proceeded from your consorts 24. The conclusion of his Preface concerneth me He telleth his Reader that he shall seldome light vpon any Diuine that dealeth more vnsufficiently or perfidiously that I set a brasen face vpon the matter speake confidently conuey cunningly gild artificially seeming some iolly fellow and a rare flourishing writer and being one of the most shallow and beggerly writers of these dayes a very Mount-banke setting forth for fresh and new merchandise the very rif-raf and refuse of other Protestant authours bringing nothing that hath not been by their part so shaken battered and beaten that it can not be but a foule disgrace among the learned to put into light and to set to sale so base ouerworne threed-bare and ragged stuffe But what M. Bishop is all that I haue sayd so threed-bare so ouerworne so many times answered in so many of your books and could not you all this while contract so much marrow and pith out of your large volumes as should serue to reply to one whole part of that that hath been answered to you I smile at his folly heerin and can not withall but pitie him that he hath not so much wit as to thinke that euery man will wonder that against such a writer and such an answer he should not be able in three yeeres and more to defend so much as his Epistle to the King yea and that to make good that which he saith he can bring no better exceptions than he hath heere done I see that he is not willing to make sale of me he would faine haue me sticke stil to him and so God willing I will till my rags haue choaked him and my threed-bare stuffe haue worne him so bare as that he shall be ashamed to come any more into the companie of honest men 25. In the meane time and vntill I can giue further defense against his Reproofe I pray thee gentle Reader by some few examples to take knowledge what sinceritie or fidelity thou art to expect of him who hath so deeply charged me with the want thereof And heere first I wish thee to obserue how that he may lay an imputation of vntruth vpon me he sticketh not to eat and deny his owne words I sayd in my Epistle Dedicatorie to the King that he chargeth the religion professed by his Maiestie with heresies impieties blasphemies c. He answereth me thus m Reproofe pag. 25. 26. You in the weightier part falsly slander me which I will proue euen by your owne testimonie for I say as it may be seene in your owne booke that I will let passe their impietie that make God the authour of all wickednesse and say nothing of their blasphemy who touch our Sauiour with doubting if not with despaire of his owne saluation in which speech I tax by the way Caluin and Beza and som other c. Whereas both in my booke and in his owne his words are generall as touching the Protestants religion which the King professeth n Answer to the epistle sect 13.14 pag. 109. 121. Thus much for my first reason collected from the vntruth of the Protestants religion The second shall be grounded vpon the vngodlinesse of it where I will let passe that high point of impietie that they make God the authour of all wicked actions c. and will beside say nothing of that their blasphemy against our Sauiour c. See heere the protestants religion the vngodlinesse of it they make God the authour of sinne their blasphemy against our Sauiour all in generall no shew of restraining it to Caluin and Beza and yet as if he presumed that the books were all lost and no further to be seene he dareth to challenge me for slandering him and to refer me thereupon to mine own booke where he saw and where it is open for euery man to see that he himselfe lieth but this is a trifle perhaps to denie his owne words thou shalt discern him much more plainly in the vsage of mine In o
Pag. 12. answer to the second section of his Epistle I say thus p Bulla Pij 5. de Maior obed cap. Vnam sanctam Behold sayth the Pope we are set ouer nations and kingdomes to build vp and to plant to pull vp and to destroy c. and therefore what the wisdome of God saieth as M. Bishop alleageth q Prou. 8.15 By me Kings raigne the same the Pope blasphemously applieth r Ceremon eccles Rom. lib. 1. cap. 2. Ad sum mum pontificem Dâ—i vices gerentem in terris tanquoam ad eum per quem reges regnant c. to himselfe Per me reges regnant By me Kings raigne To prooue that the Pope saith that By him Kings raigne I alleaged his owne booke Sacrar ceremon eccl Rom. l. 1. c. 2. where it is expresly sayd that it is he by whom Kings doe reigne as I haue now set downe in his owne words euen as * supra sect 5. before I noted him saying of the Emperour By me he reigneth Now in setting downe my text in Å¿ Reproofe pag. 82. his booke hee quite leaueth out the citation and then telleth his Reader t Pag. 84. This is the fift lie that he makes within the compasse of lesse than halfe a side for albeit the Pope vse the words spoken to the Prophet Ieremy Ecce nos constituti sumus c. yet doth he not those by King Salomon vttered in the person of Gods wisdome which M. Abbot deceitfully shuffleth in But M. Bishop do I lie indeed What will you tell me that I lie and in the mean time suppresse the proofe whereby it should appeare that I doe not lie If I should thus deale I know what you would terme it and I could not but acknowledge it what it is in you let the world iudge I forbeare to giue it the right name Another prank he plaieth of as great honesty as this in putting in of words which are none of mine u Answer to the epistle sect 3. pag 19. Our faith therefore say I because it is that which the Apostles committed to writing is the Apostolike faith and our Church ex consanguinitate doctrinae by consanguinity and agreement of doctrine is procued to be an Apostolike church At the end of which words M. Bishop x Reptoofe pag. 103. in setting downe my text hath put in c. as if there were something els to come in than he hath expressed and in the rehearsing of them in his answer addeth these words y Pag. 114. And is the only true Catholike church as if I had said that our Church of England is the only true Catholike church and is proued by perfection of doctrine to be the only true Catholike church heereupon running vpon mee for saying the same which I reproued in the Donatists wheras the words against which hee fighteth are none of my words but are most leaudly and falsely thrust in by himselfe You tell me of tricks M. Bishop but if I had vsed such tricks as these and many other of yours I would be ashamed euer to set pen to paper again Remember what your selfe haue said z Reproofe pag. 283. The diuels cause it is that needeth to be bolstered out and vnderpropped with lies 26. Yet further gentle Reader to giue thee some small taste of his answers to the authorities by me alleged thou maiest first take knowledge of those words of Austin a Answer to the epistle sect 3. pag. 18. ex August cont lit Petilian l. 3. c 6 Siquis siue de Christo siue de eâ—us ecclesia siue de quaecunque re quae pertinet ad fidem vitamque nostram non dicam Nos c. sed si angelus de caelo vobis annunciauerit praeterquam quod in scripturis legalibus Euangelicis accepistis anathema sit If any man nay if an Angell from heauen shall preach vnto you concerning Christ or concerning his Church or concerning any thing pertaining to our faith and life but what ye haue receiued in the Scriptures of the Law and the Gospell accursed be he What saith M. Bishop heere b Reproofe pag. 112. To S. Austin I answer first that those are not his formall words which he citeth Is that all But if those be not his formall words why doth he not tell his Reader what his formall words are Surely if hee were a man formally honest he wold deale more materially than to mocke his Reader in this sort Well though he will not tell the formall words yet he expoundeth the meaning to be if any shall preach contrary to that that is written whereas S. Austin telleth vs that c August de Doct. Christ l. 2. c. 9. In ijs quae apertè in scriptura posita sunt inueniuntur illa omnia quae continent fidem moresque vinendi in those things which are plainely set downe in the Scripture are found all those things which conteine faith and conuersation of life and therefore meaneth not only if any preach contrary but as his words are if any preach any thing beside that that is written accursed be he 27. I alledged that S. Paul writing his epistle to the Romans d Answer to the epistle sect 4. pag. 24. ex Theodoret praefat in epist Pauli comprehended therein as Theodoret saith omnis generis doctrinam accuratam copiosamque dogmatum pertractationem doctrine of all sorts or all kind of doctrine and very exact and plentifull handling of the points thereof The first part of these words in Latin he leaueth out in my text and in his answer saith to it thus e Reproofe pag. 132. 133. That you may see how nothing can passe his fingers without some legerdemaine marke how he Englisheth Theodorets words Dogmatum pertractationem the handling of opinions is by him translated all points of doctrine whereas it rather signifieth some than all opinions or lessons But M. Bishop this dealing of yours is somewhat too grosse Mee thinkes you should seeke to be acquainted with some Aegyptians that you may learne of them somewhat more cunningly to shift and conueigh Thou seest gentle Reader that he hath dashed out Omnis generis Doctrinam all kinde of Doctrine wherein the force of the words consisteth and then saith that by legerdemaine I haue Englished Dogmatum pertractationem all points of Doctrine Doe not maruell that he doth so because he well perceiued that by these words of Theodoret his Reader should see that if the Apostle comprehended in that epistle all kinde of Doctrine then the doctrine of the church of Rome that now is cannot be the same that it was of old because they haue so many Doctrines now whereof there is nothing conteined in that epistle 28. I produce Agatho Bishop of Rome professing f Answer to the epist sect 4. pag. 29. duty of obedience to the Emperour Constantinus the fourth and taking vpon him obediently to performe what the said Emperour commanded Heare
without a circumscribed place is to say that it may be at once both a body and not a body circumscribed and not circumscribed which being a thing repugnant to the truth of God to say that a thing is and yet it is not it is that which it is not and it is not that which it is the deniall thereof is not a deniall of Gods omnipotency but a reproofe of mens folly who to vphold their owne deuises sticke not to broach paradoxes and strange opinions iniurious vnto almighty God They who affirme the vbiquity of the body of Christ they likewise pretend for their defence the omnipotency of God And what will M. Bishop I maruell answer them thereof Is not their allegation of Gods almighty power as strong against him as his is against vs And will he be taken to deny the omnipotency of God because he subscribeth it not to be a matter of Gods omnipotency to make a finite creature of like infinity with himselfe If not let him yeeld the same measure to vs that he doth to himselfe and acknowledge his own temerity and rashnesse in charging vs that we limit the infinit power of God within the compasse of mans weake vnderstanding and in effect make him no God at all only because we will not betray Gods omnipotency to be the releefe of their fancy He telleth vs of some who were so blind and bold as to auouch God not to be able to conceiue or vnderstand how that is possible which he hath spoken of and this he noteth to haue been in a conference at Paris but who they were or when this conference was he telleth vs nothing and for my part I take it that he doth therein but vse his liberty he knoweth what I meane as he is wont to do Albeit I doubt not but some man in some forme of words might allude to that which Thomas Aquinas saith who hauing affirmed the impossibility of Gods doing those things which absolutely in themselues are vnpossible addeth m Tho. Aqu. vt supra Nesp hoc est contra verbuÌ„ angeli dicentis Non erit impossibile deo omne vertuÌ„ Id enim quod contraâ—ictionem implicat verbum esse non potest quia nullus intellectus potest illud concipere Neither is this contrary to the word of the Angell saying No word shall be vnpossible to God for that which implieth contradiction can be no word saith he because no vnderstanding speaking vniuersally is able to conceiue it Yet M. Bishop telleth vs that very naturall Philosophy teacheth that that which they say hath no repugnancy in it selfe as in his place saith he I haue prooued but where that place is we doe not yet find As for the Philosophy which they teach their naturals we doe not well know what it is but we well thinke that neuer any wise Philosopher was so vnreasonable a naturall as to hold it a matter of naturall reason that a body should be without circumscription and yet remaine a body or be in many places at once being but one and the same body and that the ancient Fathers were of another reason I haue n Sect. 2. before shewed And if by naturall Philosophy it may be made good why doth he a little before blame mans weake vnderstanding as vnable to conceiue it why doe their writers of naturall Philosophy alwaies passe it ouer as a matter beyond their element and without the compasse of their rules yea why doe they all rest it vpon so extraordinary an act of Gods omnipotency if there be nothing but what the light of naturall Philosophy can enable vs to comprehend To conclude this point before M. Bishop any more question Gods power in this matter we wish him to resolue vs of Gods will and if he can approoue to vs the will of God we will doubt no farther of his power If he cannot so doe he doth but reason as Praxeas the Heretike did o Tertul. adu praxcam Ergò inquiunt difficile non fuit deo ipsum se patrem fiiium facere c. sed si tam abruptè in praesumptionibus nostris hac sententia vtamur quiduis de deo confingere poterimus quasi fecerit quia facere potuerit It was not hard or vnpossible to God to make himselfe both the Father and the Sonne his heresie standing in the confounding of the persons and making them all one But saith Turtullian if in our owne presumptions we so abruptly vse that sentence that nothing is vnpossible to God we may feigne of God what we list and say that he hath done it because he could doe it M. Bishop then must not maruell that in his presumptions we likewise resist him As Tertullian required the Heretikes so doe we him to prooue to vs p Ibid. Probare debebis ex scripturis c. by Scripture that which he affirmeth to be beleeued vpon the power of God 9. W. BISHOP If they were enemies to Gods omnipotencie alone it might be somewhat excused because that might seeme to proceed rather from the weaknesse of their vnderstanding then out of any ill affection towards God but if they doe further oppose themselues against the goodnesse mercy and iustice of God that must needs discouer very great impietie to lie festring in their bowels Who seeth not that it doth highly attaint the inestimable goodnesse of God and his tender loue towards mankind to impute the reprobation of man and his eternall damnation not vnto mans owne wickednesse and deserts but vnto the meere will and pleasure of God himselfe and yet this is too too common an assertion amongst the Protestants In colloq Monpelgar pag. 522. Let Beza one of their brauest champions speake for the rest God saith hee in his secret counsell hath set downe an vnremooueable decree that he will not haue the greater part of men saued nor to beleeue in Christ and come to the knowledge of trueth but hath created ordained and predestinated them to euerlasting damnation Pag. 336. To whom M. PERKINS in this booke draweth neere affirming it to proceed from the verie will of God that he shewes mercy to some and forsaketh others Mercy indeed God of his meere goodnesse doth powre out vpon vs abundantly but to imagine that hee of his owne will and prime choise without any foresight of our sinnes doth forsake vs and appoint vs to hell fire is heinous impiety most contrary vnto the very nature of God whose goodnesse is so pure and sincere that it doth good to all things and wisheth euill to none vnlesse they doe first greatly deserue it What an vngodly opinion then is it to hold that hee of his owne free choise ordained man a creature made to his owne Image and likenesse to most grieuous and endlesse torments without foresight of any offence of his As though he should take a singular pleasure to see a principall worke of his owne hands frie in hell fire R. ABBOT Here M. Bishop