passing through the middest of the assembly he came to the vppermost place of it where he stood on his feete and when a little seate of gold was set for him he would not sit downe before the Bishops beckned to him so to doe Where Eusebius saith indeede that he passed vnto the vppermost end of the Hal but doth not say that vvhen he came thither he was placed in the highest seate and one may wel sit in the highest end of a large Hal and not in the highest place thereof But in the vppermost part of the Hal a little chaire vvas placed for him beneath the benches whereon the Presidents of the Councel and chiefest Patriarks did sit for so the other Ecclesiastical historiographers doe intimate Further hauing after one of the Bishops made an Oration to the Councel Ibidem As a most louing Sonne vnto the Bishops and Priests his Fathers as Theodoret vvriteth not as a President of a Councel to his inferiours Euseb de vita Constant lib. 3. cap. 13. Moreouer hauing finished his said speech Sermonem omnem Concilij Praesidijs reliquit as testifieth Eusebius he left al the communication and discussings of matters vnto the Presidents of the Councel Out of vvhich vvordes we gather euidently that the Emperour was not the President of the Councel but there were other Presidents thereof vnto vvhom the Emperour referred the decision of the questions then in controuersie Finally the Emperour Bazilius deliuereth in the end of the eight general Councel That Constantine subscribed the Councel after al the Bishops there assembled vvhereas the President and chiefe Iudge of the Councel subscribeth in the first place Seing then that Constantine the great confessed that it appertained not to him to judge Bishops but to be judged of them and that therein he is seconded by Hosius Athanasius S. Ambrose and others al most ancient and renowmed Prelates of Christes Church And being most probable that he had no place in that Councel but by permission of the Bishops at whose beck he sate downe in a little seate a part and did not speake to them in other manner then a child doth to his Father leauing vnto the Presidents of the Councel the discussion of the matters there proposed what vpright weigher of such serious affaires can doubt but that he was nothing lesse then the chiefe President and moderator there True it is that he out of his owne zeale graue vvisdome did first attentiuely heare them then sometimes spake himself specially to appease the contentious wranglings of the Arrian Heretikes and their fauourites of whom many were there present and the ouer forward and feruent zeale of some Catholikes but this argueth no superinteÌ„dency or presidency but only Christian discretion and charity to helpe forward an orderly examination and peacible determination of those controuersies But saith M. Abbot the Bishops acknowledged him to be their supreme judge in that they referred their controuersies and quarrels to be ended by him Nothing lesse for vve referre many babling matters to be ended vnto our honest neighbours And as M. Abbot himselfe rehearseth out of Eusebius about the Bishops of Aegipt That Constantine interposed himselfe as an arbitratour of their controuersies not as Iudge euen so did some of the Councel referre their quarrels to him as an Arbitratour And most like that they who so did vvere vnruly Arrians or very vndiscreete Catholikes whereof who but an indiscreet person or wrangling Heretike can take hold Againe vvhere Eusebius reporteth that Constantine did as an arbitratour seeke to make attonement betweene the Aegiptian Prelates he addeth that he did it with very great respect Eos vt Patres imò vt Dei Prophetas omnino honorifice reuerens Reuerencing them very honourably as his Fathers yea more as the Prophets of God not domineering ouer them as his inferiours and prescribed to them some such thing as did belong to the good of Gods Church to wit that they would leaue off their dissention and quietly obey vnto the decrees of the Nicene Councel Lastly M. Abbot perceiuing very wel that he had hitherto but trifled and spoken little to the purpose he addeth And that M. Bishop may know that Constantine held himselfe the supreme judge ouer Bishops let him heare Constantine himselfe concerning them Theodor. lib. 10. cap. 19. If we haue holy Bishops of right beliefe and men indued with humanity we shal be gladde but if any audaciously and vnaduisedly shal grow vnto the commending of those pestilent heresies his insolency shal be repressed by the execution of Gods seruant euen by me These vvordes of the Emperour supposing them for the time to be spoken to Bishops though they come nearer to a probable shew of some kinde of supremacy then his sitting in the vpper end of the Hal in a golden Chaire and his curteous exhortation to peace and now and then helping out this man or that man with his matter yet doe they not reach home For the execution of punishment inflicted vpon Bishops by the decree of Councels or the Ecclesiastcal Canons may be and to this day is committed vnto the lay Magistrate without any feare of making him thereby the supreme judge in causes Ecclesiastical It rather proues him to be the minister or seruant of the Church in those cases But what wil you say if those threats of the Emperors were not giuen out against Bishops or any Clergy-men at al but only against lay-men then M. Abbot must needs confesse that he giues not M. Bishop to vnderstand that the Emperor is supreme judge ouer Bishops but that M. Abbot is one of the most audacious perfidious and cosening vvriters that euer set pen to paper vvho blusheth not euen thereto vaunt of his forces and to assure euen his aduersary of an inuincible argument where is no shadow in the world of any probable proofe for his part let any indâ—fferent man but turne to the place and he shal finde without any doubt those vvordes of threat to be spoken only to the cittizens of Nicomedia Their Bishop Eusebius and Theognis Bishop of Nicea were for being though wily yet obstinate Arrians by the decree of the Nicene Councel deposed from their Bishopricks and other chosen in their places wherevpon the most Christian and wise Emperor vvriteth vnto his subjects the cittizens of Nicomedia vvhom he heard to be too much addicted to their Arrian Bishop and his heresies to beware of him and hauing touched his faults and just punishment inflicted vpon him therefore by the Councel coÌ„meth to the wordes which M. Abbot peruerteth The wordes of the Emperour are these I am vestrum est ea fide in Deum aciem mentis vestiae intendere in qua vos semper mansisse constat c. Now it is your parts O yee cittizens of Nicomedia to serue God in that faith in which you haue alwaies continued and to performe al offices of Godlinesse And if it so happen that we may alwaies haue Bishops
and honour of the See of the most blessed Apostle Peter being preserued inuiting vs also by his letters to assist in person at this reuerend Councel which neither the necessity of the time nor any custome could permit howbeit in our bretheren Paschasius and Lucentius Bishops Bonifacius and Basilius Priests your brother-hood hath me President in your Synode c. these wordes of S. Leo ouerthrow at once al M. Abbots vveake forces for the Emperours supremacy First he declareth that he liked of the Emperours not commandement but counsel and aduise of calling of a Councel marry so to that it be not taken to derogate aught from the right honor of the See of Rome vvithout vvhose sentence according to the ancient Canons no Councel could be celebrated then that the Emperour had no power to command him to come to that Councel and lastly that he in his Legates and not the Emperour was President in that general Councel But to stay yet a while in this matter of calling the Councel for further assurance that the Popes letters and authority did principally moue al Catholike Bishops to meete in general Councels take first their owne declaration therof in formal tearmes thus spake the Fathers assembled in the second general Councel which vvas the first holden at Constantinople in their letters to Pope Damasus Theodoret. hist l. 5. c. 9. By the commandement of letters sent the last yeare by your reuerence vnto the most royal Emperour Theodosius we vndertooke the journey euen to Constantinople And in the Councel of Chalcedon the Bishops of Maesia vvriting vnto the Emperour Leo doe say That many holy Bishops met together in the Citty of Chalcedon Habetur inter Epistolas pertineÌ„tes ad Concil Chal. Per jussionem Leonis Romani Pontificis qui verè caput est Episcoporum By the commandement of Leo Bishop of Rome who is truly the head of Bishops Ioyne hereto the testification of the Emperour Martianus himselfe being one of M. Abbots owne witnesses thus writeth that Godly Emperour In Epist eius praefixa Concil Chalced. ad Leon. PoÌ„t Being called by the prouidence of God to the Empire c. we for the venerable Catholike religion of the Christian faith c. haue thought good in the beginning thereof to speake by our letters to your Holinesse who hold the principality in the Bishoply function of the same Godly faith requesting your Holinesse to remember in your praiers the good estate of our Empire and that also for the extirpation of al wicked errour we may fully purpose to restore vnity and concord among al Catholike Bishops in celebrating of a Councel Te authore by your authority or you being the Authour thereof What can be more manifest then that this most Godly Emperour did agnize and confesse the principal authority of calling general Councels to appertaine vnto the Bishop of Rome whom he professed also to be the supreme Pastour of the vniuersal Church to whom afterward he sent the same Councel when it was ended to haue his confirmation of it as you shal heare anone Socrat. lib. 2. cap. 13. Zozâ—m l. 3. cap. 9. Tripart l. 4. cap. 9. Niceph. l. 9. cap. 5. Al which is exceedingly fortified by an ancient Canon of the Church vrged by Pope Iulius vvho liued an hundred yeares before S. Leo and is recorded by al the approued Ecclesiâ—stical Historiographers for a most ancient and inuiolable rule in Christian religion to wit that no general Councel be holden Praeter sententiam Romani Pontificis besides or without the consent and sentence of the Bishop of Rome thus farre about the authority of calling general Councels Now to that which followeth in M. Abbot Who was President in those general Councels M. Abbot affirmeth the Emperor to haue the Presidency thereof and for proofe alleageth only the example of Constantius the fourth Who saith he was President of the sixt Synode holden in Trullo To which I answere that the penurious man sheweth himselfe very naked and needy of some proofes that is compelled to ouer-leape fiue of the first general Councels and to fal to the yeare 675. after Christ before he can finde out one Emperour that did obtaine the name of President in a Councel To vvhich also I picke an answere out of the Epistle of the Chalcedon Councel vvhich vvas more then two hundred yeares ancienter then the other vnto Pope Leo thus it is there Quibus tu quidem vt caput praeeras in his qui tuum tenebant ordinem Imperatores verò decentissimi ad ornandum praesidebant c. Ouer which Bishops there assembled thou ô Leo wast by them that held thy ranke President as the head is to the rest of the members c. but the Emperours were Presidents most comely to adorne that assembly Where you see two kinde of Presidents in the Councel the Pope in his Legates as the head is ouer the members the Emperour to honour and grace the Assembly And therefore to the Popes Legates it did appertaine principally to propose argue determine and define the questions there debated discussed to vvhich also they did set their handes in the first place To the Emperor it did belong to see due order kept in the Councel vvhere vvere many vvily and vnruly Heretikes that al thinges might be examined quietly and without perturbation or tumult determined who also in the end subscribed after al the Bishops and their Substitutes consentiens consenting imbracing and approuing the same not determining or defining as may be seene in the 18. Action of the said sixt general Councel cited by M. Abbot To make this distinction more perspicuous and certaine let vs heare some Emperours of those daies declare themselues vvhat they did at those general Councels Theodosius the younger sent for his Legate vnto the third general councel holden at Ephesus the Earle Candidianus vvhat to be President there in his place nothing lesse no not so much as to entermeddle in any Ecclesiastical matters but only ad Synodi defensionem to defend the Councel Ex eius Epist ad Synod Ephes In oratione sua ad Synodum The Emperour Martianus was present in his owne person at the fourth Councel kept at Chalcedon where he sheweth what is the proper office of a good Emperour Our endeauour must be saith he to apply the people to the one right Church being first perswaded the true and holy doctrine And therefore let your reuerences expound and declare the true and Catholike faith according to the doctrine of the Fathers in al vnity and concord c. Valentinian the elder being requested to be present at a Councel holden betweene the Catholikes and the Arrians answered Hist 1. Tripart lib. 7. cap. 12. That it was not lawful for him being but a lay person to examine Ecclesiastical matters but the Priests to whom they did belong might meete together among themselues when they pleased and determine of them Of Constantine the great I
shal speake more at large presently This therefore may suffice to satisfie any indifferent reader how the first Christian Emperours were Presidents at Councels that is as may be gathered out of their owne wordes first to honour that assembly with their presence then to see that al things there be peacibly and orderly handled thirdly to learne the true Catholike faith by the definitions of those learned Bishops there assembled fourthly to recommend the same to al their faithful subjects and lastly to defend it against al obstinate Heretikes Al vvhich put together doth not come neare any probable proofe that they are supreme gouernours in Ecclesiastical matters but rather that they are in them to be gouerned For they neither argue determine nor define them but only doe receiue approue and defend them being before decided and defined by the Fathers assembled in the Councel by the Bishop of Rome Indeede Constantius an Arrian Emperour vvas perswaded by the Arrians to take vpon him the supreme judgement in Ecclesiastical causes but he vvas very sharply reprehended therefore by that most valiant champion of Christs Church Athanasius Patriarke of Alexandria If saith he the judgement of these matters belong to Bishops In Epist ad Solitar vitam agentes what hath the Emperour to entermeddle with them vvhere he relateth what that blessed Father Hosius vvho was Pope Siluesters chiefe Legate in the first Councel of Nice spoke of that vsurpation of Constantius Who saith he seing the Emperour Ibidem prope finem in decreeing to make himselfe Prince of the Bishops and President ouer their Ecclesiastical judgements may not worthily affirme him to be that abhomination of desolation which is foretold of Daniel In a word then the Protestants treading in the steps of the condemned Arrians vvould haue the lay Magistrates such Presidēts of Councels as haue supreme authority ouer the Bishops judgements vvhich we Roman Catholikes with the consent of al ancient and holy both Bishops and Emperours doe thinke to be very preposterous incommodious and intollerable Now to that trash vvhich M. Abbot chops in by the way by broken and halfe sentences the same Leo saith he professeth his obedience to the Emperours appointment and wil to Theodosius and Martianus for proofe he quoteth Leo vvhere we may gather that a false marchants fingers are to be looked vnto For in the first place there is expresse signification of S. Leo Epist 16. 17. not fulfilling the Emperour Theodosius request vvhich was to haue him present at the second Councel of Ephesus and there was no reason for it these be his owne wordes Albeit no reason doth permit me Epistola Leon. 16. t◠meete at the Episcopal Councel appointed by your piety because I haue no president for it by the example of any of my predecessours and the necessity of the time wil not suffer me to leaue the citty c. yet so farre forth as our Lord wil vouchsafe to helpe I haue applied my endeauour that the decree of your clemency may in some sort be obeied by sending hence some of my brethren who shal supply my place c. Doe you see what profession of obedience S. Leo made to the Emperour Theodosius vvhom he telleth plainly that no reason vvil permit him to obey his appointment and vvil Is not this trow you honest dealing deserues not this man to be wel credited vvhen he citeth the Fathers vvhen as he blusheth not to alleage them and to quote the place distinctly vvhich if you wil but turne vnto you shal finde him to be a man that hath a seared conscience and cares not what he saith so he may deceiue his simple reader Now to the second place there indeede S. Leo hath that the Emperours piety and most religious wil Epistola 57. is to be obeied by al meanes but he doth not make profession of his owne obedience to the Emperour but speaketh indefinitely obediendum est and that not to his appointment and wil as M. Abbot fableth but vnto his Godly and most religious wil that is vvhen he commandeth or desireth any thing according vnto the wil of God Now if you wil but looke into the circumstances of this obedience you shal yet further discouer the deceit of M. Abbot for the Emperour Martianus did write vnto Pope Leo that he would confirme the Councel of Chalcedon with his owne sentence vvhich was before subsigned by his Legates present thereat and that in the first place the Emperour being perswaded as it is set downe in the same Epistle that the Councel should haue greater force to suppresse al Heretikes if it might be taught throughout al Churches that the definition there of did please the See Apostolike Here you may see that the Emperour demanded no obedience of S. Leo but shewed himselfe to haue so great opinion of his judgement authority that it would greatly countenance and commend that general Councel which vvas by al the Bishops and the Emperour himselfe before subsigned A reasonable man can desire no more to proue S. Leo his supremacy in Ecclesiastical causes then the testimony of this godly Emperour Martianus Tom. 1. Concil in Prolog Concil Chal. epist 1. Martian ad Leo. For first he acknowledgeth him to hold the principality among al Bishops Secondly he acknowledgeth him to be the authour of calling general Councels these two points haue beene before rehearsed Thirdly he promiseth S. Leo to assemble the Bishops of the East that they might declare those thinges that be agreable vnto the Catholike faith and Christian religion euen as your Holinesse hath according vnto the Ecclesiastical Canons defined Ibid. epist 2. Sicut sanctitas tua secundum Ecclesiastic as regulas definiuit And lastly al thinges being so defined he doth send vnto S. Leo to confirme the general Councel Doth not this acknowledgement of the Emperour that the Pope is the authour of calling general Councels that he is to direct and instruct them assembled what they are to define and lastly to confirme and ratifie that which is defined euidently proue that the supreme managing and authorising of the highest Ecclesiastical affaires doe belong vnto the Bishop of Rome Now to returne to M. Abbot he shewes the like wordes of Pope Agatho his due obedience to Constantius the fourth I finde no such wordes in that place quoted by him true it is that I haue not his whole letter but the abridgment of it as is standes in the Summe of the Councels Epist Agath ad Constant in Synod 6. art 4. where he thus beginneth That we may briefly intimate to your piety what the vigour of our Apostolike faith doth containe which we haue receiued by tradition from the Apostles Apostolike Bishops and holy Councels by which the foundations of the Catholike Church of Christ are fastned and fortified c. Out of which wordes we may gather that Pope Agatho was ready to satisfie the Emperours request in certifying and instructing him vvhat
no man of any other country might afterwards doubt of their so approued sanctity To M. Abbots question I then answere that euen by the order of S. Peter and S. Paul Clemens l. 8. Constit c. 39. S. Stephen was Canonized for a Martir and a festiual day kept in remembrance of his glorious death The like order was obserued for the Apostles and other Martirs And from that time downe to this time I could proue if neede were Canonization of Saints not only by the Bishops of Rome but by the testimony and practise of the best Bishops and Doctors of the Christian religion vvhat ignorance then in al antiquity doth this man bewray by this impertinent demand More impudent yet is this his next Who euer beleeued or taught as it is now in the Roman Church that the Bishops blessing is the forgiuenesse of venial sinnes He citeth in the Margent the Annotations in the Rhemes Testament vpon the 10. of S. Mathew and 12. verse vvhich being looked into doth conuince M. Abbot of vnspeakable impudency Lib. 9. in Lucam L. 22. de Ciuit Dei c. 8. He saw there S. Ambrose alleaged formally to confirme that the Bishops blessing doth remit venial sinnes He could not choose also but see S. Augustine and others quoted in the Margent in commendation of the Bishops blessing vvho else where vvith the Councel of Carthage reproueth the Pelagian Heretikes Epistola 90. for holding that the Bishops blessing was giuen to the people in vaine Seing then that both S. Ambrose and S. Augustine with other more auncient Fathers and Doctors of the Church did grounding themselues vpon Christes owne word and promise teach that the Bishops blessing vvas of great vertue and that it doth namely forgiue venial sinnes by the verdict at least of S. Ambrose that most holy and learned Bishop whose antiquity grauity and sanctity is more to be respected then a thousand of such light prophane Abbots was it not I say incredible and most shameful audacity to demand who euer beleeued or taught that when he saw before his eies such worthy Authours alleaged for it this passeth so farre al ordinary audatious impudency that I know not how to stile it Other innouations he wil of courtesie passe ouer to further occasion but for these jolly points whereof the greatest is scarce worth a pinne he requireth satisfaction vvhich being so readily and easily giuen him he wil belike become a new man if he could once be perswaded to giue ouer lying and trusting to his artificial colouring of lies In the meane season this which I haue said wil I hope serue to satisfie the indifferent reader that the principal pillars of the Church of Rome in her most flourishing estate haue in al points taught the same doctrine that the present Church of Rome doth now teach And it is one of M. Abbots truthes that is to say a most bright glistering vntruth that as Theseus shippe was in continuance of time by putting in of new plankes wholy altered so is now the doctrine of the Church of Rome For I haue before most euidently proued out of authentike recordes of the ancient Bishops of Rome that they beleeued and taught the Real presence and sacrifice of the Masse Praying to Saints Worshipping of their Relikes and Images Purgatory and praier for the dead Auricular confession Workes of satisfaction and supererogation Merit of good workes the Vowes of religious persons the Popes supremacy Briefly al the points in controuersie betweene the Protestants and vs as may more at large be seene in the reformation of M. Perkins Deformed Catholike vvherefore the similitude of Theseus shippe which M. Abbot borrowed of a Catholike treating of another subject vvil not serue his turne but may be more aptly returned vpon themselues vvho bragge and beare the world in hand that they haue reformed al the errours of the Church and brought it vnto the purity of the Apostles times vvhereas in truth they haue plucked vp most of the plankes and boordes of Christes shippe by oppugning most of the articles of the Christian faith and doe what in them lieth to build vp a rotten Thesean shippe of old condemned errours to steale away the golden fleece of Christes true shippe that is to pil and poul the true Catholike Christian of that white fleece of innocency which he receiued in baptisme or recouered by reconciliation to saile after Theseus towardes Paganisme and the infernal gulfe of hel Now because M. Abbot hath here indeauoured to staine the pure and cleane sanctity of our religion with the spots and yron-mooles of errors and heresie I wil to requite his paines giue a touch vnto some special points of erronious doctrine noted by the best Authours for such in expresse tearmes vvhich the Protestants haue as it were raked out of the dunghil of rascal and reprobate miscreants and doe now a-fresh deliuer the same nothing in manner disguised vnto their miserable followers for the purity of the Gospel Yea some of the same are so euident and cleare that they are constrained to defend the authours of them for learned and godly men though by al antiquity they vvere condemned for ignorant and infamous Heretikes and to note the most holy and best vnderstanding and juditious Fathers as lesse skilful then these other erring companions For example Aërius both a knowne and professed Arrian Heretike and also vnknowne to the world for any monument of learning or vertue and therefore likened by Epiphanius to a Beetle and Horse-flie only notorious for these his errours taught first That we ought not to offer sacrifice or to pray for the soules departed Secondly That we ought not to keepe any set times or appointed daies of fasting but when any man wil then let him fast that we may not seeme to be vnder the law For these two points specially that Arrian Aërius vvas Cronicled for a notorious Heretike both by Epiphanius a most holy learned and auncient Grecian Bishop and by S. Augustine one of the most famous lights of the Latin Church the later of whom liued 1200. yeares past Neuerthelesse the Protestants preferre the odde inuentions of that contemptible obscure and blinde Arrian before the judgement of these most renowmed Doctors of Christs Church Must he not then be a very simple or rather sencelesse creature that vnderstanding so much vvil notwithstanding follow them Againe Iouinian was so meane a scholler that he was not able to write his owne minde in good and congruous latin wherefore S. Hierome vvas faine to helpe him out with it and doth as he tearmeth it out of his darke vvorkes cast serpents as it vvere out of their holes into the light Lib. 1. cont Iouin cap. 1. that they may be seene and slaine What vvere these venimous blinde-wormes trow you you shal heare in that most zealous and learned Doctors owne words Iouinian saith first Lib. 1. cont Iouin cap. 2. That Virgins Widowes and married Women baptized if they differ not
Serenus Bishop of Massilia who could not endure that any thing should be worshipped that is made with handes and telleth him that he should forbidde the people the worshipping of them c. Here are many foule faults for S. Gregory did not commend but reprehend the vndiscreet zeale of that Bishop who did breake some pictures set in the Church because some late conuerted Heathens not yet wel instructed in the Christian religion did adore them as if they had beene Gods S. Gregory telleth him plainely That that should not be broken which was not set vp in the Church to be adored but only to instruct them that were ignorant Secondly though S. Gregory forbidde Images to be adored as Gods yet doth he teach them to be worshipped as representations of most holy personages which may be seene plainely to omit diuers other places by his letters vnto Secundinus Lâ—v. 7. Epist 53. ad SecuÌ„d To whome he sent the Images of our Sauiour of the blessed Virgin Mary and of the holy Apostles S. Peter and S. Paul telling him first that his petition to haue those Images did greatly please him for saith he thou doest loue him with al thy hart and whole intention whose Image thou desirest to haue before thine eies and straight after addeth I know that thou doest not therefore desire to haue our Sauiours Image that thou maiest worship it as a God but for a remembrance of the Sonne of God that thou maiest waxe warme in his loue whose Image thou doest behold and we truly doe cast our selues downe before the said Image not as before a God-head but vve adore him whome by the Image we remember to haue beene borne or suffered or to sit in his throne Can any thing be more manifest then that S Gregory approued both the hauing of Images which be sent to his friend and setting them in Churches for the instruction of the vnlearned and also worshipping of them euen so farre-foorth as humbly to kneele before them which he himselfe as wel practised in his owne person as also taught others so to doe which is al that we Catholikes doe defend as greatly condemning as the Protestants themselues that any Christian should adore them as Gods or giue any Godly honour vnto them How wrongfully then did M. Abbot alleage S. Gregories wordes and how shamefully hath he misconstrued them cleane besides that most holy Fathers meaning with whom in faith and doctrine we doe fully agree But let vs yet goe one step further more euidently to discouer how perfidiously M. Abbot doth deale with those ancient and most holy Doctors He is not ashamed to cite them sometimes in confirmation of those errors the which they doe expresly confute in the very same place take this for an assay Epiphanius saith he an Easterne Bishop Page 62. euen in the time of Hierome acknowledgeth for true those wordes of Socrates that the Priests and Bishops thereof were not forced by any law to forbeare their wiues and that many of them whiles they were Bishops had children borne vnto them by their lawfull married wiues and quoteth Epiphanius against the 59. Heresie of the Cathary where in deede he handleth that matter but after another manner These he his wordes Indeede the holy preaching of God doth not since Christs comming admit them to take holy orders who haue married againe after their first wiues death in respect of the excellent dignity of Priest-hood and this doth the Church of God obserue sincerely but so doth not the Church of the Protestants ergo it is not the Church of God Then he commeth to our present purpose and saith The same Church of God doth not admit and receiue a man that hath a wife liuing and that getteth children to be a Bishop Priest Deacon or Subdeacon but him that either abstaineth from the company of his wife or else liueth widdower and that specially where the Ecclesiastical Canons be sincere and not corrupted Hitherto Epiphanius as flat contrary to M. Abbots report of him as can be for he reported that whiles they were Bishops they had children borne vnto them and there was no law that forced them to forâ—eare their wiues Epiphanius telleth vs otherwise That the Canons of the Church which are Ecclesiastical lawes did not suffer any to be Bishop or Priest that kept company with their wiues And â—hich maketh the fault the more palbable Epiphanius addeth an objection vpon which it seemeth M. Abbot grounded his assertion But â—hou vvilt say that in some places Subdeacons Deacons and Priests doe yet get children note by the way that in no place how corâ—upt soeuer Bishops so did as M. Abbot reporteth but this answereth holy Epiphanius is not according vnto the Canon but after the minde of men that in tract of time fainted and so foorth Where he proueth abstinence from marriage or continual continency to be not only decent for the high and holy calling of Clergie men but also necessary for their daily praiers and for the suddaine occasions of their sacred function so that finally S. Epiphanius is found to confute that directly which M. Abbot reports him to acknowledge for true And if this be not most wilful corruption and falsification of these learned Fathers sentences I know not what may be Because this is a point that toucheth euery Christian that hath care of his saluation so neare Page 122. I wil insist more vpon it Is not this saith M. Abbot a horrible impiety that standeth written in their law our Lord God the Pope and then doubleth it saying To beleeue that our Lord God the Pope could not so decree as he hath decreed should be accounted heresie In the Canon law which he calleth our law is no such horrible impiety but in his report is a double lie The former is to auouch that to stand in the law which is only written in the glosse which is no law as al men know The second and the more shameful is that it standeth not in the glosse neither but he belieth both the one and the other Extrauag Ioan. 22. cum inter in glossa let any man turne to the place quoted by himselfe and there towardes the end vpon the word declaramus he shal finde only Dominum nostrum Papam our Lord the Pope and the word God is foisted in by M. Abbot to make vp that horrible impiety of which he speaketh As very a lie is it which he citeth out of the Decretals of Pope Gregory Page 119. that forsooth the Pope is not a meere man whereas the Canon hath De translat Episco cap. Quanto Non puri hominis sed veri Dei vicem gerit that is The Pope is the vicegerent or vicar not of a meere man but of true God to wit of Christ who is both God and Man No more truth is in that assertion of his out of venerable Bede Page 199. our very holy and most learned country-man Then were
Roman Church the faith whereof he in al his life-time imbraced and by al meanes possible confirmed I reserued to this place for the affinity of proper applying the other two sentences taken out of S. Augustine the former is set in the fore-front of his booke and is rehearsed againe in the latter end Eorum dicta contraria c. If I would refel their sayings against vs so often as they impudently resolue not to care what they say so that they speake in what sort soeuer against our positions it would grow vnto an infinite peece of worke This sentence of S. Augustine is pronounced against Infidels who did not beleeue at al in Christ nor professe the Christian faith as appeareth both by the general scope of those bookes of the citty of God Lib. 2. de ciâ—itat cap. 2. vvhich are written against the Heathens and more particularly by the third chapter of the same second booke by him cited Now with what countenance and congruity could M. Abbot cite that against vs Christians vvhich he knew right vvel not to concerne them any thing at al at least in S. Augustines meaning M. Abbot thought belike to vvinne no smal reputation of great reading and good remembrance of the ancient Doctors workes but alleaging them as he commonly doth cleane besides the holy Fathers intention he shal I weene picke very smal thankes of any juditious reader for his labour but be esteemed rather for one that is somewhat pretily ouer-seene then any vvhit vvel seene in their learned writinges Now to the other sentence of S. Augustine which he pronounceth against the Donatists our Predecessours if al be true that M. Abbot saith where they cannot by fly and wily cosenage creepe like Aspes In psalm there with open professed violence they rage like Lions Note that M. Abbot cited this place euen as that of S. Bernard in general not quoting particularly where there being aboue 200. discourses of S. Augustines vpon the Psalmes the cause was that he knew vvel that it did make nothing for his purpose The Donatists were diuided among themselues into three principal sects called Donatists Rogatists and Maximianists Now the Donatists being the strongest part and the head of the others vvould in a certaine citty thrust out their younger bretheren the Maximianists and not knowing how otherwise to compasse it because of the temporal Magistrate who fauoured neither party greatly but was rather Catholike the Donatists finally resolued to pleade that the Maximianists vvere Heretikes and therefore by the Imperial lawes then and there in force not to enjoy any spiritual liuinges vsing this crafty tricke of cosenage against their neare kinsmen the Maximianists for which S. Augustine resembleth them to Aspes Now against the Catholikes in their coasts they did rore and rage like Lions Then doth that holy Father shew How the Lions teeth were to be broken in their owne mouthes for if saith he the Maximianists because they were Heretikes were not capable of any Church liuinges much lesse were the Donatists who were the greater Heretikes of the two and against whom more specially the Imperial lawes were enacted Hence it is easie to be seene how this sentence might be applied vnto the Lutherans that in some places of Germany hoise out their younger bretheren the Caluinists as Heretikes and also to the Protestants in England vvho deale in lâ—ke manner vvith the Puritans carrying themselues like Aspes more wilely towardes them pretending only to censure and chastise them vnder colour of Ecclesiastical vniformity among themselues but proceeding against the Catholikes Lion-like with open professed violence But how this may be cast vpon the Catholikes no man can see I trow vnlesse it be M. Abbot with his spiteful soare eies so that finally few men can be found to match M. Abbot in the vntoward and il fauoured applying of the Fathers sentences which hath beene also before declared And because he both here and often afterward calleth vs Donatists and the Donatists our Predecessours I wil here once for al shew who be true natural Donatists and that out of S. Augustine and Optatus both very renowmed Bishops both most learned and sincere vvitnesses that liued also in the middest of the Donatists when they most flourished August ad Quod-vult These then were the Donatists chiefest heresies First That the true Church of Christ was perished al the world ouer sauing in some coasts of Africke where their doctrine was currant Secondly They rebaptised Catholikes that fel into their sect Thirdly They held not the faith of the blessed Trinity intire and whole but some of them taught like Arrians the Sonne to be lesse then the Father but as S. Augustine noteth this was not marked of their followers Fourthly They were soone deuided among themselues into three principal sects Donatists Rogatists and Maximianists There vvere also amongst them many frantike furious fellowes called Circumcelliones August Epistola 50. who rouing vp and downe in troupes committed many outrages set fire on Catholike Churches tormented Priests abused most impiously the blessed Sacrament of Christs body reserued in the Churches Optat. lib. 2. coÌ„t Parmeni Aug. Epist 119. cap. 18. cast the boxes of holy Oiles out of the Church windowes that they might be broken and the holy Oiles trodden vnder feete Finally The Donatists deuised a new kinde of Psalmes to be songe before their diuine seruice and sermons These be the special points of the Donatists errours and erroneous practises as they witnesse who best knew them and were least like of any men to belie them S. Augustine I say and Optaetus Bishop of Mileuitane both very sound authours of singuler same and credit Now let any man of wit judge whether the Catholikes or Protestants doe most resemble them yea who can deny but that the Protestants doe almost in euery point follow them at the heeles For first the Protestants teach euen as they did that Christes visible Church was perished for the inuisible Church the Donatists held could not perish as S. Augustine witnesseth for 900. Aug. in psal 101. cap. 2. yeares at the least al the vvorld ouer and is euen now wholy decaied in al other parts of the world sauing where their doctrine is embraced and this was the maine point of the Donatists heresie Secondly though al the Protestants doe not rebaptise yet one part of them to wit the Anabaptists doe vse it For the Protestants be deuided into Lutherans Sacramentaries and Anabaptists to omit Trinitarians and Arrians euen as the Donatists were into Donatists Rogatists and Maximianists Thirdly diuers of their principal teachers as Melancthon Caluin and many others doe corrupt the sound doctrine of the most sacred Trinity as I haue shewed in the Preface of the second part of the Reformation of a deformed Catholike though the common sort of them doe not greatly obserue it Fourthly for plucking downe of Churches abusing the most blessed Sacrament holy Oiles and al holy ornaments that belonged
meaning that it vvas in Ianuary past before he had seene my booke vvhich though he say not directly but that my booke was then sent to him yet he would haue his reader take it so that he might thereby and by that vvhich followeth gather vvhat expedition he had vsed in the answering of it wherein he giueth him vvrong to vnderstand For two monethes before that the booke vvas common to be had and great communication about the answering of it in the place of his abode and either he or one of his name had in short marginal notes assaied to giue answere vnto many points of the same epistle by that very Ianuary But admit that he saw not the booke before why did he not then goe in hand with it hauing receiued straight commandement from so high a personage to vse al expedition for the answering of it Forsooth the Barber-surgeon hauing his soare eies in cure would not giue him leaue to doe it Is it likely that the L. Archbishop was so euil informed of his estate that he would require him to make a speedy answere to a booke before he knew that he was in case to reade it But his Lordships letters perhaps found M. Abbot according vnto the season of the yeare frozen and could not as then vvorke in him any great resolution to answere but the spring following beganne to reuiue his drowsie spirits and in Iuly vvhen the heate of Sommer had throughly warmed him then â—â—e his affection to answere was so feruent and his disposition so fiery that he bestirred himselfe beyond al measure dispatching within three moneths not only this booke of thirty sheetes of paper but preparing also woofe and warpe as he speaketh for three hundreth more Surely this vvere vvonderful celerity if we might be so bold as to beleeue him but vntil he make better proofe of his fidelity he must pardon vs if in hast we giue not credit vnto him For vvho can perswade himselfe that M. Abbot being injoined to vse such expedition in answering would haue staied one yeare and a halfe before he published his answere vnto one sheete and halfe of paper for my Epistle containeth no more if he could haue sooner compassed it and who knowes not that a dedicatory Epistle vvhere matters are summarily touched only is none of the hardest partes of the booke to be answered But the man meaning in this Preface to commend himselfe aboue the skies saw that it was necessary to remoue this stumbling-block out of the vvay and before hand to excuse his extreame slownesse that it might not seeme strange how so admirable quicke a pen-man should be holden occupied so long time about so little I may not omit to note that vvhich now three times M. Abbot hath repeated to wit That the answering of my booke was committed â—o him from great authority vvherein he seemeth by his often reiâ—erating of it to take no smal pride that such a charge should be â—ssigned him from so high a personage But good Sir if my booke be nothing else but A fardle of baggage and rotten stuffe as you â—earme it it must needes redound rather to your shame to be â—hought a fit man to giue it answere For as euery man knoweth 〈◊〉 bald beggarly scholler is the meetest match to deale with a fardle of baggage But if there be more in my booke then you sometimes would haue people to beleeue they that haue a good opinion of it may hap to thinke that those graue wise-men in high authority fore-saw that it would hardly be answered by laying nakedly testimony of Scripture and Fathers to testimony and reason to reason vvherefore they thought it best pollicy to make choise of some jolly smooth-tongued discourser that might with a â—ufling multitude of faire pleasing wordes carry his reader quite from the matter and then blinding him vvith some colourable shew of learning lâ—â—de him into errour Proceede ROBERT ABBOT NOw the Treatise against which M. Bishop writeth is commonly knowne and entituled A reformed Catholike c. written by one M. Perkins since deceassed a man of very commendable quality and wel deseruing for his great trauaile and paines for the furtherance of true religion and edifying of the Church Against this booke M. Bishop so bendeth himselfe in his dedicatory Epistle as that with al he traduceth the whole doctrine of our Church and with such motiues and reasons as a badde cause wil afford him plaieth the part of Symmachus the Pagan Labouring vnder the name of antiquity Symmach relat ad Imp. Ambr. epistolarum lib. 5. to bring in Idolatry and to perswade his Majesty that that is Catholike religion which indeede is nothing else but errour and superstition In the due examination whereof waighing wel the sundry and slippery foundations wherevpon he buildeth I presume gentle reader that thou wilt be of my minde that he did not thinke hereby to preuaile any whit with his most excellent Majesty but only vsed the pretence of this dedication to credit his booke with them who he knew would take al that he said hand ouer head vpon his owne bare word Surely if he had not presumed of very wel-willing and friendly readers he would neuer haue dreamed to gaine any credit by writing in this sort What his Epistle is thou maist here see concerning the rest as yet I wil not say much only I aduertise thee and doe assure thee that if thou diddest like of M. Perkins booke before thou hast no cause by M. Bishop to dislike of it now Thou shalt see it assaulted with ignorance with impudency with vntruth and falshood with grosse and palpable heresie and that which he commendeth to be the marrow and pith of many large volumes thou shalt finde to be nothing else but a fardle of baggage and rotten stuffe For some tast thereof let me intreate thee to take wel in worth for the time this answere to his Epistle for the rest to haue me excused as yet both in respect of that weakenesse whereby I haue beene so long withholden from the following of this worke as also for the care I haue as wel to giue thee ful satisfaction in the questions here discussed as to stoppe the aduersaries mouth that he may haue nothing further to reply I haue propounded to my selfe the rule of Tertullian in such businesses alwaies to be obserued Decet veritatem totis vti viribus non vt laborantem truth is to vse it whole strength and not to fare as if it had much a doe to defend it selfe I am loth therefore to come hastily into the field and with mine owne sworde only to make an vncertaine fight but to take conuenient time to leuy such troupes and bandes â—as that I may not neede to doubt of the victory and it may appeare vnto thee that notwithstanding the crakes and brags of these Romish sicophants yet the truth is 2. Reg. 6. vers 16. That they that are with vs are more then they that
wit to take special order that God almighty be truly and sincerely serued for Kinges may and ought to doe that though they be not supreme gouernours in causes Ecclesiastical For albeit it belong not to them to declare the true sence of al questioned places of holy Scriptures nor to determine al doubts rising in diuinity nor briefly to performe such other functions as are proper to the supreme Gouernour of Christes Church yet his Majesty might haue called together the most learned of his subjects of al sides and haue heard vvhich of them could best haue proued their doctrine to haue beene most conformable to the sacred word of God to Apostolical traditions to most ancient general Councels to the vniforme consent of the most holy and best learned Doctors of the primitiue Church and accordingly to haue embraced the same himselfe and by his Princely authority to haue established the same throughout al his Dominions It remaineth then euident That his Majesty might haue taken special order for the true seruice of God notwithstaÌ„ding he haue not supreme authority in Ecclesiastical causes And most false is this assertion of M. Abbots that any law of the Pope doth inhibite him to deale so farre-forth in matters of religion that Canon which he citeth doth only forbidde lay-Magistrates Distinct 96. Si Imperator to meddle with the ordering and judging of Priests and Clarkes and such other Ecclesiastical officers as doe properly belong to Bishops But that Kinges ought to meddle in matters of religion and how farre-forth they ought S. Leo the first a most famous Pope doth in these memorable vvordes declare You must ô Emperour without doubt know Epist 75. ad Leo. August that Kingly power is giuen to you not only for the rule of the world but is principally bestowed vpon you for the defence and aide of the Church that by suppressing wicked attempts you may both defend that which is established and also pacifie those thinges which are troubled But of this point I shal haue occasion presently to speake more at large It followeth ROBERT ABBOT AS touching the reason also vvhich he alleageth why Princes should take special order that God be rightly serued Because of his meere bounty and grace they receiue and hold their Diademes and Princely Scepters The Pope denieth that they hold the same immediately from God but are to receiue them by his mediation and approbation and no longer to hold them then they conforme themselues to his lawes Bulla Pij 5. Ecce nos constituti sumus super gentes regna c. Behold saith the Pope we are set ouer nations and kingdomes to build vp and to plant to pul vp and to destroy c. And therefore what the wisdome of God saith as M. Bishop alleageth by me Kings raigne the same the Pope blasphemously applieth to himselfe Prouerb 8. vers 15. Per me Râ—ges regnant By me Kings doe raigne thus the Pope would haue Princes as very beasts as Nabuchodonoser was not to know of whom they hold their crownes and kingdomes but to thinke that al dependeth vpon him But M. Bishop acknowledgeth here the truth that of God they hold the same and therefore should make it their special care that the same God be honoured accordingly And here vnawares he justifieth our doctrine as touching the Princes supreme authority for the gouernement of our Church the effect whereof we teach to be this to prouide by lawes and to take special order that God be purely and vprightly serued that Idolatry and superstition be remoued that the vvord of God be truly and sincerely taught that the sacraments be duly administred and the Bishops and Pastors diligently performe the seruice and duty that doth appertaine vnto them that the commandements of God be not publikely and scandalously broken for these things we acknowledge the King to be vnder Christ the supreme gouernour of the church within his Dominions and this duty M. Bishop confesseth to appertaine vnto him And thus did the good Kinges of Iudah Dauid Ezechias Iosias c. thus haue Christian Emperours and Princes done thus and no otherwise did Queene Elizabeth and yet for the doing hereof shee was proscribed by the Pope and so much as in him lay depriued of her Crowne and Scepter but the hand of God was with her and shee prospered thereby and died in peace c. WILLIAM BISHOP I Doe many times much muse how men of any sort and fashion specially how professors of Gods truth such as M. Abbot would be esteemed dare put into light such odde paltry shifts and poure out together such heapes of grosse lies A lie it was that I denied to his Majesty such authority as would serue for the taking order how God might be rightly serued in his realme Another lie it is that the Popes lawes doe inbibite Kinges to meddle with matters of religion A third that I affirmed Kinges to hold their crownes immediately from God vvhich though it be true in that sence he taketh it yet is it false that I so said in that place for I meddle not with those tearmes of immediately or mediately The fourth is that the Pope denieth Princes to hold their Diademes and Princely authority immediately from God but are to receiue them by his mediation for euen in the very Canon cited last before by himselfe the Pope acknowledgeth Distinct. 96. Si Imperator That Emperours and Kinges receiue from God the prerogatiue of their power vvhereupon the Glosse plainly noteth that they did not receiue their soueraigne authority from the Pope Which was also obserued in the Canon next before EadeÌ„ distiÌ„ct out of Pope Gelasius wordes And it is further the common opinion of al our Diuines vvherefore vnlesse this counterfait Diuine did meane here to lie for the whetstone I know not what he meant to huddle vp lies so thicke together euery one lowder then the other But saith he Pius Quintus writeth Eccenos constituti sumus super gentes regna Behold saith the Pope we are set ouer nations and kingdomes to build and to plant to plucke downe and to destroy c. therefore they apply to themselues that which the wisdome of God giueth to Kinges By me Kinges doe raigne This is the fift lie that he makes within the compasse of lesse then halfe a side for albeit the Pope vse the wordes spoken to the Prophet Hieremy Ecce nos constituti sumus c. yet doth he not those by King Salomon vttered in the person of Gods vvisdome vvhich M. Abbot deceitfully shuffleth in the place of the other Now the authority committed to the Prophet Hieremy did not make the King of Iuda to hold his crowne of him as al Diuines both Catholikes and Protestants doe grant wherefore though the same be yet remaining in the Church of God as it is not only granted by al Catholike Doctors but euen by the verdict of Caluin himselfe In cap. 10. Cor. vers
vpon just and vnjust that is bestoweth out of his owne bounty many temporal commodities vpon them that doe ful litle deserue them at his handes Wherefore M. Abbot was ouer-seene to bring in the Princes prosperity for proofe of the goodnesse of their religion Let vs proceede WILLIAM BISHOP BVT sithence there be in this our miserable age great diuersities of religions and yet but one only wherewith God is wel pleased and truly serued as saith the Apostle Ephes 4. One body one spirit as you are called into one hope of your vocation one Lord one faith one baptisme my most humble sute and supplication to your high Majesty is that to your eternal good you wil embrace maintaine and set forth that only true Catholike and Apostolike faith wherein your most roial Progenitours liued and died or if you cannot be wonne so soone to alter that religion in which it hath beene your Highnesse misfortune to haue beene bredde and brought vp that then in the meane season of your tender goodnesse you would not suffer the sincere Professours of the other to be so heauily persecuted R. ABBOT SECT 3. Page 14. HERE M. Bishop propoundeth briefly to his Majesty the summe of his petition the foundation whereof he laieth in a principle which we acknowledge to be a truth that whereas there be diuersities of religions in the world there is but one only where vvith God is truly serued Hereupon he frameth his humble sute that his Majesty wil embrace and maintaine that only true Catholike and Apostolike faith but that needeth no sute of his for his Majesty already doth that For what is the Catholike faith but the faith of the Catholike Church and which then shal we take to be the Catholike Church surely the Catholike Church by the very signification of the word is the vniuersal Church so called Quia per totum est August de vnit Eccles Athanas Q 81. Because it is ouer al or through al the world and is not tied to any country place person or condition of men not this Church or that Church as S. Augustine speaketh * August in psal 56. But the Church dispersed throughout the world and not that which consisteth iâ— men now presently liuing but so as there belong to it both those that haue beene before vs and that shal be after vs to the worldes end whereby we see how absurdly the Church of Rome taketh vnto it the name of the Catholike Church and how absurdly the Papists take vnto them the name of Catholikes The Catholike Church is the vniuersal Church the Church of Rome a particular Church there fore to say the Catholike Roman Church is al one as to say the vniuersal particular Church To speake by their rule the Roman Church is the head and al other Churches are members to it but the Catholike Church comprehendeth al therefore to say the Roman Church is the Catholike Church is as much to say the head is the vvhole body Neither doth it helpe them that of old particular Churches vvere called by the name of Catholike Church it being no otherwise done but as in toto similari in a body vvhere al the parts are of the same nature vvhere euery part hath the name of the vvhole and no one part can challenge the same more then another as in the elements euery part of the fire is fire euery part of the vvater vvater and so of the like for so euery Church where true faith was taught August coÌ„t Epist Fund cap. 4. was called to distinguish it from heretical assemblies the Catholike Church and euery Bishop of such a Church vvas called a Bishop of the Catholike Church and no one Church more then another assumed vnto it any prerogatiue of that title Therefore they called the Catholike faith the faith that vvas receiued by the Church throughout the vvorld and the true Christians vvere called Catholikes August Epist 48. Ex communicatione totius orbis by hauing communion and fellowship of faith vvith the Church of the whole world it is therefore a meere vsurpation whereby the Papists cal the Roman Church the Catholike Church WILLIAM BISHOP M. ABBOT is now at length come from his extrauagant roâ—ing narrations vnto some kinde of argumentation Here he wil giue a proofe of his valour here we shal soone try whether he come so wel furnished into the field that he neede not to doubt of the victory as in the beginning he vaunted of himselfe or vvhether his special skil and force doe not rather lie in railing at vs and in cosening of his reader then in any sound kinde of reasoning That doctrine vvhich he learned out of S. Augustine concerning the signification of the vvord Catholike vve vvillingly admit off to wit That religion is Catholike that faith is Catholike which is spread ouer al the world and hath beene alwaies imbraced and practised euen from the Apostles time to our daies and such is the religion vvhich I vvould haue perswaded his Majesty to receiue in to his Princely protection To this vvhat saith M. Abbot marry that his Majesty hath already receiued it How doth he proue that not by any one plaine and round argument directly to the purpose but from the Catholike religion falleth to the Catholike Church and so spendeth the time in most friuolous arguing against the Roman Church of vvhich I made no mention at al. Doth he not deserue a lawrel garland for the vvorshipful ranging of his battle and is he not like to fight it out valiantly that thus in the beginning flieth from the point of the question Proue good Sir that his Majesty embraceth and maintaineth that religion vvhich is spread ouer al the vvorld and that hath continued euer since the Apostles time and then you may justly say that he vpholdeth the Catholike religion according to your owne explication out of the ancient Fathers But because M. Abbot saw this to be impossible he gaue it the slippe and turneth himselfe to proue the Roman religion not to be the Catholike and perceiuing that also as hard to performe as the other he shuffles from the religion and faith of vvhich the question vvas vnto the Roman Church that is from the faith professed at Rome to the persons inhabiting the citty of Rome whom he wil proue not to be Catholikes and the Roman Church not to be the Catholike Church Doe you marke vvhat winding and turning and what doubling this simple Minister is driuen vnto ere he can come to make any shew of a silly argument But let vs giue him leaue to vvander vvhither his fancy leadeth him that vve may at length heare vvhat he would say It is forsooth That the Church of Rome doth absurdly cal her selfe the Catholike Church and that Papists doe absurdly take to themselues the name of Catholikes because the Catholike Church is the vniuersal Church but the Church of Rome is a particular Church therefore to say the Roman Catholike Church is
of their Church Wherevpon if you demand of a French Catholike of what Church he is his answere wil be that he is of the Catholike Roman Church where he addeth Roman to distinguish himselfe from al Sectaries vvho doe cal themselues somtimes Catholikes though most absurdly and to specifie that he is such a Catholike as doth wholy joine with the Roman Church in faith and religion Euen as the vvord Catholike was linked at first vvith Christian to distinguish a true Christian beleeuer from an Heretike according to that of Pacianus an ancient Authour Epistola ad Simphorian Christian is my name Catholike is my surname so now a daies the Epitheton Roman is added vnto Catholike to separate those Catholikes that joine with the Church of Rome in faith from other sectaries who doe sometimes cal themselues also Catholikes though very ridiculously because they be diuided in faith from the greatest part of the vniuersal world Out of the premises may be gathered that the Roman Church may wel signifie any Church that holdeth and maintaineth the same faith which the Roman doth whence it followeth that M. Abbot either dealt doubly vvhen he said the Roman Church to be a particular Church or else he must confesse himselfe to be one of those Doctors vvhom the Apostle noteth 1. Tim. 1. vers 7. For not vnderstanding what they speake nor of what they affirme Now to this his second sophistication The Roman Church by our rule is the head and al other Churches are members to it but the Catholike comprehendeth al ergo to say the Roman Church is the Catholike is to say the head is the whole body Here is first a mishapen argument by vvhich one may proue or disproue any thing for example I wil proue by the like that the Church of England is not Catholike thus The Church of England by their crooked rule is a member of the Catholike Church but the Catholike Church comprehendeth al where fore to say the English Church is the Catholike Church is to say a member is the whole body Besides the counterfait fashion of the argument there is a great fallacy in it for to omit Fallacia accidentis that vve say not the Church of Rome but the Bishop of Rome to be the head of the Church it is a foule fault in arguing as al Logitians doe vnderstand when one thing is said to be another by a metaphore to attribute al the properties of the metaphore to the other thing For example Christ our Sauiour is metaphorically said to be a Lion Apocal. 5. vers 5. Vicit Leo de tribu Iuda now if there hence any man would inferre that a Lion hath foure legges and is no reasonable creature ergo Christ hath as many or is not indued with reason he might himselfe therefore be wel taken for an vnreasonable and blasphemous creature Euen so must M. Abbot be vvho shifteth from that propriety of the metaphore bead which was to purpose vnto others that are cleane besides the purpose For as Christ vvas called a Lion for his inuincible fortitude so the Bishop of Rome is called the head of the Church for his authority to direct and gouerne the same but to take any other propriety of either Lion or Head when they be vsed metaphorically and to argue out of that is plainly to play the sophister Wherefore to conclude this passage M. Abbot hath greatly discouered his insufficiency in arguing by propounding argumēts that offend and be very vitious both in matter and forme and that so palpably that if young Logitians should stand vpon such in the paruies they would be hissed out of the schooles it must needes be then an exceeding great shame for a Diuine to vse them to deceiue good Christian people in matter of saluation And if after so great vaunts of giuing ful satisfaction to the reader and of stopping his aduersaries mouth that he should not haue a word to reply he be not ashamed to put such bables as these into print he cannot choose but make himselfe a mocking-stocke to the world surely his writinges are more meete to stoppe mustard-pots if I mistake not much then like to stoppe any meane schollers mouth ROBERT ABBOT IT is therefore a meere vsurpation whereby the Papists cal the Roman Church the Catholike and the very same that the Donatists of old did vse Aug. Ep. 48. They held the Catholike Church to beat Cartenna in Africa and the Papists hold it to be at Rome in Italy they would haue the Church to be called Catholike Ibid. breu collat 2. cap. dici 3. not by reason of the communion and society thereof through the whole world but by reason of the perfection of doctrine and sacraments which they falsly challenged to themselues the same perfection the Church of Rome now arrogateth to it selfe and wil therefore be called the Catholike Church Cōt Crescon grammat lib. 2. cap. 37. Epist 48. From Cartenna the Donatists ordained Bishops to other countries euen to Rome it selfe And from Rome by the Papists order must Bishops be authorised to al other churches They vvould be taken to be Catholikes for keeping communion with the Church of Cartenna and so the Papists vvil be counted Catholikes for keeping communion with the Church of Rome They held Ibidem that howsoeuer a man beleeued he could not be saued vnlesse he did communicate with the Church of Cartenna And the Papists hold that there is no saluation likewise but in communicating vvith the Church of Rome The Donatists vvere not so absurd in the one but the Papists are as absurd and ridiculous in the other WILLIAM BISHOP IN the former passage M. Abbot bestowed an argument or two raked out of the rotten rubbish of those walles to vse some of his owne wordes vvhich vvere before broken downe by men of our side Now he commeth to his owne fresh inuention as I take it for it is a fardle of such beggarly base stuffe and so ful of falshood and childish follies that any other man I vveene vvould not for very shame haue let it passe to the print It consisteth in a comparison and great resemblance that is betweene the old doating Donatists and the new presumptuous Papists if M. Abbot dreame not The Donatists saith he held the Catholike Church to be at Cartenna and the Papists doe hold it to be at Rome in Italy False on both sides because we doe not hold it to be so at Rome as they did at Cartenna for we hold it to be so at Rome as it is besides also dispersed al the world ouer they that it vvas wholy included vvithin the straight boundes of Cartenna in Mauritania and her confines so that whosoeuer was conuerted in any other country must goe thither to be purged from their sinnes as S. Augustine testifieth in expresse tearmes Epistola 48. in the very place by M. Abbot alleaged False also in the principal point that the
Donatists held the Catholike Church to be at Cartenna for there dwelt only the Rogatists who were as S. Augustine there speaketh Breuissimum frustrum de frustro maiore A most smal gobbet or fragment broken out of a greater peece that is to say a few schismatical fellowes fallen from the Donatists as the Puritans are from the Protestants or the Anabaptists from the Sacramentaries so that although men of that sect held the Catholike Church to be at Cartenna yet the maine body of the Donatists maintained it not to be there at al but held that congregation of Cartenna to be vvholy schismatical and no true member of the Catholike Church This first part then of the comparison is most vgly and monstrously false The second is not vnlike The Donatists would haue the Church to be called Catholike not by reason of the communion and society thereof through the whole world but by reason of the perfection of doctrine and sacraments which they falsly challenged to themselues the same perfection the Church of Rome now arrogateth to her selfe Here are many faults the first is a grosse lie in the chiefe branch for the Donatists did not cal the Church Catholike for the perfection of doctrine and sacraments see S. Augustine in both places who expresly deliuereth Breui collat cap. 2. diei 3. Epist. 48. that it was for the fulnesse of sacraments Ex plenitudine sacramentorum or for the obseruation of al Gods commandements Ex obseruatione omnium diuinorum praeceptorum of perfection of doctrine they said not one word they were more sharpe-vvitted as S. Augustine obserueth then to goe about to proue vniuersality by perfection which is not vniuersal But seing wel that they could not defend their congregation to be Catholike that is vniuersal but by some kinde of vniuersality they defended it to be so called for the vniuersality fulnesse of sacraments and coÌ„mandements that is because their Church retained al the sacraments that the Catholikes did and professed to keepe al Gods commandements as fully as they M. Abbots former fault then in this second point of resemblance and that a foule one is in that he belieth the Donatists And more palpably should he haue belied the Roman Church if he had justly brought in the resemblance to wit if he had said as due proportion required that vve hold our Church to be Catholike as the Donatists did theirs for the perfection of doctrine and sacraments vvhich is so manifestly vntrue and so cleerely against the doctrine of al Catholike writers that he that was wont to blush at nothing seemeth yet ashamed to auouch it openly and yet doth at last traile it in deceitfully As for perfection of doctrine and sacraments though it be only in the Catholike Church yet it is so farre wide from the signification and vse of the vvord Catholike that none except such wise men as M. Abbot is doe thinke any thing to be Catholike because it is perfect The third particle of the resemblance is That from Cartennathe the Donatists ordained Bishops to other countries euen to Rome it selfe And from Rome by the Papists order Bishops be authorised to al other Churches I am not so copious as to afford to euery leasing of M. Abbot a new phrase vvherefore the reader I hope wil beare with my rudenesse if I cal sometimes a lie by the name of a lie It is an vntrue tale that the Donatists ordained Bishops from Cartenna for they could not abide that place but esteemed it to be Schismatical as you haue heard before He doth misreport S. Augustine vvho saith Lib. 2. cont Crescon c. 37 Quò ex Africa ordinare paucis vestris soletis Episcopum you Donatists are wont to order and send a Bishop thither to your few companions out of Africa not from Cartenna in Mauritania Neither doth the Catholike Church appoint that euery Bishop should goe to Rome to take holy orders and from thence to be sent to other Catholike countries but in euery other region where be three Catholike Bishops they may be lawfully consecrated albeit for vnities sake and to preserue due order they be confirmed by the Bishop of Rome the supreme head vnder Christ of the Catholike Church The fourth point of the comparison is most absurd for the Donatists were so farre from thinking them Catholikes that kept communion with the Church of Cartenna that they detested and abhorred their company as Schismatikes Neither doe we cal any men Catholikes for keeping coÌ„munion with the Church of Rome if it be taken for that particular Church which is contained within the vvalles of Rome but because that communicating with that Church in faith and religion they doe communicate with al other of the same faith which are spread al the world ouer Finally the fift is as false as the fourth and in the same sort to be confuted True it is that the Donatists thought that none could be saued out of their congregation which is almost a common position of euery sect and heresie but most sure it is that there is no saluation out of the true Church of Christ no more then was out of the Arke of Noë in the general deluge vvherefore whosoeuer doth not communicate with the Church of Rome vvhich is the chiefe member thereof in society of faith and sacraments is out of the state of grace and saluation according to that of S. Hierome to Pope Damasus I following no chiefe but Christ Epistola 7. tit 2. joine my selfe to the communion of Peters chaire vpon that Rocke I know the Church to be built whosoeuer doth eate the Paschal lambe out of this house he is prophane he that is not found within the Arke of Noë shal perish c. vvhere there is much more to this purpose To conclude this passage seing that M. Abbot went about to proue the Church of Rome to be like that of the Donatists by no one sound argument but by meere fabling lying he must looke vnlesse he repent Apocal. 21. vers 8. to haue his part with al liars in the poole burning with fire and brimstone And if it please the reader to heare at what great square the Donatists vvere vvith the Church of Rome to which M. Abbot doth so often resemble them I wil briefly shew it out of the best records of that time S. Augustine speaketh thus to the Donatist Petilian Lib. 2. cont Petili c. 51. What hath the Church or See of Rome done to thee in which Peter did sit and now sitteth Anastatius why doest thou cal the Apostolical chaire the chaire of pestilence See how friendly the Donatists saluted the Church of Rome stiling it the chaire of pestilence Lib. 2. cont Parmeni Optatus Bishop of Mileuitan saith thus Whence is it that you Donatists contend to vsurp vnto you the keies of the Kingdome and that you wage battaile against the chaire of Peter presumptuously and with sacrilâ—gious audacity If they vvaged battaile against
the Church of Rome so cruelly surely there was no agreement betweene them Wherefore as the Catholikes of Africa then so they that were taken into the communion of the Church of Rome cared little for the Donatists as witnesseth S. Augustine saying of Cecilianus Bishop of Carthage August Epistola 162. He neede not to care for the multitude of his conspiring enemies the Donatists when he saw himselfe by communicatory letters joined with the Roman Church in which alwaies the principality of the Apostolical chaire flourished c. So we at this time neede as little to care for the bitter reproches and deceitful arguments of the Protestants so we stand stable and firme in the like society of faith and religion with the same Church of Rome ROBERT ABBOT Cont. Epist. Fund cap. 4. THERE vvas reason why Augustine should be moued with the name of Catholike vvhen they that were called Catholikes had testimony of their faith from the communion society of the Church throughout the vvhole vvorld and were therefore so called Breui collat diti 3. cap. 2. Quia communicant Ecclesiae toto orbe diffusae Because saith S. Augustine they communicate with the Church spread ouer al the whole world But most sottishly it is alleaged for a motiue to vs being now Donatistically applied to one particular Church of Rome and to men bearing the name of Catholikes only for communicating vvith that Church Surely as the name of Iewes was of old a name of honour and the proper title of the people of God but afterwardes by their Apostacy who bare it was left for Esai 65. vers 15. a name of curse and reproch so the name of Catholike was an honourable name and the peculiar title of the true children of the Church but now by their abuse who haue vnjustly taken that name vnto themselues it is become a name of curse and shame vvith the people of God and the proper badge of Apostataes and Heretikes And as the Apostle Rom. 2. v. 28. denieth the name of Iewes to them vvho yet according to the letter were so called because of the circumcision of the flesh and applieth the truth of the nam◠to them vvho vvere so according to the spirit albeit according to the letter they were not so named so the name of Catholikes in deede belongeth not to the Romish faction who according to the letter take vpon them to be so called but the true meaning thereof belongeth to them vvho although they joy not in the litteral name c. yet doe follow the same faith vvhich they followed vvho first were called by the name of Catholikes Let them haue the shel so that we haue the kernel c. the name in his true vse importeth them that imbrace the faith of the Catholike that is the vniuersal Church that hath beene from the beginning of the world that is through the vvhole vvorld and shal be to the worldes end WILLIAM BISHOP S. AVGVSTINE indeede was so much moued with the name of Catholike that he alleageth it to haue beene one principal cause Cont. Epist Fund cap. 4. De vera relig cap. 7. which kept him in the lappe of the Church And else where very often exhorteth al Christians To hold the communion of that Church which both is Catholike and knowne also by that very name not only to her owne followers but also to others And the self◠same reason alleaged by M. Abbot himselfe vvhich caused that most holy vvise and learned Father to esteeme so highly of that title Catholike is now of great force to perswade al reasonable men to make themselues members of the Roman Church for by joining in society of faith with the Church of Rome they shal cōmunicate with the Church spred ouer the whole vvorld because the faith and religion of the Church of Rome hath beene generally receiued al the world ouer as our aduersaries themselues doe confesse The name Catholike is by the Protestants Donatistically applied to their Schismatical congregation that neither are nor euer were scattered al the world ouer but be inclosed and confined vvithin certaine countries of Europe as the Donatists were within the boundes of Afrike Most sottishly then to vse his owne wordes doth M. Abbot affirme the name Catholike to be applied by vs of the Roman religion vnto the particular Church of Rome when as we cal al other Churches of what country soeuer that with the Church of Rome keepe intirely the same faith Catholike And men of al other nations doe we cal Catholikes as vvel as those vvho are Romans borne because they al beleeue and confesse the same one Catholke faith that is extended ouer al the world Secondly M. Abbot is much mistaken in his comparison of the name of Iewe with the name Catholike for to omit first that such examples proue nothing but doe only serue for shew or explication and moreouer that it can hardly be shewed that the name of Iewe was a name of such honour at any time for that peoples honourable name vvas Israelites and vvere not called Iewes til towardes the declination and wane of their estate Neither was it euer any peculiar and proper title of the people of God for God had many good seruants that were neuer called Iewes as may be gathered by Iob the Husite Naaman the Sirian the widow of Luc. 4. vers 26. Sarepta a Sidonian and by a great number of Prosilites and finally by that which the Apostle teacheth Rom. 2. vers 14. Many Gentils were saued without the law Lastly most vncertaine it is of what name the Prophet Isay speaketh when he saith Cap. 65. vers 13. It shal be left for a name of curse Al these impertinencies of his example being too too many I doe remit him but cannot pardon his grosse fault in the maine point of the comparison for the name Iewe according to the vsual signification of the word being the name of a certaine people of one race and kindred and hauing a law giuen them by Moises which should continue only for a prescript time and end at the comming of Christ is not like the name of Catholike which is no special name of the people of any one country but is attributed and doth agree to al sortes of men of what country or nation soeuer that doe embrace the true Christian faith And is inseparably linked and so fast joined and riueted with the Christian profession and religion that it shal neuer faile fal or be separated from it so long as Christs faith standeth nor euer be contemned of the faithful whiles Christs true religion flourisheth vvhich is proued inuincibly out of the very Etimology of the name Catholike and that according to M. Abbots owne interpretation in the same place who doth expound it to signifie that Church which is through the whole world and shal be to the worldes end If the name Catholike shal continue to the worldes end the true title of
heauen shal preach vnto vs any thing concerning Christ or concerning his Church or concerning any thing pertaining to our faith and life but what we haue receiued in the Scriptures of the law and Gospel accursed be he Our faith therefore 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 proued to be an Apostolical Church c. of this Apostolical Church his Majesty is the supreme gouernour vnder Christ As for M. Bishops religion it cannot be the Catholike religion because it is not that vvhich the Catholike Church that is the faithful of al ages haue practised His faith is not the Apostolike faith because it is not that vvhich the Apostles left in writing They make no mention of the Pope of his Supremacy of his Pardons of worshipping of Images inuocation of Saints Pilgrimages and a thousand such trumperies WILLIAM BISHOP WE agree in this that there is but one faith one baptisme one spiritual foode and one religion in the Catholike Church but M. Abbot is fouly ouer-seene about the time when the true Church beganne first to be called Catholike which was not before Christs time but afterwardes according to that alleaged out of Pacianus an ancient authour who writeth of the name Catholike saying Christian is my name Pacian epist ad Simphor de nomine Catholico Catholike is my surname For when among Christians some beganne to teach false doctrine and to draw others after them into sects they that remained sound did cleaue fast vnto the whole body of the Church were intituled Catholikes to distinguish them from Heretikes that did not joine vvith the vniuersal corps of Christians in faith and religion which M. Abbot before did in plaine wordes confesse see his text afore vvhere he beginneth to argue of the word Catholike And the reason is most perspicuous why the Iewes and their religion could not be called Catholike though it vvere right and according to the wil of God for that time because Catholike signifieth that which is spread al the world ouer and receiued of al nations so was not the law of Moises and the manner of seruing God therein prescribed but vvas peculiar vnto the children of Israel and as it were confined within the limits of one land and country vvherefore it could not be called Catholike and vniuersal And M. Abbot was greatly deceiued or else goeth about to deceiue others when for proofe of communicating with the Catholike Church he recoileth back vnto the beginning of the vvorld Why did he not rather shew that their new Gospel flourished in al countries assoone as the Christian faith vvas planted and that it hath continued in al ages since the Apostles daies vntil our time that had beene to haue spoken directly to the purpose which he seldome vseth But he saw that to be a worke to hard for Hercules and therefore to delude his reader and to lead him from the matter he flieth vp to the old farne-daies of Abel Noē Abraham c. as though they had reuealed vnto them al those particular points of faith which Christ taught his Apostles and the same religion and manner of vvorshipping God that we Christians haue which is flatly opposite to the doctrine of S. Paul who testifieth Ephes 3. v. 4. That the mistery of Christ vnto other generations was not knowne vnto the Sonnes of men as now it is reuealed vnto his holy Apostles and Prophets in the spirit Those ancient Patriarkes as men Hebr. 11. vers 13. looking a farre off at the daies of Christ the light of the vvorld did not discouer so distinctly the misteries of the Christian faith as the Apostles vvho vvere Iob. 6. v. 45. taught by his owne mouth and made to know Ioh. 15. v. 15. al his Fathers secretes and had ¶ * Rom. 8. vers 23. the first fruits of the spirit in best sort to vnderstand them and carry them away To be short our Sauiour hath decided this question and saith in expresse wordes Math. 13. vers 17. Many Prophets and just men haue desired to see the thinges that you see and haue not seene them and to beare the thinges that you heare and haue not heard them Obserue then how absurdly M. Abbot behaueth himselfe in this matter First he vseth tergiuersation in leaping so farre backe from the point of the question seeking communion with the Catholike Church some thousandes of yeares before there vvas any Church Catholike Secondly in auouching the ancient founders of the first world to haue beleeued clearely and particularly al the articles of faith that vve beleeue or else why doth he conclude that the Roman faith is not Catholike because in that old and hoare-headed world some branches of their faith were not sprong vp and of ful growth They did not saith he worship Idols and Images they did not pray to Saints c. But good Sir did they beleeue that al their children vvere to be baptised and that al persons of riper yeares among them were to receiue the holy Sacrament of Christes body yea can M. Abbot demonstrate that they had perfect faith of the most holy and blessed Trinity beleeuing distinctly in three persons and one God or that the redeemer of the world Christ Iesus was to be perfect God and perfect man the nature of man in him subsisting vvithout the proper person of man in the second person of the Trinity which are the most high misteries of our Christian faith I am not ignorant that albeit those ancient Patriarkes and Prophets had not cleare and distinct knowledge of many articles vvhich vve are bound to beleeue yet they beleeued some few of them in particular and had a certaine confuse and darke conceit by figures and tipes of most of the rest Touching these very points vvhereof M. Abbot would haue them vvholy ignorant if his bare vvord without any manner of proof were so powerful I affirme that they held the most of them vvhich I wil not stand here to proue at large for that were Protestant-like to runne from one question to another without order but I wil only giue a touch to euery one of his instances referring the reader for more ful satisfaction to the proper place of those head controuersies First no Catholike euer taught any man to worship Idols let that then passe as a Protestant slander but that Images are to be placed in Churches the examples recorded in the old Testament of hauing them both in their a Exod. 25. vers 18. Tabernacle and in the b 3. Reg. 6. vers 23. Temple of Salomon this sentence of the Psalmist c Psalm 98. vers 5. Adore his foote-stoole and many such like places and resemblances doe argue very strongly that Images are to be worshipped Secondly inuocation of Angels is most plainly practised by the holy Patriarke Iacob the Father of al
or Predecessours erred he leaueth them to the counsaile of God but by the vvord of God learneth himselfe to be one of them Vers 16. that shal hate the whoore and make her desolate and shal eate her flesh and burne her with fire Albeit it is vtterly false vvhich he affirmeth that al his Majesties Progenitours Kinges of these Realmes of England and Scotland liued and died in the Romish faith that now our Romish factours labour so much to set vp Indeede he and his fellowes are vvont to be very lauish in their speeches of this matter as if from King Lucius of Britanny and Donaldus of Scotland the only religion that had beene professed had beene that vvhich now is practised by them vvhere as it shal afterwardes plainly appeare that at the comming in of Augustine the Italian Monke 400. yeares after the receiuing of the faith in this Iland the Bishops and Churches of Scotland joined with the Britanes against those new obseruations which the same Augustine brought from Rome and vvould by no meanes admit thereof for the space of an hundred yeares at least refused to communicate with the English that had receiued the same Yea in the time of King Henry the third 1200. Math. Paris in Hērico 111. Anno 1238. 1239. yeares after the incarnation of Christ when the Popes Legate vvould haue entred into Scotland to visit the Churches there the King of Scots Alexander the second forbadde him so to doe alleaging that none of his Predecessours had admitted any such neither would he suffer it and therefore willed him at his owne peril to forbeare so long vvas it before the Popes authority could gaine acknowledgment in that Kingdome which his agents would make vs beleeue hath beene in al ages vniuersally and vnquestionably receiued But they care not indeede vvhat they say or write so that it may carry a magnifical and braue shew to dazel the eies of them that are not wel acquainted with their leude and naughty dealing WILLIAM BISHOP PAGANS and Heretikes doe now and then like Apes counterfait true Christians And no maruaile for their great master Sathan 2. Cor. 11. vers 14. doth transfigure himselfe sometimes into an Angel of light and did alwaies and yet doth labour ¶ * Esai 14. vers 14. to be like vnto the Highest but it is easie to espy their apish trickes and to returne their fond subtleties vpon their owne heades Simmachus plaied but the part of a foolish sophister when he pleaded so with the Emperour Valentinian we are to follow our Fathers for the Emperours Father and neerest Predecessors were no Pagan Idolaters but professed Christians as al men know vvho are conuersant in those ancient histories To the point of the proofe I answere in briefe that it is a most sound inducement among vs Christians and to be dearely regarded of al To follow the foot-steppes of our fore-fathers in beleeuing if they before haue not degenerated from their Ancestors The base and ground of it is this As God is more ancient then the Deuil and Christ IESVS then al Heretikes so vvas the true seruice of God and the right faith of Christ planted sowne and tooke fast roote before Heresie and Idolatry sprong vp vvhich hath firme testimony from our Sauiour who teacheth Math. c. 13. vers 24. That the good seede was first sowne by the Father of the houshold and the cockle after and ouersowne by the enemy VVhence it followeth perspiculously that they who doe hold the same doctrine inuiolably vvhich was embraced by them of that stock who were first cōuerted to the Christian faith are true and sincere Christians Those children then vvho follow the holy steps of their Catholike Progenitors ascending from Sonne to Father successiuely til they ariue at the first Christians in that country are true Christians and they that doe not succeede their Predecessors in their faith and religion but either are fallen themselues or doe follow others vvho before fel from the faith of their fore-fathers are vndoubtedly slipt into errour and infidelity By vvhich discourse it is euident that I tendered a most reasonable request vnto his Majesty that he would imbrace and countenance that religion which al his Progenitors euen to the first Christian among them had liued and died in because they vvere al Catholike and not one of them can be named vvho changed the religion of his fore-fathers yet this notwithstanding Simmachus the Pagan vsing the like argument in shew vvas not to be heard the difference is because his fore-fathers for vvhose Idolatry he pleaded had before forsaken the true and sincere vvorship of the one liuing God and therefore their children vvere not to continue in their Idolatry but to returne vnto their former Ancestors true piety So vvere the Donatists children of whom S. Augustine cited by M. Abbot speaketh not to follow their Fathers in that sect and heresie but to leaue their late corrupted parents in their new doctrine and to looke back vnto their grandfathers ancient faith and religion from vvhose integrity their Fathers were degenerated Euen as now a-daies we exhort men that had or haue Parents turned Protestants not to be led away vvith their erring Parents opinions but happily to receiue their forefathers ancient faith from vvhich their Fathers reuolted vnaduisedly And so shal they returne vnto the roote and original of our Lordes tradition as S. Cyprian speaketh because they shal returne to that faith vvhich was receiued from hand to hand euen from the Apostles our Lordes most trusty and sacred messengers and cleauing fast to that shal not neede to regard what any man hath thought fit to be dine or said against it Now to that point vvhich followeth in M. Abbot Apocal. 17. There shal be a time when the Kinges of the earth shal giue their power to the beast and bend themselues to fight against the Lambe vvhich I doe willingly admit but vvhen that time shal be or vvhat Kinges it is very vncertaine for there shal be also a time Esai 60. Psalm 70. When the Kinges of the earth shal be as nurses to the true Church and shal most humbly both obey it and also enrich and defend it to the vttermost of their power Now by the very insinuation of the Text and the vniforme consent of ancient writers the good Kinges shal cherish exalt and magnifie the Church before those euil Kinges shal arise who falling away from their fathers faith and from the Catholike Church vvil lend their aide to her professed enemies to vvorke her ouerthrowe vvhich is a shrewd presumption that the Kinges of former ages stood farre better affected to the true Church of God then some of later times Wel this I leaue to vnderstanding mens judgement But I may not slippe M. Abbots exceeding grosse ouer-sight or rather hainous crime in ranking his Majesty among those Kinges mentioned in the Apocalipse for albeit Cap. 17. they shal hate the whoore and make her
hundreths al his Majesties Ancestors both English and Britans embraced and maintained the same Catholike Roman faith which we now doe The same might as easily be proued of the Churches of Scotland vvho acknowledge Palladius and Patritius for two of the chiefe founders of the Christian faith in that country vvho both were brought vp at Rome and sent into Scotland by Celestinus Bishop of Rome to instruct the Scots in the doctrine of the church of Rome euen as Augustine vvas from S. Gregory into England From which the Scots Church neuer swarued vntil of late yeares Knoxe Buchanan and such like giddy-headed and fiery spirited fellowes seduced them And M. Abbot most ignorantly or impudently affirmeth it to haue beene 1200 yeares after the incarnation of Christ ere the Popes authority could get any acknowledgment there for in the very same hundreth yeare by him named they vvere so farre off from denying the Popes authority ouer them in causes Ecclesiastical that they did acknowledge him to be also their Protectour in temporal affaires For when King Edward the third would haue giuen them Iohn Balial for their King they answered him Walsingham in vita Edw. Anno 1292. That they would not accept of him for such without the Popes consent who had their country in protection as they then pleaded And M. Abbots argument to the contrary is most friuoulous Alexander the King bade the Popes Legate to enter his country at his peril ergo he did not acknowledge the Popes authority By the like argument one might proue that King Philippe and Queene Mary did not acknowledge the Popes authority for they commanded a Legate of his to stay at Calis and to forbeare entrance into this Realme at his peril The Popes Legates then when they be sent about affaires that doe seeme to the Prince and his Councel prejuditious to the temporal state may be refused without disparagement to the Popes supreme authority in causes Ecclesiastical And the King of Scots had reason to refuse that Cardinal Legate whose special arrand was to collect mony to maintaine the warres of the holy Land vvhich was not to be spared in his country Besides the very entertainement of such a great State so accompanied was reputed as needlesse so ouer costly for that poore country If M. Abbot haue no better stuffe then this to vphold his badde cause he that best knew his owne meaning and designement hath to the life painted out himselfe where he saith They care not indeede what they say or write so that it may carry a magnifical and braue shew to dazel the eies of them that are not wel acquainted with their lewde and naughty dealing ROBERT ABBOT BVT M. Bishop being out of doubt that he should not preuaile in this first part of his sute therefore addeth the second Or if you cannot be wonne so soone to alter that religion in which it hath beene your misfortune to haue beene bredde and brought vp that then in the meane season you wil not so heauily persecute the sincere professours of the other Where you see the presumption of a base and beggerly vassal I forget here that he is a Doctor of diuinity I consider him as a subject thus to vpbraide his Prince vvith misfortune in his breeding and bringing vp whereas his Majesties bringing vp by the singular prouidence of almighty God hath serued to make him high admirable among other Princes and he hath learned thereby to be indeede a King by casting off the yoke of bondage vvhereby sundry other Princes are enthralled to a beast Yea and by his bringing vp is so wel able to defend the religion he professeth that M. Bishop must stand before him like a dumbe Asse able to say nothing but only to repeate their old cuckowes song The Church the Church The Fathers the Fathers albeit he can make nothing good neither by Church nor Fathers But his sute is that his Majesty vvil leaue off so heauily to persecute them complaining before he haue cause and intreating his Majesty to leaue off before he hath begunne And doth he like a dissembling hypocrite talke of heauy persecution only for an easie imprisonmēt and amersement of goodes vvhen they in most barbarous and cruel sort by infinite vexations and torments by rackes and strappadoes by fire and sword haue spilt and destroied the bloud and liues of so many thousandes of ours only for the profession of the Gospel of Christ but no otherwise doe they complaine of persecution then did of old the Donatists and runnegate Circumcellions And vve say of them as S. Augustine did of the others They suffer persecution Sed pro fatuitate pro vanitate but it is for their foolery Prouerb 22. vers 25. it is for vanity Foolishnesse is bound in the hart of a child saith Salomon but the rodde of correction shal driue it away from him Indeede they doe for the most part play the children it is but their wil or rather vvilfulnesse for which they suffer they can giue no reason why they doe so but what ignorance affordeth them They must follow the Church they wil doe as their fathers and fore-fathers haue done it is fit that a childes stomacke be subdued vvith a rodde and necessary that some course be taken for the subduing and reforming of their wil. WILLIAM BISHOP M. ABBOT concludeth this his clowdy and vvindy Section with a storme of railing calling me in it dumbe Asse dissembling Hipocrite base and beggarly Vassal This last name he giueth me because I shewe my selfe sorry for that it vvas his Majesties misfortune to be bredde and brought vp in the Protestants religion great cause you see vvas giuen him to burst out into so rude and bitter wordes But to qualify this clownish tricke he addeth the excuse of a country Coridon rather indeede accusing then excusing himselfe for why did he forget that I was a Doctor in diuinity or how did he forget it that euen then so wel remembred it He would not forsooth respect it here but by a metaphysical abstraction consider me only as a subject wherein he discouereth a double folly for first who seeth not that any man of neuer so great vvorship or honour may in like sort be called a base vassal if his dignity and degree be excepted Might not M. Abbot himselfe if one should forget his calling and learning be stiled in like manner a base beggarly vassal vvherefore this figure of his may rather be tearmed rustical then rethorical And had he not also forgotten himselfe to be a Doctor in diuinity yea a man of ordinary ciuility he would not haue plaied the part of a furnish and foule-mouthed butterwench by falling into such rude tearmes of scurrillity His second ouer-sight is more queasie and dangerous for if I be a base vassal in that I am a subject then is my Soueraignes honour called in question for none be base in that they are subjects vnlesse their Soueraignes be so meane and obscure
censured a base and beggarly vassal for shewing my selfe sorrowful for my Princes misfortune what stile deserues he for such outragious reproches bealched forth against the highest Bishop of Christes Church Now whereas M. Abbot boldly auerreth That thereby his Majesty hath learned to cast off the yoke of bondage by which other Princes are enthralled to a beast sauing his reuerence I answere that other Kinges nourished in countries accounted as ciuil to say the least as Scotland vvil not change that their bondage vvith his Majesties supposed liberty and freedome because they hold it farre better to enjoy the direction and assistance of the Bishop of Rome for the vniforme and peacible gouernement of their Clergy according vnto the ancient Canons of the Church then either to take it into their owne handes or to cōmit it to the discretion of Consistory Ministers or to any other sort of late deuised Ecclesiastical plat-formes Godly wise and vnderstanding Kings vvil no doubt consider that some who perswade them to cast off such yokes are very false Parasites no sound and true harted subjects because it is said of Kinges out of il counsel in the second Psalme Let vs breake their bandes and let vs cast from vs their yoke vvhereas contrariwise in the same place the spirit of God speakes thus to Princes Apprehendite disciplinam Receiue discipline that is obserue al good orders and take correction least that our Lord waxe angry with you and then you perish from the right way And if they themselues should so much forget their duty to God and respect to his holy Church as to seeke the vtter ruine and subuersion of it yet very reason teacheth them that it is farre more safe orderly and expedient that there should be one only supreme Pastour assisted with the graue counsel of some of the wiser sort of euery Christian country as the Popes holinesse is with the counsel of his most graue wise and learned Cardinals to controule and correct them then to be left to the mercy of the Ministers of euery country and to the tumultuous reformation of the rash and giddy multitude who by the cōmon consent of the best learned Protestants must take their Prince in hand and belabour him if he goe about to oppresse the Gospel as hath beene before proued To proceede is it not a rare pranke of a parasite to auouch that an ancient student in diuinity must needes stand dumbe like an Asse before his Majesty and not be able to answere him one word in his owne profession but the Church the Church the Fathers the Fathers I vvish hartily that his excellent Majesty would match me with no meaner a man then Doctor Abbot he that professeth himselfe able to stoppe al mens mouthes to alleage not only the Church and the Fathers but the Scripture the Scripture and by his Highnesse authentike judgement approue him to haue the better cause that can pertinently cite most plaine texts of Scripture for their religion I make no doubt but the Protestant part notwithstāding their common craking of the vvord of God should goe to the ground Marry vvhen vve auouch holy Scripture for vs in as expresse tearmes as can be deuised they wil not yeeld but deuise most extrauagant glosses to fly from the euident testimony of Gods most holy word whereupon we are compelled to make recourse vnto the definition of the Church of God Iob. 16. v. 13. Which is guided by the spirit of God vnto al truth and vnto the learned commentaries of the most ancient holy and juditious Fathers vvho vvere for their times appointed by the holy Ghost to rule and instruct the same his Church that seing how they vnderstood the holy Scriptures vve may by their euen and vnpartial line and square direct our judgement in the true sence of holy Scripture vvhich is the principal cause why we rely so much vpon the Church and Fathers and for vvhich he so scornefully vpbraideth vs vvith the Church the Church the Fathers the Fathers And here to returne one of M. Abbots sharpe wordes vpon himselfe vvhat a dissembling hipocrite was he to say that when al was done we could not make any thing good by either Church or Fathers Sect. 9. 10. when as he himself doth plainly confesse that S. Augustine S. Hierome Epiphanius and diuers other Fathers be flat for vs and is driuen roundly to deny their authority and to preferre the opinions of condemned Heretikes Iouinian Vigilantius and Aërius before these most renowmed Doctors and Pastors As grosse and palpable an vntruth is that vvhich followeth That the Catholikes be not heauily persecuted by the state whereas al their goodes and chattels be vvholy confiscate and two partes of their landes their bodies at pleasure subject to prison there to lie without baile or mainprise their persons daily in danger of death for receiuing or any vvay maintaining their Pastours to omit al other their oppressions which be almost innumerable but belike because al Catholikes be not by most cruel death suddainly made away this Minister of bloud accounteth their persecution light and easie And vvhereas he so enlargeth the short and smal persecution of their bretheren I doe offer to joine with him in this issue that more Catholike Priests Religious men and others haue beene tormented murthered and most despitefully slaine by men of their religion within the compasse of two Realmes France and England during the only time of Queene Elizabeth her raigne then were of Protestants and men of al other Sects for a thousand yeares before in those countries yea take to them also al Spaine and Italy The Donatists and al other sectaries doe suffer persecution as S. Augustine truly saith for their obstinate folly vvhat of that ergo whosoeuer suffereth persecution for his religion is a foole what a foolish reason in this then were the Apostles and al the best Christians fooles But M. Abbot saith We be children and can yeeld no reason for that we suffer but what ignorance affordeth vs to wit we must cleaue to the Church and follow our fore-fathers Surely that were a foule fault that we as children should obey our Mother the holy Church and follow the faith and religion of our fore-fathers But first it is most palpably false that we can yeeld no other reason for our religion as our bookes euidently doe conuince Then if we had no other reason but that one it alone were sufficient for it is an article of our Creede to beleeue the Church and S. Paul assureth vs 1. Tim. 3. vers 15. That the Church is the pillar and ground of truth vvhereupon this is receiued as a principle of faith among the ancient Fathers allowed euen by Protestants themselues That he that hath not the Church to his Mother shal neuer haue God to his Father he therefore that cleaueth fast vnto the firme pillar of the Church and followeth her precepts as of a most faithful Mother can neuer goe astray
Finally he doth absurdly apply S. Augustines wordes spoken against the Donatists to vs they vvil much better fit the Protestants vvho imitate their errours in most points as I haue proued already who also may be more aptly resembled to children that stand in neede of a rodde because their religion is euery vvay childish as being young and of late borne phantastical and without any sound ground of mature judgement as changeable also as children according to the diuers humour of the state and time SECT 4. W. BISHOP VERY many vrgent and forcible reasons might be produced in fauour and defence of the Catholike Roman religion whereof diuers haue beene already in most learned Treatises tendered to your Majesty wherefore I wil only touch three two chosen out of the subject of this booke the third selected from a sentence of your Majesty recorded in the aforesaid conference And because that argument is as most sensible so best assured which proceedeth from a principle either euident in it selfe or else granted and confessed to be true my first proofe shal be grounded vpon that your Highnesse resolute and constant opinion recorded in the said conference Page 75. to wit That no Church ought to separate it selfe further from the Church of Rome either in doctrine or ceremony then shee hath departed from her selfe when shee was in her most flourishing and best estate from whence I deduce this reason The principal pillars of the Roman Church in her most flourishing estate taught in al points of religion the same doctrine that shee nâ—w holdeth and teacheth and in expresse tearmes condemneth for errour and heresie most of the articles which the Protestants esteeme as chiefe partes of their reformed Gospel therefore if your Majesty wil resolutely embrace and constantly defend that doctrine which the Roman Church maintained in her most flourishing estate you must forsake the Protestant and take the Catholike into your Princely and Roial protection ROBERT ABBOT YOV talke M. Bishop of many vrgent and forcible reasons but you talke as your fellowes doe like mount-bankes and juglers You haue much prating and many wordes but your reasons vvhen they are duly examined are as light as feathers before the vvinde neither vvould they seeme other to your owne followers but that you bewitch them with this principle that they must read nothing written on our part for answere to them we see your vrgent and forcible reasons in this booke vvhich you tel vs is the marrow and pith of many volumes I doubt not but by that time I haue examined the same your owne pupils and schollers if they reade the answere wil account you a meere seducer a cosener and abuser of them and wil detest you accordingly But to beginne withal you offer three reasons to his Majesty in this your Epistle for the justifying of your Romish religion for the impeaching of ours Two chosen out of the subject of this booke the third selected from a sentence of his Majesty Now if these reasons proue reasonlesse then your reason M. Bishop should haue taught you more manners and duty then thus to trouble his Majesty vvith your reasonlesse reasons To examine them in order the first reason is grounded vpon a principle most judiciously soundly affirmed by his Majesty That no Church ought further to seperate it selfe from the Church of Rome in doctrine or ceremony then shee hath departed from her selfe when shee was in her flourishing best estate and which is subtilly left out by M. Bishop from Christ her Lord and head For seeing it cannot be denied that the Church of Rome vvas once sound and vpright in faith the Apostle bearing witnesse Rom. 1. That their faith was published throughout the world it must needes follow that vvhat shee hath not since that time altered is stil vpright and sound and therefore to be embraced Now from thence M. Bishop argueth thus The principal pillars of the Church of Rome in her most flourishing estate taught in al points the same doctrine that shee now teacheth and in expresse tearmes did condemne of heresie most of the articles of our religion ergo c. but soft and faire M. Bishop there is no hast c. WILLIAM BISHOP TRVE there is no hast indeede for M. Abbot comes faire and soft to the matter What a number of idle vaunting wordes and vaine repetitions be here as though any juditious man vvere to be perswaded by bare wordes and voluntary supposals before he see any proofe S ir I doubt not but the indifferent reader vvil suspend his judgement and deeme nere the worse of my vvriting for your empty censure til he see good reason to the contrary Sure I am that some Catholikes hauing read your booke doe like much the better of mine and esteeme yours a very fond peece of worke ful of babble lies and foule wordes void of found proofes and farre from common ciuility Who are more circumspect then you your selues to keepe your followers from reading our bookes vvho first imprison any that wil helpe to print them then set fines on al their heades that shal keepe them and make very diligent search after them so that al these common wordes may most truly be returned vpon your selfe Mutato nomine de te narratur fabula You note that I subtilly left out of his Majesties speech from Christ her Lord and head but shew no cause why and no maruaile for none indeede can be shewed they are needlesse wordes as being comprehended in the former For if the Church of Rome departed not from her selfe vvhen shee was in her most flourishing and best estate shee cannot depart from Christ her Lord and head vvherefore to note this for a subtle tricke giueth the reader cause to note you for a wrangler and one that is very captious where no cause is offered M. Abbot comes at length to my first reason and goeth about to disproue it thus ROBERT ABBOT WE hope you wil not deny but the Apostle S. Paul was one principal pillar of the Church of Rome vvho there shed his bloud He vvrote an Epistle to that Church vvhen the faith thereof was most renowmed throughout the world He vvrote at large comprehending therein as * Theodor. in praefat epist Pat. li. Theodoret saith doctrine of al sortes or al kinde of doctrine Et accuratam copiosamue dogmatum pertractationem An exact and plentiful handling of al points thereof Now in al that Epistle what doth he say either for you or against vs nay what doth he not say for vs against you he condemneth the Rom. 1. v. 23. changing the glory of the incorruptible God into the similitude of the Image of a corruptible man and worshipping the creature in steede of the creatour It is for vs against you for you by your schoole-trickes doubt not to teach men by the Image of a man to worship God and by religious deuotion of praiers and offerings to worship Saints and Saints Images
ABBOT PAVL saith the Rom. 8 v. 18. sufferinges of this time are not worthy of the glory that shal be reuealed vnto vs but you say they are vvorthy WILLIAM BISHOP I Say that M. Abbot hath gotten such a custome of abusing Gods word that he scarce alleageth one sentence of it vvithout one paltry shift or other The wordes of S. Paul truly translated are Our sufferinges are not worthy to the glory or as our English phrase is are not to be compared to the glory of c. that is our labours or paines are not either so great and waighty or of so long endurance as be the joies of heauen yet through the dignity which we receiue by being made members of Christ and by the vertue of Gods grace wherewith those workes be wrought and by the promise of God both we are accounted vvorthy of heauen according to S. Pauls owne phrase 2. Thessal 1. vers 5. Which persecutions you sustaine that you may be counted worthy the Kingdome of God and our sufferinges meritorious of life euerlasting vvhich S. Paul doth very precisely teach vvhere he saith that 2. Cor. 4. vers 17. our tribulation which for the present is momentary and light yet worketh aboue measure exceedinglie an eternal waight of glory in vs we not considering the thinges that are seene but that are not seene and else vvhere is bold to say 2. Tim. 4. vers 8. That God had laid vp for him a crowne of justice which our Lord wil render to me in that day a just Iudge and not only to me but to them also that loue his comming If God as a just Iudge render the joies of heauen as a crowne of justice then were they before justly deserued and the sufferinges of them that deserued them vvere in just proportion worthy of them Thus briefly any indiffereÌ„t reader may perceiue how farre S. Paul being rightly taken is from affording any reliefe vnto the Protestant cause They doe now as many vnlearned and vnstable men did euen in his owne time witnesse S. Peter 2. Pet. 3. vers 16. depraue and misvse certaine sentences of his hard to be vnderstood to their owne perdition and to the deceiuing and vndoing of their followers for in al his Epistles being vnderstood as he meant them there is not one word or sillable that maketh for the Protestants or any other sectaries and plenty there are of plaine texts for the most points of the Catholike faith A tast vvhereof I wil giue you as soone as I shal haue made an end of answering vnto this his idle discourse ROBERT ABBOT PAVL saith nothing for those points for the denial vvhereof M. Bishop condemneth vs. Nothing for the justification before God by vvorkes nothing for free-wil nothing for Relikes nothing for the merit of single life nothing for praier for the dead nothing for traditions nothing for any of the rest Now in this case M. Bishop it had beene fit that you should by very good reason haue satisfied his Majesty how it should be probable or possible that the Apostle writing at large to the church of Rome should not once mention any of those maine points wherein the religion of the Church of Rome now vvholy consisteth if the Church of Rome vvere then the same that now it is That he should say nothing of the prerogatiue of that Church nothing of the Pope of his pardons of the Masse of transubstantiation of Monkish vowes of Images of pilgrimages of praier to Saints of al the rest of your baggage stuffe in a word that he should be a Papist yet should write nothing Rhem. Test. argum of the Epist in general but that in shew at least serueth the Protestants turne only we must be perswaded forsooth that where anything soundeth contrary to the Râ—mish faith we faile of the right sence But vndoubtedly M. Bishop either S. Paul vvas a Protestant or else he dealt very negligently in your behalfe S. Peter was another principal pillar of that Church the founder and head thereof as you perswade vs vvhat would he also forget his triple crowne vvould he say nothing for al these thinges not a word there is nothing hindreth in either of his Epistles but that he also must be taken for a ProtestaÌ„t Me thinkes here you should fare Erasmus de ratione as in another case Robertuâ— Liciensis did before the Pope you should spit and cry out fie vpon Peter fie vpon Paul would they not thinke these trash and trinkets of ours so much worth as to speake of them Ah these Protestants these Heretikes they say al for them and nothing at al for vs. But alas Peter and Paul had not heard any of these thinges and therefore no maruaile that they wrote nothing of them They reade Moyses and the Prophets they preached as Christ did according to the Scriptures the Catholike religion that had beene from the beginning of the world they continued betwixt the old and the new Testament vve see a vvonderful agreement but concerning Popery we see nothing WILLIAM BISHOP WE haue here a dainty dish of M. Abbots cookery a large rhetorical conclusion deducted out of leane thinne and weake premises He assaied to make a shew out of the Apostle that there was not a little which would serue the Protestants turne and cited to that purpose certaine sentences out of him but so properly that some of them indeed seemed to sound for him though they had in truth a farre different sence others had neither sence nor sound nor sillable for him Neuerthelesse as though he had gotten a great conquest he singeth a triumph and striketh vp a braue victory that al in Peter and Paul is for the Protestant nothing for the Papist Afterward as it were correcting himselfe he addes nothing but in shew at least serueth the Protestants turne vvhich is one of the truest wordes he there deliuereth The Protestants indeed be jolly nimble witted fellowes that can make any thing serue at least for a shew of their cause and when al other thinges faile thâ—m 2. Tim. 4. vers 4. Aâ— fabulas conuertuntur they turne their eares away from truth as the Apostle speaketh and fal to fables and one Robin good-fellow I vveene for lacke of a better is brought vpon the stage to spit and cry out Fie vpon Peter fie vpon Paul that had not remembred to say one word for Popery but al for the Protestant Fie I say vpon such a cause that must be vnder-propt vvith such rotten baggage stuffe What shadow of likely-hood is there that one should tel the Pope such a tale to his face or that Erasmus vvho vvas in most points a Catholike should report it or could there be any poore Robin excepting M. Abbots himselfe so simple and poore-blinde that in al the writings of those blessed Apostles he could not finde one vvord that gaue any sound or shew for the Catholike cause you haue heard already that I
v. 8. Rom. 16. vers 19. Your obedience is published into euery place But no maruaile to the vvise though he did not then make mention of her Supremacy for that did not belong to the Church or people of Rome but to S. Peter vvho vvhen S. Paul wrote that Epistle vvas scarse vvel setled there neither did that appertaine to the matter he created of Of pardons S. Paul teacheth in formal tearmes which both the Church of Corinth and he himselfe gaue vnto the incestuous Corinthian that then repented these be his wordes 2. Cor. 2. vers 10. And whom you haue pardoned any thing I also for my selfe also that which I haue pardoned if I haue pardoned any thing for you in the person of Christ that we be not circumuented of Sathan What can be more manifest then that the Apostle did release some part of the penance of that incestuous Corinthian at other mens request vvhich is properly to giue pardon and indulgence And if S. Paul in the person of Christ could so doe no doubt but S. Peter could doe as much and consequently other principal Pastours of Christes Church haue the same power and authority The last of M. Abbots instances is That S. Paul saith nothing of traditions wherein he sheweth himselfe not the least impudent for the Apostle speaketh of them very often He desireth the Romans to Rom. 16. vers 17. marke them that make dissentions and scandals contrary to the doctrine which you haue learned and to auoide them but the doctrine that they had then learned before S. Paul sent them this Epistle vvas by vvord of mouth and tradition for little or none of the new Testament was then written vvherefore the Apostle teacheth al men to be auoided that dissent from doctrine deliuered by tradition And in the Actes of the Apostles it is of record how S. Paul vvalking through Siria and Silicia confirming the Churches Act. 15. v. 41 Commanded them to keepe the precepts of the Apostles and of the Ancients Item vvhen they passed through the citties they Act. 16. v. 4. deliuered vnto them to keepe the decrees that were decreed by the Apostles and Ancients which were at Hierusalem and the Churches were confirmed in faith c. Where it also appeareth that those decrees vvere made matter of faith and necessary to be beleeued to saluation before they vvere written He doth also charge his best beloued disciple Timothy 1. Tim. 6. vers 20. To keepe the depositum that is the vvhole Christian doctrine deliuered vnto him by word of mouth as the best Authours take it auoiding the prophane nouelty of voices and oppositions of falsly called knowledge Againe he commandeth 2. Tim. 2. vers 2. him to commend to faithful men the thinges which thou hast heard of me by many witnesses Was not this to preach such doctrine as he had receiued by Apostolike tradition without writing And further vvhich suppresseth al the vaine cauils of the sectaries he saith 2. Thessal 2. vers 15. Therefore bretheren stand and hold the traditions which you haue learned whether it be by word or by our Epistle where you see that some traditions went by word of mouth from hand to hand aswel as some others were vvritten and vvere as wel to be holden and stood too as the written proceeding from the same fountaine of truth Gods spirit Thus much in answere vnto the instances proposed by M. Abbot vvhich he very ignorantly and insolently auoucheth to haue no proofe or sound of proofe out of S. Paul I could vvere it not to auoide tediousnesse adde the like confirmation of most controuersies out of the same blessed Apostle as that 1. Tim. 3. vers 15. the Church is the pillar and ground of truth vvherefore any man may most assuredly repose his faith vpon her declaration That Christ gaue Ephes 4. v. 11. 13. Pastors and Doctors to the edifying of that his mistical body vntil we meete al in the vnity of faith c. Therefore the Church shal not faile in faith vntil the day of judgement nor be inuisible that hath visible Pastors and teachers Also Hebr. 5. vers 1. that Priests are chosen from among men and appointed for men in those thinges that appertaine to God that they may offer gifts and sacrifices for sinne That Preachers and 1. Cor. 3. v. 9. Priests are Gods coadjutors and helpers and not only idle instruments That S. Paul and Timothy 1. Cor. 9. vers 23. 1. did saue other men and therefore no blasphemy to pray to Saints to helpe and saue vs. That S. Paul did Tim. 4. vers 16. accomplish those thinges that want to the passions of Christ in his flesh for Christes body which is the Church therefore Christes passion doth not take away our owne satisfaction That he a Colloss 1. vers 24. 1. Cor. 9. vers 16. gloried in preaching the Gospel of free cost which was a worke of supererogation That b Ephes 5. vers 32. Marriage is a great Sacrament That c 1. Tim. 4. vers 23. grace was giuen to Timothy by the imposition of the handes of Priest-hood vvhence it followeth that Matrimony and holy Orders be true and perfect Sacraments But vvhat doe I I should be too long if I would prosecute al that which the Apostle hath left in vvriting in fauour defence of the Roman faith This I doubt not wil suffice to confront his shamelesse impudency that blushed not to affirme there vvas not a vvord in S. Paul that sounded for the Catholike but al in shew at least for the Protestant As for S. Peter I vvil wholy omit him because the Protestants haue smal confidence in him Here I may be bold I hope to turne vpon M. Abbot this dilemma and forked argument vvhich S. Augustine framed against the Manichean Adimantus Lib. 1. cont Adimant Hoc si imprudens fecit nihil caecius si autem sciens nihil sceleratius If M. Abbot did ignorantly affirme S. Paul to haue said nothing for the Roman Catholikes what could be more blind then not to be able to discerne any thing in such cleare light if he said it vvittingly knowing the contrary then did he it most vvickedly so to lie against his owne conscience to draw after him selfe other men into errour and perdition ROBERT ABBOT WEL M. Bishop let vs leaue Peter and Paul for heretikes let vs see vvhether those that succeeded did al teach the same doctrine that the Church of Rome now teacheth Hollinshead descript of Britan. ca. 7. Eleutherius the bishop of Rome being sent vnto by Lucius king of this realme for a copy of the Roman constitutions for the gouernement of this new conuerted Church and of the imperial lawes for the better ordering of his common wealth about 150. yeares after the death of Christ for answere writeth vnto him Annals of England by Iohn Stow. That hauing receiued in his Kingdome the law and
and to the publike tranquillity of the common vveale Now let the indifferent reader consider vvhether there be any one word in this supposed letter that carrieth meate in mouth as they say to feede the Protestants faith so that here is an ancient and reuerend Fathers letter cited to no purpose But M. Abbot saith that now a-daies not the King but the Pope is Gods Vicar and his Vicar general for al Kingdomes True it is the Pope is Gods Vicar in al Christian Kingdomes Sext. proem in glossa though there be not one vvord of any such matter in the glosse cited by him but that is in Ecclesiastical matters vvhich nothing hindereth but that the King is also Gods Vicar in temporal affaires for he may be called a Vicar that doth Vicem gerere alterius that is another mans Deputy Lieutenant or Substitute One King may haue many Vicars that is substitutes or deputies to whom he committeth some principal charge King Henry the eight for example hauing giuen him by the Parliament supreme power in both Ecclesiastical and Temporal causes had one Vicar for spiritual causes and many other for the temporal so God hath the Bishop of Rome for Christes Vicar general in causes of the Church and Kinges in the administration of the common vveale And the very Canon cited by M. Abbot would haue taught him so much if he had read it vvith a minde to learne the truth rather then to sucke out some matter of cauil out of it Distinct 96. Si Imperator for therein be these wordes The Emperour hath the priuiledges of his power which he obtained of God for the administration of publike lawes Marke here the Pope acknowledgeth the Emperour to be Gods Deputy and Vicar in the administration of the common lawes vvhich in the Canon that goeth next before is confirmed for there Gelasius an ancient Pope speaketh thus to Anastatius the Emperour Ibidem duo sunt There be two thinges ô Sacred Emperour wherewith this world is principally gouerned to wit the holy authority of Bishops and the power of Princes These two then be both Gods Substitutes and Vicars the one for spiritual causes the other for temporal wherefore M. Abbot reasoneth very childishly vvhen he goeth about to proue that we deny the King to be Gods Vicar because we teach the Pope to be Gods Vicar for vve hold that they both be Gods Vicars though in distinct and different matters Neither lastly can he take any aduantage of the word gouerne if it be in that letter for King Lucius demand was for the Imperial lawes to gouerne the temporal state of his realme vvherefore it is euident that he spake there of temporal gouernement and not of spiritual Now because the maine question is whether Kings haue authority ouer Bishops in Ecclesiastical causes or Bishops ouer Kinges let vs heare some two or three of S. Peter and S. Paules Successours M. Abbots owne vvitnesses deliuer their knowledge thereof The first shal be the same learned and holy Pope Gelasius last named he affirmeth in the same Epistle vvhich vvas written to the Emperour himselfe that the authority of Bishops in spiritual causes doth extend it selfe ouer Kinges and Emperours these be his vvordes Distinct 96. Duo sunt Thou knowest ô Emperour thy selfe to depend on their judgements and that they cannot be reduced to thy wil and pleasure therefore many Bishops fortified with these ordinances and with this authority supported haue excommunicated some Kinges others Emperours And if a particular example be demanded of the persons of Princes blessed Innocentius the Pope did excommunicate the Emperour Archadius for consenting vnto the deposition of S. Iohn Chrisostome And blessed S. Ambrose though a holy Bishop yet not Bishop of the vniuersal Church for a fault that to others did not seeme so grieuous excommunicating Theodosius the great did shut him out of the Church c. Is not this plaine enough and directly to the purpose that Bishops haue power ouer Princes in Ecclesiastical causes and the authority of Gelasius is of such vvaight with M. Abbot shortly after that here he cannot gaine-say it vvith any honesty I vvil joine to him Anacletus vvhom M. Abbot also noteth the next who succeeded immediately after Clement S. Peters Scholler he saith expresly Epistola 1. prope finem That the Church of Rome receiued by our Sauiour Christes order the primacy and preeminence of power ouer al Churches and ouer the whole flocke of Christian people If then M. Abbot vvil allow that Kinges be any of Christes people the Pope hath authority ouer them S. Clement himselfe one of S. Paules Philip. 4. v. 3. coadjutors and whose name is in the booke of life hath left this vvritten among the constitutions of the Apostles Lib. 2. c. 11. Wherefore ô Bishop endeauour to excel in sanctity of workes knowing thy place and dignity thou art Gods Lieutenant and placed ouer al Lordes Priests Kinges and Princes Fathers Sonnes Masters and al Subjects joined together Ibid. cap. 33. And in the same booke touching by the vvay the dignity of Bishops repeateth these memorable wordes out of holy Scripture spoken to Moyses as a King Bishop Exod. 7. v. 1. Ecce constitui to Deum Pharaonis Behold I haue created thee the God of Pharao vvho was King of the land of Aegipt vvhere both Moyses and al the children of Israel then liued see the dignity of a Bishop aboue his owne King And the 38. chapter of the same booke of Clement is formally intituled That Priests are more excellent then Kinges and Princes And finally that the gouernement of the whole Church was committed to Bishops that vessel of election S. Paul is a sufficient witnesse vvho saith Act. 20. v. 28. Take heede to your selues and to the whole flocke wherein the holy Ghost hath placed you Bishops to rule the Church of God which he hath purchased with his owne bloud If then M. Abbot wil allow that Kinges be any of Christs flocke and that he purchased them with his bloud they are to be ruled by Bishops who are placed by the holy Ghost to rule the whol◠flocke of Gods Church Hitherto comparing the Bishop of Rome with temporal Princes I haue proued the prerogatiue of Ecclesiastical gouernement to appertaine to the Bishops Now a word or two of the preeminence of the Church and See of Rome ouer al other Churches vvhich shal be briefly verified euen by the testimony of some of the most ancient and most holy successours of S. Peter and S. Paul to whom M. Abbot attributes so much The afore named Anacletus who succeeded next after their owne Disciple S. Clement hauing shewed that al Ecclesiastical causes belong to Bishops euen as temporal causes doe to the temporal Magistrate Epistola 1. ad omnes Ecclesias addeth that if more difficult questions shal arise as the judgements of Bishops and greater causes let them if any appeale be made
be referred vnto the See Apostolike Because the Apostles by the commandement of our Sauiour haue ordained that questions of greater difficulty shal alwaies be referred vnto the Apostolike See vpon which Christ built the whole Church saying vnto blessed Peter the Prince of the Apostles thou art Peter vpon this rocke wil I build my Church c. Anacletus his immediate successor Euaristus Pope Martir writing vnto the Bishops of Africke Epistola 1. ad Eccles Africanam speaketh thus Truly your charity following the rule of the wise hath chosen rather to referre vnto the See Apostolike as to the head what ought to be obserued in doubtful matters then to presume your selues by vsurpation and writing to the brethren in Aegipt Epistola 2. doth command certaine Bishops whom he resembleth to adulterers because they had intruded into other Bishops Citties to be cast out of those places and to be made infamous and depriued of al Ecclesiastical honours adjoining That if after these thinges so dispatched they should haue further complaint against them that matter were to be enquired out and to be determined by the authority of this holy See Note how these holy Popes that vvere so nigh vnto the Apostles taught it to belong vnto the See of Rome to determine of the causes of the Bishops of Afrike and Aegipt most remote from them And because the Apostle S. Paul willeth 2. Cor. 13. vers 2. euery word to stand in the mouth of two or three witnesses I vvil take for the third Alexander the first Pope and Martir who succeeded vnto Euaristus he is as plaine and formal in this cause as any of the rest these be his wordes Epist 1. omnibus orthodoxis It is related vnto the primacy of this holy and Apâ—stolike See vnto which the disposition of the highest cases and the affaires of al Churches are by our Lord committed as to the head c. and a little after Our Lord here appointed this holy See the head of the whole Church I omit here the verdict of al others herein because this very matter must be spoken off hereafter againe and againe these three most ancient graue and Godly Martirs al successours of S. Peter and S. Paul vpon whose authority M. Abbot here only insisteth vvil suffice to certifie the indifferent reader that euen from the Apostles daies the Bishop of Rome hath beene taken for supreme judge in al Ecclesiastical causes aswel in the East as West Church To finish this passage thou maist gentle reader by this little see what shamelesse shifts M. Abbot is forced to vse to make any coulourable shew out of antiquity for the lay Magistrates superiority in spiritual causes He is first driuen to cite an vnlearned an vnlikely and an Apocriphal letter of 1400. yeares old vpon the credit of men of our owne age and those most partial too on his owne side the letter bearing date also many yeares after the death of him that is supposed to be the authour of it and when al is done in the same vvorshipful letter there is not one pregnant proofe for any part of their doctrine lastly that his owne chosen witnesses doe deliuer vp most cleare euidence against himselfe he therefore that vvil giue judgement on his side must needes shew himselfe exceeding partial ROBERT ABBOT ANACLETVS Bishop of Rome Dist 1. Episcopus 2. peracta and after him Calixtus ordained that consecration being done al should communicate or else be excommunicated For so say they the Apostles did set downe and the holy Church of Rome obserueth But the Church of Rome that now is maketh it lawful for the Priest to receiue alone the people in the meane time standing gazing and looking on and the fight only must suffice them WILLIAM BISHOP HERE is nothing in manner worth the answering only the cosening deceitfulnesse of the man is to be displaied First Anacletus hath only De consecrat dist 1. Can. Episcopus that Deacons Subdeacons and other Ministers that in solemne feasts attend in holy vestiments vpon the Bishop whiles he doth sacrifice vnto God should in the same solemne feasts communicate or else be debarred of their Ecclesiastical places where is not one word of the lay peoples communicating And therefore that Canon is wholy besides the purpose sauing that it doth teach that then Bishops vsed to offer sacrifice vnto God and that the Clarkes did in holy vestiments serue them at Masse See the Canon and vvonder at the folly of the man In like manner doth the second Canon of Calixtus speake of Ecclesiastical persons that serue at Masse for so saith the Collector De consecrat dist 2. Can. peracta Ecclesiasticis liminibus careat Minister Let the Minister or he that serueth want Ecclesiastical place With which agreeth the glosse vpon the same Canon vvhich also is euident by the very Text for the punishment set downe is Ecclesiasticis carere liminibus To be shut out of the Ecclesiastical mens seates and places vvhich vvere no punishment to a lay man that was not before admitted into any such roome And as it may be seene in the said distinction Cap. Etsi non frequentius De consecrat dist 1. and Cap. Secularis Lay men were commanded about those times to communicate but thrife in the yeare at Easter Whitsontide and Christmasse Briefly here is nothing against the moderne practise of the Church of Rome for both they that solemnely serue at Masse on festiual daies doe receiue and no lay man is denied to communicate on any day either on those feasts or at any time else vvhen he vvil prepare himselfe thereto But to debarre Priests from seruing God in that most high degree be their deuotion and preparation neuer so good vntil they can get some company of the laity to communicate with them is without just cause to robbe God of his soueraigne honour to extinguish the working of his holy spirit in deuout soules and to defraude the whole flocke of the benefit of many most holy and effectual praiers not only of the Priests but also of the people vvho doe not with vs stand gazing on at the time of communion as M. Abbot prophanely conceiteth but humbly kneeling doe then pray most deuoutly and doe in spirit and desire communicate also Briefly there is not one sillable in those Canons sounding to the Protestant sence that Priests should not coÌ„municate if the Clarke or people joine not vvith them but only that the indeuout and slugglish Clarkes should be depriued of their places if vpon high feasts they did neglect to communicate with the Bishop or Pastor ROBERT ABBOT IVLIVS the Bishop of Rome disallowed intinctam Eucharistiam De consecrat 2. cum omne the dipping of the Eucharist the Sacrament of Christs body in the cuppe Because no witnesse thereof was brought out of the Gospel but there is mentioned the commending of the bread by it selfe and the cuppe by it selfe but
sute of diuers Bishops of the East he did solemnely summon S. Athanasius that most learned and valiant Patriarke of Alexandria to appeare at Rome before him there to answere vnto such crimes as were indeede most vvrongfully objected against him Lib. 4. hist Tripart c. 6. Nicephor lib. 9. cap. 6. thus saith the holy History The Pope following the law of the Church commanded them also to come vnto Rome and according to the rule of the Canons cited the venerable Athanasius to judgement Athanasius obediently appeared but his aduersaries knowing that their lies in that place vvould soone be discouered durst not appeare vvhereupon Athanasius was purged of those imputations Ibid. cap. 12. and restored to his Bishoprick Vnto the same Iulius not long after Athanasius being pittifully abused by the Arrians repaired the second time for aide vvhere he found diuers other Bishops of the East namely Paulus Bishop of Constantinople Marcellus Bishop of Ancony Asclopas Bishop of Gaya and Lucianus Bishop of Adrianople al Easterne Bishops and yet appealing to Iulius Pope of Rome for remedy of the wrongs done them by the Arrian Heretikes which doth most manifestly testifie that in the primitiue Church al other Bishops acknowledged the Bishop of Rome for the supreme Pastour of Christes Church vvhich also Zozomenus doth confirme shewing how Iulius restored them al Tanquam omnium curam gerens Zozom l. 3. hist. cap. 8. propter propriae sedis dignitatem As one that had care ouer them al for the dignity of his owne See And Iulius his owne wordes recorded by no meaner a man then S. Athanasius doe declare the same for blaming the Bishops of the East he saith Athanas in Apolog. 2. Why did you not write vnto vs especially you of Alexandria are you ignorant that the custome is that we should first be written vnto that from hence it might be defined what was right therefore if you haue any quarrel against any Bishop you ought to haue referred it hither to our Church c. And shortly after I signifie to you such thinges as were receiued from the blessed Apostle S. Peter c. vvhere M. Abbot may see that one of S. Peters successours of great worth and authority doth tel the Bishops of the East Church that by order set downe by S. Peter himselfe Bishops causes of al countries ought to be referred vnto the definition of the Bishop of Rome he therefore is their superiour I adde hereunto because it belongeth both vnto Pope Iulius and this present purpose of their supremacy in Ecclesiastical causes this sentence taken out of the Ecclesiastical history The Councel holden at Antioch was not good Hist Tripart lib. 4. cap. 9. for that Iulius Bishop of Rome was not there present nor sent any Legate in his place because the Ecclesiastical Canons doe command that Councels ought not to be celebrated without the sentence of the Bishop of Rome ROBERT ABBOT GELASIVS Bishop of Rome saith as we say Gelas cont Eutich Nestor That in the Saâ—rament is celebrated the Image or resemblance of the body and bloud of Christ and that there ceasseâ—h not to be the substance or nature of bread and wine But now the Romish religion maketh them Heretikes that say the Sacrament is the Image or resemblance of the body bloud of Christ and not the body and bloud of Christ it selfe or wil not beleeue that the bread and wine are substantially and really turned into the same body and bloud Albeit they beleeue with the same Gelasius that the Sacrament is a diuine thing and that thereby we are made partakers of the diuine nature euen of Christ himselfe really and substantially but yet spiritually vvith al his riches becomming ours and being eaten of vs not by our teeth into our bellies but by faith into our harts vnto life euerlasting WILLIAM BISHOP FIRST I say that M. Abbot hauing his eie-sight sore troubled with a grosse defluxion of salt rhewme taketh a Rowland for an Oliuer that is one Gelasius an vnknowne Grecian for Gelasius an African borne yet Bishop of Rome That he was not Gelasius the Bishop of Rome appeareth plainly out of that very treatise cited by M. Abbot for that Gelasius professeth to alleage the testimony of al the learned Fathers who wrote before him yet he maketh no mention of the most renowmed authours in the Latin Church as of S. Hillary S. Augustine S. Hierome and of Pope Leo al vvhich wrote before Gelasius the Bishop of Rome and were had in very great estimation by him as may be seene by his declaration of the Canonical Scriptures of the most approued fathers workes Dist 15. SaÌ„cta Romana Ecclesia Ibidem Againe that Gelasius citeth often and relieth much vpon the authority of Eusebius Bishop of Caesarea vvhereas Gelasius the Pope hath noted his vvorkes for little better then Apocryphal so that nothing is more like then that the good man hath mistaken his marke and is fallen from the successours of S. Peter and S. Paul vpon I cannot tel whom yet because he is an old writer though of what credit it be vncertaine I wil not refuse him And to the former part of his sentence that in the Sacrament there is an Image or resemblance of Christes body I answere that vve Catholikes doe say as much in effect for euery Sacrament is a visible signe of an inuisible and holy thing and so Christs body vnder the forme of bread and wine is a resemblance of his body parted from his bloud on the Crosse and the body of Christ vnder the formes of bread and vvine as it is in the Sacrament is a picture also or resemblance of the vnion of his mistical body in faith and charity euen as the bread is made of many graines of corne and the vvine pressed out of many clusters of grapes The later part of his sentence may also haue a good meaning and stand wel with our doctrine for the nature of bread doth not wholy ceasse to be in the blessed Sacrament because the forme sauour and tast of bread which be natural qualities thereof doe stil remaine though the whole inward substance be turned into the body of Christ which that Gelasius doth in the same place signifie when he there saith The same bread to be changed into the diuine substance that is into the substance of Christ by the operation of the holy Ghost whereby the receiuers are made partakers of the diuine nature And M. Abbots glosse vpon these later wordes is very extrauagant for we cannot in property of speech be said to be partakers of Christs nature really by being made partakers of his riches for it is one thing to be partaker of a mans nature really another farre different to be partaker of his goodes and benefits And as for the receiuing of Christ spiritually by faith that may be done vvithout receiuing any Sacrament at al but Gelasius either speaketh of receiuing Christ in the
Sacrament or else M. Abbot doth fondly alleage his wordes against the real presence wherefore his later paraphrase is a meere trifle and a vaine shift See more of this man and matter in the question of the real presence Let vs proceede ROBERT ABBOT De consecrat dist 2. comperimus THE same Gelasius when he vnderstood that some receiuing only the portion of the sacred body of Christ did forbeare the cuppe of his sacred bloud did forbidde that superstition and willed that either they should receiue the Sacrament whole or be kept from the whole because the diuiding of one and the same mistery cannot come without great sacriledge But now the Church of Rome is so farre off from acknowledging the diuiding of that mistery to be sacriledge as that shee pretendeth to be moued with just causes reasons Concil Trid. Sess 5. Can. 2. such as Christ and his Apostles and the primitiue Church had neuer the vvit to consider off to administer the Sacrament to the people only in one kinde and pronounceth them accursed that say shee erreth in so doing WILLIAM BISHOP NOW we come to Gelasius the Pope indeede and by his very phrase related by M. Abbot you may plainely perceiue that he beleeued firmely the sacred body of Christ and his pretious bloud to be really present in the blessed Sacrament for thus he speaketh We haue found that certaine men hauing receiued the portion of the sacred body doe abstaine from the Chalice of the sacred bloud Neither doe his wordes fit M. Abbots turne for the peoples receiuing vnder one kinde for he speaketh of Priests that doe consecrate both together vvho therefore must receiue both together that he may be partaker of the sacrifice which he himselfe hath offered For as it is said in the Canon next before De consecrat dist 2. relatum est Quale erit illud sacrificium cui nec ipse sacrificans particeps esse dignoscitur what kinde of sacrifice is that whereof he that sacrificeth doth not participate Wherefore it is by al meanes to be obserued that how often the Priest doth sacrifice the body and bloud of our Lord IESVS Christ vpon the Altar so often he exhibite himselfe a partaker of the body bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ. These wordes taken out of the Councel of Toledo goe immediately before those wordes which M. Abbot citeth and doe euidently shew that they are to be vnderstood of the Priest only that consecrateth the Sacrament as also the very title would haue told M. Abbot if he had beene disposed to take them right It is that the Priest ought not to receiue the body of Christ without his bloud So that here is not a vvord against the giuing the blessed body of Christ alone to the people But M. Abbot is forced like an euil Apothecary to take quid pro quo as they say one thing for another or else he should not be able to furnish his poore erring customers vvith any sort of pleasing drugges to feede their corrupt tast and grosse humours He doth by a parenthesis enterlace That Christ nor his Apostles nor the primitiue Church had euer the wit to consider any just cause of giuing the Sacrament in one kinde to the people vvhich is spoken too too like a blasphemer to touch our Sauiour Christ Iesus with lacke of vvit skil or due consideration who as diuers ancient Doctors doe testifie ministred the blessed Sacrament himselfe to two of his Disciples at Emaus vnder one only kinde of bread Luc. 24. vers 30. He tooke bread and blessed and brake and did reach it to them and their eies were opened and they knew him and he vanished out of their sight vvhere the circumstances August lib. 3. De consensu Euang. c. 25. Epist 59. ad Paul q. 8. Hier. in Epitaph Paulae of blessing breaking and giuing bread as he did at his last supper and the maruailous operation of it doe very probably proue it to haue beene the blessed Sacrament after which giuen in one kinde IESVS vanished out of their sight * Isichius lib. 2. in cap. 9. Beda in Theophil in eâ—m locum Lucae Opus imperfectuÌ„ in Mat. homil 17. In the Apostles time also very vsually the Sacrament vvas administred in one kinde They were perseuering in the doctrine of the Apostles and in communication of the breaking of bread and praiers vvhere breaking of bread being joined with preaching and praier doth conuince it to be spoken of the blessed SacrameÌ„t Againe saith S. Luke In the first of Sabaoth when we were assembled to breake bread Paul disputed with them c. This assembly vpon a Sonday furnished with S. Paules sermon must needes be to be made for the receiuing of the blessed Sacrament as a August Epist 86. Beda in illum locum S. Augustine and venerable Bede doe testifie In al which places following the expresse letter of the Scripture and the interpretation of many holy Fathers we haue warrant for the administration of the Sacrament to the people vnder one only kinde they then I hope vvanted not wit to know a cause of giuing the Sacrament in one kinde Lastly that in the primitiue Church the Sacrament was receiued vnder one kinde is most manifest by the testimony of b Tertull. lib. 2. ad Vxorâ—m Cyprian sermone de lapsis Ambros de obitu Satyri Tertullian S. Cyprian S. Ambrose and many others who declare how the Christians in those times of persecution carried to the sicke and reserued in their owne houses the blessed Sacrament viz. vnder the forme of bread to receiue it when they were in danger of torments or death for their more comfort and strengthning against those assaults Thus much by the way of administring the Sacrament vnder one kinde vnto the laity out of the practise of the primitiue Church the Apostles and our Sauiour himselfe in answere vnto M. Abbots parenthesis Now ere I take my leaue of this holy and most reuerend Pope Gelasius I vvil note briefly some branches of the Catholike faith which he doth formally deliuer to counterpoise those friuoulous objections vvhich M. Abbot haleth in obtorto collo as the Latin phrase is by the heeles out of his writinges First I haue declared out of him already Epist. ad Anast Imperat. In Epist ad Episcopos Daâ—daniae how that Bishops haue power and authority ouer Kinges and Emperours in Ecclesiastical causes so farre forth as to excommunicate them when vrgent cause so requireth He saith further That the Canons of the Church doe ordaine that from any part of the world appeale may be made to the See of Rome and that from it no man is suffered to appeale Againe That euery Church in the world doth know that the See of blessed Peter the Apostle hath right and power to loose and vnbinde that which is bound by the sentences of what Bishop soeuer as that See which hath lawful authority to judge
of al Churches Item In decreto de libris sacris Ecclesiasticis tom 2. Concil Distinct 15. Sancta Romana c. That the See Apostolike takes great heede that it be not stained with any touch of peruersity or any kinde of contagion Finally Gelasius assisted with seauenty other B shops doth declare the bookes of Wisdome Ecclesiasticus Tobias and of the Machabees to be Canonical Scripture and the Epistles Decretals of the ancient Bishops of Rome to be of sacred and sound authority and to be receiued vvith reuerence al vvhich the Protestants deny ROBERT ABBOT LEO Bishop of Rome speaking of the Martirs saith Epistola 81. That although the death of many Saints hath beene pretious in the Lordes sight yet the death of no innocent person hath beene the propitiation of the world that the righteous receiued crownes but gaue none and that the fortitude of the faithful haue growne examples of patience not gifts of righteousnesse that their deaths as they were seueral persons were seueral to euery of themselues and that none of them by his death paide the debt of any other man because it is only our Lord Iesus Christ in whom al were crucified al dead al buried al raised againe from the dead But now the Church of Rome hath changed that language and telleth vs that there are superabounding passions and satisfactions of the Saints Bellar. de Indulg l. 1. c. 2. Rhem. Annot. in col 1. v. 24 wherein they haue suffered more then is due for their owne sinnes vvhich doe serue to supply the necessity and want of others and that they doe thereby pay the debt of other men that hereof is growne a treasure in the Church of Rome which is to be dispensed and disposed by the Pope and that hence his Indulgences and pardons haue their ground WILLIAM BISHOP HERE are many vvordes of a right reuerend Father cited to smal purpose for the Church of Rome hath not yet changed one sillable of the same her old language Shee doth maintaine with S. Leo That no man how holy soeuer he were hath by his death or otherwise paid the ransome of any other mans sinnes or satisfied God for any one mortal sinne either of his owne or of any other mans but that it is Christ alone who with the price of his pretious bloud hath fully satisfied his Fathers justice for al and euery such deadly offence and for the eternal punishment which was due to the same and this is al that S. Leo teacheth Neuerthelesse we hold and that vvith S. Leo that after the guilt of such sinnes is through Christ released vs yet are we on our owne partes to endure some temporal punishment for the same offences by Christes order and appointment both to apply vnto vs the vertue of his owne sufferinges as also to make vs that are members of his body like vnto him our head Whereupon the Apostle saith Rom. 8. v. 17. That we be the sonnes of God and coheires with Christ Si tamen compatimur vt conglorificemur If yet we suffer with him that we may be glorified with him of this matter see more in the question of satisfaction This to be our doctrine M. Abbot could not be ignorant Page 118. because it is word by word deliuered euen by M. Perkins himselfe in that place Now that S. Leo vvas wel acquainted with such satisfactions as we on our partes are bound to make his learned workes doe yeeld plentiful testimony I wil cite but a place or two thus he answereth vnto Nicetus vvho did write vnto him to know how he should deale with some Christians vvho being taken prisoners of the Infidels had there among them polluted them selues with eating of meates offered vp to Idols Epist 77. c. 5. Let them saith Leo be purged with satisfaction of penance which is not so much to be weighed by length of time as by compunction of the hart And againe speaking of certaine Priests that were doing of penance he saith Wherefore such men as these who haue fallen Epist 99. ad Rusti cap. 2. must relieue themselues in priuate Ad promerendam misericordiam Dei To deserue the mercy of God Vt illis satisfactio si fuerit digna sit etiam fructuosa That the satisfaction may be fruitful to them if it be worthy that is if it be correspondent to their faults alluding to that of S. Iohn Baptist Math. 3. Doe fruites worthy of penance so that by the judgement of S Leo and the ancient practise of his time men that truly repented them of their sinnes vvhereby the guilt and eternal punishment was abolished were afterwardes put to penance and to doe worthy satisfaction and that not only to satisfie the cōgregation or other men as the Protestants fable vvho haue a greater care to please men then God but to be purged of their fault and to deserue mercy at Gods hand as S. Leo doth plainly teach Now that this temporal punishment which is due to euery Christian after the eternal is through Christ forgiuen him may be released and pardoned by the gouernours of the Chuch and principally by the Pope as chiefe Pastor thereof vnder Christ and that through the superaboundant sufferings of some others is a matter so wel knowne to Antiquity that he must needs confesse himselfe a very puny therein that thinketh it to be a new deuise of the late Church of Rome For that S. Gregory the great who liued aboue a thousand yeares past D. Tho. alij in 4. sent dist 20. instituted Stations to diuers Churches in Rome and granted great Indulgences and Pardons vnto al that with due preparation visited the same is so wel knowne that few learned Protestants doe doubt of it or dare deny it S. Leo himselfe vvho vvas S. Gregories Ancestor more then an hundred yeares in the said Epistle to Nicetus doth plainely signifie as much for he leaueth that enjoined penance of the conuerted party Epistola 77. numer 6. to the discreet moderation of the Bishop to be shortned and released as he shal see cause which is properly a Pardon or Indulgence Moreouer Pope Siluester vvho vvas S. Leo his Predecessour by more then an hundred yeares Antiodor l. 4. summae cap. de relaps at the request of S. Helen Constantine the great his mother consecrated a Chappel in Rome called Sancta Croce in Hierusalem the vvhich he did both beautifie and enrich with diuers Relikes of Saints and granted large Indulgences to al that should with deuotion visit the same as the ancient Records of the same place doe testifie And that the Pastours of other Countries yet more ancient then the former were very wel acquainted with this language of this superaboundant passions and satisfactions of some Saints let that most learned Archbishop of Carthage in Afrike glorious Martir S. Cyprian beare witnesse He instructing the Christian prisoners and most noble Confessours for vvhose triumphant sufferinges the vse
then was to grant Indulgence and release of penance vnto other penitent persons that had fallen aduiseth them to be very circumspect Lib. 3. epist 15. quaest 11. apud Pamelium before they graunted the participation of their passions vnto others and to weigh wel the measure of their offences that sued vnto them for such pardon and to commend vnto their Bishop and Clergie such only and that by their proper names Quorum poenitentiam satisfactioni proximam conspicitis Whose penance you see almost ended and very neere to due satisfaction vvhence an vnderstanding man may fully gather our vvhole doctrine of satisfaction and indulgences First that due penance is to be enjoined by the Ghostly father after humble and harty sorrow and acknowledgment of the fault Secondly that the same penance may be abridged and released by the Pastours of the Church Lastly that such fauour indulgence and release is made at the contemplation of other mens superaboundant passions And he addeth further in the same booke That without doubt Epistola 18. those penitents are mâ—ch holpen towardes the release of their sinnes with God and not only with the congregation by that communication of the Martirs sufferings to them And to mount yet higher this doctrine of Satisfaction and Indulgence is confirmed by that glorious Doctor of the Gentils S. Paul who first adjudged the incestuous Corinthian to a most grieuous penaÌ„ce for his sinnes afterward strooke off some part thereof by a special pardon saying 2. Cor. 2. vers 10. And whom yee haue pardoned any thing I also in the person of Christ And else where he declareth plainely that he himselfe had a part of those superaboundant passions which might be communicated to others saying 2. Tim. 2. vers 10. I suffer or sustaine al thinges for the elect that they also may obtaine the saluation which is in Christ IESV with heauenly glory And yet more that Colloss 1. vers 24. he did fulfil in his flesh those thinges that wanted of the passions of Christ for his body the Church Seing the blessed Apostle S. Paul doth so plainely teach that his owne sufferings were auailable to other mens saluation and that he fulfilled in his owne flesh that vvhich was wanting vnto other Christians must he not be a ranke Infidel that wil not beleeue any mans sufferinges sauing Christs to be able to helpe another or to supply the want or necessity of others And if it needed I could yet ascend to the old ancient daies of that blessed man Iob who had good store of those superaboundant passions as the holy Ghost speaking by his mouth doth testifie for he saith Iob 6. Would to God my sinnes by which I deserued wrath were weighed and the calamitie which I suffer in a balance this calamity of mine would euen like the sandes of the Sea appeare the heauier and more waighty Now good reader judge whether it be such strange newes to heare of superaboundant passions and satisfactions in the treasury of Gods Church and whether it be vnfit or vnlikely that the Bishop of Rome chief gouernour thereof should carry a special hand in the disposition of the same It is not then the Church of Rome that hath changed her ancient language but I could hartily wish that M. Abbot would learne once to change his vsual language and euil custome of calumniating her and of misconstruing the holy Fathers vvordes vvhich by the grace of God he may the sooner be perswaded to doe if he wil weigh wel that Apocal. 12. vers 9. DIABOLOS calumniator the great Dragon and old Serpent cast out of heauen is called Sathan and the Deuil for calumniating and misreporting of others vvherefore if he wil not be taken for one of the Deuils disciples he must needes giue ouer this shameful practise of falsifying the ancient Doctors sentences and of cauilling against that doctrine which they taught vnder colour of some of their darke speeches ROBERT ABBOT THE same Leo did not take vpon him to cal general Councels but when occasion of the heresie of Eutiches so required Leo Epist 9.23.24.31.42 47.48.49 Made request to the Emperour Theodosius that he would command a Councel and after intreated that he would appoint the same in some place of Italy which notwithstanding the Emperour would not but commanded it to be holden at Ephesus and Martianus after that at Chalcedon And that vvhen Leo againe would haue had it deferred to a better opportunity As in deede the affaires of the Church Socrat. lib. 5. hist in proem after that the Emperours were Christians seemed to depend vpon their wil and at their liking the greatest Councels were assembled as Socrates witnesseth Secundum sanctionem Imperialem per Imperialem sanctionem Synod 6. CoÌ„stant art 1. 4. 6. as the sixt Councel in Trullo often repeateth yea and so as the Emperour at his pleasure was President of the Councel as in that sixt Synode was Constantius the fourth But now the calling and presidency and confirmation of Councels is defended to belong wholy to the Pope as for Christian Emperors and Princes they haue nothing to doe but to send vvhen he calleth and to receiue vvhat he confirmeth The same Leo professed a Leo Epist 16. 17. his obedience to the Emperours appointment and wil to Theodosius and Martianus And Agatho the Bishop of Rome b Agath Epist ad Const Syno 6. ar 4. his due obedience to Constantius the fourth and what your Majesties clemency hath commanded saith he our seruice hath obediently performed the Emperor being honoured according to the ancient doctrine of the Church c Tertull. ad scop Apolog cap. 30. as next to God and inferiour to God only But since that time the Romish doctrine is that d Decr. Greg. de maiorit obed c. solite looke how much the Moone is lesse then the Sunne so much is the Emperour inferiour to the Pope and therefore they haue vvritten him e Catol test ver the Popes man and made him to hold his stiroppe and appoint him to hold the basin to him and to doe sundry other offices of seruice And to make al sure the Pope hath made him to sweare fidelity and alleageance to him f Clement de appellat cap. Pastoralis There is no doubt saith the Pope but we haue superiority ouer the Empire who doubteth but that Priests are the Fathers and Masters of Kinges and Princes Distinct 95. quis dubitet Distinct 96. Si Imperator Is it not miserable madnesse for the children to goe about to subject their fathers or schollers their masters and therefore Christian Emperours must subject their executions to the Ecclesiastical Prelate and not preferre them WILLIAM BISHOP LET it first be considered vvhat blunt and weake tooles the poore Protestants are forced to vse for want of better vveapons to vvound simple soules withal This and it please you is one of their mightiest
any greater cause arise and diuers such other plaine and cleare markes of superiority that euen M. Abbots badde eies may easily serue him to discerne them Seing then S. Leo thought himselfe and his predecessours to haue ful authority and that by the holy Canons made by diuine inspiration to delegate ouer the Churches of the East vvhere was most doubt of his authority such power vnto others Can it be doubted but that he vvas most certainly perswaded that the Bishop of Rome hath and alwaies had supreme command in Ecclesiastical causes al the world ouer And that you may see that S. Leo vvas not only of that opinion but that the best most learned of the East Church of that time were also as fully perswaded of the Church of Romes authority ouer al the world I wil adjoine hereunto the sentence of Theodoretus one of the soundest Catholikes and one of the most learned and famous authours of those daies He being Bishop of Cyrus in Asia doth write vnto Renatus a Priest of Rome thus Theodoret. Epistola 2. The Heretikes haue spoiled me of my Priestly function and seate they haue cast me out of the citties hauing no respect vnto my gray haires nor regard of my time spent in religion wherefore I pray you that you wil perswade the most holy Archbishop Leo that he wil vse his Apostolike authority and command vs to come to your Councel for that holy See doth hold the sterne of gouernement ouer al the Churches in the world Another Epistle this holy Father did write vnto Leo himselfe wherein he saith I doe expect the sentence of your Apostolike See and doe humbly beseech your Holinesse to succour me appealing to your just judgement c. And that you may yet further perceiue that S. Leo his sentence was of force to restore him being a Bishop in Asia to his former dignity and seate these few vvordes out of the Councel of Chalcedon wil sufficiently proue thus speaketh the Councel Actione 1. Let the most reuerend Bishop Theodoret enter in that he may be partner of the Councel because the most holy Archbishop Leo hath restored him to his Bishopricke Now I come to answere M. Abbots goodly proofes and vvise glosses to the contrary S. Leo saith he would not take vpon him to cal general Councels That is false for he did cal a general Councel in the West witnesse these his wordes vnto Tuilius the Bishop of Asturicensis Epistola 91. numer 17. I haue sent letters to our bretheren and fellow Bishops of Carthage in Afrike Tarragone in Spaine Portugal and France Eisque concilium Synodi generalis indiximus And haue summoned them to meete at a general Councel And that could not escape S. Leo his knowledge vvho vvas most skilful in al Antiquity which by tradition descended vnto one of his successors Pelagius the second who was S. Gregory the great his predecessor to wit Epistola 1 ad Orientales that the authority of calling general Councels was through the priuiledge of S. Peter giuen vnto the See Apostolike But he made request saith M. Abbot vnto Theodosius first and after vnto Martianus the Emperors that they would command a general Councel to be holden in Italy which they would not doe but chose rather another place Be it so for sometimes such mighty Monarkes take more state vpon them then Christian dutie doth permit And as for Theodosius the younger though he were a good Emperour at the first yet afterward it is euident that he assisted the Heretike Eutiches his Patron Dioscorus too farre in that wicked assembly at Ephesus See Actionem primam Concil Chalced. Liberatus cap. 12. the place by him assigned for that general Councel The reason that moued S. Leo to request those Emperours to cal a Councel was not for that he doubted of his owne authority therein but for diuers other good respects First because as I before signified the Bishops to be assembled vvere for the most part the Emperours subjects in temporal affaires and therefore were not vvithout his priuity to be called so farre from their residences And for this cause the Kinges of euery country being aduertised by the Popes Holinesse of a general Councel doe to this day as it appeared in the last general Councel of Trent summon the Bishops of their Realmes to the said general Councel and command them to make choise of some to send thither vvhich doth nothing derogate to the Popes general summoning Besides the Heretikes of those times vvould not obey the Pope nor their lawful Pastours command no more then these of our time wherefore the Emperours power vvhich they dreadded and stoode in more awe off vvas to be joined with the Popes authority wherefore he had good cause to request it Yet that the vnderstanding reader may perceiue how S. Leo euen then did fore-see that some inconuenience might happe to follow of his condescending so farre vnto the Emperours pleasure about the place and time of that Councel he as it were to preuent it doth yeeld his consent in such sort that no great aduantage can be taken of it Epist 41. ad Martian thus he vvriteth to the Emperour Martian I required indeede of your most gratious clemency that the Synode which you thought necessary to be assembled as we also required for the restoring of vnity in the East Church might be for a time deferred that the mindes of men being more settled those Bishops which for feare of enemies are staied at home might also meete but for that you doe zealously preferre Gods cause before the affaires of men and are wisely and Godly perswaded that it wil further the wealth of your Empire to haue the Priests of God in vnity and the Gospel preached without dissention Ego etiam vestris dispositionibus non renitor I doe not withstand or striue against this your ordinance Here you may see that he did not yeeld vpon obedience vnto the Emperours order but moued vpon good consideration would not contend against it his very wordes yet giuing that he might haue withstoode him if he had thought it more expedient for the common good Againe in his letters to the same Councel of Chalcedon he putteth in a caueat by vvhich they might vnderstand that this his condescending to the Emperour should not be taken for a prejudice against the authority of the See of Rome for calling of Councels these be his wordes Epistola 45. ad Synod Chalced. I had wished indeed most dearely beloued that al the Priests of God did agree in one profession of the Catholike faith c. but because many thinges are done of which we often repent c. the religious aduise of our most gratious Emperour is to be embraced mouing your holy brother-hood to assemble your selues together for the ouerthrowing of Sathans sleights and for the restoring of vnity in the Church Beatissimi Apostoli Petri sedis jure atque honore seruato the right
causes but relieth vvholy either vpon the example of reprobate Heretikes or vpon his owne inferences and enforcements drawne out of some darke sentences so shamelesly alleaged for the most part that they are cleane contrary to the plaine testimony of his owne authors in the very same place vvhereas we haue that most renowmed Emperours owne formal and expresse wordes professing himselfe to haue no power to judge ouer Bishops and Church affaires and that also fortified by the sound record of most graue holy and learned Fathers who liued some in his owne daies and some very neare thereunto Let then any man judge if he be not too too partial vvhether I gaue his Majesty wrong to vnderstand when I enformed him that Constantine the great that glorious ornament of our country vvould not take vpon him to be supreme gouernour in causes Ecclesiastical Or vvhether M. Abbot doe not goe about exceedingly to abuse his most excellent Majesty that with such bables foule shifts and manifest lies would perswade him the contrary Hitherto of the Emperours authority in calling of Councels and ouer Bishops so farre forth as M. Abbots objections out of S. Leo ministred just cause Now ere I passe vnto the next Successor of S. Peter and S. Paul which M. Abbot would force to speake in defence of their new Gospel I must according to custome shew in part what this Authour of his S. Leo doth teach in fauour of the Catholike cause that the indifferent reader may judge whether he were rather a Protestant or a Papist as they tearme vs. And because S. Leo is both ancient for he liued about 1200. yeares past and was also a most holy man by whom God did miraculously vvorke euen in his life time Againe for that he was very skilful both in the holy Scriptures and al learned Antiquity Greeke and Latin as may be seene by his Sermons and Epistles specially by the last Epistle written for the instruction of the Emperour called also Leo where he citeth S. Hillary S. Ambrose S. Augustine Latines S. Athanasius Theophilus Cyrillus Patriarkes of Alexandria Gregory Nazianzene S. Basil and S. Iohn Chrysostome Greeke Doctors And finally for that his workes be without al exception euen by the consent of the Protestants yea of such credit vvith them that they are gladde vvhen they can snatch a broken sentence out of him in fauour of their doctrine I wil therefore somewhat more largely cite his sentences in defence of the present Roman religion because they cannot choose but be of great value with al euen-minded men And the better to satisfie M. Abbots demandes I wil frame the order of S. Leos testimonies much thereafter Of the Pope and his Pardons S. Leo taught very much and most plainely as hath beene related in the beginning of this matter Of the Masse and of Transubstantiation he speakeh as perspicuously in very formal tearmes commanding Epist 79. ad Dioscor n. 2. That two Masses be said euery festiual day in great parishes where the people cannot conueniently meete al together at one Ne quaedam pars populi sua deuotione priuetur si vnius tantum Missae more seruato sacrificium offerri non possit nisi qui prima diei parte conuenit Lest some of the people be depriued of their deuotion if the custome of one Masse a day be obserued and the sacrifice may not be offered but at their meeting that come first in the morning In those daies when al men were so deuout to heare Masse that no body would willingly omit to heare one Masse at least euery holy day there was I weene no hundred markes to be forfeited for euery Masse they heard And were they then true Protestants thinke you who so zealously coueted to be present at the sacrifice of the Masse Moreouer S. Leo was so wel assured of the Real presence of Christes blessed body in the Sacrament and knew it to be so clearely acknowledged euen of the vulgar and common sort in those daies that he tooke it for a ground to confute the Eutichian heresie For hauing first declared that those Heretikes by affirming our Sauiour not to haue taken the true flesh of man did destroy his passion and resurrection he adjoineth Epist 22. ad Clerum In what darkenesse of ignorance in what drowsinesse of slouth haue these Eutichians I might as wel say Protestants lien that they could neither by hearing learne nor by reading vnderstand that which in the Church of God is so vniformely voiced and spoken off by euery man that it is not with-holden from the tongues of Infants to wit the truth of the body and bloud of Christ among the Sacraments of the Christian faith c. the substance and summe of S. Leos reason is that our Sauiour gaue his true flesh in the holy Sacrament to be eaten of vs therefore he tooke the true flesh of man otherwise he could not haue giuen it vs to eate ergo Eutiches was deceiued who denied Christ to haue taken the true flesh of man affirming him to haue taken only some shadow or similitude of it And because I am in the matter of Sacraments I vvil joine S. Leos testimony for the vertue of Baptisme In quo saith he foluitur quicquid peccati est Epist 84. ad Aquileiensem Episcopum cum quo nascitur Therefore is one baptised that whatsoeuer there is of sinne in him it may be loosed And after in the same Epistle Infants doe die to original sinne and elder folkes to al manner of sinne in Baptisme vvhich confutes the Protestants opinion that original sinne liueth and raigneth in al men after baptisme Now for the Sacrament of Confession and Satisfaction he is so formal that he hath left no euasion to the most nimble-witted Protestant Publike confession by reason of some inconueniences that thereupon ensued he prohibited but priuate and that which the Protestants cal auricular confession he alloweth and commendeth Epist 78. nu 2. ad vniuersos Episcopos Campaniae these be his wordes I decree that this manner of penance which is so exacted of the faithful that a prefession of euery kinde of sinne be written in a role and rehearsed publikely be wholy abrogated when as it is sufficient that the guilt of consciences be in secret confession declared to Priests alone For albeit that fulnesse of faith seeme laudable which for feare of God doe not stagger to blush before men neuerthelesse seing that some mens sinnes be such that it is not expedient they should be published least their enemies should take hold on them and prosecute them in law let that custome be abolished least many be thereby frighted from the remedies of penance for that confession is sufficient which is tendered first to God then also to the Priest c. Againe in another place Epistola 89. The manifold mercies of God doth so succour mans frailty that not only by the grace of baptisme but by the medicine of penance also
the hope of eternal life is recouered that they who had lost the gift of regeneration condemning themselues by their owne judgement might attaine vnto remission of their sinnes the aide of Gods goodnesse being so disposed that pardon from God cannot be obtained but by the supplication of Priests For the Mediatour of God and Man the man IESVS Christ hath giuen this power vnto the Prelates of the Church that they may both enjoine satisfaction to the penitent and that they may also admit them being by the same holesome satisfaction purged through the gate of reconciliation vnto the communion of the Sacraments Where he further teacheth That they who die without this gift of pardon shal neuer be saued and doth also greatly blame them who deferre their confession til toward the point of death when saith he there is scarce space either for the confession of the penitent or for the reconciliation of the Priest It vvas not then vndoubtedly treason in S. Leos daies to be reconciled by a Priest seing he so often and so much recommended it to al Christian people and held it the only gate to re-enter into Gods fauor for al such Christians as were fallen from the grace they had before receiued in the Sacrament of Baptisme That Bishops Priests Deacons yea and Subdeacons should not marry and if any married man vvere chosen a Subdeacon that he should refraine from the company of his wife S. Leo is very plaine thus he decreeth Epist. 82. ad Anastasium Thes num 4. It is free for men that be not of the Clergie to marry but to shew the purity of perfect continency carnal copulation is not graunted so much as to Subdeacons that they who haue wiues be as though they had them not and they who haue them not doe continue single And if in this order which is the fourth from the head with the Protestants it is no order at al it is meete that chastity be kept how much more is it to be obserued in the first second and third that no man be esteemed worthy either of the place of a Deacon or honour of a Priest or excellency of a Bishop who is discouered not to haue yet bridled himselfe from the pleasure of wiuing This of the continency of Priests Wil you heare S. Leos opinion of the Vowes of religious men and women which the false Father Abbot scornefully tearmeth Monkish Epist 90. ad Rusti Norb. cap. 12. The profession of a Monke saith he vndertaken by a mans owne free choise and desire cannot be forsaken without sinne because that must be performed which we haue vowed to God Wherefore he that forsaking the profession of a single or solitary life is turned souldier or fallen to marriage is to be purged publikely by the satisfaction of penance for albeit warre-fare may be harmelesse and marriage honest yet is it a transgression and offence to haue forsaken the better choise It followeth in the next number Ibid. ca. 13.8 Maidens who not constrained by their parents command but of their owne accord haue made profession of Virginity and receiued the habit if afterwardes they desire to marry they doe sinne though they were not yet consecrated Ibidem 14. but if after both profession and consecration they should fal to marry it cannot be doubted but that they should commit a very hainous crime For if mans decrees cannot be infringed without punishment what shal light vpon them who haue broken the couenants of the diuine mistery How forcibly doth this chast doctrine of S. Leo batter and beate flat to the earth the voluptuous loosenesse of runnegate votaries and giues checkmate to the Protestants for vpholding the same as wel done That you may yet further perceiue what an euil Protestant and a perfect Papist S. Leo was he commendeth highly the Emperour Martianus his vertue and Godlinesse for receiuing with worthy honour the holy Relikes of blessed Flamianus departed who a little before was Patriarke of Constantinople And for praying to Saints you haue heard before Serm. 5. de Epiphania how he encouraged al men Eorum ambire suffragia earnestly and as it were ambitiously to sue for the aide of their praiers Againe he exhorteth his auditours to celebrate vvith him the Saturday following the Vigils of the most happy Apostle S. Peter Ser. 8. de Iejunio decim Who saith he with his praiers wil vouchsafe to helpe our praiers fastings and almes-deedes Behold he made no question but that S. Peter both knew their desires and deserts and would also further them vvith the aide of his effectual praiers In briefe then we haue that the most learned and holy Pope S. Leo the first taught praying to Saints and worshipping of their Relikes the vowes of Monkes and professed Virgins that Priests and al in holy orders should not marry but liue continently that Priests haue power to reconcile and to forgiue sinnes and that euery man who hopeth for any pardon of his sinnes at Gods handes must particularly confesse them in priuate to a Priest and by due satisfaction purge himselfe from them that in the Sacrament there is the same true flesh of Christ which was crucified and did arise from death that Masse is to be said euery holy day wherein the sacrifice of Christs body is offered that S. Peter was the supreme Pastour of Christes Church and that the Bishop of Rome is his lawful successour therein hauing supreme authority ouer both East and West Church These with such like points which may by diligent perusing his most eloquent and diuine workes be gathered doe most perspicuously demonstrate the Church of Rome in his time vvhich vvas neare 1200. yeares agoe to haue held the selfe same language concerning matters of faith vvhich the same Church of Rome at this day speaketh And that M. Abbot in seeking to proue the contrary did but shew himselfe either very ignorant in his workes or ouer studious not to take his Author right as his manner is but to picke some matter of cauil out of him thereby to blinde and deceiue the simple reader Now to the next ROBERT ABBOT PELAGIVS the Bishop of Rome the first of that name admitted a married man to be Bishop of Syracusa only putting in a caution that he should not dilapidare the Church goodes and transferre the same to his wife and children Dist. 28. de Syracusana The danger whereof he signifieth was the cause of that constitution which did forbidde a man hauing a wife and children to be preferred to a Bishopricke otherwise a man is not repelled for hauing wife children saith the Glosse because the Apostles permitted the same But now the Church of Rome Glossa ibidē wil by no meanes admit men to be Bishops or Priests not for that they would auoide the dilapidating of the Church goodes for that is a thing common with the Popes themselues Platina in vita Iohan. 16. To apply al to satisfie the
greedinesse and couetousnesse of their familiars their bretheren their nephewes vnder which name commonly goe their bastards but because they asscribe to marriage as the old Heretikes did Bellarm. de Cler. lib. 1. cap. 19. pollution and vncleanenesse which cannot stand with the sanctity and holinesse of the Priestly function WILLIAM BISHOP IF M. Abbot did not euery vvhere almost shew himselfe to be a shamelesse man and one that careth not how corruptly so he may somewhat colourably cite the ancient Fathers sentences this passage were alone more then sufficient to proue him to be no better then a cosening counterfeit In these few lines there are foure euident vntruthes vttered by him The first is that a man is not repelled from being a Bishop for hauing wife children but only for feare of dilapidation of the Church goods This is most euidently false for though the feare of spending the Church goods vpon prophane vses be one cause vvhy it is not expedient that a Bishop or Priest should be maried yet the more principal reason thereof is the purity of the single life and the freenesse of it from al such vvorldly affaires and temporal troubles as are necessarily linked vvith the care of prouision for wife children This you heard before out of S. Leo who was predecessor to Pope Pelagius the first by more then an hundred yeares These be also the reasons of S. Augustine and S. Hierome vvho vvrote thereof vvhole volumes against the Heretike Iouinian and were giuen first by S. Paul himselfe when he teacheth that 1. Cor. 7. vers 31. he who is without a wife is careful for the thinges that pertaine to our Lord how he may please God but he that is with a wife is careful for the thinges that appertaine to the world how he may please his wife and is diuided And Vers 32. Vers 34. the woman vnmaried and virgin thinkes on the thinges that pertaine to our Lord that shee may be holy both in body and spirit See the more special groundes of the single life of clergy-men wherevpon euen by the confession of M. Abbot himselfe Page 42. A law was made in the Church of Rome by Pope Siritius who was 150. yeares before Pelagius that al Priests and Deacons should either be chosen single men or else promise to abstaine wholy from the company of their wiues which is also decreed in the second Councel of Carthage holden about the same time where the holy Bishops there assembled doe say Canon 2. That we may keepe that which the Apostles did teach and Antiquity herselfe obserued giuing al men to vnderstand that the single and chast life of the Clergy vvas taught by the Apostles and obserued in most pure Antiquity It being then so notorious and wel knowne a thing that whosoeuer would be a Bishop must needs refraine from the company of his wife no caution was required for that by Pope Pelagius because there was no question or doubt of it And M. Abbot dealeth deceitfully to argue out of the not mentioning of that vvhich was vnderstood of al men as necessary to be presupposed and is in most of the Canons of the very same distinction Distinct 28. expresly deliuered and also in two other vvhole distinctions going next before His second false tricke is in the citation of the glosse and that a very foule one for he chops it off in the middest leauing out that which wil marre al his market The glosse saith vpon that caution against dilapidations that it is to be vnderstood when be that is chosen to be a Bishop doth loue his wife and children so tenderly that it is to be presumed he would for their sakes dilapidare the Church goods c. otherwise a man is not repelled for wife and children to wit for that point of dilapidations whereof the glosse there speaketh This to be the sence any vnderstanding man vvould easily perceiue if the glosse had gone no further But it addeth as it were to meete with M. Abbots cauil Dum tamen longa continentia praecesserit A man that hath a wife may be admitted to be a Bishop putting in good surety that he wil not dilapidare the Church goods yet with this prouiso That he hath long before liued continently that is refrained wholy from the company of his wife as it is before said in the Canon Priusquam of the same distinction See how expresly the glosse excepts that which M. Abbot auoucheth it to affirme His third false tale is That the Church of Rome now wil by no means admit maried men to be bishops priests which is not true for in those very cases vvherein they vvere at any time admitted before they vvould be admitted now that is If there were want of other able men and some such eminent learning and vertue in a maried man as were not to be found in a single then he might be made both Priest Bishop so that he and his wife would liu◠continently for there is no Canon of the Church to the contrary His fourth lie is a luculent and bright one That we forsooth asscribe pollution and vncleanenesse to marriage as the old Heretikes did for neither Cardinal Bellarmine vvhom he quoteth nor any other Catholike doth teach the act of matrimony to be the worke of the Deuil or damnable sinne as the Manichees and some other Heretikes did Nay he declareth there plainly that it may be without any sinne at al though most commonly concupiscence beare to great a sway in it both preuenting the rule of reason and somewhat exceeding the measure of it as a Lib. 14. de Ciuitat c. 17. Item lib. 5. cont Iulian. cap. 8. 10. S. Augustine testifieth and doth make a man more dul and heauy to spiritual exercises and not so pure holy as the office of a Priest doth require as b Hier. lib. 1. cōt Iouinian S. Hierome and c Chrysost l. 6 de Sacerdot S. Chrysostome doe witnesse And that a man thereby is made lesse holy and pure both in body and spirit S. Paules owne vvordes doe intimate ¶ 1. Cor. 7. vers 34. The woman vnmarried thinketh how shee may be holy both in body and spirit so that within the compasse of not many lines M. Abbot le ts flie two cast of lies and yet as it were not content vvith so few he interlaceth three other lies to furbish and smooth vp the rest The first is that now a daies married men are not repelled from Bishopricks to auoide dilapidations which is false For that is one cause as I shewed before and is also touched euen by that most renowmed Father Bellarmine euen in the same place cited by M. Abbot De Clericis lib. 1. cap. 19. in his fifth reason vvhere he teacheth That the marriage of Bishops and Priests doth hinder much that hospitality and tender care of the poore which men of the Church ought to haue for the
care of prouiding for wife children doth wholy extinguish or greatly diminish their good house-keeping and prouiding for the poore as the lamentable experience of our very time doth sufficiently instruct vs. What if some Popes or other Clergy-men haue beene too forward to satisfie the greedy couetousnesse of their carnal friends that is their owne fault contrary to the prouident order and law of the Church and if the corrupt nature of man be so inclinable to fauor them that be next in bloud to them was it not right vvisely ordained by our Church that Clergy-men should haue no wiues and children for that men naturally doe loue them most dearely and vse al meanes to prouide for them But how carelesly herein doe the Protestants carry themselues vvho doe encourage and as it were push their Clergy-men forward to haue wiues and children vvho being thereby clogged with the cares of this world bidde adieu to al courteous and plentiful hospitality and leaue the poore to shift as they can for themselues for they haue more then enough to doe to prouide for their owne wiues and children The second lie is shuffled into the parenthesis taken out of Platina to vvit That vnder the name of nephewes commonly goe their bastards vvhich is not in his authour but a most malitious slander deuised of his owne head and auouched without any testimony and therefore to be contemned The third is in that he maketh Platina to affirme it to be a common thing with the Popes which he only noteth for a special fault in some few Is this man worthy thinke you the sacred title of a Diuine or of the common name of an honest man vvho doth in manner nothing else but sow lies together and that sometimes so thicke that for euery line neere hand there is onelie or other vvas his meaning trow you to giue instruction to the ignorant and satisfaction to the learned as often he vaunteth or rather to blinde the simple and to feede the vaine folly of the ouer credulous Protestant Prouerb 10. Qui nititur mendacijs saith the vvise man hic pascit ventos Idem insequitur aues volantes He that relieth on lies doth feede the windes that is may please vaine and light heades He doth also follow birdes flying in the aire that is doth feede the humour of hawty wauering and vnsettled spirits but can neuer giue contentment or satisfaction to any graue modest and discreet man who doth flie from a crafty and subtle liar as from the very off-spring of that Serpent which with lying deceiued our first mother Eue. But goe on vvith your lies seing it wil be no otherwise ROBERT ABBOT THE Emperours of Rome Theodosius and Valens according vnto the doctrine of the ancient Church of Rome Petri Crinit de honest disciplina lib. 9. cap. 9. Vpon care of preseruing the religion of the high God did forbidde the making grauing or painting of the Crucifix and commanded it vpon penalty to be abolished wheresoeuer it was found But now not the making â—nly but also the vvorshipping of the Crucifix is a matter of high religion in the same Church of Rome WILLIAM BISHOP VERITAS non quaerit latebras Truth is not ashamed of her selfe nor coueteth to hide her head in corners vvhen shee may with safety be suffered to shew her face publikely That decree of the Christian Emperour Theodosius is extant and to be seene in the very corps of the ciuil law vvhat needed then M. Abbot to runne vnto a late obscure authour called Petrus Crinitus Peter with the long haire to seeke that which is of so good record in so famous a volume thinke you that it is without some mistery that he being thirsty would leaue the fresh fountaine and runne to drinke of the dirty puddle Latet anguis in herbae There is a padde in the straw A strange longing he had to finde out some cauil against any part of the doctrine of the Church of Rome and because that could not be by the true and ful report of the Catholike Emperours decrees he would needs fly to some broken relation of he cared not whom to blinde his vnwary reader vvithal The decree then as it vvas made by the Emperour and standeth Authentikely in the Code maketh much for the honour of the Crosse for he commanded That the signe of the Crosse should not be ingrauen Lib. 1. Codi tit leg Cùm sit nobis or painted on the pauement Ne sacrum signum pedibus calcaretur that the holy signe of the Crosse might not be trodden vnder feete Which said decree of Theodosius the elder the Emperour Tyberius the second one of his Godly successours vnderstanding wel vvhen he espied a Crosse cut in marble lying on the ground he commanded it to be lifted vp saying Paul Diaconus lib. 18. Rerum Romanarum We ought to blesse our fore-head and breast with the Crosse of our Lord and we treade it vnder our feete In what high estimation the signe of the Crosse was vvith that most bright mirrour of Emperors Constantine the great and how gloriously it was placed in their Diademes Pallaces and publike places no man can be ignorant that is acquainted with their Hystories And somwhat I haue said thereof already in the question of Images therefore I doe here omit to speake any more of a matter so euident I might here by the way blame M. Abbot not only for his deceitful dealing but also because he forgetteth vvhereabout he goes for his drift here is to teach that S. Peter and S. Paules successours the Bishops of Rome did of old teach another doctrine then these of later yeares doe now of vvhich number of Bishops Theodosius the Emperour was none but many such faults as this I let passe vvittingly or else I should neuer make an end And vvhereas he addeth That these Emperours did forbidde the making of the Crosse according vnto the doctrine of the ancient Church of Rome Obserue first that it is so said only without any proof and besides it is auouched very impudently as being flat repugnant vnto the knowne and notorious practise of Constantine the great their late and most famous predecessour Now to the next ROBERT ABBOT Greg. lib. 9. Moral ca. 1. 14. GREGORY Bishop of Rome taught That al the merit of our vertue al our righteousnesse is but vice and vnrighteousnesse if it be stricktly examined it needeth therefore praier after righteousnesse saith he that whereas being sifted it would quaile it may by the only mercy of the Iudge stand for good Bernard in Annot. 1. De lib. Arbit Grat. In fine Trident. sess 6 cap. 16. Yea and Bernard by the same doctrine of the Church of Rome saith That mens merits are not such as that eternal life is due vnto them of right or that God should doe wrong if he did not giue the same they are the way to the Kingdome saith he but not the cause of obtaining the
Kingdome But now the * Rhem. Test Annot. in 2. Tim. 4. v. 8. ad Hebr. 6. vers 10. Church of Rome attributeth so great perfection of righteousnesse to good workes as that they fully satisfie the law of God and worthily deserue eternal life yea they affirme them to be so farre meritorious as that God should be vnjust if he rendered not heauen for the same chargeing the justice of God not in respect of his promise but in respect of the merit and desert of the workes WILLIAM BISHOP NOW that M. Abbot is driuen to flie to that most holy and renowmed Pope S. Gregory the great for defence of their doctrine he is like to speed wel no doubt for he was the first founder of the Catholike religion amongst vs English-men and a great maintainer of it al the world ouer as shal appeare to the eie of euery vnpartial man that wil but reade that little which shal by me hereafter be produced out of him First touching the merit of workes we beleeue the same that S. Gregory taught to wit That al the merit of our owne vertue al our owne righteousnesse that is al that vertue and righteousnesse which we haue by our owne nature or strength is rather vice and iniquity then vertue And therefore that vve had neede most humbly to sue and pray to God for mercy and forgiuenesse of our sinnes and for the assistance of his heauenly grace which is the roote and fountaine of al good workes and merits M. Abbot therefore mistakes S. Gregory grosly if he thinke him to deny any true merit or righteousnesse to be in a vertuous Christian for though he say that our owne to wit that which we doe by vertue of our owne natural power be nought vvorth yet he teacheth most expresly that good workes done by the helpe of Gods grace doe merit life euerlasting Thus he hath left vvritten vpon that verse of the Psalme I haue meditated in thy workes Gregor in Psal 141. He that acknowledgeth the riches of this world to be deceitful and doth through the loue of heauenly thinges contemne earthly that man doth meditate vpon good workes which when this life doth passe away shal remaine yeeld the reward of eternal life For we liue not here profitably Nisi ad comparandum meritum quo in aeternitate viuatur But to get merits by which we may liue eternally And vpon these wordes of the 101. Psalme Their seede shal be directed for euer Our workes are therefore called seedes saith he because like as we gather fruit of seede euen so doe we expect reward of our workes for the Apostle saith Gallat 6. Whatsoeuer a man wil sow that shal he reape He therefore that in this life soweth the seede of good workes shal in the life to come reape the fruit of eternal recompence And in the same booke of his Morals out of vvhich M. Abbot snatched his darke wordes S. Gregory declareth clearely Greg. lib. 4. Moral c. 42. That as there is among men a great difference of workes in this life so in the next there shal be as great distinction of dignities that how farre here one man exceedes another in merits so much shal be there surmount the other in rewardes If then according to S. Gregories plaine doctrine grounded vpon the Royal Prophets Dauid and the Apostle S. Paul good workes be the seedes vvhich bring forth life euerlasting If the merit of this life be that wherewith we must liue eternally hereafter If according to the difference of merits in this life we shal receiue distinct dignities in the life to come can any man of judgement doubt but that he most perspicuously taught both that there be true merits in vertuous and good workes and also that according vnto the different degree of merits distinct dignities of glory shal be rendred in heauen The most sweet and religious father S. Bernard is haled into this ranke of S. Peters successours against al due order because he was no Bishop of Rome but our prophane Abbot saith that the holy Abbot Bernard herein agreeth vvith the ancient Church of Rome How may we know that Is it because that godly and deuout man did in al points imbrace and follow the ancient Roman faith L. 2. de Cons ad Euge. In Vita lib. 2. c. 3. 6. Item lib. 4. cap. 4. Lib. 3. cap. 5. Serm. 66. in Cant. lib. Sententiarū non procul ab initio then it is a cleare case that the Bishop of Rome is supreme gouernour of Christes Church that the sacrifice of the Masse is a most true holy sacrifice and that the same body that was borne of the blessed Virgin Mary is really and substantially there present that it is flat heresie to deny either praier to Saints or praier for the dead that euery one must confesse his sinnes to a Priest that the vowes of Monkes and religious persons are most pretious jewels and ornaments of a Christian soule vvhereof he was so earnest a Patrone and perswader that in his * In Vita life-time he instituted 160. Monasteries Briefly there is no branche of the present Roman faith which may not be confirmed out of his godly and learned workes Wherefore if S. Bernard agreed vvholy with the doctrine of the ancient Church of Rome so doth the Church of Rome that now is But if M. Abbot wil say that in this point of merits only he jumpeth vvith the auncient Church though in none of the rest should he not rather haue proued it to be so then to haue taken it as granted Yes verily vnlesse he vvould be esteemed for such a trifler as ordinarily doth petere principium begge that which he should principally proue To the purpose then I say that neither the ancient Church of Rome doth deny the merits of good workes as may be seene in that question nor yet S. Bernard for when he saith That our merits doe not in justice deserue heauen he vnderstandeth that of our merits taken by themselues without Gods promise and appointment of heauen for the reward of them the which secluded excepted God should not doe any body wrong if he gaue not heauen for the same but Gods ordinance promise presupposed and the grace of Christ by which the merit is wrought then it doth euen in S. Bernards opinion of right deserue heauen and God should doe wrong not to repay it with heauen And this in effect doth S. Bernard himselfe teach in the second place cited by M. Abbot vvhere he saith That it is just that God pay that which be oweth De Lib. Arbitrio In fine but he oweth that which be promised the promise was indeede of mercy but now to be performed of justice which justice though it be also principally Gods because it proceedes from his grace yet it hath pleased God to haue vs to be partners of that his justice that he might make vs merit ours of his
beene supreme gouernour of Christes Church To vvhich fallacy it is most easie to answere First that albeit the Patriarke of Constantinople could not so cal himselfe in a lawful good meaning but proudly and wickedly because he had his jurisdiction limited vvithin the boundes of his owne Patriarkship had nothing to doe with any other churches that vvere vvithout it so that his power was in no sence vniuersal that is spred ouer al the world yet this name might in some good sence notwithstāding haue beene giuen vnto the Bishop of Rome as S. Gregory himselfe in one of the same Epistles vvhich M. Abbot citeth doth intimate For vvriting to the Patriarke of Alexandria he saith Lib. 4. Epist 36. Your Holinesse knoweth that by the Councel of Chalcedon vvhich vvas one of the foure first general Councels most highly esteemed off by S. Gregory this name of vniuersallity was offered to me as Bishop of the Apostolike See for as he testifieth Epist 32. of the same booke that name was in honour of S. Peter Prince of the Apostles attributed by many in that Councel vnto the Bishop of Rome yet saith he none of my Predecessours consented to vse it because verily if one Patriarke be called vniuersal the other are made no Patriarkes at al. Briefly then to dispatch this great matter that name vniuersal as it was challenged by Iohn Patriarke of Constantinople who had no right to it in any good sence was presumptuous peruerse and prophane in vvhich consideration S. Gregory so tearmed it Neither vvould he nor any of his predecessours vse that name though in that sence that they had charge and command ouer the vniuersal Church it might haue beene attributed to them yet because it was subject to another construction to wit that the Bishop of Rome was the only truly proper Bishop of euery Diocesse and other named Bishops were not true and proper Bishops there of but the vniuersal Bishops Vicars Suffraganes and Substitutes therefore they vtterly auoided that name as matter of jealousie and scandal choosing the humble stile of seruus seruorum Dei The seruant of Gods seruants For the further satisfaction of the learned reader I wil proue out of S. Gregory in the very same place quoted by M. Abbot both that he wrote against the name of vniuersal Bishop in the later sence And that notwithstanding he refused that name yet that he acknowledged and taught the Bishop of Rome to haue supreme authority ouer al the Church of Christ Touching the first the wordes before alleaged out of his 36. Epistle Lib. 4. Epist 36. doe demonstrate so much to wit If one Patriarke be called vniuersal the other are made no Patriarkes at al vvhich can haue no other sence then that the calling of one Patriarke or Bishop Vniuersal doth signifie him so to be a Bishop in euery place that no other besides him can be truly and properly called Bishop but must be his Vicar and Subdelegate The like saith he in his 34. Epistle to the Emperesse Lib. 4. Epist 34. That his brother and fellow Bishop Iohn striued to be called Bishop alone And in the 7. booke and 69. Epistle to Eusebius he saith Si vniuersalis est restat vt vos Episcopi non sitis If one Bishop be vniuersal it remaineth that you be no Bishops This then is most certaine that S. Gregory spake against the name of Vniuersal Bishop taken in this sence that he was so a Bishop as no other but he could be Bishop in any place Marry if we vnderstand by it one man to haue the general charge of al the Churches in the vvorld yet so as there be also Bishops and Archbishops his brothers who haue the particular and proper gouernement of their seueral Diocesse then S. Gregory telleth vs plainely that S. Peter and his Successours the Bishops of Rome were such these be his wordes Lib. 4. Epist 76. It is manifest to al that know the Gospel that the charge of the whole Church was by our Lordes owne mouth committed to S. Peter Prince of al the Apostles And againe in the same Epistle Behold Peter receiued the keies of the Kingdome of heauen the power of binding and loosing is giuen to him the charge and principality of the whole Church is committed to him vvhich is also repeated in one of the Epistles cited by M. Abbot Lib. 4. Epist 32. And that by S. Peter this vniuersal charge and authority was left vnto the Bishops and See of Rome no man can vvitnesse it more manifestly then S. Gregory hath done First hauing proued out of the word of God S. Peters supremacy he adjoyneth Lib. 6. Epist 201. Therefore though there were many Apostles yet for the principality it selfe the only seate of the Prince of the Apostles hath preuailed in authority As farre as the See Apostolike is euidently knowne to be set ouer al Churches by the authority of God So farre amongst other manifold cares that doth greatly occupy vs when for the consecration of a Bishop our sentence is expected Againe Lib. 2. Epist 69. Lib. 7. Epist 64. For whereas he the Patriarke of Constantinople acknowledgeth himselfe to be subject vnto the Apostolike See of Rome I know not what Bishop is not subject vnto it Moreouer What thing soeuer shal be done in that Councel without the authority and consent of the See Apostolike it is of no strength and vertue Whereas on the other side he saith Those thinges that are once ratified Lib. 7. Epist 69. by the authority of the See Apostolike neede no further strength or confirmation If any man desire to see how S. Gregory himselfe practised that soueraigne authority ouer al the parts of the Christian world let him but reade his Epistles and he shal finde it most perspicuously Magdeburg Centur. 6. In Indice verbo Gregorius euen as their owne great writers of the Centuries doe testifie directing them to the places in his workes where they shal finde the same How devoide then was M. Abbot of al good conscience and honest dealing that vvould vnder the colour of his writing against the name of vniuersal in that sence perswade the simple that S. Gregory vtterly misliked of the supremacy of the Bishop of Rome Now because that S. Gregory hath beene alwaies highly esteemed and greatly respected of both Latin and Greeke Church for his singular holynes and learning and was besides the principal cause vnder God of the conuersion of vs English-men vnto the Christian faith I wil note out of his workes summarily what was his opinion of many of the questioned points of faith betweene the Protestants and vs because M. Abbot citeth him against vs that euery one may see vvhat religion was first planted amongst vs English-men and continued for a thousand yeares Of the Supremacy and Merit of good workes hath beene spoken already Concerning the sacrifice of the Masse it was daily offered vp to God in his age
handes and by which many miracles were wrought if with filing be could get off any thing For when many that come hither doe craue that blessing that they might haue of that dust which is filed off those chaines the Priest comming with the file◠doth for some presently get off something whereas for other he drawing the file on the chaines a long time nothing at al wil off it Further to a Noble man of France he sent the blessing of S. Peter and a little Crosse within the which was inclosed some such filing of S. Peters chaines Which for a time saith he bound S. Peters necke Lib 2. Epist 72. but shal loose your necke from sinne for euer Some relikes also of S. Laurence Grid-yron were inclosed in the foure corners of that same Crosse That by the helpe of that whereon his body was broiled your minde saith he may be kindled in the loue of God Touching the Images of Saints he not only approueth them to be made but teacheth them to be set in Churches Lib. 7. Epist 119. that they who cannot reade may by beholding of them learne to imitate some of their vertues Moreouer he exhorteth al men to worship them by kneeling before them yet with this caueat that they doe not yeeld them any such adoration as is proper to God What a protectour he was of Purgatory praier for the dead Lib. 7. Epist ad Secundin Lib. 4. Dialog cap. 20. may be seene in these places vvhere he saith that we must beleeue that there is a Purgatory fire to cleanse lighter offences after this life before the day of judgement And proues it both by Christes wordes ¶ Math. 12. vers 32. If any man blaspheme against the holy Ghost it shal not be forgiuen him neither in this world nor in the world to come And out of S. Paul 1. Cor. 3. vers 15. He shal be saued yet so as by fire And in the beginning of the third penitential Psalme expounding these wordes of the Prophet O Lord rebuke me not in thy fury neither chastise me in thy wrath he adjoineth This is as much as if Dauid had said I know that after this life some shal feele the fire of Purgatory others shal receiue the sentence of eternal damnation But because I esteeme that transitory fire of Purgatory to be more intollerable then any tribulation of this life I doe not only wish not to be reproued in the fury of eternal damnation for I feare also to be purged in the wrath of thy transitory correction In this exposition he agreeth vvith S. Augustine vpon the same Psalme euen as he did in the first with the same profound Doctor Lib. 21. de Cinit cap. 24. Et lib. 6. contra Iouintanum cap. 9. Further he teacheth to pray for the soules departed Lib. 4. Dialog cap. 50. And to offer sacrifice for them Ibid. cap. 55. and else where in many places To speake a word of the single and chast life of the Clergie S. Gregory saith None ought to be admitted to the ministry of the Altar Lib. 1. Epist 42. L. 12. In fine In decretis sauing such whose chastity hath beene approued before they were made Ministers Againe If any Priest or Deacon doe marry accursed be he How wel he liked of the vowes and holy profession of Monkes and Nunnes may appeare by that that he himselfe was one of them And he relateth Homil. 11. in Ezechiëlem Hom. 40. in Euangel that there were 3000. Nunnes of name in his time within the walles of Rome whose life was so holy and so much exercised in fasting praiers and teares that he did beleeue had it not beene for them none of the rest had beene able to haue subsisted so many yeares amongst the swordes of the Longobardes He then did not as the Protestants doe thinke religious persons vnprofitable members of the common weale by whose holy liues and deuout praiers he esteemed the Citty to haue beene preserued For the sprinckling of holy Water in Churches erecting of Altars placing thereof Relikes of Saints see Lib. 9. Epist 71. For Pilgrimage to holy places Lib. 4. Epist cap. 44. Homil. 37. in Euang. Lib. 2. Dialog cap. 17. Finally if I would stand to rehearse al that S. Gregory hath vvritten in the defence of the Catholike Roman faith I should make a vvhole volume And this briefe extract out of his owne authentike workes vvil suffice I hope to demonstrate what a jolly patron he was of the Protestants doctrine and vvith vvhat good conscience M. Abbot and his fellowes doe alleage him as a fauourer of their errours which he disproued confuted and condemned so fully and particularly little lesse then a thousand yeares before they vvere hatched and thrust into the world And must it not needes vvorke in al considerate English-mens harts a very vehement inclination to imbrace the now professed Roman religion to see the same point by point professed taught and practised a thousand yeare gone by so wise holy and learned a Bishop vvho was also as I noted before the chosen instrument of God principally to procure our reclaiming from Idolatry and the seruing of false gods vnto the true and sincere faith of IESVS Christ That faith which he taught was planted first amongst vs English-men See the Catholike Apologie out of Protestants as the most learned among the Protestants doe confesse the same hath also euer since vntil of late beene wholy retained of al our most holy Ancestours is it not then a great shame for vs to degenerate so farre and to fal so fondly from it I trust in the mercies and goodnesse of God that we shal once haue grace to perceiue vnderstand and amend it ROBERT ABBOT GREGORY the ninth Bishop of Rome though liuing in later time of great corruption yet by the ancient doctrine of the Catholike Church could say that * Greg. Ep. ad Germ Archi-Episc Cōstat apud Math. Paris in Henrico tertio the not knowing of the Scriptures by the testimony of the truth it selfe is the occasion of errours and therefore that it is expedient for al men to reade or beare the same But now the doctrine of Rome is that it is pernitious for the people to meddle vvith the Scriptures that reading and knowledge thereoff is the breeding of error and heresie and as dogges from holy things so the people must be secluded from the reading and vse of them WILLIAM BISHOP M. ABBOT seemes to be fallen into a dangerous consumption and to draw fast vpon a desperate estate or else he vvould neuer vse such silly salues as this to prolong the life of his forlorne cause From Gregory the first he leapeth ouer the heades of an hundred Popes his Successours and lighteth next vpon Gregory the ninth that liued aboue six hundred yeares after him whom also he citeth not out of his owne workes but from the report of another and when al is done he hath
not a word out of him that wil greatly helpe their cause For what saith he that we say not we hold with him that the want of knowledge of the Scriptures is the cause of heresie for he that knoweth and vnderstandeth wel the holy Scriptures can neuer fal into errour or heresie Besides vve denie not but that it is expedient for al men either to reade the Scriptures or to heare them to reade them themselues if they be men of judgement and indued with a lowly spirit carrying with them this rule of S. Peter 2. Pet. 1. vers 19. That the Scriptures as they were not written by a priuate spirit so they must not be vnderstood by a priuate interpretation vvherefore in al darke and doubtful places they must not trust to their owne wit but make their recourse vnto the Catholike Church Ioh 14. v. 26. Ioh. 16. v. 13. 1. Tim. 3. vers 15. Which is directed by the spirit of God into al truth and therefore called the pillar and ground of truth for the true sence and meaning of them Al the rest both Men Women and Children we would haue to heare the holy Scriptures read vnto them and expounded by their lawful Pastours and approued Preachers who are chosen and sent to feede their soules with that heauenly foode of the word of God So that Gregory the ninth differeth nothing from Paul the fift the present Pope of Rome who is fully of the same opinion And M. Abbots audatious assertions to the contrary are but meere slanders For we hold it not pernitious for al sortes of people to reade the Scriptures vnlesse it be in such false translations as the Protestants haue made but haue our selues translated them into the vulgar tongue that al Godly wel minded people of any reasonable capacity may diligently and deuoutly reade them at their good oportunity M. Abbot vvas wont heretofore to alleage some authour or other to giue the better countenance to his lies but now he is faine to face them out himselfe without the helpe of any other and hauing put his special confidence in lying as they did of vvhom the Prophet speaketh Esai 28. Posuimus mendacium spem nostram We haue put our hope in lying he thrusteth them out lightly by huddles False then it is first that we teach the people to be secluded from the reading of Scripture as dogges are from holy thinges for vve would haue none other debarred from reading of them but wauering wilful and peruerse fellowes 2. Pet. 3. vers 16. Who as S. Peter teacheth abuse the holy Scriptures to their owne destruction and to the seducing of others Secondly it is a lie in graine to auouch that we teach the knowledge of the Scriptures to breede errour and heresie vnlesse he meane the corrupt and peruerse knowledge of them which is rather to be tearmed the ignorance of them for the true knowledge of them deliuereth vs from al errour and heresie and settleth vs in the sound doctrine of the Catholike Roman Church True it is that many now a-daies vvho haue some smattering in the vvordes and verses of the text hauing itching eares and wauering minds are the sooner lead away through their little skil in the Scriptures and ouer-great presumption of their owne wits for hearing Heretikes cite for proofe of their heresie some texts of Scripture which they know to be Gods vvord and hauing neither sufficient learning to answere them nor grace to aske counsel therein of the true Pastors of Christs Church vvho would rightly informe them become a pray to the rauening vvolues Againe the very experience of this age doth sufficiently informe an vnderstanding man that the ouer common reading of Gods word by the more rude and vnruly sort hath rather ingendred a corruption of manners then bredde any amendment thereof for euery peeuish scripturist puffed vp with the opinion of his owne learning wil rather take vpon him to be a teacher of others then a practiser of them himselfe And often very preposterously Women wil teach Men Children their Fathers Sheepe their Pastours in a word many wil be jangling about matter of religion and very few studious to liue religiously These disorders I graunt doe not spring directly out of Gods word but out of our corrupt nature too too prone to presumption on our owne skil And there fore let any reasonable man judge vvhether they did not more vvisely who vsed to bridle this itching appetite of reading in the curious and thought it better to binde them to follow the aduise of their spiritual guides which haue charge of their soules then our new bretheren who allow euery Man Woman and Child to read vvhat bookes of Scripture they list and to wrangle about them so commonly S. Paul insinuateth that al places of Scripture are not fit for al sortes of men but in some parts 1. Cor. cap. 3. vers 2. There is milke for sucklings and in others Strong meate for the more perfect And our Sauiour Christ IESVS spake much in parables vvhich are not for euery ones capacity A sword is a good weapon but put it into the hand of a madde man it wil doe more harme then good so if some men get a smattering in holy Scriptures they wil vse it ful madly Wherefore the Catholike Church though shee wish euery child of hers to know so much of the Scriptures as vvil doe them any way good yet shee knowes it to be holesome and very necessary that a moderation be vsed therein according to the discreet aduise and judgement of Godly and prudent Ghostly Fathers ROBERT ABBOT HIEROME and RVFFINVS by the doctrine of the Church of Rome Hier. in Prolog Galiat in Praefat. lib. Salomonis Ruffin in expositione Simboli excluded from Canonical Scripture the same bookes that we doe the bookes of Iudith Tobias Wisdome Ecclesiasticus Baruch and the rest they say plainly Non sunt in Canone non sunt Canonici They are not Canonical nor in the Canon The Church readeth them for instruction of manners not to giue any authority to any Ecclesiastical doctrine But now the Church of Rome wil haue them to be receiued and beleeued for Canonical Scriptures and of equal and like authority withal the other bookes WILLIAM BISHOP I Obserue first that M. Abbot forgetting himselfe vvhich is a foule fault in a liar and leauing his owne prescript order is now fallen cleane from S. Peter and S. Pauls successours the Bishops of Rome Secondly that he neuerthelesse holds his old custome in lying I winke at that petty lie that he thrusteth in Baruch among the rest vvhich his Authors doe not but may not dissemble this greater for whereas he saith Hierome and Ruffinus by the doctrine of the Church of Rome exclude from Canonical Scripture the same bookes that we doe therein he fableth for though they so did yet did they it not by the doctrine of the Church of Rome For Innocentius the first Pope of Rome
vvhom S. Augustine alleageth stiling him a Saint and ranking him with S. Ireneus S. Cyprian and S. Ambrose in these wordes August lib. 1. cont IulianuÌ„ cap. 4. Cùm hijs etiam ipse considet etsi posterior tempore prior loco In time somewhat after some of them but in dignity of place before them This holy and learned Bishop of Rome I say vvho flourished in S. Hieromes daies or else S. Augustine vvho was in manner his equal Epist. 3. ad Exuper cap. vltimo could not haue cited his testimony doth expresly declare those very bookes to be Canonical Scripture I trust his declaration that ruled that See of Rome wil rather be taken for the doctrine of the Church of Rome then any other mans besides Againe Pope Gelasius the first who liued not long after him which also is one of M. Abbots chosen patrons did in publike assembly In Decret de Libris sacris in 2. tomo CoÌ„ciliorum assisted also vvith 80. other Bishops define the same bookes to be Canonical Scripture who can then doubt but that the Church of Rome in S. Hieromes and Ruffinus daies tooke those bookes to be Canonical Scripture wherefore it was but M. Abbots addition to the text to affirme that Hierome and Ruffinus according to the doctrine of the Church of Rome did so say Besides the third Councel of Carthage holden at the felfe-same time CoÌ„cil 3. Carthag cap. 47. doth declare the said bookes of Tobias Ecclesiasticus c. to be Canonical Scripture affirming also that therein they followed the sound judgement of their Ancestours Lib. 2. de Doctrina Christ cap. 8. Lib. 18. de Ciuitat cap. 36. S. Augustine in sundry places of his workes doth by name declare the bookes of Wisdome Ecclesiasticus Tobias Iudith and the two bookes of the Machabees to be Canonical Scripture and seemeth to expound S. Hieromes sentence in these wordes The bookes of the Machabees the Iewes indeede doe not receiue but the Church of God taketh them for Canonical Scriptures Whence we after the auncient Lib. 7. Etimolog cap. â— learned and holy Bishop Isidorus doe collect this distinction The Canon of the Scriptures is twofold the one of the Hebrewes the other of the Christians that of the Hebrewes vvas compounded long before Christes daies in which these bookes of Wisdome Ecclesiasticus c. are not comprehended because they vvere written in later times and not in the Hebrew tongue Prolog Galiator Of this Hebrew Canon speaketh S. Hierome in that Prologue as it wil be manifest to al that shal but reade it for he saith first That the Hebrewes haue but 22. letters and according to the same number but 22. bookes in their Canon then reckoning them vp by name inferreth therefore the booke of Wisdome c. be not in the Canon to wit that Canon of the Hebrewes whereof he there spake vvhich also appeareth more euidently by his answere to Ruffinus vvho objected against him as a shameful reproach that he rejected certaine Chapters of Daniël because they were not in the Hebrew though they were in the Septuaginta S. Hierome excuseth himselfe saying Lib. 2. cont RuffinuÌ„ versus finem That therein be shewed the opinion of the Hebrewes but did not deliuer his owne sentence And as he there saith That he who would calumniate that his doing should shew himselfe a sycophant so he doth thereby giue al others to vnderstand that he vvho would after that faire warning build any Catholike conclusion vpon his relation of the Hebrewes opinion should proue him selfe a foole in trusting to so sandy and slippery a foundation And yet further in his Preface vpon the booke of Iudith he teacheth That the Hebrewes did not take that booke of Iudith for Canonical yet the first Nicene Councel vvhich is the most authentike of al general Councels did account it in the number of holy Scripture so that in S. Hieromes opinion also though these bookes were not in the Canon of the Hebrewes yet they may be very sincere Canonical Scripture with the Christians vvho haue the spirit of discerning and judging of such Canonical bookes as wel as the ancient Hebrewes had But S. Hierome saith in the later place That the Church doth not vse them to establish Ecclesiastical doctrine I answere that the Churches of Afrike did vse them euen in his owne time and the Church of Rome which is the principal of al Europe at the least as hath beene proued before so that his vvordes must needes be restrained vnto some Churches in Asia where he liued for the most part or it may be said that the Church had not then when S. Hierome so wrote generally declared them to be Canonical though very shortly after euen before his dying day they were in the most principal places of the Church both declared and receiued for Canonical That the Church had sufficient authorâ—ty by declaration to make bookes of Scripture Canonical that before were not generally taken for such the Protestants themselues must needes confesse because they take for Canonical the Epistle to the Hebrewes and diuers others with the Reuelation of S. Iohn which vvere doubted off by many of the learned Christians in the primitiue Church Lib. 3. Hist. Eccles c. 10. 19. as witnesseth Eusebius ROBERT ABBOT VIGILIVS borne at Rome and Bishop of Trent according to the doctrine of the Church of Rome that then was affirmeth That the body of Christ when it was vpon the earth Vigil coÌ„t Eutich lib. 4. was not in heauen and that now because it is in heauen it is not vpon the earth But now the Councel of Trent and Church of Rome perswade vs that the very body of Christ though it be in heauen yet is really and substantially here vpon earth also vpon the Altar and in the Pix and in the Priests belly and in the bellies of as many as are partakers of the Sacrament WILLIAM BISHOP In vita S. Sisinnij THIS large amplification is shortly answered Vigilius though a holy Catholike Bishop as his praying to Saints doth demonstrate yet was none of S. Peters successours neither doth he speake any thing against Christs real substantial presence in the Bles SacrameÌ„t if his wordes be taken in his owne meaning to wit that Christ since his ascention is not here in that maÌ„ner and fashion as he did conuerse vpon the earth with his Disciples that is in the forme of man Which I gather out of Vigilius his owne wordes for he saith that Christ is departed from vs in the forme of a seruant and so according vnto that forme of a seruant in the habit and likenesse of a man he is not present with vs but the very same body vnder the forme of bread is in as many places as the blessed Sacrament is consecrated See for this more in the question of the Real presence ROBERT ABBOT Hier. in Catalogo TERTVLLIAN being for enuy of
the Clergy of Rome fallen into the heresie of Montanus and thereupon oppugning the same Church declareth what the said Church then taught concerning fasting Tertul. de Iejun aduersus Psythicos of purpose to dispute against it They say saith he that men are to fast indifferently at their discretion not by commandement euery one according to his owne time and occasion that the Apostles did so obserue imposing no yoke of standing fasts and such as should in common be kept of al c. WILLIAM BISHOP FROM the Pastours of the See of Rome M. Abbot is declined to the enemies of the same Church doth he not fairely obserue his owne order and promise But vvel M. Abbot if Tertullian for enuy of the Clergy of Rome fel into heresie let your charity towards the Roman Clergy helpe to draw your selfe out of the same sinke of heresie But where was your judgement to cite an author vvriting out of the corrupt humour of enuy as you confesse your selfe for an vpright indifferent reporter of his aduersaries cause Did euer enuy yet learne to speake vvel Why did you not rather alleage some sound Catholike Authour for the reporter of Catholikes opinions What is it because as Vultures and Rauens doe rather flie to rotten carrion and dead stinking carcases then to any sound bodies so they that seeke to deuour poore sinful soules doe make choise of tainted and corrupt authors out of their contagion to infect and destroy others Simile simili gaudet Like wil to like Nay vvhat if M. Abbot be not satisfied with the badde vvordes of Tertullian vvhich proceeded out of enuy and malice but doth yet by chopping and changing of them make them farre worse then they be in the authour is he not then to be esteemed as a most corrupt mangler of antiquity Tertullian to make his owne error seeme the lesse proposeth odde trifling arguments against it which he could answere with more ease and that after an odious manner as the aduerse party is wont to doe that he might make the Catholikes out of loue with them yet doth M. Abbot relate the same in great grauity as the most sincere substantial proofes of the contrary party sauing that now and then after his old fashion he falsifieth his authour too Now to the vvordes of Tertullian the first are craftily cropped off by him for Catholikes neuer said so absolutely That they were to fast at their owne discretion and not by commandement for Tertullian confesseth there that Catholikes held themselues bound to fast the Lent and on Wednesdaies and Fridaies therefore they could not say that they were to fast only at their owne discretion True it is that they answered him and the Montanists that they vvere not bound to keepe any of their new deuised fasting-daies nor to fast after the manner that they prescribed and that by the commandement as they said and lied of the Paraclete or holy Ghost from such fasts they proclaimed themselues free vvhereupon he malitiously reported that they said they might fast when they list and were not bound to fast by any cōmandement Secondly whereas Tertullian saith in the name of Catholikes That the Apostles imposed no yoke of standing fasts and such as should be commonly kept of al Nisi eo tempore quo oblatus est sponsus by which he meaneth specially the Lent wherein the memory of Christes death is celebrated and afterward mentioneth the Catholikes halfe-fasts as he tearmeth them of Wednesdaies and Fridaies M. Abbot to make them speake like good Protestants dasheth al that cleane out of the text leauing them to say that the Apostles appointed no fasting daies at al neither Lent nor Fridaies So what by Tertullians odious relation and M. Abbots false addition or substraction there is a pretty peece of cosenage to gul the simple and vnwary reader The wordes then of Tertullian being first such as proceeded from enuy and then also much mangled afterward and peeced togither at M. Abbots pleasure I hold it not necessary to stand vpon them but doe come vnto M. Abbots inferences and goodly buildinges vpon such a deceitful foundation ROBERT ABBOT SEE M. Bishop how like a Protestant the Church of Rome spake in those daies would you not thinke that Luther or Caluin or Beza were the Authour of these wordes How lightly doe you regard these arguments from vs which the Church of Rome 1400. yeres agoe vsed to the very same purpose that we now doe But the Church of Rome hath learned now to sing another songe shee condemned the heresie of Montanus then but now shee maintaineth it I auouch it M. Bishop that concerning fasting neither you nor al your fellowes are able to acquite the Church of Rome of the heresie of Montanus WILLIAM BISHOP I See M. Abbot how like the Protestant humour is vnto the distempered spirits of old time I thinke verily that Luther Caluin Beza and such late plagues of Christendome doe yet more deceitfully and falsly report Catholikes opinions and arguments then euer Tertullian did How lightly these arguments which you afterward enforce are to be regarded shal shortly appeare The Church of Rome hath not changed one note of her old songe concerning fasting neither shal you with the helpe of al your companions proue vs to be Montanists in this point of fasting I being the simplest of a thousand amongst the learned on our side vvil quickly cleare our party from that imputation And contrariwise I doubt not but to proue you and yours to be the disciples of louinian and Aërius old condemned Heretikes in this point of fasting Let vs lay vvordes a-side and come to arguments ROBERT ABBOT THE Montanists appointed certaine and standing daies for fasting and for the forbearing of certaine meates so doe the Papists The Montanists did not take any creature or meate to be vncleane but did only by way of deuotion as they pretended forbeare at certaine times and the Papists also doe the same The Montanists being vrged vvith that place of S. Paul to Timothy of them that cōmanded to abstaine from meates answered that that place touched Marcion and Tatianus such others vvho condemned the creatures as euil and vncleane not them vvho did not reject the creatures but only forbeare the vse of them at sometimes the same answere giue the Papists The Montanists tooke that their fasting to be a seruice worship of God so doe the Papists The Montanists thought that their fasting did merit at gods hands that it was a satisfaction for sinne that emptines of belly did much auaile vvith God and made God to dwel with man the same effects doe the Papists teach of their superstitious fasts Looke what arguments the Papists vse for their fasting the same Tertullian vsed for the Montanists Looke what cauils and calumniations the Papists vse against vs of feasting in steed of fasting of Epicurisme and pampering the belly the same Tertullian being a Montanist vsed against the doctrine of the Church of
their saying doe alleage this Canon which maketh nothing at al for them because it speaketh only of a Priest that had a wife in times past Qui vxorem habuit that had a wife not that hath a wife Such men that vvere once married after their vviues death we doe admit to be Priests and to offer sacrifice condemning the Eustachians or vvhosoeuer else vnder pretence of their former mariages doth seeke to debarre them from that sacred function Marry such sensual or weake men that cannot or wil not refraine from marriage or company of their wiues vve doe wholy exclude from the celebration of the holy misteries And verily ignorantly and sawcily doth Mathew of Paris or any other late writer reprehend Gregory the seauenth for forbidding al men to be present at their Masses For it argueth great and grosse ignorance in al learned antiquity to account it a strange thing that Priests keeping company with their wiues should be repelled from the Altar vvhen not only Gregory the great Leo the great and Epiphanius vvhose sentences I haue before recited but also euen by M. Abbots owne confession Pope Stritius with the Clergy of Rome and S. Hierome did teach the very same little lesse then a thousand yeares before Mathew of Paris daies to omit sundry other ancient Fathers and decrees of approued Councels so that it was no strange example or vnaduised act to forbidde such fleshly fellowes to celebrate Masse neither could any but loose libertines be offended at it ROBERT ABBOT THE Valentinian Heretikes and Heracleonites Irenae lib. 2. cap. 18. Epiph. Haeres 36. August de Haeres 16. were condemned by the old Church of Rome for vsing expiations and redemptions by anointing men vvhen they were about to die yet thereof hath the Church of Rome now framed to themselues their Sacrament of Extreme vnction WILLIAM BISHOP HERE are but a few lines and yet not free from some lies The Church of Rome hath her Sacrament of Extreme vnction registred in the holy Scriptures as M. Abbot knoweth wel enough in these wordes Iacob 5. vers 14. Is any man sicke among you let him bring in the Priests of the Church and let them pray ouer them anoiling them with oile in the name of our Lord and the praier of faith shal saue the sicke and our Lord lift him vp and if he be in sinnes they shal be remitted him Where we see a set holy ceremony which was instituted by Christ and published by his Apostle S. Iames to be vsed ordinarily by the Priests for remission of sinnes which doth conuince it to be a true and proper Sacrament A fond fiction then was it to say that it was after the Apostles time inuented by Heretikes and that the Church of Rome hath borrowed it of them vvith which foolish deuise of theirs it hath also very smal affinity for their dreame was that by the pronouncing of certaine vnknowne Hebrew vvordes ouer the head of the sicke their soule was made inuisible and incomprehensible Epiph. Haeres 36. euen vnto the infernal spirits as M. Abbots owne authour witnesseth Briefly they differed in forme of wordes in substance of matter and in the state and intention of the Minister They vsed certaine Hebrew vvordes Messia Vphared and such like vvhich are set downe by Epiphanius We these God of his most pittiful mercy and by this holy anointing forgiue thee thy sinnes They vsed oile or some other ointment mixed with vvater We oile alone blessed by a Bishop Any lay person of their brother-hood might minister their drugs Our Sacrament is to be administred by a Priest only Their intention was to make the soule inuisible to the infernal spirits But ours is according to the doctrine of the Apostle to purge the sicke from the relikes of sinne and to giue him comfort and strength to resist the assaults of the ghostly enemy There being so great difference in al the essential points of these two anoilinges judge what a wonderful inginer M. Abbot did take himselfe to be when he conceited that he could by his fine pen shal I say or brazen fore-head make them seeme al one to the simple ROBERT ABBOT IT vvas heresie in the Pelagians with the old Church of Rome to affirme in this life a possibility perfectly to fulfil the law of God and S. Hierome as touching this point L. 1 2. 3. aduers Pelag. expresly disputeth against them but now it is heresie with the Church of Rome to affirme and teach the same that Hierome did as M. Bishop afterwardes giueth vs to vnderstand The same Pelagians were accounted Heretikes for saying that a man in this life might be anamarticos without sinne and that by baptisme he becommeth so but now the Church of Rome teacheth the same And M. Bishop in plaine tearmes telleth vs Page 32. That there is no more sinne left in the new baptized man then was in Adam in the state of innocency to vvhich state of baptisme they also equal a man vvhen he is shriuen to the Priest and of him hath receiued absolution from his sinnes I reserue the Pelagian doctrine of Free-wil and Satisfaction to their due place vvhere God-vvilling it shal appeare that therein also the now Church of Rome approueth those points as Catholike and true for which the ancient Church of Rome condemned them Yea so farre is the Pelagian heresie in request vvith the Papists as that Faustus a Bishop of France at that time a maintainer thereof Bignae Bibliot sacrae Tom. 2. Osor de Inst lib. 9. is by some of them recorded for a Saint and his booke vvhich he hath vvritten in behalfe thereof is called Opus insigne A notable worke And by some other the doctrine of S. Augustine against the Pelagians concerning Predestination is repugned which of old vvas acknowledged by the Church of Rome to be the Catholike doctrine of the Church WILLIAM BISHOP M. ABBOT comes now to make an end of his slanders and false imputations against the present Catholike Roman Church after the same sort as he hath heretofore vsed to wit with wrested and vntrue reportes of the old Heretikes opinions and the ancient Fathers refutations of them The Pelagians did teach indeed that it was possible to keepe Gods Cōmandements but therefore they were not accounted Heretikes for the same doth both S. Augustine and S. Hierome that writ against them approue and confirme in many places I wil touch some of each of them S. Augustine hauing alleaged certaine texts of holy Scripture to proue the same doth conclude thus By these and innumerable other testimonies De Peccatis Meritis Remissione lib. 2. cap. 6. I cannot doubt either that God hath commanded man any thing that is impossible for him to doe or that it is impossible for God to helpe man to fulfil whatsoeuer he hath commanded him and therefore a man holpen by God may if he wil be without sinne De Grat. l. Arbit ca. 16. And
censure and touch of reproach vpon the same his worke called Bibliotheca Patrum Lastly concerning the doctrine of Predestination I reade not that the Pelagians were called in question about it nor yet for Satisfaction vvherefore M. Abbot must first out of some good Authors shew their errours therein before he goe about to slander vs vvith the imitation of them but as I am vvel assured of the later so I thinke he wil not in hast performe the former ROBERT ABBOT I Omit many other matters that might here be added perswading my selfe that I said enough to trouble M. Bishop in the prouing of that that he hath so propounded that the principal pillars of the Church of Rome in her most flourishing estate taught in al points of religion the same doctrine that now shee holdeth c. only for conclusion let me aske him what Bishop of Rome there was for the space of a thousand yeares that practised or taught that concerning Pardons which is now practised and taught in the Church of Rome that the Bishop of Rome hath any authority to giue such libels of pardon or that it is in him to giue faculties and authority to others to graunt the like vvith reseruation of special causes to himselfe or that he can for saying such and such praiers or for doing this or that release a man from Purgatory for so many hundred or thousand yeares vvhat Bishop of Rome was there that did proclaime a Iubilee vvith promise that al that would come to Rome to visit the Churches that yeare should haue ful and perfect forgiuenesse of al their sinnes or that did charge the Angels as did Clement the sixt that vvhosoeuer should die in his journey thitherward they should bring his soule into the glory of Paradise Balaeus in Clem. sexto which of them did take vpon him to Canonize a Saint vvho euer beleeued or taught as it is now receiued in the Church of Rome that the Bishops blessing is the forgiuenesse of venial sinnes Sextus in proem in glossa Rhem. Test in Math. 10. vers 12. Other innouations I wil passe ouer to further occasion but concerning these matters in this place I would pray M. Bishop to let vs be satisfied how the principal pillars of the Church of Rome haue in al points taught the same that the Church of Rome teacheth now The truth is that as the name of Theseus shippe continued a long time vvhen as it was so altered by putting in of new plankes and boordes as that it had nothing left of that that was in it when it was first built by Theseus so the Church of Rome stil continueth her name and would be taken to be the same albeit by chopping and changing shee is come to that passe that shee hath in a manner nothing left of that doctrine for vvhich shee vvas first called the Church of Rome But M. Bishop taketh vpon him to proue the contrary let vs now examine what his proofes are WILLIAM BISHOP YOV doe wisely to omit many other matters that you might haue added if they be like vnto these vvhich you haue already put downe for they are proued to be nothing else in manner but falsifications of the ancient Fathers vvritinges or fond illations of your owne bolstered out with a huge and shamelesse troupe of vntruthes the more one omitteth of such baggage and paultry stuffe the more it maketh for his credit Wherefore if M. Abbot had let al this alone no doubt but he should haue saued much of his reputation which by such vnchristian like and vnhonest dealing he is like to leese with the indifferent juditious reader If he perswade himselfe that he hath put me to some paines and trouble to trace out the vntruth of his allegations he is not deceiued for he produceth them so corruptly with such additions substractions misconstructions and euil applications that euery place he cites must needes be turned vnto in the Authours owne workes before a man can repose any trust in him or shal know what answere to make I pray you good Sir if there be any sparke of Christian sincerity left in you let this admonition serue to intreate you not to put your aduersary or reader to such trouble any more Either for loue of the truth or for feare of Gods judgements and rebuke of honest men forbeare to misreport your Authours If it be a shame to bely the Deuil vvhat impudency and impiety is it to bely most reuerend holy and learned Doctors and which much increaseth that hainous crime thereby to blinde Christian people and to draw them along with him to the bottomelesse pit of hel It hath I willingly confesse more troubled me to spend my spare time in discouering vntruthes and dishonest shifts trickes then it should haue done to haue bestowed it in substantial arguing and in round debating of questions in controuersie with short and sound arguments But I hope by this the vpright reader hath seene that M. Abbot was so farre off from troubling me to proue The principal pillars of the Roman Church in her most flourishing estate to haue taught the same doctrine that the present Church of Rome no teacheth that he hath rather furthered it by ministring vnto me so fit an occasion yea omitting others which I could choose my self for my better aduantage I haue not refused to verifie and make good the present doctrine of that Church euen by the testimony of those very authours of vvhich M. Abbot himselfe made choise as of men that spake most against it If then by their verdict who are thought by our aduersaries to be most estranged from vs our cause is confirmed and proued to be most just and veritable vvho is so carelesse of his owne saluation that had rather follow a lying Master leading to perdition then to imbrace so manifest a truth drawing towardes saluation May I not here justly exclaime with the holy King and Prophet and say Psalm 4. O yee Sonnes of men how long wil you be so heauy harted why are you so farre in loue with vanity and seeke after leasing he that is the true light Iohan. 1. who doth illuminate euery man that commeth into this world of his infinite goodnesse and mercy lighten your vnderstanding and incline your harts that you may perceiue and receiue that ingrafted word that truth of Christ preached by his Apostles approued by the most honourable Senate of the ancient Fathers beleeued al the world ouer that hath also continued euer since inuiolably vvhich only and none other can saue your soules Now for a conclusion and vpshot of this matter M. Abbot would faine know What Bishop of Rome for a thousand yeares after Christ had authority to giue any such libel of pardons as are now giuen or that could graunt to others any such faculty with reseruation of special causes to himselfe c. I answere if these be the greatest difficulties that with-hold him from approuing the doctrine
of the present Roman Church he may vpon very smal consideration be reclaimed and brought to reforme his errours For to S. Peter himselfe who was afterwards Bishop of Rome was giuen euen by our Sauiour Christ IESVS ful power and authority to pardon whatsoeuer he saw fit to be pardoned Math. 16. vers 19. To thee I giue saith he the keies of the Kingdome of heauen whatsoeuer thou loosest or doest pardon vpon earth shal be pardoned in heauen And if S. Peter might loose any sinne how hainous soeuer much more might he release some part of the temporal paine which was due to sinne vvhich is properly to giue a libel of pardon the like power had S. Paul who did in the person of Christ 2. Cor. 2. vers 10. Cyprian l. 3. Epist 15. Pardon the incestuous Corinthian by cutting off some part of his penance vvhich otherwise he had beene to suffer for his former sinnes vvhich were then forgiuen S. Cyprian and the Bishops and Clergy in those auncient daies of the primitiue Church did vse to pardon and release the penance injoyned to grieuous offendours after their repentance at the intercession and request of the Confessors and designed Martirs as hath beene before declared The most authentike Councel of Nice doth declare Cōcil Nicen. cap. 12. that it is lawful for Bishops to deale more mildly and fauourably vvith them vvhom they saw to performe their injoyned penance seriously vvhich was to graunt them a pardon Leo. Epist 77 ad Nicetum num 6. The very same doth Leo the great vvho was Bishop of Rome aboue 1100. yeares past teach most plainly willing the Bishop to release of the due penance injoined what he thought good which is properly to giue indulgence or pardon I omit here Pope Siluester his predecessour and S. Gregory the great one of his successours because I haue before alleaged them not doubting but that these few so auncient so graue so learned vvil suffice to satisfie and instruct him that is willing to learne And as for communicating the same authority to others vvho can reasonably doubt of it considering that the power of absoluing from sinne which is farre greater then the other is imparted to al both Bishops and Parish Priests I haue also before proued most manifestly Leo. Epist 82 ad Anastat Gregor lib. 4. Epist 6. ad Episcop Arelat that both S. Leo and S. Gregory most worthy Bishops did as delegate their authority vnto other Bishops so reserue vnto their owne hearing and judgement the causes of greatest difficulty vvherefore M. Abbot if he wil hearken vnto reason cannot choose but hold himselfe therein fully satisfied He recuiles backe to Indulgences and multiplieth his demands about one and the same matter like to a Cooke that hauing but one sort of meate to serue in doth mince it into many mammocks and then make thereof sundry dishes Can the Pope saith he for saying such or such praiers or for doing this or that release a man from Purgatory for an hundreth or a thousand yeares What a question is this if the Pope can distribute indulgences as hath beene before proued no doubt but he can the rather doe it by injoyning the party that receiueth them to say vvithal some praiers or to doe some other good vvorkes for thereby the party doth the better deserue to be made partaker of the other grace But can he release a soule out of Purgatory for a thousand yeares Yes marry can he and that too not for some certaine number of yeares but for euer and euer The reason is for that the soules there are members of the same body that we are and there capable of the same graces of pardon vvhereof also they stand in very great neede according to the truth of Christian doctrine howsoeuer the Protestants doe erroneously thinke the contrary reade the Question of Purgatory And touching the present purpose among many other pardons graunted by S. Gregory the great there is to be seene vntil this day one Altar by him erected in the Monastery of S. Andrewes in Rome where he was himselfe first Nouice and afterwardes Abbot where at vvhosoeuer said Masse for a soule in Purgatory shal deliuer one there-hence Concerning the Iubilee which is free and ful pardon graunted once in fiue and twenty yeares vnto euery one that shal visit seauen Churches in Rome that yeare some fifteene times or thereabouts what new difficulty can there be about that yea it is as the most renowmed pardon that is graunted so the most reasonable for it can be obtained but once in fiue and twenty yeares and then exceeding hardly by vnder going a long costly and painful journey to the citty of Rome and by exercising there al the workes of piety and mercy as fasting praying and giuing of almes making general confession and receiuing the blessed Sacrament and often visiting of many Churches and Altars Those most godly meanes of training men to true repentance and satisfaction for their former faults and amendmēt of their liues if the Protestant religion were acquainted withal there would be among them some checke and stoppe of their vvicked courses But if they vvil needes sinne on themselues and neuer giue ouer nor amend vntil Gods judgments fal vpon them yet let them not be offended at vs that doe aduise al men to labour in time for such indulgences that they may escape the due punishment of their sinnes either in this vvorld or in the next Is it not also most probable and likely if those good soules vvho to doe some satisfaction for their former euil liues and to serue God more deuoutly in those holy places where some of the holy Apostles and an innumerable company of valiant Martirs and holy Confessors liued and died doe die by the way in that Godly purpose that they are carried by Angels to heauen as Lazarus was into Paradise we pray to God to command such by his holy Angels to be brought into Abrahams bosome as may be seene in the Masse for the dead But Balaeus in Latin and Bale the Irish Apostata in English M. Abbots worthy authour reporteth that Clement the sixt himselfe did command the Angels to carry them into Paradise No great regard is to be had vvhat such a lying lewd fellow relates and so I thinke him vnworthy any other answere Touching Canonization of Saints we hold that the Bishops of the prouinces vvhere their vertuous liues and most godly deathes cōfirmed by miracles are best knowne did alwaies from the beginning of christian religion declare and testifie to the Church that they were to be esteemed of al men for Saints Since it hath beene found most expedient that the vvhole course of the life and death of such being by most diligent inquisition tried out and taken in the places of their aboade be afterwardes sent to Rome there to be also throughly examined first and then accordingly to be declared Saints by the highest Pastor of the Church that
al one to say the vniuersal particular Church here is a vvel shapen argument and worthy the maker it consists of al particular propositions which euery smatterer in logicke knowes to be most vitious besides not one of them is good but al are sophistical and ful of deceit First concerning the forme if it were currant one might proue by it that no one Church in the vvorld vvere Catholike take for example the English congregation vvhich they hold to be most Catholike and apply M. Abbots argument to it thus The Catholike Church is the vniuersal Church but the Church of England is a particular Church wherefore to say the English Church is Catholike is to say a particular Church is an vniuersal His first fault then is in the very forme of reasoning which alone is sufficient to argue him to be a sophister and one that meaneth to beguile them that vvil trust him now to the particulars His first proposition the Catholike Church is the vniuersal Church is both absurd because the same thing is affirmed of himselfe for vniuersal is no distinct thing but the very interpretation of the vvord Catholike and also captious as hauing a double signification For the Catholike Church doth signifie both the vvhole body of the Church compacted of al the particular members vnited and joyned together in one in which sence no one particular Church can be called the Catholike Church because it is not the vvhole body spread ouer al the world for it is totum integrale to vse the schoole tearmes and not totum vniuersale quod dicitur de multis Secondly the Catholike Church doth also designe and note very properly euery particular Church that embraceth the same true Christian faith which hath continued euer since Christs time and beene receiued in al countries not only because it is totum similare as M. Abbot speaketh vvherefore euery true member of the Catholike Church may be called Catholike but also because each of the said particular Churches hath the same Faith the same Sacraments and the same order of gouernement al vvhich are as it vvere the soule and forme of the Catholike Church vvhich M. Abbot acknowledgeth and further also confesseth out of S. Augustine that Christians were called Catholikes Ex communicatione totius orbis Epistola 48. By hauing communion of faith with the whole world If then by his owne confession euery particular Church yea euery particular Christian that embraceth and professeth that faith which is dilated al the vvorld ouer be truly called Catholike how fondly then did he goe about to proue the Church of Rome not to be Catholike and Papists not to be Catholikes because forsooth they were particulars Yet that he may be thought not to doate outright but rather to dreame he addeth That at least the Church of Rome hath no reason to assume to her selfe the prerogatiue of that title because that euery Church where the true faith is taught is truly called Catholike and no one more then another I note first that this man is as constant and stable as the weather-cocke on the toppe of a steeple before he proued stoutly as you haue heard that no particular Church could be called Catholike now he wil haue euery particular Church that receiueth the true faith to be called Catholike Neither doe vve say that any one Orthodoxe Church is more Catholike then another if the word Catholike be taken precisely though we hold that among al the particular Catholikes the Roman holdeth the greatest priuiledges both of superiority in gouernement and of continuance and stability in the same true Catholike faith which is deduced out of the word of God because that Church Math. 16. vers 18. Is the Rocke according to the exposition of the ancient Fathers vpon which the whole Church was built and against which the gates of hel should neuer preuaile Againe the Bishop of Rome succeedeth lineally vnto S. Peter Luc. 22. vers 23. Whose faith through the vertue of Christs praier shal neuer faile wherefore S. Ireneus a most learned Archbishop of Lions in France and a glorious Martir of great antiquity saith That al Churches ought to agree with the Church of Rome Lib. 3. cap. 3. for her more mighty principality S. Cyprian Archbishop of Carthage in Africke affirmeth Li. 1. epist 3. That perfidiousnesse and falshood in matters of faith can haue no accesse vnto the See of Rome S. Ambrose taketh it to be al one to say the Catholike and the Roman Church in these vvordes If he shal agree with the Catholike that is De ob Satyri Hieron in Apolog 1. cont Ruffi cap. 1. with the Roman Church So doth S. Hierome when he saith of Ruffinus What faith doth he say his to be if the Roman faith we are then Catholikes affirming men to become Catholikes by holding the Roman faith a De Praescript Tertullian b Epiphan Haeres 27. Epiphanius c Lib. 2. cōt Parmeni Optatus d August Epist 165. S. Augustine doe proue their Churches to be Catholike and themselues to be Catholikes by declaring that they doe communicate vvith the Church of Rome in society of faith and doe condemne their aduersaries to be Schismatikes and Heretikes because they did not communicate vvith the same Roman Church And vvhich is greatly to be noted no general Councel of sound authority vvherein the Christian truth hath beene expounded and determined but is confirmed by the Bishop of Rome And on the other side no heresie or errour in faith hath sprong vp since the Apostles daies that did not oppose it selfe against the Roman See and was not by the same finally ouerthrowne Whereupon S. Augustine had good reason to say That that chaire obtained the toppe of authority De vtil cred cap. 17. Heretikes in vaine barking round about it This little I hope vvil suffice for this place to declare that there is great cause vvhy vve should attribute much more to the Roman Church then to any other particular Church whatsoeuer and yeeld to it the prerogatiue of al singular titles in a more excellent manner Here comes in M. Abbots second proposition but the Church of Rome is a particular Church in which is as great doubling and deceit as in the former for albeit the Church of Rome doe in rigour of speech only comprehend the Christians dwelling in Rome yet is it vsually taken by men of both parties to signifie al Churches of vvhatsoeuer other Country that doe agree vvith the Church of Rome in faith and confesse the Pastour thereof to be the chiefe Pastour vnder Christ of the whole Church Like as in times past the Roman Empire did signifie not the territory of Rome alone or dominion of Italy but also any nation that vvas subject to the Roman Emperour Euen so the whole Catholike Church or any true member thereof may be called the Roman Church à parte principaliore because the Bishop of Rome is the supreme head
excelling in integrity of life in sound doctrine and charity towardes al we ought truly to rejoice but if any man among you be so hardy and audacious that he shal enterprise to commend and praise those plagues of the Church Eusebius Theognis his insolency shal presently be punished by the worke and diligence of Gods seruant euen by me This is vvord for word out of the Authour so that the Emperours threat of punishment was only to the citizens of Nicomedia not to any Bishop or Clergy-man Which if it be compared with M. Abbots corruption either you must take him for a very grosse pate and more then poore-blinde that could not discerne to whom or of whom the Emperour spoke or else so feruently set to deceiue others that he cared not to straine courtesie with his Authours and to belie them a little so that he might for a vvhile til it were discouered be taken for one that had found out some special proofe that made much to the purpose ROBERT ABBOT Page 192. THEREFORE Constantine accepted of Appeales vvhen they were made to him from the judgement of Bishops and either heard matters himselfe or appointed those that should heare them And so we find that Foelix a Bishop August Epist 162. By the commandement of the same Emperour had his cause heard and was acquited before his Proconsul or Lieutenant And where the Donatists said That a Bishop should not haue his purgation before the Lieutenant S. Augustine answereth As if saith he the Bishop himselfe had so taken course for himselfe and the Emperour had not commanded that the matter should be inquired off to whose charge whereof he was to giue account to God that matter did specially belong And so doth he send for the Bishops Socrat. lib. 1. Hist. cap. 22. Zozom lib. 2. cap. 27. Ruffin lib. 1. cap. 2. that by his commandement were assembled in a Councel at Tyrus to giue account to him of that they had done there and in his hearing to shew him how truly and sincerely they had carried themselues in their judgement whereby as by many other arguments it is manifest to al men that Constantine held himself to haue a supremacy ouer Bishops and to be Iudge of their judgements and that M. Bishop seeketh meerely to abuse his Majesty in alleaging the example of Constantine against him WILLIAM BISHOP LIKE vvil to like quoth the Deuil to the Colliar as it is in our old Adage M. Abbot is so blindly bent to his errours that for vvant of more worthy Presidents he wil not sticke to flie for succour to both Donatists and Arrians old rotten and reprobate Heretikes Who were they that appealed from the judgement of Bishops to the Emperour Constantine vvere they honest Godly men whose example a good Christian may follow nothing lesse Heare S. Augustine August Epist 166. out of whom you craftily cul certaine wordes to deceiue your reader Your Ancestours saith S. Augustine to the Donatists brought the cause of Cecilianus before the Emperour Constantine put vs to proofe of this and vnlesse we proue it doe with vs what you can The Donatists then were the men that appealed from the Bishops judgements to the Emperour but though they vvere otherwise wicked Heretikes yet in this point perhaps they did not amisse saith M. Abbot a deare child of the Donatist Yes marry did they witnesse first Constantine himselfe who hearing of the Donatists appeale was maruailously moued with it as testifieth Optatus Bishop of Mileuitan that liued in the middest of them these be his wordes Lib. 1. cont Parmen Donate the fire of the Donatists thought good to appeale from Bishops to the Emperor c. to which appeale the Emperor Constantine answereth thus O rabida furoris audacia sicut in casu Gentilium fieri solet appellationem apposuerunt O madde pange of fury they haue put in an appeale as the Heathens are wont to doe Obserue how this good Emperor liked of their appeale esteeming them madde men and like to the Pagans that did make it Another vvitnesse shal be S. Augustine and in that very Epistle out of which M. Abbot doth sucke his poison for he doth most sincerely deliuer the whole circumstance of this matter Epist 162. these be his wordes Constantine the Emperour gaue the Donatists another hearing or judgement at Arles in France not that it was then needeful but condescending to their peruerse stubbornesse and coueting by al meanes to suppresse their impudency Neither durst the good Emperour so admit of their seditious false complaints that he himselfe would judge of the sentence of those Bishops who sate at Rome but assigned them other Bishops as I said from whom they yet againe appealed to the Emperour himselfe Wherein how be detested them you haue heard and I would to God they had at last vpon his judgement made an end of their most outragious animosities And as he yeelded to them so farre forth as to judge of that cause after the Bishops a sacris Antistibus postea veniam petiturus minding afterwardes to aske pardon of the holy Bishops because he did it that the Donatists might haue no excuse left them if they did not obey vnto his sentence vnto whom they themselues appealed so they would once at the lenght yeeld to the truth There you see first how the Donatists contrary to law and custome appealed to the Emperor which S. Augustine doth in other places also most formally teach Secondly that the Emperour did vehemently dislike of their appeale and put it off from himself to Bishops of whose causes and after whom he knew did professe that it did not appertaine to him to judge Yet finally to stoppe the impudent mouthes of the Donatists and to leaue them cleane vvithout al excuse of their obstinate stubbornesse he cōdescended to heare the cause himselfe after the Bishops not that he thought himselfe to haue any right so to doe but meaning to craue pardon of the sacred Bishops for that he had intermedled in their matters further then he ought to haue done Al this is taken out of S. Augustine vvord by word in that very place vvhich M. Abbot alleageth for himselfe Is not he then a very conscienslesse and most perfidious man that would thus vnder the colour of some broken wordes beare his reader in hand that the Emperour Constantine tooke himselfe in his owne right to be the supreme judge of Bishops and that euen by the testimony of S. Augustine who so plainly in the same place relateth the cleane contrary But Foelix saith he a Bishop by the commandement of the same Emperour had his cause heard and was acquited before his Lieutenant True but how came it to passe that the good Bishop was cōuented before them not by any his owne seeking or liking but through the most important sute of the Donatists August ibid. Epist 166 Qui quotidianis interpellationibus taedium Imperatori fecerunt dicentes
crowne In eo enim sibi justitiae consortem coronae statuit promeritorem cum operum quibus erat illa repromissa corona habere dignatus est coadjutorem For therein did God appoint man to be copartner of his justice and meritour of the crowne when be vouchsafed to haue him coadjutour of those workes vnto which that crowne of glory was againe and againe promised So that God is the Authour of merits both by giuing man grace to doe them and by ordaining them to such a reward Otherwise saith S. Bernard those which we cal merits might be more properly called the way to the Kingdome not the cause of raigning Obserue that he saith vnlesse you take them otherwise then he had before spoken of them But we must beare with M. Abbot for snatching here and there a sentence out of the Fathers so abruptly otherwise he could make no shew for his part out of them because they vvere so ful and wholy Roman Catholikes Besides the misconstruing of S. Gregories wordes and the corrupting of S. Bernards M. Abbot falsifieth both the Councel of Trent and the Annotations of the Rhemes Testament for the Councel of Trent hath not simply that good workes doe fully satisfie the law of God but with this qualification Pro huius vitae statu As farre forth as the state of this life doth permit And whereas M. Abbot fableth that in those Annotations the justice of God is charged not in respect of his owne promise but in respect of the merit and desert of the workes it is a palpable vntruth as euery man may see that wil but turne to the place for there are these expresse wordes Annot. in 2. Tim. cap. 4. vers 8. Heauen is the goale the marke the price the hire of al striuing running labouring due both by promise and by couenant and right debt vvhere you see as wel Gods promise and couenant as the worth of the workes to be mentioned Which is also set downe distinctly in that very Chapter of the Councel of Trent vvhich M. Abbot cited in these vvordes Eternal life is to be propounded to them that worke wel Concil Trid. sess 6. c. 16. and trust in God both as a merciful grace promised to the sonnes of God through Christ and as a reward or hire by the promise of God to be rendred to their good workes and merits Thus you see how roundly and familiarly M. Abbot is wont to auouch vntruthes and that which testifieth a good conscience in the man euen clearely contrary to his owne knowledge for in the very same both Chapter of the Councel and Annotation vpon the Testament which he alleageth there is to be seene the plaine affirmation of that which he denieth vvhich doth conuince him to be one of the most carelesse men of his credit that euer set pen to paper ROBERT ABBOT Citat in Orthodoxo consensu de sacra Eucharistia cap. 1. ex Lyturg Georgij Cassandri THE same Gregory affirmeth that Missa the Masse was so called for that they were to be dismissed or sent away by the Deacon that did not receiue the holy communion for that they that should not be present at the celebration of the Sacrament were commanded to goe forth therefore saith he vnlesse at the voice of the Deacon after the manner of our Ancestors they that doe not communicate be willed to goe forth the seruice which is called the Masse is not rightly performed But now the Romish Masse is thought to be rightly performed albeit no man communicate but the Priest and vvithout any dismissing of them that doe not adde themselues to the communion the people as was said before being only the spectatours and lookers on WILLIAM BISHOP M. ABBOT is very penurious and wants matter that comes forth with such idle stuffe as this not taken out of S. Gregories owne vvorkes neither for no such fond and vnlearned thing is there to be seene but on the report of one George Cassander a man of smal credit and therefore deserueth no answere Besides these wordes Ite Missa est are not pronounced in the Masse by the Deacon or Priest vntil the communion be wholy past euen at the very end of the Masse when the people are licensed to depart as may be seene in al Masse bookes and the ancient expositours of the Masse vvherefore they could not serue to dismisse any before the holy communion Lastly why on Gods name must they al be sent away that wil not communicate themselues shal they receiue any harme by their beholding either the blessed Sacrament or others receiuing of it deuoutly vvere it not better they assisted the communicants there continuing in praier then to walke abroade idly or is there any reason vvhy the communicants should be offended vvith their presence that no way seeke to disquiet them but rather honour them for their greater feruour in deuotion and assist them with their praiers Idle and irreuerent gazers on we allow not off nor like of their presence at any time of the Masse but I see no cause at al why other orderly and deuout people should be driuen out of the Church at the time of communion ROBERT ABBOT THE same Gregory affirmed That whosoeuer called himselfe Gregor lib. 6. Epist 30. Item lib. 4. Epistola 32.36.38 or desired to be called the vniuersal Bishop was the fore-runner of Antichrist and did propose to himselfe to follow him who despising the legion of Angels that were placed in society with him did endeauour to grow vp to the toppe of singularity that so he might seeme to be vnder none and himselfe alone to be aboue al. He calleth it a new name a name of errour a fond name proude peruerse rash wicked prophane which saith he none of my Predecessours consented to vse by which no man hath presumed to be called that was in truth a holy man Decret Gregorij de foro comp c. Licet But soone after the time of Gregory the Bishop of Rome tooke vpon him that hateful name and hath since continued the same challenging the whole vvorld to be his Dyocesse and is growne to that height of pride as that he doubteth not to proclaime Extrauag de Maio. Obed ca. Vnam Sanctam That it standeth vpon the necessity of saluation for euery soule to be subject to the Bishop of Rome WILLIAM BISHOP THIS is a pretious argument with the Protestants and though it hath beene an hundred times I weene sufficiently answered by ours yet they doe as freshly propose it and as eagerly follow it as if it were not to be satisfied whereas in truth it is but a meere sophistication A vocibus ad res as the learned tearme it from the word vniuersal vnto the supreme authority of gouernement thus The Patriarke of Constantinople cannot be called an vniuersal Bishop nor any Bishop of Rome hath consented to take that name of vniuersal Bishop vpon him ergo no Bishop of Rome hath