followeth that seeing we retaine the same saith and religion whereby the Patriarks and Prophets and other Fathers from the beginning serued God which the Papists doe not as by instance and comparison I then declared and remaineth now to be made good therefore not the Popish faith but our faith must needes be holden to be the Catholike faith This processe is cleare the Reader seeth in it neither winding nor turning and therefore it was but a simple shift of so learned a Doctor against a simple Minister to mocke his Reader with a tale of flying the point in Question where it hath so direct and expresse conclusion He saith that they willingly admit of St. Austins doctrine that that religion and faith is Catholike which is spred ouer all the world c. but I brought nothing out of Austin concerninâ Catholike faith and religion I only noted out of him why the Church is called the Catholike Church And therefore preposterously and idlâly doth he here vrge me in that sort Proue good Sir that his Maiesty imbraceth and maintaineth that religion which is spred ouer all the world c. and then you may iustly say that he vpholdeth the Catholike religion For of the Catholike faith and religion the conclusion followeth after in due place why then doth he thus preuent the time and like Dauus disorder ali but that he loueth to fish in troubled waters where his deceiptfull baites may be the lesse seene But if we must needes speake here of Catholike faith I will returne to him his owne question Proue good Sir that the Pope imbraceth and maintaineth that religion that is spred ouer all the world that Christians throughout the world are perswaded of that which you call the Catholike faith Bellarmine hath said it and Bellarmines ghost maintaineth it that the supremacy of the Pope for the deposing of Kings and Princes is a Bellar. epist ad Archipreâb apud Mat. Tort. Vnum ex praecipuis fidei nostrae capitibus ac religionis Catholicae fundamentis one of the chiefe points of your faith and of the very foundations of Catholike religion Proue now I pray you and bring vs hands and seales for it that we may beleeue you that the Christian Churches throughout Grecia Armenia Aethiopia Russia Palestina and such like are all become drunke and haue entertained this for a point of Catholike faith You will falle M. Bishop in this proofe and therefore why would you so much preiââiâate your selfe to require the same of vs But Bellarmine himselfe shall free vs from any neede to trauell for this proofe who saith that b Bellar. de notis Eccles cap. 7. Si sola vna Prouincia retineret veram fidem adhuc vere proprie diceretur Ecclesia Catholica dummodo clare ostéderetur âam esse vnam eandem cum illa quae fuit aliquo tempere vel diuersis in toto mundo Though one only Prouince or Country did retaine the true faith yet the same should truly and properly be called the Catholike Church and therefore their faith the Catholike fa ãâ¦ã so long as it could be cleerly shewed that the same is one and the same with that which at any time or times was ouer the whole world To proue then that our faith is the Catholike faith it shall be sufficient to proue that it is that which once was spred ouer the whole world Now with the proofe thereof M. Bishop is choked already and all that we see from him now is but a vaine and bootlesse strugling to recouer his breath againe But yet he saith M. Abbot gaue this the slippe and turneth himselfe to proue the Roman religion not to be the Catholike And was not that M. Bishop a shreud turne for you to proue the Roman religion not to be the Catholike and was it not very pertinent for me so to doe when you exhorted the Kings Maiesty to the Roman religion vnder pretence of that name Yea but he shuffles from the religion and faith of which the question was vnto the Roman Church But what will he haue vs thinke that there is a Roman Church without faith or religion that a man must shuffle from religion and faith to goe to the Roman Church forsooth he shuffles from the faith professed at Rome to the persons inhabiting the City of Rome to proue that they are no Catholikes and that the Roman Church is not the Catholike Church And doth not he shuffle amisse for you M. Bishop that can shuffle you from being Catholikes and the Roman Church from being the Catholike Church And he that shuffleth you from being Catholikes doth he not also shuffle the saith professed at Rome from being the Catholike faith Are these things so diuided each from other as that they cannot in their order be incident to the same discourse Surely M. Bishop my shuffling will yeeld but a bad game to you vnlesse you can cut more wisely for your selfe theâ hitherto you haue done If you haue no better cardes then yet we see you will certainly loose all W. BISHOP §. 2. BVt let vs giue him leaue to wander whither his fancy leadeth him that we may at length heare what he would say It is forsooth That the Church of Rome doth absurdly call her selfe the Catholike Church and that Papists doe absurdly take to themselues the name of Catholikes because the Catholike Church is the vniuersall Church but the Church of Rome is a particular Church therefore to say the Roman Catholike Church is all one as to say the vniuersall particular Church Here is a well shapen argument and worthy the maker it consists of all particular propositions which euery smatterer in Logicke knowes to be most vitious besides not one of them is good but all are sophisticall and full of deceit First concerning the forme if it were currant one might prouely it that no one Church in the world were Catholike take for example the English congregation which they hold to be most Catholike and apply Mr. Abbots argument to it thus The Catholike Church is the vniuersall 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 vniuersall 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 will trust him now to the particulars His first proposition the Catholike Church is the vniuersall Church is both absurd because the same thing is affirmed of himselfe for vniuersall is no distinct thing but the very interpretation of the word Catholike and also captious as hauing a double signification For the Catholike Church doth signifie both the whole body of the Church compacted of all the particular members vnited and ioyned together in one in which sense no one particular Church can be called the Catholike Church because it is not the whole body spred ouer all
the world for it is totum integrale to vse the schoole termes and not totum vniuersale quod dicitur de multis Secondly the Catholike Church âoth 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 all Countries not only because it is totum similare as Mr. Abbot speaketh wherefore euery true member of the Catholike Church mây 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 all which are as it were the soule and forme of the Catholike Church which Mr. Abbot acknowledgeth and further also confesseth out of S. Augustine that Christians were called Catholikes Ex communicatione totius orbis By hauing Epistola 48. communion of faith with the whole world If then by his owne confession euery particular Church yea euery particular Christian that imbraceth and professeth that faith which is dilated all the world 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 dote 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 will haue euery particular Church that receiueth the true faith to be called Catholike Neither doe we say that any one Oxthodoxe Church is more Catholike then another if the word Catholike be taken precisely though we hold that among all 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 is the Rocke according to the Math. 16. v. 18. exposition of the ancient Fathers vpon which the whole Church was built and against which the gates of hell should neuer preuaile Againe the Bishop of Rome succeedeth lineally vnto S. Peter Whose faith Luc. 22. v. 23. through the vertue of Christs prayer shall neuer faile Wherefore S. Ireneus a most learned Archbishop of Lyons in France and a glorious Martyr of great antiquity saith That all Churches ought to agree with the Lib. 3. cap. 3. Church of Rome for her more mighty principality S. Cyprian Archbishop of Carthage in Africke affirmeth That perfidiousnesse and falshood in matters Lib. 1. Epist 3. of faith can haue no accesse vnto the See of Rome S. Ambrose taketh it to be all one to say the Catholike and the Roman Church in these wordes If he shall agree De ob Satyri with the Catholike that is with the Roman Church So doth S. Hierome when he saith of Ruffinus What Hieron in Apol. 1 cont Russi c. 1. 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 Tertullian Epiphanius De Prascript Epiph. hares 27. Lib. 2. cont Parmeni August Epist 165 Optatus S. Augustine dâe proue their Churches to be Catholike and themselues to be Catholikes by declaring that they doe communicate with the Church of Rome in society of faith and doe condemne their aduersaries to be Schismatikes and Heretikes because they did not communicate with the same Roman Church And which is greatly to be noted no generall Councell of sound authority wherein the Christian truth hath beene expounded and determined but is confirmed by the Bishop of Rome And on the other side no heresie or error in faith hath sprong vp since the Apostles dayes 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 De vtil cred cap. 17. That that chaire obtayned the top of authority Heretikes in vaine barking round about it This little I hope will suffice for this place to declare that there is great cause why we should attribute much more to the Roman Church then to any other particular Church what soeuer and yeeld to it the prerogatiue of all singular titles in a more excellent manner R. ABBOT VVHereas M. Bishop made motion to his Maiesty to accept of the Catholike faith I tooke occasion to note that the Catholike faith is so called of the Catholike Church and consequently to shew that the Catholike Church by the very signification of the word importeth the vniuersal Church so called as I noted out of Austin and Athanasius a Aug. de vnit Eccles cap. 2. Qâam maiores nostri Catholicam nominarât vt ex ipso nomine ostenderent quiâ per totum est Athanas quest 71. Catholica propterea quòd per totum mundum diffusa sit Quia per totum est because it is ouer all or through all the world and is not tyed to any Countrey place person or condition of men b Aug. in Psal 56. Corput eius est Ecclesââ non hâc aut illa âed toto orbe diffusa nec ea quae nunc est in hominibus qui prâsentem vitam agunt sed ad âam pertinentibus ââiam his qui fuerunt ante nos his qui futâri sunt post nos vsque in sinem seculi Not this Church or that Church as S. Austin further saith but the Church dispersed through the whole world and not that which consisteth in men now presently liuing but so as that there belong to it both those that haue been before vs and shall be after vs to the worlds end Now before I could conueniently make vse and application hereof I was to remoue the stumbling blocke that lay in the way by the absurd presumption of the Church of Rome which like c Anian fabul the Asse in the fable of Antanus that to make himselfe terrible put on him a Lions skin so being become the Asse to carry Balaam the false Prophet who for d 2. Pet. 2. 15. Apoc. 2. 13. the wages of vnrighteousnesse hath set his heart to curse and scandalize the people of God to take away the reproch hereof and to gaine to it selfe a soueraigne authority ouer other Churches hath laboured by all meanes to entitle it selfe to a propriety of the name of the Catholike Church so as none should be taken to be a member of the Catholike Church but only as he is subiect to the church of Rome Duraeus the Iesuit out of the abundance of his Catholike wit hath told vs a tale which the old Catholike
Church neuer once dreamed of that e Duraeus coÌt Whitak lib. 3. In nullam planè aliam Catholicae Ecclesiae nomen quaecunque de Christi Ecclesia Prophetae praedixerunt quà m in Romanam conuenire possunt the name of the Catholike Church and those things which the Prophets haue forespoken of the Church of Christ can agree to no other but to the Roman Church Vpon this mad conceipt they haue made of the holy Catholike Church a holy Catholike Roman Church and wheras the Nicene Councell taught vs to say I beleeue one holy Catholike and Apostolike Church they teach vs to expound it f Bristow Reply to Doctor Fulke cap. 10. dem 6. I beleeue one holy Catholike and Apostolike that is Roman Church and therefore bind men by a principle of Catechisme g Ledesm Catechis traÌslat into English to beleeue all that the holy Catholike Roman Church beleeueth and holdeth It is not enough for interpretation of the Catholike Church in the articles of our beleefe to call it h Aug Hunae proaem Catechism Catholica Ecclesiae nomine intelligo perspicuum sensui expositum coetum illorum qui baptizativeram sinceramque Christi fidem profiteÌtur se Beati Petri successori Romano Pontifici vt Christi in terris Vicario subiectos agnoscunt the visible company of them that are baptised and doe professe the true and sincere faith of Christ vnlesse it be added and doe acknowledge themselues subiect to the successor of Peter the Bishop of Rome as Christs Vicar vpon earth Pope Goodface the eighth hauing declared it for a new article of Christian faith that i Extrauag de maiorit obedient e. Vnam Sanctam Subesse Romano PoÌtifici omnihumanae creaturae declaramus dicimus definimus pronunciamus ãâã esse de necessitate salutiâ for euery humane creature it is necessary to saluation to be subiect to the Bishop of Rome So extremely they doate in this behalfe as that wheresoeuer they reade the name of the Church or Catholike Church they presently sing as the horse-bals in the poole amongst the apples nos poma natamus like children that imagine the bels in ringing to sound whatsoeuer they fancy so doe vndoubtedly imagine that the church spoken of must needes be meant of their Roman Church But for the pulling of this visard from their faces I noted the absurdity that is implied in that stile of the Catholike Roman Church for the Catholike Church say I is the vniuersall Church The Roman Church is a particular Church therefore to say the Catholike Roman Church is all one as to say the vniuersall particular Church Against this M. Bishop as a notable Logician taketh exception as an ill shapen argument consisting all of particular propositions as if I had here intended a Categorical syllogisme in moode and figure which no smatterer but himselfe would euer haue dreamed The wordes haue plaine implication of an Hypothetical syllogisme seruing to inferre an absurdity against them If the Catholike Church be the vniuersall Church the Roman Church a particular Church then to say the Catholike Roman Church is as to say the vniuersall particular Church But it is absurd to say the vniuersall particular Church Therefore it is absurd to say the Catholike Roman Church Will he haue it reduced for him to a Categoricall syllogisme in moode and figure Let him take it thus No particular Church can be the Catholike Church But the Church of Rome is a particular Church Therefore the Church of Rome cannot be the Catholike Church Must I proue the maior No particular Church can be the vniuersall Church But the Catholike Church is the vniuersall Church Therefore no particular Church can be the Catholike Church So learned a Doctor should not thus haue played boyes-play but should of himselfe haue conceiued these things being cleare and plaine without any new aduertisement thereof by the simple Minister But by this forme saith he a man might proue that no one Church in the world were Catholike But keepe your termes aright M. Bishop and say as you should that no one Church in the world is the Catholike Church and then it is true that by the same argument it is proued that no one Church in the world particular Churches being each and euery of them but a part can be called the Catholike or Vniuersall Church which is the whole And tell vs I pray good Sir haue yee found that any of ours hath entitled the Church of England to the name of the Catholike Church If not why then doe you thus abuse your Reader to put that for an instance as if we affirmed it so to be The truth is gentle Reader that M. Bishop seeketh to blinde thee by altering the termes that by mee were set downe naming a Catholike Church which importeth soundnesse of doctrine in any one Church whereas I mention the Catholike Church as importing the vniuersall extent of the whole Church It followeth not indeede that because a Church is particular therefore it is not Catholike that is sound in doctrine but it followeth that because a Church is particular therefore it is not the Catholike that is the vniuersall Church Let him direct the argument against the Church of England as I did against the Church of Rome and it shall be as strong against the Church of England as against the Church of Rome Let him say and wee will not contradict him The Catholike Church is the vniuersall Church the Church of England is a particular Church therefore to say the Catholike English Church is as absurd as to say the vniuersall particular Church or more nearely to his owne wordes Therefore to say the Church of England is the Catholike Church is the same as to say a particular Church is the vniuersall Church But he turneth the conclusion that the Church of England is not Catholike which we hold to be most Catholike declaring by that addition that he referreth Catholike by a Donatisticall fallacy to quality of doctrine and faith because more Catholike and most Catholike haue no vse but only in comparing truth and sincerity of faith This coâsenage of his the learned see well enough but he careth not for that because his thrift lieth in abusing the ignorance of the more simple and vnlearned This not seruing his turne hee commeth to the particulars and of the first proposition The Catholike Church is the vniuersall Church hee saith that it is both absurd and captious And why absurd Forsooth because the same thing is affirmed of it selfe for vniuersall is no distinct thing but the very signification of the word Catholike But what is it now absurd to expresse the true signification of a word The one is Greeke the other is English and though there be no distinction in the thing yet is there not a distinction in the tongue Is the Roman Catechisme absurd because it saith k Catechism Rom. p. 1. c. 10. sect 16. Tertia
proprietas Ecclesia ea est vt Catholica nempe vniuersalis vocetur The third property of the Church is that it is called Catholike that is vniuersall or might the Catechisme say without absurdity that Catholike is Vniuersall and must I be absurd because I say The Catholike Church is the Vniuersall Church Surely when words of one language are borrowed to speciall vse in another the reddition of them in the tongue to which they are borrowed is taken with the learned as supplying the place of a definition and it is thereby made to appeare whether they be properly and rightly vsed or vnproperly abused M. Bishop and his fellowes abuse the name of Catholikes and of the Catholike Church which English men doe not so readily vnderstand Let them giue the signification of the word and call themselues vniuersals their Church the vniuersall Church and then all that haue will to vnderstand can easily see their foolery and are ready to deride them But this they hide vnder the veile and couer of a Greeke word and wee that the truth may be the better seene are necessarily to discouer and therefore iust cause had I to say The Catholike Church is the vniuersall Church and he is an absurd man to taxe it as a thing absurd Yet notwithstanding I wish the Reader duly to obserue how that taxation stand ãâ¦ã with the other that the same proposition of mine is captious For why is it captious Marry because the Catholike Church doth signifiâ both the whole body of the Church compacted of all the particular members in which sense no one pârticular Church can be called the Catholike Church because it is not the whole body and secondly the Catholike Church doth also designe and note very properly euery particular Church that embraceth the true Christian faith Where we may wonder that within the compasse of so few lines the mans wits should so extremely faile him For if the Catholike Church and the vniuersall Church be one and the same thing as he hath already told vs and vniuersall be no distinct thing but the very signification of the word Catholike then how can it be which here he telleth vs that the Catholike Church signifieth both the whole body of the Church which is the vniuersall Church and doth also very properly designe and note euery particular true Christian Church If the Catholike Church be no distinct thing from the vniuersall Church then it cannot properly note or designe euery particular Church or if it doe properly designe euery particular Church then it is distinct from the vniuersall Church Tell vs M. Bishop how these things hang togither for if the vniuersall Church be the very signification of the Catholike Church then we cannot see how a particular Church can bee properly called the Catholike Church because no particular Church can properly be called the vniuersall Church As for the exception that here lyeth against vs that the Fathers in pointing to a particular assembly doubt not sometimes to vse the name of the Catholike Church I shewed it before to be no whit preiudiciall to that that wee say because they minded not in so doing to limit themselues to that particular assembly but in a particular assembly to demonstrate the vniuersall Church For to say in any Citty for distinction sake this is the Catholike Church what was it else but to say this is that Church which is vniuersally dispersed through the whole world euen as when a man to demonstrate the elements saith This is the aire this is the earth pointing to the aire or earth whereat he is present but therein intending to demonstrate the whole body of the aire or earth hauing continuation with that whereto he pointeth For as the Apostle directing his speech to the Church of Ephesus nameth l Act. 20. 28. The Church of God which he hath purchased with his owne bloud and againe m 1. Tim. 3. 15. the house of God which is the Church of the liuing God the pillar and ground of truth so speaking of a part as to conioyne it with the whole euen so no otherwise was it that in noting any particular Church it was said This is the Catholike Church the whole Church being totum similare as I said before and the whole being subiect to be designed in any part But M. Bishop here saith that this was not only because the Church is totum similare but because each of the said particular Churches hath the same faith the same Sacraments and order of gouernment Which is as wisely and discreetly spoken as if he had said that this was not only because the Church in all parts thereof hath the same faith and sacraments but because the said particular Churches haue all the same faith and Sacraments For why is the Church said to be totum homogeneum or similare a body whose parts are all of the same nature kinde and being but because in all parts thereof there are the same faith and Sacraments or to vse the wordes of the Apostle n Ephes 4. 4. One body one spirit one hope of calling one Lord one faith one baptisme one God and Father of all who is aboue all and through all and in vs all Surely either M. Bishop was sleepy or else his wits were a wooll-gathering when he put in this exception Now then it was not said that the word Catholike is not or may not bee directed to any particular M. Bishop doth therein but meerely calumniate but I said and shewed that it is neuer rightly applied any way or to any particular but with implication of the vniuersall Church The faith is called Catholike because it is the faith of the vniuersall Church propagated and spred by the Apostles ouer the whole world Particular Churches are called Catholike and particular persons are called Catholikes as a man would say Vniuersalists for maintayning communion and fellowship of this faith with the Church of the whole world And as the name of the aire or the earth being absolutely vsed importeth that whole element whereof we speake but yet according to distinction of places we say The aire of London the aire of Oxford the aire of Winchester c. without restraining the name of the aire to any one place more then other and only meaning that part of the aire that is in such or such a place euen so whereas the name of the Catholike Church simply and absolutely vsed importeth the whole vniuersall Church the same notwithstanding is found to be distinguished by diuersity of places the Catholike Church of such a place or the Catholike Church of such a place not limiting the name of the Catholike Church to any one place more then other and in true propriety of speech meaning nothing else but that part of the Catholike Church that is in this or that place And therefore I formerly noted and thinke not vnfit here to be repeated that as Leo wrote himselfe o Leo. epist 12. Leo
Papa Ecclesiae Catholicâ vrbis Romae Bishop of the Catholike Church of the Citty of Rome so doth Constantine the Emperor write p Socrat. hist l. 1. c. 6. Constantinus Catholicâ Alexandrinorum Ecclesiae to the Catholike Church of Alexandria and Austin nameth q August coÌt Crescon l. 3. c. 13. Omnis Africana Catholica Ecclesia the Catholike Church of Africa and Aurelius writeth himselfe r Collat. cum Donat. cognit 1. c. 16. Aurelius Episcopus Ecclesie Catholicae Carthaginensis Bishop of the Catholike Church of Carthagâ another Aurelius Å¿ Ibid. cap. 201. Aurelius Episcopus Ecclesiae Catholicae Macomadiensis Bishop of the Catholike Church of Macomadia Nouatus t Ibid. c. 204. Nouatus Episcopus Ecclesiae Catholicae Sitifi Bishop of the Catholike Church of Sitif And so in the fift Councell at Constantinople we reade u Conc. ConstaÌtinop 5. act 1. Supplicatio à Clericis Monachis Apostolici throni Antiochenae magnae ciuitatis Catholicae Sanctae Ecclesiae Dei The holy Catholike Church of Antioch and in the subscriptions of the Councell Sextilianus Bishop of the Catholike Church of Tunis and x Ibid. Act. 8. in subscript Sextâlianus misericordia Dei Episcopus Ecclesiae Catholicae Tuniensis Megethius gratia Dei Episcopus Sanctae Dei Catholicae Ecclesiae ciuitatis Heracleae Mâgethius Bishop of the holy Catholike Church of the citty of Heraclea and Pompeianus Bishop of the holy Catholike Church of the citty of Victoria and many other in the like sort Herein then standeth the error not that the name of the Catholike Church is vsed of a particular Church but because it is absurdly made a propriety of one particular Church which was neuer vsed but indifferently of all Churches and neuer but with implying the signification of the vniuersall Church Thus I am still constant in one tale what I said before I said after and I say it now againe and more cause there was for M. Bishop to haue taken another Cocke to himselfe then to put the weather-cocke to me Now he himselfe confesseth that no one Orthodoxe Church is more Catholike then other if the word Catholike be taken precisely but what it meaneth with him if it be taken precisely he telleth vs not If Orthodoxall and Catholike precisely taken be all one with him he playeth the Donatist as we shall see hereafter and in that sense amongst many Churches that may bee called orthodoxal and sound there may yet be some more sound then other If in true meaning it be taken precisely and properly then it is taken as in the Creede we professe to beleeue the holy Catholike that is the vniuersall Church and so no particular Church as hath been said and as M. Bishop hath confessed can be called the Catholike Church M. Bishop therefore vnlesse he be wilfull must also necessarily confesse that the church of Rome being a particular Church dealeth absurdly in applying to it selfe the name of the Catholike Church there where the word Catholike without all doubt is precisely and properly taken But though speaking precisely no one Church be more Catholike then other yet we hold saith M. Bishop that among all the particular Catholikes the Roman holdeth the greatest priuiledges both of superiority in gouernement and stability in true faith Hold it M. Bishop where you haue it and blinde men as much as you can in the conceipt of it but where you haue it not yee are neuer likely to obtaine it To vs it is nothing what you hold what you proue is somewhat but you may hold with Copernicus if you will that the Sunne standeth still and the earth turneth round or with Anaxagoras that snow is black So the Church of Rome according to that it was we attribute eminency of place precedence of honour authority of estimation and account but authority of power or superiority of gouernment we acknowledge none belonging thereto We reade that other Churches haue yeelded vnto it amity and loue y Rom. 16. 16. The Churches of Christ salute you but no where doe we reade All the Churches of Christ are subiect vnto you And will any man thinke it credible that such priuiledges should appertaine to the Church of Rome and yet that neither St. Paul nor St. Peter himselfe should make any mention of them The one of them wrote to the Church of Rome it selfe they both wrote to many other Churches and would they neuer haue remembrance to say any thing of the Lord God the Pope Yea St. Iohn did honor to z Apoc. 1. 4. the seuen Churches of Asia by writing to them and would he neuer speake of a Apoc. 17. 9. the seuen hils of Rome but only as the seate of the whoore of Babylon Yea of those seuen Churches of Asia it is to be noted which Gregory Bishop of Rome oftentimes deliuereth hath Austin therin agreeing with him that b Gregor in Ezech. hom 15. In âoannis Apocalypsi septem Ecclesijs scribitur per quas vna Catholica designatur Praefat. ad exposit Iob. Per septem Ecclesiarâm numerum vniuersalis Ecclesia designatur Sic August Ep. 161. in them is designed or figured the Catholike or vniuersall Church And to this accordeth Optatus also when of those Churches hee saith c Optat. Mileuit lib. 2. Extra septem Ecclesias quicquid foris est alienum est Whatsoeuer is without the seuen Churches is altene and strange Now amongst those seuen Churches none had any priuiledge either of superiority in gouernement or of stability in faith There is not one Angell or one Church questioned for all as hauing charge and authority ouer all but euery Angel euery Church seuerally censured by it selfe and according to euery their works either allowed or reproued Sith then the principall must haue correspondence with the figure it must likewise be in the vniuersall Church that no one Church hath priuiledge or superiority aboue all but euery Church accordingly as it performeth fidelity vnto God either standeth or falleth either is accepted or refused And the lesse hath the Church of Rome to presume of priuiledge in this behalfe for that it hath speciall caution giuen to the coÌtrary d Rom. 11. 20. Be not high minded but feare fâr if God spared not the naturall branches take heede lest he also spare not thee Behold the bountifulnes of God towards thee if thou continue in his bountifulnes or else thou shalt also be cut off This notwithstanding M. Bishop telleth vs that that which they hold of those Romish priuiledges is deduced out of the word of God But how because that Church is the Rocke according to the expositâon of the ancient Fathers vpon which the whole Church was built and against which the gates of hell should neuer preuaile Here is chalke for cheese we were promised a deduction out of the word of God and insâeede thereof he bringeth vs an exposition of the ancient Fathers But
rest of the Bishops there And that Councels held it not anââatter of necessity to haue the confirmation of the Bishop of Rome it is manifest both by the African Councell excluding his authority from amongst them as hath beene before shewed and by the Councell of k Chalcedon which notwithstanding the opposition of the l Concil Chalced. Act. 16. Contradictio nostra his gestis inhâreat c. Jâdices dixerunt Quod interlocuti sumus tota Synoduâ approbauit Legates of the Bishop of Rome and l Leo Epist 51. 52. his owne reclayming thereto yet decreed to the Church of Constantinople equality of priuiledges with the Church of Rome saue only that the Bishop of Rome had precedence and priority of place as before also is declared As for M. Bishops other note it is a vaine and fond presumption that all heresies sprung vp since the Apostles daies haue opposed themselues against the Roman Sea and haue beene by it finally ouerthrowne The Church of Rome hath had nothing singular in this behalfe Yea many heresies there haue beene that haue more bent themselues against other Churches then against the Church of Rome neither hath the Church of Rome done so much in the confounding of them as other Churches haue done But yet he bringeth Austin affirming for him that that chaire obtained the top of authority heretikes in vaine barking round about it Where he dealeth very vnhonestly in falsifying the wordes of Austin who in that whole booke by him cited neuer once nameth the Roman Church or chaire nor saith any thing that may be auouched to haue any speciall reference or respect thereto Of the Catholike or vniuersall Church so apparantly to bee discerned from all hereticall combinations St. Austin there saith m Aug. de vtilit credendi c. 17. Dubitabimus nos eius Ecclesiae condere gremio quae vsque ad confessionâm generis humani ab Apostolica sede per successio nes Episcoporum frustra hareticis circumlairantibus c. culmân authoritatis obtinuit Shall we doubt to repose our selues in the bosome of that Church which euen by the confession of mankinde from the Apostles sitting or time when the Apostles sate by successions of Bishops hath obtained a height of authority Heretikes in vaine barking round about c. In the whole processe of that booke from the beginning to this place which is almost the very end he speaketh generally of the Catholike Church without relation to any particular Church and therefore vnlikely it is that his wordes here should beare any speciall application to the Church of Rome M. Bishop will say that I mistranslate the wordes ab Apostolica sede and that Apostolica sedes is there meant the Apostolike Sea that is the Roman Church But he must giue vs leaue to vnderstand the meaning of St. Austins wordes by St. Austin himselfe who in this cause so often signifieth by that phrase of speech the time wherein the Apostles themselues sate that is wherein they liued and occupied the roomes of teaching and gouerning the Church Thus he saith in another place n Aug. cont Faust Manich. lib. 11. cap. 2. Vides in hac re quid Ecclesiae Catholicae valeat authoritas quae ab ipsis fundatissimis sedibus Apostolorum vsque ad hodiernum diem succedentium sibimet Episcoporum lot populorum consensione firmatur Thou seest how much the authority of the Catholike Church herein auaileth which from the most surely founded seates of the Apostles vntill this day that is from the time that the seates of the Apostles were most surely founded vntill this day by ranke of Bishops succeeding one another and by the consent of so many peoples is confirmed And againe o Ibid. lib. 28. cap. 2. Vniuersa Ecclesia ab Apostolicis sedibus vsque ad praesentes Episcopos certa successione perducta The vniuersall Church saith he which is deriued by certaine succession from the seates of the Apostles that is from the time that the Apostles sate vnto the Bishops that now are And in another place p Ibid. lib. 33. cap. 9. Eam sequamini que ab ipsius praesentiae Christi tempoâibus per dispensationes Apostolorum ãâã ab corum âedibus successiones Episcoporum vsque ad haec tempora peruenit Follow that authority which hath come from the time of the presence of Christ himselfe by the ministery of the Apostles and by other successions of Bishops from their seates from the time wherein they sate vntill this time Which when hee will in more proper wordes expresse hee speaketh thus q Ibid. lib 28. cap. 4. Ecclesia quae ab ipsius Matthaei temporibus vsque ad hoc tempus certa successionum scrie declaratur The Church which from the very time of Matthew vntill this time by certaine ranke of successions is declared r Ibid. lib. 32. cap. 19. Euangelica authoritas ab Apostolorum temporibus vsque ad nostra tempora per successiones certissimas commendata The authority of the Gospell commended by most certaine successions from the time of the Apostles vntill our times And in another place Å¿ Contra Aduers leg Prophet lib. 1. cap. 20. Ecclesia quae ab illorum Apostolorum temporibus per Episcoporum successiones certissimas vsque ad nostra deinceps tempora perseuerat The Church which from the times of the Apostles by most certaine successions of Bishops continueth to our times and so forward Now then sith all these speeches as by conference appeareth serue to expresse only one and the same thing it is plaine that St. Austin when hee said ab Apostolica sede meant nothing else but from the sitting that is from the age and time of the Apostles Of the Apostles I say though he speake in the singular number because hee nameth from thence not a succession as speaking of one but successions as resârting himselfe to those many seates wherein Bishops had succeeded from the time of the Apostles And though wee doe vnderstand it of one Apostle St. Peter as elsewhere he saith t Cont. Epist fundam cap. 4. Tenet ab ipsa ede Petri vsque ad praesentem Episcopâtum successio Sacerdotum The succession of Bishops from the very seate of Peter from the very time when Peter sate vntill the Bishopricke that now is holdeth me in the Catholike Church yet doth there nothing hereby follow more to the Church of Rome then to the Church of Antioch where Peter sate as well as he did at Rome and where there had beene Bishops succeeding him vntill that time In a word let M. Bishop take those wordes as hee will yet is there nothing therein to be seene concerning the Church of Rome but only that as the principall Church and specially ãâã these Westerne parts it serued him most conueniently for instance of the succession which hee pleaded but as for the height or toppe of authority there spoken of it belongeth to
the Catholike or Vniuersall Church discountenancing all partiall and schismaticall combinations and meere impudency is it by those or any other wordes of Austin to challenge to the Church of Rome an authority or superiority of gouernement ouer other Churches when as wee see that both Austin and the rest of the Bishops of Africa did with one consent vtterly disclaime the same Hitherto therefore wee see no cause to attribute to the Church of Rome any such priuiledges as M. Bishop pretendeth and the lesse opinion haue wee that any such there are for that hee bringeth no shew of proofe but onely by wresting and falsifying the Authours whom hee alleageth in that behalfe W. BISHOP §. 3. HEre comes in Master Abbots second proposition but the CHVRCH of Rome is a particular CHVRCH 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 all Churches of whatsoeuer other Country that doe agree with the Church of Rome in faith and confesse the Pastor thereof to be the chiefe Pastor 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 Italie but also any nation that was subiect to the Roman Emperor 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 of their Church Wherevpon if you demand of a French Catholike of what Church he is his answere will be that he is of the Catholike Roman Church where he addeth Roman to distinguish himselfe from all Sectaries who doe call themselues sometimes Catholikes though most absurdly and to specifie that hee is such a Catholike as doth wholly ioyne with the Roman Church in faith and religion Euen as the word Catholike was linked at first with Christian to distinguish a true Christian beleeuer from an Heretike according to that of Pacianus an ancient Authour Christian is my name Epistola ad Simphorian Catholike is my surname so now adaies the Epitheton Roman is added vnto Catholike to separate those Catholikes that ioyne with the Church of Rome in faith from other sectaries who doe sometimes call themselues also Catholikes though very ridiculously because they be diuided in faith from the greatest part of the vniuersall world Out of the premises may bee gathered that the Roman Church may well signifie any Church that holdeth and maintayneth the same faith which the Roman doth whence it followeth that M. Abbot either dealt doubly when he said the Roman Church to be a particular Church or else he must confesse himselfe to be one of those Doctors whom the Apostle noteth For not vnderstanding what 1. Tim. 1. vers 7. they speake nor of what they affirme R. ABBOT HEre is a new-found distinction and I confesse my selfe to be one of those Doctors that know it not and wee see that M. Bishop as great a Doctor as he is yet can bring neither Scripture nor Father nor Councell nor Story nor any ancient writer whatsoeuer for the warrant of it but such as it is wee must take it barely vpon his owne word The Church of Rome hath abused the world vnder pretence of the name of the Catholike Church alleaging falsly of it selfe that which is truly said of the Catholike Church that without the Church there is no saluation To discouer this fraude we instruct men as truth is that the Church of Rome is but a particular Church and therefore cannot be called the Catholike that is the vniuersall Church and therefore againe that it is but a meere mockery of Popish impostours whereby they say that out of the Church meaning the Church of Rome there is no saluation To this M. Bishop answereth that in that proposition The Church of Rome is a particular Church there is doubling and deceipt And how I pray Forsooth albeit the Church of Rome in rigour of speech doe comprehend only the Christians dwelling in Rome yet it is vsually taken to signifie all Churches of other Countries agreeing in faith with the Church of Rome and confessing the Pope to be chiefe Pastor of the whole Church Where it is to be obserued how hee setteth himselfe meerely to circumuent and cosen his Reader For it being admitted that the Church of Rome is taken to signifie all Churches of other Countries agreeing in faith with the Church of Rome and confessing the Popes chiefty ouer them yet this nothing hindereth but that the Church of Rome is still a particular Church or a part only of the Church because the whole Church doth not agree nor euer hath agreed to giue to the Pope and Church of Rome that chiefty which they require For how many Churches are there not in Europe only but also in Asia and Africa that deride that claime of theirs and neither yeeld nor acknowledge any such superiority to belong vnto them Yea and his owne instance of the Roman Empire confoundeth him in this behalfe because as the Roman Empire was not the Empire of the whole world but imported only the Countries subiect to the Romans there being many other Dominions and Kingdomes that were neuer subiect vnto them euen so the Roman Church is not the Church of the whole world which is the Catholike Church but signifieth only those Churches which professe subiection to the Bishop of Rome there being many other Churches which professe no such subiection Now therefore be it so that the Church of Rome is so vsually taken to signifie other Churches submitting themselues to the Church of Rome M. Bishop for all this to his purpose is neuer a whit the nearer vnlesse he can shew that the Church of Rome is taken to signifie the whole Catholike Church of Christ For if it be not the whole Catholike Church then it is but a member and part thereof and therefore only a particular Church Tell vs then M. Bishop is it any where to be found that the Roman Church is taken to signifie the whole Catholike Church Marke I pray thee gentle Reader how it sticketh betwixt his teeth Faine hee would speake it and yet because hee knoweth it to bee an absurd lye his heart faileth him and only faintly hee telleth vs The whole Catholike Church may be called the Roman Church But M. Bishop doe not tell vs what in your foolish conceipt may bee tell vs what hath beene done The Fathers were interested in this cause as well as wee they haue told vs of the East Church and the West Church the Greeke Church and the Latin Church they haue infinite times made mention of the Roman Church but shew vs that euer they meant by the Roman Church to signifie the whole Church Here hee is blancke and can say nothing and if he would say any thing the
I will take it here in his due place making it to appeare that this mistaking in a circumstance altereth nothing of the substance of that comparison which I had there in hand The first branch then of the comparison shall bee this The Donatists did set vp a particular Church to be the Catholike Church all of them first in the south of Africa some of them afterwards namely the Rogatists at Cartenna in Mauritania and so haue the Papists done at Rome in Italie Against this branch as it was before set downe hee giueth two exceptions First that they doe not hold it so to be at Rome aâ the Rogatists did at Cartenna And what is the difference Marry they hold it to be so at Rome as that it is dispersed also all the world ouer but the Rogatists held it to be wholly included in the bounds of Cartenna and confines thereof The first part of which answere on their owne behalfe is false and the second part thereof concerning the Rogatists is vaine For it is false that hee saith that their Romish Church is dispersed all the world ouer and hee knoweth well that the Churches of Greece and all the Easterne Churches are holden by them to be Schismatikes because they disclaime subiection to the Church of Rome True it is they would haue it all the world ouer and they make simple fooles beleeue that it is so but they themselues know that the skirts of it are too short to reach so farre and that a huge part of the Church there is that will haue nothing to doe with them And this drew from Bellarmine that caution that I before mentioned in the first Chapter that a Supra cap. 1. §. 1. though one only Prouince did imbrace the true faith yet the same should truly and properly be called the Catholike Church so long as it could bee plainly shewed that it is one and the same with that which at any time or times was ouer the whole world Now hereof it followeth that the other part of his exception concerning the Rogatists is vaine For although the communion of the Church of Rome be farre larger then that was of the Rogatists at Cartenna yet doth neither of them containe any more but a part and their doctrine as touching their communion sorteth all to one For whereas M. Bishop saith that the Rogatists included the Church within the bounds of Cartenna and the Countrey thereabout it was not by position of doctrine that they so included it as if it could not be any where else but because they pretended that the Church was only in their communion and there were none in any other part of the world that tooke part with them it followeth of this defect that they so included it But though there were now not aboue b Aug. Epist 48. Tu cum decem Rogatistis quâ remansistis c. ten or eleuen Bishops of them remayning as Saint Austin obiecteth to them yet by that hee vpbraideth them with this number remayning it appeareth that they had beene of greater number and extent and wee cannot doubt but that they would as willingly haue had the whole world to ioyne with them as the Church of Rome would Now inasmuch as they held themselues only to bee the Catholike Church And there were none of them otherwhere to bee found to Baptise and reconcile peâitents but only within the confines of Cartenna Saint Austin rightly obiecteth it as an absurdity ensuing thereof that c Ibid. Quisquis fâârit hac praedicatione commotus in qualibât paâte orbis terâarum nisi quaesierit inuenerit latentâm in Mauritania Caesariensi Cartennensem Vincentium aut aliquem ex cius nouâm aut decem conâortibus dimitti ei peccata non posâint c. Nisi Cartennas venerit aut in viââiam Cartennensium mundari omninââ delictis suis non potârit then whosoeuer there were in any part of the world that were moued with the preaching of the Gospell vnlesse he did seeke and finde out Vincentius Bishop of Cartenna lurking in Mauritania Caesariensis or some one of his nine or ten consorts he could not haue remission of sinnes or as otherwise hee expresseth it except hee came to Cartenna or into the Countrey neare adioyning hee could not bee clensed from his sinnes Now although the Roman Church as M. Bishop vnderstandeth it is of much larger extent and stretcheth it selfe into sundry Countries and Nations yet being but of small compasse in comparison of the whole world the exprobration of the same madde fancy lyeth vpon it that whosoeuer in the further parts of the world shall be moued with the preaching of the Gospell and conuerted thereby vnlesse hee come to Rome or into some part of the world where he may meete with a Popish Priest hee cannot bee baptised or reconciled to God hee cannot obtayne the remission of his sinnes it being by them resolued of themselues as by the Rogatists of themselues that out of their particular communion there is no saluation Therefore both Rogatists and Papists let them goe together and the truth is that in this behalfe there is no difference betwixt them As touching his second exception although it bee not generally true of the Donatists that they placed the Catholike Church at Cartenna yet it is not altogether vntrue because the Rogatists were Donatists d August vt supra Vos qui non solum cum illis communiter Donatistae a Donato verumetiam propriè Rogatisââ a Rogatâ appâllânuâ being in common with the rest called Donatists of Donatus as Saânt Austin noteth and by a more proper name Rogatists of Rogatus For although they had in some spleene and vpon some peâuish quarrell diuided themselues from the rest yet the substance of their doctrine was still the same as before as appeareth by St. Austin who disputing against Vincentius the Rogatist chargeth him in effect with nothing else but the common positions of the Donatists and therefore they were all at once coÌmonly comprehended vnder the name of Donatists The Donatists then though not all the Donatists but of them the Rogatists only placed the Catholike church at Cartenna and to the Rogatists then being a part of the Donatists the Papists are like who doe in the same sort place the Catholike Church at Rome Yea and although the Donatists in generall did not seate the Church at Cartenna yet M. Bishop is not ignorant that they in generall before some quarrelling fell amongst them did in effect the same thing by designing the place thereof in Africa properly so called so as that none should be called Catholikes in any part of the world but such as did communicate with that African Church of theirs For although they acknowledged that the Church by the preaching of the Apostles had beene dispersed ouer the world according to the manifold testimonies and prophecies of holy Scripture in that behalfe which they professed to beleeue âet they said that c Aug. de
vnit Ecclesiae c. 12. Ista inquiunt credimus copleta esse cofitemur sed postea oâbis terrarum apostatauit sola remaâsit Donati communio ãâ¦ã postea cap. 15 Postea câterâs deâicientibus solam Christo Asâicam remansisse the Church afterward fell away by Apostasie and there remained only the communion of Donatus that the rest failing there remained to Christ Africa only Whereupon it was vrged vpon them as consequent of this opinion that either f Ibid cap. 16. Ostendat Ecclesiam vel in sola Africa perditis tot gentibus retinendam vel ex Africa in omnibus gentibus reparadam atque adimplâdam ât ibid. Declaretur Africa vel in reliquis sola derelâcta vel ad priacip ãâ¦ã âânouandi atque implendi orbis solâââruata the Church was to be retained thenceforth in Africa only or else that from thence as the beginning the Churches of the whole world were to be repaired and restored againe The former they disauowed because they had their partakers till there fell out distraction amongst them not only in Africa but also in g Ibid. cap. 3. Epist 48. Mauritania Caesariensis in Tripolis Byzacium amongst the Auzuges in h Idem cont lit Petil. lib. 2. cap. 108. Spaine yea and at Rome also as followeth to bee said hereafter Yea by the wordes of the Catholike Bishops to Marcellinus the Lieutenant i Collat. cum Donatist 1. c. 16. Neque enim desperare debemus multò digniùs sacilius âos velle vt parâ Donati vniuerso ârbi Christiano reconcilietur quà m vniuersus orbis Christianuâ à parte Donati rebaptizetur hoping that the Donatists would thinke it more meete and more easie that their part should be reconciled to the whole world then that the whole world should be rebaptized by them it appeareth plainly that their opinion did not exclude the hauing of their communion throughout the whole world It remained therefore that Africa was to be as it were the head and foundation of their Catholike Church and from thence the Church through the world was to bee renued and restored againe by holding communion and fellowship with that Church Euen in the same sort standeth the matter with the Papists who tell vs that the Church in all the farre parts of the world hath failed that k Rhem. Testam Annotat. 2. Thess 2. 3. the Patriarchall and Apostolike Seas are all either extinguished or by Schisme and Heresie fallen away and only the Roman Church hath remained wherein only is the communion of the Catholike faith and whence the Church through the whole world is to be reedified and reduced to the obedience of the Pope And to that purpose they tell vs of strange wonders that they haue done and make as if they had conuerted whole worlds of nations to their Roman faith when as indeede they doe but mocke the world with lies and tales talking liberally of Countries whither they know it vnlikely for vs to come to search out whether they speake truth or not and the nations which they pretend to haue conuerted being either colonies of their owne people transported thither or some Insidels forced to accept baptisme without religion or such as by wiles they haue surprised to make profit of by trafficke and merchandise as in Iaponia the Iesuits most lewdly and trecherously haue done Thus then M. Bishop auoiding to be like the Donatists by putting the matter spoken of ouer to the Rogatists is in this point become like both to Rogatists and Donatists by tying the seate of the Catholike Church to one only particular place W. BISHOP §. 2. THe second is not vnlike The Donatists would haue the Church to be called Catholike not by reason of the communion and society therof 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 call the Church Catholike for the perfection of doctrine and Sacraments see S. Augustine in both places who expresly deliuereth that it was for the fulnesse of Sacraments Ex plenitudine Sacramentorum Breui collat cap. 2. dici 3. Epist 48. or for the obseruation of all Gods Commandements Ex obseruatione omnium diuinorum praeceptorum of perfection of doctrine they said not one word they were more sharpe-witted as S. Augustine obserueth then to goe about to proue vniuersality by perfection which is not vniuersall But seeing well that they could not defend their congregation to be Catholike that is vniuersall but by some kinde of vniuersality they defended it to be so called for the vniuersality and fulnesse of Sacraments and Commandements that is because their Church retained all the Sacraments that the Catholikes did and professed to keepe all 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 belyed the Roman Church if hee had iustly brought in the resemblance to wit if he had said as due proportion required that we hold our Church to be Catholike as the Donatists did theirs for the perfection of doctrine and Sacraments which is so manifestly vntrue and so clearly against the doctrine of all 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 word Catholike that none except such wise-men as M. Abbot is doe thinke any thing to be Catholike because it is perfect R. ABBOT THe second branch of this comparison betwixt the Papists and the Donatists I set downe thus 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 chalenged to themselues and the same perfection the Church of Rome now arrogateth to it selfe and will therefore be called the Catholike Church M. Bishop saith that there are many faults here yet he reckoneth but only two belike he would haue me thinke that he doth me a fauour to let passe the rest As touching the first he very grosly telleth me that in the chiefe branch there is a grosse lye for the Donatists saith he did not call the Church Catholike for perfection of doctrine and Sacraments For what then Marry for the fulnesse of Sacraments and for the obseruation of all Gods Commandements Well it is true indeede that Saint Austin challengeth Vincentius a Aug Epist 48. Acutum aliquid videris dicere cum Catholicâe nomen non ex totius orbis communione
conaris solos remansisse Rogatistas qui Catholici rectè appellandi sant c. Et vos esse solos in quibus fidem inuâniat filius hominis cum venerat themselues only to be Catholikes and that with them only Christ at his comming should finde faith left it as consequent that none could bee called Catholikes but by communicating and ioyning with them Now they did but apply to their Schisme at Cartenna those thinges which the Donatists in common held concerning their Church in Africa who said of themselues that b Collat. Carthag 3. cap. 22. Apud nos est vera Catholica with them only was the true Catholike Church c August de vnit âccles c. 13. Velut pro se commemorant quod ait Dominus Filius hominis veniens putas inueniet fidem in terra that with them only Christ should finde faith whence it should remaine that in their communion only men were to beare the name of Catholikes Now whether we looke to the Rogatists for Cartenna or to the Donatists for Africa the Papists are like them both who pleade the same for their Roman Church that they did for the other two that men are Catholikes for keeping vnity of faith and agreement therewith But M. Bishop telleth vs that they doe not call men Catholikes for keeping communion with the Church of Rome if it be taken for that particular Church which is contayned within the walls of Rome Where we see how true it is which Optatus saith that d Optat. lib. 2. Memoriam custodem oportet habere mendacem a lyar needeth to haue a good holding memory for he himselfe a little before speaking of that particular Roman Church to which he attributeth the priuiledges of stability in faith and superiority in gouernement aboue all other Churches hath told vs that St. Hierome e Part. 1. § 2. affirmeth men to become Catholikes by holding the Roman faith and that Tertullian Epiphanius Optatus and Austin doe proue their Churches to be Catholike and themselues to be Catholikes by declaring that they doe communicate with the Church of Rome and did condemne their aduersaries to be Schismatikes and Heretikes because they did not communicate with that Church If it bee true which hee hath told vs thus before that men become Catholikes by communicating with that particular Roman Church why doth he here tell vs the contrary that they doe not call men Catholikes for that cause The reason is because he speaketh no otherwise then as Optatus obiecteth to Parmenian the Donatist f Optat. lib. 1. Omnis pro tempore nihil pro veritate All for the time and present shift and nothing for the truth Well let vs heare what it is for which men with them are called Catholikes Because that communicating with that Church the particular Roman Church in faith and religion they doe communicate with all other of the same faith which are spred all the world ouer So then men are not g Aug. Breuic Collat. cum Donat l. 3. c. 2. Quia communicant Ecclesiae toto orbe di ãâ¦ã Catholâci meritò sunt vocantur Catholikes now as of old because they communicate with the Church dispersed ouer the whole world but because in the communion of the Church of Rome they coÌmunicate with the Church of the whole world But what if the Church of the whole world doe not hold communion with the Church of Rome as when the East and West Churches haue beene diuided and when Arianisme had ouerflowed in a manner the whole world whence was the name of Catholikes to be taken then Yea to speake of later times before the Portugals and Spaniards had gotten the Indies or discouered the new world and before Ignatius Loâola had hatched his cockatrices broode which braggeth of so great conuersions there attayned vnto when neither the Greeke Churches in Europe receiued the Roman faith and out of Europe scant any Church at all how could it then be said that men were called Catholikes for that in communicating with the Church of Rome they communicated with the Church spred ouer all the world And sith they say that all other Churches may erre and only the Church of Rome hath the priuiledge of perpetuall truth put case that all other Churches doe erre how shall the name of Catholikes be continued but only for holding correspondence with the particular Church of Rome Yea how is it that he seeth not that he meerely circumuenteth and ouerthroweth himselfe For if a man be a Catholike for coÌmunicating with the Church of the whole world and it be by communicating with the particular Church of Rome that he communicate with the Church of the whole world then it is by communicating with the particular Church of Rome that the name of a Catholike doth belong vnto him To be short M. Bishops former acknowledgement iustifieth the resemblance as I haue set it downe and yet the Donatists if they could haue had their way would neuer haue doubted to say of their Church as M. Bishop doth here of his that men should be called Catholikes not for communicating with their African Church as it was contayned only within the bounds of Africa but for that in communicating with that Church they communicated with all other of the same faith spred wheresoeuer in the world Neither could the one nor can the other assume to themselues that they were or are spred ouer the whole world and therefore neither could the one nor can the other take vpon them to be Catholikes but only each for communion with their owne Church W. BISHOP §. 5. 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 Noe in the generall deluge wherefore whosoeuer doth not communicate with the Church of Rome which 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 ioyne my selfe to Epistola 7. tit 2. 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 Noe shall perish c. where there is much more to this purpose R. ABBOT THe Rogatists as touching their Church of Cartenna and the Donatists as touching their Church of Africa were of minde that howsoeuer a man beleeued he could not be saued vnlesse he did communicate with their Church This M. Bishop acknowledgeth to be true and if this be true what hindereth but that the resemblance standeth good The Papists
Rome keepâ entirely the same faith In which sort the Donatists also would not haue denyed all other Churches to be called Catholike that with their Church of Africa kept entirely the same faith and therefore I said rightly before that the name is now by the Papists Donatistically applyed not only to one particular Church of Rome as M. Bishop falsly repeateth to put the sot if he could from himselfe to me but also as I added to men bearing the name of Catholikes only for communicating with that Church As for vs we apply the name Catholike no more to the congregations of the Protestants then we doe to all that professe in truth the communion of one vniuersall Church The name of Protestants being casuall and arising by occasion in these Northerne parts may haply be inclosed and confined within the bounds of Europe but the Church of Christ cannot be so inclosed and o Aug. Epist 48. Erit Anathema quisquis annunciauerit Ecclesiam praeter communionem omnium gentium cursed is he saith St. Austin that preacheth the Church otherwise then in the communion of all nations No otherwise doe wee preach the Church wee limit it not to our selues wee say the Papists ought not to limit it to themselues There are questions betwixt them and vs but how many Christian Churches are there in the world which neither know them nor vs nor haue euer heard any thing of the quarrels that are betwixt vs How many Churches are there in the East which haue heard of the Pope and his proceedings and will by no meanes endure to hold communion with him He will say that those Churches doe not accord with vs in iudgement of all points of faith Be it so no more did Cyprian and p Aug. cont Gaudent lib. 3 art 10. Quando rebaptizabat Cyprianus ab hâreticis venientes Ecclesia CarthagineÌsis Episcopus tunc Ecclesiâ Romanae Stephanus Episcopus in âodem baptismâ quem foris accepâraÌt suscipiebat âaereticos ambo haec diuersa facienâes in vnitate Catholica permanebant Stephanus Bishop of Rome agree in all points and yet they were both members of one Catholike Church How many differences of opinions are there found amongst the Fathers and yet we doe not therefore diuide them into many Churches They may erre and we may ârre but we beleeue that wheresoeuer the Gospell of Christ is read and published there Christ hath a people to whom hee reuealeth all truth that shall be necessary vnto eternall life In a word they professe the same Christ they reade the same Gospell and Scriptures that we doe and therein our faith both hath beene from the beginning and doth now continue dispersed and spread ouer the whole world W. BISHOP §. 2. SEcondly M. Abbot is much mistaken in his comparison of the name of Iew with the name Catholike for âo 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 Iew was a name of such honour at any time for that peoples honourable name was Israelites and were not called Iewes till towards 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 Husitâ Naaman the Syrian the widdow of Sarepta a Sydonian and by a great number Luc. 4. vers 16. of Prosilites and finally by that which the Apostle teacheth Many Gentiles were saued without the law Rom. â vers 14. Lastly most vncertaine it is of what name the Prophet Isay speaketh when he saith It shall be left for a name cap. 65. vers 13. of curse All 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 Iew according to the vsuall signification of the word being the name of a certayne people of one race and kindred and hauing a law giuen them by Moyses which should continue only for a prescript time and end at the coÌming of Christ is not like the name of Catholike which is no speciall name of the people of any one Countrây but is attributed and doth agree to all sorts of men of what Countrey or nation soeuer that do embrace the true Christian faith And is inseparably linked and so fast ioyned and riueted with the Christian profession and religion that it shall neuer faile fall or be separated from it so long as Christs faith standeth nor euer be contemned of the faithfull whiles Christs true religion flourisheth which is proued inuincibly out of the very Etymologie 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 shall be to the worlds end If the name Catholike shall continue to the worlds end the true title of the Church who then but miscreants and Heretikes can take it for a name of curse reproch and shame Is it not vntill this day set downe in the Apostles Creede as the honourable title and epithite of the true Church I beleeue the holy Catholike Church Must he then not be rather an Apostata then a Scholler of the Apostles that blusheth not to anouch the very name Catholike to be the proper badge of Apostataes and Heretikes which the Apostles ascribe and appropriate vnto true Christianity If any proude and false fellowes doe vsurpe that name and challenge it to themselues wrongfully as many did euen in S. Augustines time when M. Abbot confesseth it to haue beene in greatest estimation let such vsurping companions be rebuked sharply and conuicted of their insolent and audatious folly but the name Catholike which the Apostles thought worthy and fit to be placed in the articles of our Creede and principles of our religion must alwaies remaine and be among true Christians a name very glorious and desireable We therefore say with S. Augustine We receiue Tract 32. ââ Iohannem Lib. 1. coât Gaudent c. 33. the holy Ghost if we loue the Church if we be ioyned togither by charity if we reioyce in the Catholike name and faith And they that doe not ioy in that name but mocke at it doc blaspheme as the same most holy Authour intimateth The name Iew being taken in the Apostles sense for one of what nation soeuer that fulfilleth the iustice of the law neuer was nor neuer shall be a name of reproch so that M. Abbot is driuen to hop from one sense of that name to another to make it applyable to his purpose R. ABBOT SVch examples saith he proue nothing but serue only for explication And what of that As though it were vnlawfull for me to vse explication and I were bound to proofe only His first exception then is wholly idle and of no effect
thee gentle Reader how warily M. Bishop speaketh Hee saith that he could in most controuersies adde the like confirmation willing hereby to haue thee vnderstand that as all his confirmations hitherto haue beene nothing worth so all the rest should bee starke naught And that thou maiest beleeue him herein hee taketh course presently to giue thee assurance of it St. Paul saith a 1. Tim. â 15. The Church is the pillar and ground of truth Wherefore any man saith he may most assuredly repose his faith vpon her declaration Well but aske him hereupon Why then doe not you M. Bishop repose your faith vpon the declaration of the Church of England Not so will he say for this is the proper priuiledge and prerogatiue of the Church of Rome Wisdome and how commeth this to be proper to the Church of Rome Doth your booke tell you so Doe you not see that the Apostle vseth those wordes namely of the Church of Ephesus where Timothy was Bishop and therefore leaueth them appliable in the like sort to euery particular Church and therefore as well to the Church of England as to the Church of Rome And what exception hath he to the contrary but that as the Church of the liuing God hath beene from the beginning of the world so it hath beene from the beginning of the world the pillar and ground of truth and can hee make it good that there hath beene from the beginning a Church priuiledged thereby from being ledde into errour that all men might alwaies infallibly rest themselues vpon the sentence of that Church If not how can hee vpon this ground conclude that now which was not then and what he cannot finde to haue been in the Church of Hierusalem what likely-hood is there that it should be now found in the Church of Rome But it hath beene sufficiently declared before that b Part. 3. Confutation of Doctor Bishops Answer to Master Perkâns Aduertisement c. sect 2. to be the pillar and ground of truth is the common duty of euery Church not any prerogatiue of the Roman Church and noteth what the Church alwaies by calling ought to be not what in act and performance it alwaies is Therefore this first confirmation of M. Bishops is but a paper shot it maketh a great noise but woundeth not The second is like the first c Ephes 4. 11. Christ gaue some Apostles some Prophets some Euangelists some Pastors and Doctors for the gathering togither of the Saints for the worke of the Ministery and for the edification of the body of Christ till we all meete together in the vnity of faith and knowledge of the sonne of God c. Hence he inferreth thus therefore the Church shall not faile in faith vntill the day of iudgement nor bee inuisible that hath visible Pastors and Teachers Vrge him here a little further as touching this not sailing in faith and thou shalt see how he will goe from the Church to the Church of Rome and from the Church of Rome to the generall Councell and from the generall Councell to the Pope and all both Pastors and Doctors and Church and Councell serue but for a saddle whereon the Pope rideth in his royaltie saying as a Councell of old vpbraided him d Auent Annal l. 7. In cuius fronte nomen contumeliae scriptum est Deus sum errare non possum Synod Reginoburg I am God and cannot erre They rest the priuiledge of not erring in the Pope and may we not thinke this text well alleaged to proue that the Pope cannot erre who is in truth neither Pastor nor Doctor but a Hireling and a Theefe The wordes of the Apostle serue to instruct vs that Christ Iesus being ascended vp on high prouideth for his Church raising vp Pastors and Doctors for the ends which he there expresseth but hee doth not say that Pastors and Doctors are alwaies answerable to those ends God gaue the Priests and Leuites for the like blessing vnto Israel and it was said of them e Deut. 33. 10. They shall teach Iacob thy iudgements and Israel thy law And yet there was a time when it was said of them f Ierem. 2. 8. The Priests said not Where is the Lord and they that should minister the law knew me not the Pastors offended against me and the Prophets prophesied in Baal and went after things that did not profit And againe g Malach. 2. 7 The Priests lips should preserue knowledge and they should seeke the law at his mouth for he is the messenger of the Lord of hostes but yee are gone out of the way yee haue caused many to fall by the law c. And againe h Osâ 9. 8. The watchman of Ephraim should be with my God but the Prophet is the snare of a fowler in all his waies and hatred in the house of his God And is it not so also many times in the state of the Church of Christ Is it not so often times that they whom he hath giuen for Pastors and Doctors to his Church become i Apoc. 6. 13. starres fallen from heauen to earth voide of true light themselues and therefore giuing no light to others Haue there not beene infinite complaints hereof in the Church of Rome of the negligence and ignorance and inability of them who haue sitten in place of Pastors and Doctors in the Church Did M. Bishop neuer reade in Matthew Paris an Epistle deuised as sent from hell k Math. Paris in Wil. Conq. Satanas omne contubernium infernorum omni Ecclesiastico coetui gratias eââsit quòd cum in nullo voluptatibus suis deessent tantum numerum subditarum sibi animarum suae praedicationis incuria paterentur ad inferna descendere quaÌtum secula nunquam retroacta viderunt wherein Satan and all the company of hell did send thanks to the whole Ecclesiasticall order for that whereas in nothing they were wanting to their owne pleasures they suffered by their neglect of preaching such a great number of soules vnder them to goe to hell as no ages past had seene the like Was there in this meane time no failing in faith when Clemangis as Espencaeus witnesseth complaining of the want of the knowledge and reading of Gods word said l Claud EspeÌc Digress in 1. Tim. l. 1. c. 11. Vbi id nec legitur nec auditur fidem perire labefactari necesse est vt hodie proh dolor omnibus ferè locis cernimus vt ad teÌpora propinquare videamê° de quibus Dominus putas filius hominis c. ex Clemang Where the word of God is neither read nor heard needes must faith perish and decay as now a daies alas in all places almost we see so as that we see it approcheth to the times whereof our Sauiour saith Thinke yee when the sonne of man commeth he shall finde faith vpon the earth or when things m Ibid. ex Agobert Antiphonarium correximus
THE TRVE ANCIENT ROMAN CATHOLIKE BEING AN APOLOGY OR COVNTERPROOFE AGAINST DOCTOR BISHOPS REPROOFE of the defence of the Reformed CATHOLIKE THE FIRST PART Wherein the name of Catholikes is vindicated from Popish abuse and thence is shewed that the faith of the Church of Rome as now it is is not the Catholike faith nor the same with the faith commended in the Epistles of St. Peter and St. Paul and that confirmed by the testimony of the ancient Bishops of Rome and other Writers of that Church By ROBERT ABBOT Doctor of Diuinity Master of BALIOââ Colledge in Oxford August cont Faust Munich l. 29. c. 2. Maneat nobis aduersus illâs potius pro veritate certamen quà m cum illâs in falsitate concordia LONDON Printed by William Stansby for Ambrose Garbrand and are to be sold at the signe of the Wind-mill in Pauls Church-yard 1611. TO THE RIGHT HIGH AND MIGHTY PRINCE HENRY PRINCE OF WALES DVKE OF CORNWALL AND ROTHSAY EARLE OF CHESTER Knight of the most Honorable Order of the GARTER MOST gracious and renowmed PRINCE such is the malice and fury of Antichrist Greg. lib. 4. Epist 38. and his army of Priests as Gregory calleth them in oppugning the religion and faith of Christ as giueth cause to vs that fight for Christ to stand continually ãâã our guard and to be ready still in armes to entertaine the assaults that are continually made against vs. They carry themselues now towards vs the more eagerly and angerly for that they see themselues deceiued of the prey which they long hoped for imagining before this time out of the troubled waters of this State to haue fished somewhat for aduantage to themselues Which expectation being by the mercy of God wholly frustrate they imitate the Dragon in the â Reuelation casting out of their Reuel 12. 15. mouthes by calumniations and slanders and all outrage and importunity of malicious contradiction euen flouds of waters to carry violently away and to drowne if it were possible the woman euen the Church of Christ amongst vs that hath escaped their cruel and bloudy hands But thanks be to God that hath giuen vs meanes to set mounds and banks against these raging flouds that howsoeuer they threaten yet they hurt vs not nor endanger any but such as rashly aduenture to swimme in vnknowne waters or being desirous of curiosity and foolish humour to see their owne shadow in the riuer Tyber whilest they admire themselues cast themselues head-long to bee drowned therein Now in that seruice of the Roman Antichrist Doctor Bishop our Countriman hath very industriously done his part and hath laboured if not to excell yet to equall almost any of his fellowes in the subuerting of wayward and vnstable soules and in animating of men to obstinacy against the truth of God Who hauing to the Kings most excellent Maiesty disgorged against vs the venome and poison of his corrupt and wicked heart and being by me duly chastened for his disloyal and traiterous attempt to delude by false suggestions his Liege and Soueraigne Lord seeing his impostures and fraudes most plainely discouered and laied open hath since added drunkennesse Deut. 29. 19. to his thirst and sought to fill vp the measure of his former iniquity by wilfull railing at those things which he knoweth to be true and hauing no other way to reuenge the impeaching of his credit greatly touched as he conceiued by the answering of his booke hath in a latter booke runne vpon mee furiously and loden me so much as in him lieth with odious imputations of abusing falsifying misconstruing misapplying both Scriptures and Fathers like the vngracious Thiefe at the barre who conuicted by most cleare and apparant euidence yet still impudently cryeth out that all is false But by an Aduertisement written for the time concerning that booke of his I haue made it manifest that that cry of his is but a cry of course the breath of an obdurate and euill conscience by which he standeth condemned in himselfe desperately Tit. 3. 11. bent against his owne knowledge to peruert to forge to face any thing to serue his turne which plainly appearing so to be little reason had I to trouble my selfe to giue any further answere to it Neuerthelesse because the further answere of the chiefe part of it hath fallen within the compasse of my intention of describing the true ancient Roman Catholike and no difference there is but that whereas I might otherwise haue walked at mine owne liberty I now tie my selfe to follow him I haue yeelded so much to him that whereas by comparison I formerly shewed that the new Church of Rome in faith and religion is farre estranged from the old it may now more fully appeare that so it is and that M. Bishop contending for the contrary hath done it only for his belly and for his credits sake hauing made the deceiuing of soules his occupation to liue by and being ashamed at these yeares to confesse that he himselfe hitherto hath been deceiued Which worke I most humbly desire may goe forth vnder the protection of your Highnesse whom according to that eminent wisedome and knowledge wherewith God hath endued these your younger yeares I make the Iudge of this quarrell and therefore the first part thereof I now tender at your Highnesse feete for a testimony of my loyall and dutifull affection and for acknowledgement of my deuotions vnto almighty God for the preseruation of your Highnesse and the continuance and increase of his graces and blessings towards you that your Princely name may more and more grow great and may be a terrour to that selfe-exalting Kingdome and Monarchy of the great Capitolian Priest at length to worke the vtter ruine and confusion thereof Which as we beleeue not to bee farre of so we hope that in that glorious reuenge of the cause of almighty God your Highnesse shall haue a chiefe and an honorable part and that God will strengthen your arme and giue edge to your sword to strike through the loines of all them that are the supporters of that Antichristian and wicked state Which with all other additions of honour and renowme both with God and men I will neuer cease to further by my prayers vnto almighty God so resting alwaies To your Highnesse seruice most humbly and affectionately deuoted R. Abbot TO THE CHRISTIAN READER THov hast here good Christian Reader the first Part of the worke which I promised The true ancient Roman Catholike Thou maiest remember that in my answere to Doctor Bishops Epistle to the King I challenged the name of Catholiks from the Popish abuse thereof and shewed out of the true explication and vse of the word Catholike that neither the Church of Rome can be called the Catholike Church nor the faith of the Roman Church that now is can be called the Catholike faith and therefore that very fondly and by a meere vsurpation they take vnto them the name of Catholikes After this I entred
by occasion to a comparison betwixt the new that is and that that of old was the religion of the Church of Rome consisting specially of three parts In the first I shewed that neither the Epistle of S. Paul to the Romans which is the briefe of the religion which they at the first receiued and containeth as I shewed out of Theodoret all manner doctrine of faith nor yet the two Epistles of S. Peter whom they make the founder of their Church doe containe any defence of the doctrine now taught at Rome but doe teach only our religion In the second I set downe sundry definitions and doctrines of the ancient Roman faith deliuered by the Bishops of Rome and other Authours that haue witnessed the doctrine of that Church wholly consonant and agreeable to that that we teach and altogether impugned by the Roman Church that now is In the third I declared that there were sundry heresies condemned of old by the Roman Church which the Church of Rome now embraceth and defendeth The points of this comparison I then set downe only positiuely the occasion requiring no more not respecting what cauillations the aduersary might bring for oppugning thereof the matter being by that light that I gaue very cleare that the Church of Rome is not now the same that it was of old This matter I afterwards thought worthy of a larger treatise and purposed when opportunity should serue a more full prosecution of it thinking it would bee a great comfort and establishment to the consciences of many men perhaps to some an occasion of better minde when they should see in that Church of Rome that now is such a plain repugnancy to that that of old was which notwithstanding taketh vpon it impudently to haue beene alwaies the same and to bee the only certaine rule and oracle of true faith In this meane time Doctor Bishop fearing lest his silence should make his cause suspicious and therefore thinking it necessary whether right or wrong to say somewhat publiââeth A Reproofe of the defence of the Reformed Catholike setting vnder this title a Gorgons head to affright all men concerning me as hauing abused Gods sacred word mangled misapplyed and falsified the ancient Fathers sentences so that whosoeuer hath any due care of his owne saluation can neuer hereafter credit me in matter of faith and religion Concerning which hideous outcry of my falsifications I referre thee to the Aduertisement which I haue added to my third part of the defence of the Reformed Catholike where thou shalt see that as hee hath laied himselfe open so I haue scourged him accordingly But in that Reproofe of his very little is it that hee hath said for iustifying what he himselfe had before written not being able indeede to defend any one point thereof only he found somewhat whereof to cauill concerning my debating of the name Catholike and the comparison which I made betwixt the old and new Roman Church and thereof as touching the matter of substance he hath framed his booke To this therefore I haue addressed my description of the ancient Roman Catholike forbearing that more orderly course which I had intended for the performance of this worke and choosing rather to follow him steppe by steppe as formerly I haue done only beginning where hee commeth to the purpose and leauing all his vagaries and affected discourses to be more briefly touched in the end of all Of this worke I haue yet finished but only one part wherin I haue at large discouered their vaine ostentation of the Catholike name and faith and shewed plainely that the Romish religion now accordeth not with S. Pauls Epistle to the Romans no nor with his other Epistles which M. Bishop calleth to assist him because he findeth nothing to helpe him in that Epistle to the Romans In all which I haue beene carefull gentle Reader to giue thee satisfaction by the cleare testimony either of some learned Bishops of Rome or of some other famously approued and commended in that Church Being now required a seruice of another kinde so that I cannot yet goe forward with the rest I haue thought good to publish this in the meane time If I haue promised any thing in this that is not here performed expect it in that that is to come Assist me I pray thee with thy prayers vnto almighty God by whose grace I hope in due time to supply that that is wanting now The Contents of this Booke CHAP. I. THat the Church of Rome doth vaineây and absurdly challenge to it selfe the name of the Catholike Church and hath no priuiledge from God either of superiority in gouernement or stability in faith CHAP. II. The comparison betwixt the Papists and the Donatists is iustified and enlarged CHAP. III. That the name of Catholikes is abused by the Papists and is in their abuse a Donatisticall and hatefull name of faction and schisme that being in that sort substantiuely and personally vnderstood it was not vsed for three hundred yeares after Christ and therefore being abused may bee left againe that Popery properly so called is nothing but additions of latter time to our religion CHAP. IIII. That the Church before Christ euen from the beginning was a part of the Catholike Church and that the faith and religion of the new Testament differeth not in substance from the old M. Bishops proofes for Popery out of the old Testament are shewed to be ridiculous and vaine In the end is a briefe defence of the Kings supremacy in causes Ecclesiasticall CHAP. V. That faith and religion cannot be safely grounded on the example of Fathers and fore-fathers and that the Popish agents and factours doe in this pretence also abuse the credulity of ignorant men CHAP. VI. That the reasons of Popery where there is not a minde preiudicate are not vrgent or forcible and that M. Bishop was iustly censured for that in repeating a rule deliuered by the Kings Maiestie for iudgement of true religion he left out some words thereof CHAP. VII Of the flourishing and best estate of the Church of Rome and of the testimony of Theodoret concerning fulnesse of doctrine contained in the Epistle to the Romans and that the Apostle there condemneth Popery of idolatry in worshipping Saints and Images CHAP. VIII That iustification before God consisteth not in proceeding from faith to workes but in the continuation of faith to faith and that this faith notwithstanding cannot be separated from charity and good workes CHAP. IX That the iustification of man before God is the imputation of righteousnesse without workes CHAP. X. That eternall life is meerly and wholly the gift of God and cannot be purchased by merit or desert CHAP. XI That concupiscence or lust is sinne euen in the very habit and first motions of it CHAP. XII Of the spirit of adoption giuing witnesse to the faithfull that they are the sonnes of God CHAP. XIII That the good workes or sufferings of this life are not meritorious or worthy
M. Bishop shew you selfe a man of your word let vs see that which you say is deduced out of Gods word for as for the exposition of the Fathers it auaileth not if it be not deduced out of the word of God Hee is dumbe and can say no more if you will take the Fathers exposition for a deduction out of Gods word be it so otherwise deduce he that can for M. Bishop can deduce nothing Albeit let vs aske him who be those ancient Fathers that haue expounded the Roman Church to be the Rocke vpon which the Church is built What M. Bishop are you afraid to name them Though you set not downe their words yet did not leisure serue you to quote them in the margent of your book that we might take knowledge of them It is true that St. Peter is sometimes termed the Rocke vpon which the Church was built but who euer said that the Rock is the Church of Rome or that the Church is built vpon the Roman Church The truth is that he belieth the Fathers and fathereth vpon them that which they neuer meant The Rocke vpon which Christ would build his Church is often by the Fathers expounded to be Christ himselfe and the true faith confession of Christ e Aug. de verb. Dom. serâ 13. Super hanc Petram quam confessus es super hanc petraÌ quam cognouisti diceâ Tu es Christus c. adisicabâ Ecclesiam med id est super meipsum fiâium Dei viui c. Vpon this Rocke which thou hast confessed saith Austin vpon this Rocke which thou hast acknowledged saying Thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God I will build my Church that is vpon my selfe being the sonné of the liuing God f Hilar. de Trinit lib. 6. Super banc confessionis Petram Ecclesiâ aedificatiâ est c Haec fides Ecclesiae fundamentum est per hanc fidem infirma aduersus cam sunt portae inferorum hâc fides regni câlestis babet âlâues c. Vpon this Rocke of confession faith Hilary is the building of the Church This faith is the foundation of the Church by this faith the gates of hell preuaile not against it this faith hath the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen c. Chrysostome saith g Chrysost in Math. hom 56. Super hanc Petram id est fideÌ confessionem Vpon this Rocke that is this faith and confession Theodoret likewise expoundeth it h Theodor. in Cant. l. 2. PetraÌ appellat fidei pietatem veritatis professionâ c. the piety of faith the profession of truth Anâbrose saith i Ambros in Ephâ c. 2. Super hanc petram c. id est in hac Catholicae fidei confessione statuam fideles ad vitam Vpon this Rocke will I build my Church that is in this confession of the Catholike faith will I stablish the faithfull vnto life and againe that those wordes of the Apostle k Ibid. In quo omnis structura c. Hic sensus est vnde Dominus aât super hanc petram c. In him that is in Christ all the building is coupled together c. are the sense and meaning of that which the Lord saith vpon this Rocke will I build my Church And thus the whole number of the Bishops of Palestina in the Councell of Chalcedon vnderstood it l Epist Iuuenal Episc Palest in append Concil Chalced. Super hanc confessionem roberata est Ecclesia Dei Vpon this confession the Church of God is confirmed and strengthened By many other such like expositions of the ancient Fathers it may appeare that Christ IâSVS euen the true faith of Christ for Christ is nothing to vs but by faith is the true Rocke whereupon the Church is builded that the gates of hell may not preuaile against it And to this St. Iohn accordeth m 1. Iohn 5. 4. 5. This is the victory that ouercommeth the world ãâã our faith for who is it that ouercommeth the world but he that beleeueth that Iesus is the sonne of God If Christ then be the Rocke by faith in him how falsly doth M. Bishop deale to foist in the Roman Church in steede of Christ or of the faith of Christ Now if Christ properly and truly be the Rocke then it can be but accidentally and vnproperly that Peter is so called only in respect of his doctrine and example of faith expressed and vttered in his confession n Math. 16. 16. Thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God As Abraham is o Esa 51. 1. the Rocke from whence we are hewed so is Peter the Rocke whereupon we are built not for that either of them conferreth any thing to vs but only for that they stand before vs for patternes of imitation whereto we are to conforme our selues that togither with them we may be builded vpon the true Rocke p 1. Cor. 3. 11. that foundation beside which no other may be laid which is Iesus Christ. But in this Peter was not alone the rest of the Apostles as well as hee q Iohn 6. 69. beleeuing and knowing that Iesus was Christ the sonne of the liuing God Yea and in the place where Peter vttereth that confession as the question was asked of all the Apostles Whom say yee that I am so we must vnderstand also and so St. Austin affirmeth that r Augustin in Psal 88. Respondens Petrus pro omnibus vnus pro vnitate Peter answered for all one for vnity and consequently that all being in the like case the wordes which Christ returneth though in token of vnity vttered to one yet in that vnity did appertaine to all Therefore by the words there spoken to Peter Hiârome concludeth that Å¿ Hieron in Amos lib. 3. c. 6. Petra christus est qui donauit Apostolis suiâ vt ipsi quoque Petra vocentur Tu es Petrus super hac petram c. Christ the Rocke gaue not to one only Apostle but to his Apostles that they also should be called Rocks And in like sort Origen conceiueth it when he saith t Origen in Math. cap. 16. Quod si super vnum illum Petrum tantum existimas âdificari totaâ Ecclesiam quid dicturus es de Ioanne filio tonitrâi Apoâlolorââ vnâ quoque Quin alioqui num audebimus dicere quòd aduersus Petrum vnum noÌ prâualiturâ sinâ portâ inferorâ aduensus caeleros auââ Apostolos praeualiturae sinâ ac noÌ potius in omnibus singuliââorum fit illud quod dictum est super ãâã Petram c. Quòd si dictum hoc Tiâi dabo claues c. câteris quoque commune est cur non simul omnia quae prius dicta sânt quae sequuntâr ãâã ad Petrum dicta sunt omnium communia If thou thinke that the Church was built vpon Peter only what wilt thou say of Iohn the sonne of thunder euery of the Apostles shal we dare
men p Iren. l. 3. c. 3. Ad hanc Ecclesiam propter potentârem principalitatem necesse est omnem conuenire Ecclesiam hoc est eos qui sunt vndique fideles in que semper abhis qui sunt vndique conseruata est ea qua est ab Apostolis Traditiâ To this Church saith he because of her more potent principality it is necessary for euery Church to accord that is the faithfull euery where wherein the Tradition which came from the Apostles hath beene alwaies preserued Now take this reason added by Ireneus which by M. Bishop is concealed and it will plainly appeare why it was necessary for other Churches to accorde with the Church of Rome For this Church for the renowme and famousnesse of the place being then the seate of the Empire was the most eminent Church in the world and therefore continuing still in the doctrine of the Apostles without alteration or change it was most fit of all other to be propounded as a patterne to other Churches whereto to conforme themselues and with which whosoeuer accordeth not did thereby swarue from the doctrine of the Apostles But the case is now altered because the Church of Rome it selfe is now questioned for swaruing from the Tradition of the Apostles which being so that cannot be said to be necessary now which was necessary so long as shee continued in that Tradition And thus sarre we finde only a necessity of consenting then in doctrine with the Church of Rome but for her superiority in gouernement wee finde nothing Yes saith M. Bishop for Ireneus attributeth to the Church of Rome a mightier or more potent principality which what should it import will he say but a superiority of Dominion and gouernment ouer all other Churches But I answer him that principality doth not enforce soueraignty and dominion for he himselfe is holden for a principall man amongst the Seminary Priests and yet hee hath no rule or dominion ouer them Principality importeth specialty and chiefty and noteth an honour of estimation and account and thus the Church of Rome though hauing no title of dominion for ruling and gouerning yet had the honour to bee a chiefe and principall aboue other Churches Now principality is alwayes potent and they that are chiefe and eminent aboue others sway much by their example and perswasion and their very names are very auailable to induce other whom notwithstanding they haue no authority to command according to that which Hilary saith that q Hilar. Epist apud August tom 7. Plureâ sunt in Ecclesia qui authoritate nominum in sententia tenentur aut ad sententiam transferuâtur in the Church there are many who by authority of names are moued either to hold still their opinion or to alter and change the same Such and no other was the potent principality of the Church of Rome and thus doth Ireneus in the same place say that that Church r Iren. vt supr scrip Sit qua est Româ Ecclesia potentissimas literas Coâinthijs c. wrote most potent letters to the Corinthians namely such as were effectuall and strong to moue them and the rather for that they came from such a famous and renowmed place And that M. Bishop may vnderstand that I doe not answere him by a deuice of mine but according to the truth he shall find that Cyprian calleth the Church of Rome Å¿ Cypr. lib. 1. Epist 3. Ad Petri Cathedram Ecclesiam principalem c. the principall Church and yet in the same place he denieth t Ibid. Nauigare audent ad Petri CathedraÌ c. Oportet eos quibus praesumâs non circumcursare c. Nisi paucis dâsperatis âerditis minor esse videtur authoritas Episcoporum in Africa constitutorlâ c. the authority of the Bishops of Africa to be inferiour to the Bishop of Rome And thus the African Councell acknowledgeth the Church of Rome to be u Conc. Afric cap. 6. Primae sedis Episcopus non appelletur Princâps Sacerdotum aut summus Sacerdos aut aliquid huiusmodi sed tantùm primae sedis Episcopus the first or principall Sea and the Bishop thereof they terme the Bishop of the first or principall Sea and yet they denied to the Bishops of Rome to haue any authority ouer them Yea when Zozimus Bonifacius and Celestmus challenged the same by a forged Canon of the Nicene Councell those x Ibid. c. 101. Quia hic in nullo câdiââ Grâcâ ea poââimus inuenirâ ex Orientalibus Ecclesijs vbi perhibetur eadem decreta posse etiam authentica reperiri magis nobis desideramus adferri African Bishops for the disprouing thereof sent to the Patriarches of Antioch Alexandria and Constantinople for authenticall copies of the said Councell wherein they found no such matter and y Ibid. c. 105. Vt aliqui tanquam à tuae sanctitatis latere mittantur nulla inuenimus patrum Synodo constitutum Quod ex parte Nicem Concilij transmisistis in Concilijs verioribus tale aliquid non potuimus reperââe Executores Cleâicos vestros quibusque petentibus nolite mittere c. thereupon wrote to Celestinus that he should forbeare to send his Legates to entermeddle in their matters and z Ibid. c. 92. Non prouocent nisi ad Africana Concilia vel ad primates Prouinciarium sâârum ad transmarina autem qui putauerit appellandum à nullo intra Africam in communionem suscipiatur forbad all appeales saue to their owne Councels excommunicating them that presumed to appeale to Rome and in this recusancy of subiection they continued afterwards for the space of an hundred yeares vntill Eulalââs the Bishop of Carthage if it be true which is reported of him and not coyned at Rome betrayed the liberty of that Church and submitted the same to Boniface the second who doubted not most wickedly to say of those African Bishops of whom the learned Father St. Austin was one that a Bonifac. 2. Epist ad Eulal tom 2. Concil Aurelius Carthaginensis Ecclesiâ olim Episcopus cum collegis suis infâigante Diabolo superbire teÌporibâ praedecessorum Bonifacij atque Celestini coÌtra RomanaÌ Ecclesiam coepit by the instigation of the Diuell they had then begunne proudly to demeane themselues against the Church of Rome As for that potent principality of the Roman Church and necessity of according therewith which M. Bishop intendeth Polycarpus knew it b Euseb hist l. 5. c. 23. Neque enim Anicetâ suadere Polycarpâ poterat ne seruaret c. quae semper seruauerat not when he would not be perswaded by Anicetus Bishop of Rome to keepe the feast of Easter according to the manner of the Church of Rome Neither did c Ibid. cap. 22. Episcopis per Asiam qui morem ipsis ab antiquo traditum retineÌdum esse affirmabant prâerat Polycrates Polycrates the Bishop of Ephesus with the rest of the Churches of Asia acknowledge
any such when they withstood Victor Bishop of Rome in the same cause and neglected his excommunication the same Polycrates alleaging for himselfe that d Ibid. Ego qui sanctam Scripturam volui ac reuolui non târbabor illis quae terrendi gratia obijciuntur Etânim maiorâs mei Deo magis quà m hominibus obedienâââ esse dixerunt hauing read the holy Scripture ouer and ouer he would not be troubled with those things that were threatned to him because his ancestors had taught him rather to obey God then men Neither did e CoÌcil Carthag apud Cyprian Per totum Cyprian and his African Bishops conceiue any such when in their Councell they determined the point of the Baptisme of Heretikes professedly against the knowen iudgement of the Bishop and Church of Rome whether truly or falsly that skilleth not only hereby it appeareth that they had not learned nor did beleeue M. Bishops necessity of according with the Church of Rome Neither did the Easterne Churches imagine any such principality in the church of Rome when as Leo hauing affirmed it to be f Leo. Epist 62. Ad octauum Calend. Maiar Paschalem obseruantiam perducere nimis insolens aperta transgressio est a strange and manifest trespasse or transgression to bring Easter day to the eighth of the Calends of May he was faine notwithstanding to yeeld g Idem Epist 93. Studio vnitatis pacis malui Orientalium definitioni acquiescere quà m in tantae festiuitatis obseruantia dissidere to them therein because they would not yeeld to him Neither did Hierome beleeue any such who writing purposely in derogation of the Church of Rome saith h Hieron epist ad Euagr. Si authoritas quaritur vrbis maior est vrbe c. Quid mihi prâfers vnius vrbis consuetudinââ quid paucitatem de qâa ortum est supercilium in leges Ecclesiâ vindicas If authority be required the whole world is greater then one City what doest thou bring me the custome of one City why doest thou maintayne a paucity or fewnesse whence hath growen proud vsurping vpon the lawes of the Church Neither did Ambrose admit it who for defence of a ceremony vsed in his Church of Millan saith i Ambros de Sacram. lib. 3. cap. 1. Cupio in omnibus sequi Romanam Ecclesiam sed tamen nos homines sensum habemus I desire in all things to follow the Church of Rome but wee also are men that haue vnderstanding and therefore what is more rightly obserued otherwhere wee iustly obserue the same Neither was it acknowledged by the sixe hundred and thirty Bishops of the Councell of Chalcedon who affirming k Chalcedon Concil Act. 15. Can. 28. Antiquae Roma throno quòd vrbs illa imperaret iure patres priuilegia tribuere ât eadem considerationâ moâi centum quinquaginta Dei amaâtissimi Episcopi Sanctâssimo noua Româ throâo âqualia priuilegia tribuere rectè iudicantes vrbem quae Imperio Senatu honorata sit c. etiam in rebus Ecclesiasticis non secus ac illam extollâ c. the priuiledges of the Church of Rome to haue beene giuen to it by the Fathers before fâr that that City was the seate of the Empire did for the same consideration giue to the Church of Constantinople equall priuiledges with the Church of Rome when the City of Constantinople was honoured with the Empire and Senate as well as the City of Rome which in the l Synod 6. in Trullo Can. 36. Decernimus vt thronus Constantinopolitanus aequalia priuilegia cum antiquâ Romae throno obtiâeat sixt Synode holden at Constantinople in Trullo by almost three hundred Bishops more was againe approued and confirmed Now then by the continuall practise of the Church it appeareth that the wordes of Ireneus cannot be truly applied to approue any superiority of gouernement to appertaine to the Church of Rome As little doe the wordes of Cyprian auaile to challenge thereto certaine continuance and stability in true faith who exagitating the tumultuous and disorderly courses of certaine lewd and schismaticall persons who being censured by the Bishops of Africa sought to patronage themselues vnder the fauor of the Bishop of Rome vpbraideth them that m Cyprian lib. 1. Epist 3. Nec cogiââre âos esse Romanos quorum fides Apostolo praedicante laudata est ad quos perfidia habâre non possit accessum they considered not that the Romans were men whose faith by the testimony of the Apostle was commended to whom perfidiousnesse can or may haue no accesse Where M. Bishop adding in his translation of the wordes or falshood in matters of faith to make the wordes serue his purpose thrusteth them quite from the purpose of him that wrote them It made nothing for Cyprians purpose that falshood in matters of faith could haue no accesse to the Romans the thing that hee aimeth at is that in matters of iurisdiction perfidious and trecherous persons iustly punished for their euill demeanours and thereupon comming to Rome with lies and tales should finde no admittance or harbour there M. Bishop though hee giue to the Bishop of Rome a priuiledge not to erre in deciding matters of faith yet will not denie but that hee may erre in cases and proceedings of iurisdiction and in examining and iudging matters of fact may giue countenance to lewde and vngracious men as hee did to the Iesuites against the Priests It beeing then impertinent here to Cyprians occasion to affirme the Church of Rome to bee free from errour in question of faith either wee must make him speake idlely or else wee must construe his wordes the other way that those lewde and euill disposed persons should finde no fauour or entertainement there Which hee saith cannot bee not as to affirme an impossibility thereof but as to signifie how farre hee presumed of their integrity in this behalfe and that they would make good the Apostles commendation of their faith one fruit whereof should bee to resist the courses of such tumultuous disturbers of Ecclesiasticall order and peace and to yeeld no accesse or âare to their calumnious and false suggestions Gregory Nazianzene well noteth that in diuers meanings it may bee said of a thing that it cannot bee n Greg. Nazianz Orat. 5. Significata horuÌ posse vel noÌ posse coÌplura sunt Interdum dicuntur de virium desectu certo huius tempore respectâ alicuius c. Interdum vsurpamus de eo quod vt plurimùm accidit c. NonnunquaÌ vt rationi non consentaneum c. Nonnunquam vt quod voluntas noÌ admittat c. Praeterea quod natârae quidem respectu sieri nequit praestari autâm à Deo potest si is velit c. Praeter haec quod prorsus vel fieri vel contingere nequit c. First to note want of strength at a certayne time and in some respect as to say of a
child that hee cannot wrastle which notwithstanding beeing growen hee can Secondly it signifieth that such a thing commonly or for the most part cannot bee as when it is said A Citty that is set vpon a hill cannot bee hidde which notwithstanding by interposing somewhat may bee hidden and not seene Thirdly that wee say cannot bee which is not conuenient or agreeable to reason as when it is said The children of the Bride-chamber so long as the Bridegroome is with them cannot fast meaning that so long it is not reasonable or fitting so to doe Fourthly it is said cannot bee which the will admitteth not or liketh not to doe as when the Euangelist saith of our Sauiour He could doe no great miracles there because of their vnbeliefe wherein is a relation to the former meaning the will not admitting that which is not fitting or conuenient to be done Fiftly we say that can not be which by naturall course cannot be though by the power of God it may be done And lastly we say so of that which in no sort can be and is wholly and altogether vnpossible It was farre from Cyprians meaning that it was a thing wholly vnpossible for the Romans to admit the hearing of such persons for if he had so thought what needed he so much to labour Cornelius the Bishop in that behalfe but he would note it as a thing vnfitting to that testimony which the Apostle had giuen of them and which being so vniust he assured himselfe they would by no meanes yeeld vnto Euen in the same manner as Gregory saith that o Greg. Mor. l. 33. c. 22. Iniqui si apârtè malâ essent à bonis omninò recipi non possent men openly euill cannot be receiued or entertained of them that be good and as Marcellinus saith of a Bishop that p Collat. cum Donat. 1. c. 62. Falsi crimen nec obijcere condecet sacerdotem nec committere potuisse credendum est it beseemeth him not to obiect falshood to another nor is it to be beleeued that he could commit the same himselfe and as Leo saith q Leo. Epist 52. Priuilegia EcclesiaruÌ Sanctorum patrum Canonibus instituta Nicena Synodi fixa decretis nulla possunt improbitate conuellâ nulla noâitate mutari The priuiledges of Churches established by the Canons of the Fathers and by the decrees of the Nicene Councell cannot by any sinister practise be impeached on by any nouelty changed and as we commonly say out of the law Id tantùm possumus quod iure possumus r Aug. cont Gaudent lib. 2. c. 22. Quod non potest iustè non potest iustus We can doe that only which we can lawfully doe or as St. Austin saith to the same effect The iust man cannot doe what he cannot iustly doe agreeable to the wordes of the Apostle Å¿ 2. Cor. 13. 8. Wee can doe nothing against the truth but for the truth Where as in infinite places more wee may not vnderstand a meere deniall of possibility but a signification of improbability of vndecency or breach of duty if the thing bee done that is spoken of euen as St. Austin expoundeth the wordes of the Angel to Lot t Genes 19. 22. I can doe nothing till thou be come thither u Aug. cont Gaudent lib. 2. c. 22. Non posse se dixit quod sine dubiâ poterat per potentiam sed non poterat per iustitiam He saith he could not which doubtlesse by power he could but by iustice he could not doe Now if M. Bishop be pecuishly wilfull against common sense to vnderstand perfidiousnesse of falshood or errour in matters of faith yet that Cyprian can be vnderstood no otherwise but according to the same meaning it is infallibly proued for that in a matter of faith he with his Councell of African Bishops as I said before determineth contrary to the Church of Rome and of Stephanus the Bishop of Rome saith expresly that hee x Cyprian ad Pompei Haereticorum causam contra Christianos coÌtra Ecclesiam Dei assârere conatur c. Imperitè atque improuidè scripsit c. Quae ista obstinatio quaeuâ prâsumptio humanam traditionem diuina dispositioni anteponere c. vnitatem veritati de diuina lege venientem noÌ tenens hâresâm contra Ecclesiam vindicat endeauoured to mainteine the cause of Heretikes against Christians and against the Church of God that he wrote ignorantly and vnwarily that obstinately and presumptuously he preferred the Tradition of man before the ordinance of God that not holding the vnity and truth that proceeded from the law of God he defended heresie against the Church Wherein although it be true that Cyprian did erre yet we cannot doubt but that vpon aduertisement giuen him by the Bishop of Rome he would haue reformed his errour and submitted himselfe to the iudgement of that Church if he had knowen that priuiledge of immunity from errour which M. Bishop now by his testimony challengeth thereunto In a word to shew the weaknesse of the foundation whereupon M. Bishop buildeth all this fable Cyprian where he saith as the other Fathers sometimes doe y Cypr. Epist ad Iubaian alt ad Quirin Petrus super queÌ Dominus aedisâcauit Ecclesiam suam that Christ builded his Church vpon Peter in the very same place disputeth against the sentence of the Bishop of Rome thereby plainly declaring that from Peter to the Bishop of Rome there is by his iudgement no such priuiledge deriued as these men so infinitely babble of Now though his proofes hitherto be vaine yet those that follow are more vaine beside that hee is faine to report them falsly to giue them that little colour that they seeme to haue Ambrose saith he taketh it to be all one to say the Catholike and the Roman Church Forsooth Ambrose reporteth that his brother Satyrus hauing escaped the danger of shipwracke and being come to land was destrous in token of thanks-giuing to receiue the Sacrament So it was that the heresie or schisme of the Luciferians at that time preuailed in those parts and hee was carefull by no meanes to communicate with them Therefore z Ambros de obitu Fratris Percontatus ex âo est vtruââam cum Episcopâs Catholicis hoc est cum Romana Ecclesia conâeniret he questioned with the Bishop whom hee had sent for vnto him whether hee accorded with the Catholike Bishops that is with the Roman Church Hee held it not enough to name Catholike Bishops because Heretikes and Schismatikes doe take vpon them to be called Catholikes but because he knew the Church of Rome then retayned the Catholike faith he would take knowledge of them to be Catholike Bishops by this that they ioyned themselues in fellowship of faith with the Roman Church And is not here thinke you a goodly reason They were then Catholike Bishops that did communicate with the Church of Rome therefore
it is all one now to say the Catholike and to say the Roman Church The Church of Rome as the most famous and chiefe Church was most fit to bee named in this case but otherwise it may euen as well be said They were Catholike Bishops that coÌmunicated with the Church of Millan where Ambrose was Bishop therefore to say the Church of Millan is all one as to say the Catholike Church As little discretion is there in his next allegation out of Hierome who mentioning the words of Ruffinus concerning some workes of Origen by him translated The Latin Reader shall finde nothing in them different from our faith demandeth thus a Hieron Apolog aduers Ruffin lib. 1. Fide suam quam vocat Eamnè qua Romana pollet Ecclesia an illam quâ Origenis voluminibus continâtur si Romanam respondeâit ergo Catholâci sumus qui nihil de Origenis errore transtulimus c. Which calleth hee his faith that which the Church of Rome professeth or that which is contained in the bookes of Origen If he answere the Roman faith then are we Catholikes who haue translated nothing of the errour of Origen For what is there here said of the Roman Church but what might likewise bee saâd of any other Church professing the true faith The argument followeth because the Roman Church did then maintayne the true Catholike faith so should it follow of the rest If he professe the faith of the Church of Constantinople of Antioch of Alexandria yea of the poore Church of Eugubium then is he a Catholike because al these did then professe the Catholike faith But what is this to M. Bishops purpose to proue in the Church of Rome a priuiledge of continuance and stability in the same true Catholike faith to proue that the Roman faith should bee alwaies the certayne and vndoubted patterne of the true Catholike faith In which conclusion his other Authours also doe all faile him who though it be graunted him that they did as he saith proue themselues then to be Catholikes and their Churches Catholike by declaring themselues to communicate with the Church of Rome and their aduersaries to bee Heretikes because they did not so for that the Church of Rome was then famously knowen to haue continued the same from the beginning in the points of faith then impugned by the Heretikes yet very idlely and childishly are they alleaged to proue that which M. Bishop intendeth that it should alwayes thenceforth continue so But indeede hee racketh his Authours and wrongeth them neither doe they say that which hee would haue them taken to say Tertullian appealeth to other Churches as well as to the Church of Rome and referreth his Reader to the most famous of them accordingly as they are nearest at hand b Tertul. de praescript Percurre Ecclesiaâ Apostolicas apud quas ipse adhuc Cathedrae Apostolorum suis locis praesidentur c. Proxima est tibi Achaiai habes Corinthum Si non longè es a Macedonia habes Philippos habes Thessalonicenses Si potes in Asiam tenderâ habes Ephesum Si autem Italâae adiaces habes Romanam Runne through the Apostolike Churches in which there are Bishops still sitting in the seates of the Apostles in their places Is Achaia next vnto thee thou hast Corinthus If thou be not farre from Macedonia thou hast Philippos and the Thessalonians If thou canst goe into Asia thou hast Ephesus If thou border vpon Italie thou hast the Church of Rome What is there here for M. Bishops turne c Epiph. haeres 27. Epiphanius setteth downe a Catalogue of the Bishops of Rome but saith not a word to that effect as M. Bishop citeth him Optatus approueth his part to be Catholike not simply by communicating with the Church of Rome but for that togâther with the Church of Rome d Optat. lib. 2. Siâicius hodie noster est socius cum quo nobis totus orbis coÌmercio formatarum in vna communionis societate concordant they communicated with thââhurch of the whole world Yea in the same booke hee attributeth as much in this behalfe to the seuen Churches of Asia as to the Church of Rome therby as strongly reproueth the Donatists e Ibid. Cum quibus Ecclesijs nullum communionis probamini habere consârtiâ c. Extra septem Ecclesias quicquid soris est alienum est You are proued to haue no fellowship of coÌmunion with the seuen Churches Whatsoeuer is without the seuen Churches is stranger to the Church Austin setteth downe the succession of the Bishops of Rome and vpbraideth the Donatists that f Aug. Epist 165. In hoc ordine successionis nullus Donatista Episcopiâ inuenitur no Donatist was found amongst them but as well doth he obiect to them that whereas g Ibid. Quile gunt in codicibus sanctis Ecclesias quibus Apostoli scripseruÌt nullum in eis habeÌt Episcopum Quid autem peruersius insaniê° quà m lectoribê° easdem Epistolas legentibus dicere pax tecum ab earum EcclesiaruÌ pace separare quibus ipsa Epistolae scriplae suÌt they read the Epistles of the Apostles they diuided themselues from the peace and fellowship of those Churches to which the Apostles wrote the same Epistles So then in all these Authors which he alleageth he doth but meerely abuse his reader which is the cause why he thus set downe their names without their wordes for that he presumed that only alleaging their names men would imagine that vndoubtedly they said somewhat for him whereas if he had set downe their wordes euery man might see that they said nothing Yea but it is greatly to be noted saith M. Bishop that there is no generall Councell of sound authority wherein the Christian truth hath beene expounded and determined but is confirmed by the Bishop of Rome Well and it is as greatly to be noted that the sentence of no Bishop of Rome was anciently holden sufficient for the deciding of a question of faith except the same were confirmed by a generall Councell Therefore doth Leo Bishop of Rome mention h Leo epist 61. Apostolicae sedis Epistola vniuersali sancta Synodi assensâ firmata Et Epist 70. Scripta mea adiecta vniuersalis Synodi coÌfirmatione c. his Epistle against the heresie of Eutyches confirmed by the vniuersall assent of the sacred Synode and his writings hauing the confirmation of the generall Councell added thereto And what his authority was in the Councell it may be conceiued by that he wrote to the Councell of Ephesus i Idem Epist 14. Misi qui vice mea sancto conueÌtui vestrae fraternitatis intersint communi vobiscum sententia qua Domino sint placitura constituant I haue sent my deputies to be present with you in your assembly and by sentence in common to decree those things which may be pleasing to the Lord where wee see that he challengeth no more but a voice in common with the
testimony of Pighius one of his owne fellowes should be sufficient to choake him a Pigh Eccles Hierarch l. 6. cap. 3. Quis per RâmanaÌ Ecclesiam vnquam intellexit aut vniuersalem Ecclesiam aut generale Concilium Who did euer by the Roman church vnderstand the vniuersall Church A generall Councell is holden to be by representation the vniuersal or Catholike church and who was there euer so far out of his wits as to cal a generall Councell the Roman Church The seuen Churches of Asia haue been taken to betoken the vniuersall Church as we haue seene before but who euer said or thought that they did betoken the Roman church Now whereas he telleth vs that it may be so taken I answer him that so some man may take M. Bishop to signifie a ioined-stoole For if men will take names words to signifie what they list why may not some man be as wilfull in the one as he seeth them witlesse in the other What authority haue they to impose significations vppon words and phrases contrary to the first original thereof and to the alwaies continued custome and vse of the whole Church The Church of Christ absolutely is but one dispersed and scattered ouer the whole world Of this one Church there are notwithstanding diuers parts which all being in nature alike are by the name of the whole called by the name of b Act. 15. 41. Rom. 16. 16. Churches For distinction of these Churches they haue euery of them their denomination of the places where they are The church of Antioch is called c Act. 13. 1. the Church which is at Antioch the Church of Corinth is d 1. Cor. 1. 2. the Church of God which is at Corinth the Church of Ephesus are e Ephes 1. 1. the Saints which are at Ephesus And thus when the Apostle meant to write to the Church of Rome he writeth f Rom. 1. 7. to all that be at Rome beloued of God c. For as the Church of Thessalonica is g 1. Thess 1. 1. the Church of the Thessaelonians that is of them that inhabite Thessalonica so the Church of Rome is the Church of the Romans that is of them that inhabite Rome And thus we see that in the inscriptions of the Epistles of the ancient Bishops of Rome accordingly as we haue them albeit sometimes they wrote themselues Bishops of the Catholike Church yet doe shew that they meant it no otherwise then as all Bishops wrote themselues Bishops of the Catholike Church as I haue before shewed namely with limitation thereof to the Citty of Rome whereof they were Bishops without euer dreaming of M. Bishops vniuersall Roman Church Thus we finde h Calixt Epist 1. Calixtus Archiepiscopus Ecclesiae Catholicae vrbis Romae Calixtus Archbishop of the Catholike Church of the Citty of Rome i Marcellin Epist 1. Marceilinus Episcopus Sanctae Ecclesiae Catholicae vrbis Romanae Marcellinus Bishop of the holy Catholike Church of the Citty of Rome k Marcell Epist 2. Marcellus Episcopus Sanctae Apostolicae Catholicae vrbis Romae Marcellus Bishop of the holy and Apostolike and Catholike Citty of Rome And so Leo onewhere writing himselfe l Leo. Epist 13. Leo Catholicae Romanae Ecclesiae Episcopus Leo Bishop of the Catholike Roman Church doth otherwhere plainly expresse the meaning thereof m Epist 1 2. 3. Leo vrbis Romae Epi copios Et Epist 12. Leo Papa Ecclesiae Catholicae vrbis Romae Leo Bishop of the City of Rome Leo Bishop of the Catholike Church of the Citty of Rome To bee short it is not to bee found that euer the Church of Rome was otherwise vnderstood but only for the Church of the Citty of Rome and shall wee hearken to these new vpstart Minters that thus coyne vs a Church of Rome that was neuer heard of before And therefore it is nothing to vs what they by abuse of speech teach their followers to say let their French Disciples say they are of the Catholike Roman Church we vnderstand them thereby to take part with the Church of Rome but the Church of Rome is that of Rome only whereto they addict themselues Albeit by that addition what doe they but shew themselues Sectaries and Schismatikes diuiding themselues factiously apart from the whole the Catholike Roman Church absurdly so named by themselues from that which is absolutely and therefore truly called the Catholike Church For the Catholike Church is the whole Church as hath beene said but Roman put to it is a terme of diminution and abridgeth the whole to a part the vniuersall to a particular because the whole is not Roman Therefore to say Catholike Roman is to say Catholike not Catholike and Roman Catholikes are Catholikes which are no Catholikes and of them it may be truly said which Optatus said of the Donatists n Optat lib. 2. Vultis vos solos esse totum qui in omni toto non estis You would haue your selues only to be the whole who are not in all the whole Now here we may aske them with what face they can talke of antiquity who haue brought into the Church so strange a nouelty as this is The name of Catholikes and of the Catholike Church which pleased antiquity is not enough for them Pacianus said of old o Pacian ad Simpron epist 1. Christianus mihi nomen est Catholicus verò cognomen Christian is my name and Catholike my surname but that is changed now into Roman Catholike is my surname disclaiming thereby the communion and fellowship of the Catholike Church and banding themselues in a partiall and factious confederacy with the Roman Church Thus hauing departed from the ancient faith and discipline of the Catholike Church they doe notwithstanding for colouring of their Apostasie retaine certaine names and formalities thereof but they doe it so as that by their additions and constructions they make no other but mungrels and bastards of them And this appeareth by the reason that M. Bishop giueth of their adding Roman to Catholike namely to separate them that ioyne in faith with the Church of Rome from other sectaries because Catholikes were of old so called not for ioyning in faith with this or that Church but for being members of the vniuersall Church And if that reason were sufficient it should haue waighed of old as well as now when there were so many Sects and Heresies in the Church when Schismatikes and Heretikes vsurped to themselues the name of Catholikes and yet the Catholike saw no reason to draw the whole to the name of any part or to call themselues otherwise then by the name of Catholikes as resoluing to professe no other communion or fellowship but vniuersally with the Church of the whole world Neither was it otherwise till Antichrist had exalted himselfe in the Roman Sea who challenging to himselfe and his only to bee the Church of God tooke vpon him to
set his owne marke vpon the Church to call it the Catholike Roman Church and the members thereof Roman Catholikes that none should thenceforth bee called Catholikes but such as would bee called Roman Catholikes And hereof M. Bishop very rightly saith that hereby they separate those Catholikes that ioyne in faith with the Church of Rome from other sectaries as importing them also to bee Sectaries that ioyne in faith with the Church of Rome and that by this marke they are to bee knowen from other Sectaries For certaine it is that the name of Roman Catholike is a name of Sect and Schisme and an open proclaiming of a rent and diuision of the Catholike Church of Christ Now for conclusion of this passage hee telleth vs that out of the premises may bee gathered that the Roman Church may well signifie any Church holding the same faith which the Roman doth But what premises may wee thinke hee meaneth here Surely if this bee his conclusion wee finde here nothing but conclusion premises to proue it wee finde none Hee hath told vs before that it may bee so and here full wisely hee repeateth the same againe but neither before nor here doth hee say any thing whereof it should bee gathered that it may bee so And though it may be so yet it auaileth him nothing as hath beene said because it is but a part of the Church that ioyneth in faith with the Church of Rome and therefore the Roman Church cannot bee said to bee the whole Catholike Church so that my proposition still standeth good the Church of Rome is a particular Church and Master Bishop though hee bee a Doctor that sometimes vnderstandeth what hee speaketh yet is not so great a Doctor in this point as that hee can giue vs any reason why hee ought otherwise to vnderstand W. BISHOP §. 4. NOw to this his second sophistication The Roman Church by our rule is the head and all other Churches are members to it but the Catholike comprehendeth all ergo to say the Roman Church is the Catholike is to say the head is the whole body Here is first a mishâpen argument by which one may proue or disproue any thing for example I will 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 all wherefore to say the English Church is the Catholike Church is to say a member is the whole body Besides the counterfaite fashion of the argument there is a great fallacy in it for to omit Fellacia accidentis that wee say not the Church of Rome but the Bishop of Rome to be the head of the Church it is a soule fault in arguing as all Logitians doe vnderstand when one thing is said to be another by a metaphore to attribute all the properties of the metaphore to the other thing For example Christ our Sauiour is metaphorically said to bee a Lyon Vicit Leo de tribu Iuda now if therehence Apocal. 5. v. 5. any man would inferre that a Lyon hath foure legges and is no reasonable creature ergo Christ hath as many or is not indued with reason he might himselfe therefore bee well taken for an vnreasonable and blasphemous creature Euen so must M. Abbot bee who shifteth from that propriety of the metaphore Head which was to purpose vnto others that are cleane besides the purpose For as Christ was called a Lyon for his inuincible fortitude so the Bishop of Rome is called the head of the Church for his authority to direct gouerne the same but to take any other propriety of either Lyon 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 arguments that offend and be very vitious both in matter and for me and that so palpably that if young Logitians should stand vpon such in the paruies they would be hissed oât of the Schooles it must needs 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 full 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 writings are more meete to stop mustard-pots if I mistake not much then like to stop any meane Schollars mouth R. ABBOT HEre it may well be doubted whether M. Bishop were such a Doctor as to vnderstand himselfe because it should not seeme likely if hee had so done that hee would haue giuen such a brainlesse and stupide answere The first part thereof serueth to shew that when hee hath plaid the wise-man once he cannot be quiet vntill he haue done the like againe Of the shape of the argument I neede say no more then hath beene said of the former being of the same kinde and let him propound as he should that by the like it may be proued that the Church of England is not the Catholike Church and we acknowledge so much and doe take his argument as he hath set it downe The Church of England is only a member of the Catholike church but the Catholike church comprehendeth all wherâââre to sây the English Church is the Catholike Church is to say a member is the whole body Wee confesse it to be true and therefore we are not so absurd as to say that the Church of England is the Catholike Church wee affirme it to bee only a member and part thereof and may we not then thinke that this man hath made a doughty fray But beside the counterfait fashion of the argument there is saith he a great fallacy in it And how Marry first wee say not saith he that the Church of Rome but the Bishop of Rome is the head of the Church True it is M. Bishop that when yee compare togither the Church and the Bishop of Rome yee say that the Bishop of Rome is the head of the Church but is it not true also that when yee compare Church with Church yee say the Church of Rome is the head of all Churches Your Master a Bellarm. dâ Rom. Pont. lib. 2. cap. 13. câ Synod Nicen. 2. Act. 2. Capuâ omââium Ecclesâ arum Deâ Bellarmine hath cited this title as a matter of great moment out of the second Nicene Councel approuing the Epistle of Adrian where it is so called b Ibid. cap. 14. out of Sâricius Innocentius Iohn the second Pelagius the second Gregory the Great Bishops of Rome out of c Ibid. cap 16. Prosper and Victor Vticensis and doe you come now with your slecuâlesâc tale and tell vs that you say not so The truth is that
interpretaris sed ex obseruatione omnium praeceptorum diuinorum omnium Sacramentorum for interpreting the word Catholike not of the communion of the whole world but fâr the obseruation of all Gods Commandements and all the Sacraments and in the other place bringeth them in saying that b Breuic collar cum Donatist diâ 3. cap. 2. Donatistâe responderunt non Catholicum nomen ex vniuersitate gentium sed ex pâenitudine Sacramentoruââ institutum the word was instituted not to import vniuersality of nations but fulnesse of Sacraments but did I amisse for a briefe hereof to name perfection of doctrine and Sacraments Is not fulnesse of Sacraments the same with perfection of Sacraments and when they professed the obseruation of all Gods Commandements did they not thereby pretend an obseruation both to teach and practise all that God had commanded and is there not perfection of doctrine in teaching all Or if M. Bishop be foolishly wilfull and will say still that he seeth not perfection of doctrine in those wordes yet he might haue seene it in the very next wordes to those that I alleaged where St. Austin expresseth the Donatists conceipt in other termes thus that c Idem Epist 48. Si sorte hinc sit appellata Catholica quod totum veraciter teneat the Church is called Catholike for that it holdeth all wholly what but the whole Christian faith according to truth for what is perfection of doctrine but the holding of all according to truth And whereas he saith that St. Austin obserueth the Donatists to bee more sharpe-witted then to goe about to proue vniuersality by perfection a very ridiculous iest because Austin only in mockery telleth Vincentius that hee seemed to himselfe in so expounding the world Catholike as before to speake very acutely and wittily meaning that he did nothing lesse let Gaudentius himselfe a Donatist and a chiefe man amongst them tell him that by Catholike they did meane perfect d Coliat 3. âum Donatist cap. 102. Hoc est Catholicum nomen quod Sacramentis plânum est quod perfectum quod immaculatum The word Catholike importeth that which is full in Sacraments which is perfect which is vnspotted Now then as I haue in this point belyed the Donatists euen so and no otherwise in the application doe I belye the Roman Church M. Bishop saith that I should haue belyed them if I had sâid as due proportion required that they hold their Church to be Catholike as the Donatists did theirs for the perfection of doctrine and Sacraments But was he blinde and did he not see that I said so much Are not my wordes very expresse and cleare The same perfection of doctrine and Sacraments the Church of Rome now arrogateth to it selfe and will therefore be called the Catholike Church And what doe I therein belye the Roman Church Aske his owne fellow Bristow the great Motiue-Master who saith to Doctor Fulke e Reply to Fulke Chap. 10. Dem. 6. We tell you with the wordes of St. Austin that the Church our Mother is called Catholike of this because shee is vniuersally perfect and halteth in nothing though the Donatists and other like Heretikes doe neuer so much triumph in that interpretation and is spred ouer all the world Both interpretations agree to our Mother saith he and we claime them accordingly And it is true indeede that St. Austin in a worke which he wrote in his yonger time and which hee himselfe for the imperfection thereof f August Retract l. 1. c. 18. Quâm neque âd deram abolere decreueram had purposed wholly to suppresse doth giue that double interpretation of the word Catholike that the Church is so called g IdeÌ de Gen. ad lit imperf cap. 1. Quae Catholica diâitur ex eo quòd vniuersalitèr perfecta est in nullo âlaudicat per totum orbem dissusa est not only fâr that it is spred ouer all the world but also for that it is vniuersally perfect and halteth in nothing but in his further experience and iudgement hauing speciall occasion to discusse and examine that point he leaueth that interpretation wholly to the Donatists and neuer vouchsafeth once to make mention of it In the meane time notwithstanding seeing Bristow a Catholike writer of their creation hath so affirmatiuely told vs and claimed it to the Church of Rome to be Catholike in that sense let it be considered with what discretion M. Bishop saith that so to say of them is manifestly vntrue and clearely against the doctrine of all Catholike writers And whereas he concludeth that perfection of doctrine and Sacraments though it be only found in the Catholike Church yet is so farre wide from the signification and vse of the word Catholike that none except such wise men as M. Abbot is doe thinke any thing to be Catholike because it is perfect to say nothing that St. Austin when he gâue that construction was vndoubtedly as wise as M. Bishop let the same wise M. Bishop tell vs what he thinketh of Cyril of Hierusalem who amongst diuers reasons of the name of the Catholike Church giueth one that it is so called h Cyril Hierosol Catech. 18. Quia docet Catholicè hoc est vniuersalâtèr sine vllo defectâ vel differentia omnia dogmata quae deberent veâre in cognitionem because it teacheth Catholikely that is vniuersally and without any defect or difference all doctrines that are to be knowen Yea let him tell vs what he thinketh of Pacianus whom he named before as his Authour for i Pacian ad Symphââian Catholicus vt doctiâes pâtant obedientia omnium nuncupatur âândatorum scilicet Dei Catholike to be the surname to Christian who noteth it for the opinion of the learned that Catholike signifieth obedience to all the Commandements of God Which I say not as to approue that which either Austin or Cyril or Pacâanus haue said in that behalfe but that it may appeare what wise men M. Bishop maketh of the Fathers yea and of his owne fellowes when he list not âlieking to crosse both the one and the other so that hee can thereby shift for the present to saue himselfe But Bristow is our witnesse as we haue seene that the Church of Rome doth call it selfe Catholike as the Donatists did for the perfection of doctrine and Sacraments and M. Bishop hath shewed himselfe scantly wise in the deniall of it because it being manifest to all that are not blinde that it is a meere foppery and cogging deuice of theirs to say that the Roman Church is spred ouer the whole world either he must proue the same to be Catholike by perfection of doctrine or else it must wholly leaue the name of the Catholike Church W. BISHOP §. 3. THe third particle of the resemblance is That from Cartenna the Donatists ordayned Bishops to other Countries euen to Rome it selfe And from Rome by the Papists order Bishops be
authorised to all other Churches I am not so copious as to afford to euery leasing of M. Abbot a new phrase wherefore the Reader I hope will beare with my rudânesse if I call sometimes a lye by the name of a lye It is an vntrue tale that the Donatists ordayned Bishops from Cartenna for they could not abide that place but esteemed it to be Schismaticall as you haue heard before He doth misreport S. Augustine who saith Quò ex Africa ordinare paucis Lib. 2. cont Cââscon c. 37. 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 prâserue due order they bee confirmed by the Bishop of Rome the supreme head vnder Christ of the Catholike Church R. ABBOT PVt Africa here in steede of Cartenna and M. Bishop hath no shift to auoid this point of resemblance betwixt the Romanists and Donatists The Donatists designed the fundamentall place of the Catholike Church in Africa as the Papists doe at Rome The Donatists laboured the extent of their communion into all other Countries as also the Papists doe a Optat. lib. 2. Sed habere vos in vrbe Roma partem aliquam dicitis In the Citty of Rome it selfe as Optatus witnesseth the Donatists bragged that they had a part that ioyned with them They had there a Bishop of their owne to assemble and gouerne that part of theirs insomuch that Optatus in the same place reckoneth sixe Bishops of that faction Victor Bonifacius Encolpius Macrobius Lucianus Claudianus who had there succeeded one another Of the manner of the appointing of these Bishops St. Austin saith in the place by me cited to M. Bishop b Aug. cont Crescon lib. 2. cap. 37. Romanorum Ecclesia quò ex Africa paucis vestris ordinare soletis Episcopum To Rome for those few followers that you haue there you are wont to order and direct a Bishop out of Africa Out of Africa saith M. Bishop not out of Cartenna in Mauritania True it is if Africa be in speciall vnderstood but I not waighing the matter so strictly vnderstood Africa more largely as the third part of the world and in that signification Mauritania and therefore Cartenna in Mauritania is a part of Africa Well let Cartenna be put out and take Africa as indeed it was meant for c Theo lâret haeret fabul l. 4. de Donatist Regio quae olim Lybia nunc autem Africa appellatur that Countrey which of old was called Lybia and in which meaning St. Austin noteth that Mauritania Caesariensis where Cartenna was d Aug. Epist 48. Mauritania Caesariensis quaÌdo nec Africam se vult dici c. refused to be called by the name of Africa from this Africa the Donatists ordered and established Bishops ouer that part which they had at Rome and so said I from Rome by the Papists order must Bishops now be authorised to all other Churches Now M. Bishop seeing that Africa being thus put in steede of Cartenna the resemblance would somwhat touch their Church of Rome bringeth a very poore and silly shift for the auerting of it The Catholike Church saith he he meaneth the Roman Church doth not appoint that euery Bishop should goe to Rome to take holy Orders and from thence to be sent to other Catholike Countries No more say I did the Catholike Church of the Donatists binde men to come into Africa to be ordered Bishops there but it was enough if by Bishops of their communion he were ordered otherwhere For whether it were by sending some to order Bishops where none were or by sending Bishops already ordered it may either way stand which St. Austin noteth as a matter of their conceipt that e August de vnit Eccles c. 13. Ostendant esse praedictum solam Africam remansuram quocunque Episcopi ex Africa ââtierer tur out of Africa Bishops should be sent into all places And thus the same St. Austin although in the place alleaged he mention no more but the ordering of a Bishop to be sent to Rome out of Africa yet in another place declareth it to haue beene indifferent with them either f August ad Quodvult hârel 69. In vrbe Roma Montânses vocantur qu bus ãâã ex Africa solânt Episcoâum mittere aut âinc illuc Afri Epicopi corum pergere si fortè ibi cum ordinare placuisset to send a Bishop to Rome out of Africa or that the African Bishops should goe to Rome if they thought good to order a Bishop there namely because there were no other Bishops there of their communion by whom otherwise he might be ordered Whereas therefore M. Bishop saith that Bishops may lawfully be consecrated in any region where be three Catholike Bishops he saith no more for their Popish Bishops then the Donatists acknowledged of theirs and therefore in this point of the resemblance there is no difference at all betwixt the Donatists and the Papists Albeit by reason of that which M. Bishop confesseth that all Bishops must be confumed by the Bishop of Rome it may bee truly said that Bishops are made at Rome only because they are not taken to be fully and absolutely Bishops till they be confirmed there Which confirmation is not for vnity and order as M. Bishop pretendeth but for extortion and couetousnesse the Pope being wont to make infinite aduantage and profit to himselfe thereby neither is it giuen by the supreme head vnder Christ as he stileth the Pope but by a Nimrod and proud vsurper ouer the Church of Christ W. BISHOP §. 4. 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 call any men Catholikes for keeping communion with the Church of Rome if it be taken for that particular Church which is contayned within the walles of Rome but because that communicating with that Church in faith and religion they doe communicate with all other of the same faith which are spred all the world ouer R. ABBOT I Said the Donatists I should haue said the Rogatists who were but one part of the Donatisls as I haue before obserued the Rogatists I say would be taken to be Catholikes for keeping communion with the Church of Cartenna and euen so will the Papists be accounted Catholikes for keeping communion with the Church of Rome For the Rogatists expounding the word Catholike of integrity and perfection of faith as before we haue seene and affirming a Aug. Epist 48. Persuadere
likewise hold that there is no saluation but in communicating with the Church of Rome Forsooth we must vnderstand that the Rogatists and Donatists spake falsly concerning their Church but most sure it is saith he that there is no saluation out of the true Church of Christ. It is sure indeede and will not both Rogatists and Donatists and all manner Heretiks say the some as well as he They all confesse that out of the true Church of Christ there is no saluation and therefore doe euery sort of them take vpon them to be the true Church of Christ that so they may perswade men that there is no saluation but with them But M. Bishop inferreth Wherefore whosoeuer doth not communicate with the Church of Rome which is the chiefe member thereof is out of the state of grace and saluation And would not a Donatist as well inferre Wherefore whosoeuer doth not communicate with the Church of Africa which is the chiefe member thereof is out of the state of grace and saluation Indeed he should haue said somewhat to the purpose if he had made it good that out of the communion of the Church of Rome there is no communion of the Church of Christ but if he cannot make this good then full simply doth he conclude There is no saluation out of the true Church of Christ therefore there is no saluation out of the Church of Rome But he telleth vs that the Church of Rome is the chiefe member of Christs Church Be it so and so was the Church of Ierusalem the chiefe member of the Church of the Iewes and yet the Church of Ierusalem put to death the Prophets and Christ himselfe and in that communion there could be no saluation Is not a chiefe member of the same substance as is the rest of the body and what hindereth then but as the other members so the chiefe member may be wounded and corrupted and cause annoyance to other members that adioyne vnto it Albeit we desire him to proue to vs that the Church of Rome is the chiefe member of the Church of Christ I regard not what humane estimation hath attributed vnto it for the renowme and eminency of the place but I require some diuine institution whereby it hath beene founded the chiefe member of the Church We say that with God there is no more respect of the Church of Rome then of any other Church if they will haue vs to beleeue more we put them to that for their Roman Church which St. Austin required of the Donatists for proofe of that which they said for their African Church a August de vnit Eccles c. 6 Legite nobis hoc de Lege de Prophetis de Psalmis de Euangelio de Apostolicis literis legite credimus Reade vs this out of the law out of the Prophets out of the Psalmes out of the Gospell or Writings of the Apostles reade it to vs and we beleeue it namely that Christ abideth no where heire vpon the earth but where he can haue the Pope to be b Ibid. Quare superordinatis dicendo in nullis terris haeredem permanere Christum vbi non pâtuerit cohâredem habere Donatli his fellow heire as the Donatists said of their Pope Donatus or that the Roman Church is such a chiefe member of the Church as that no man can liue but by the breath that he draweth from thence or obtayne forgiuenesse of sinnes but in the society and fellowship thereof I know I trouble M. Bishop now he loueth not to be called vpon for Scripture for the proofe of this matter for hee knoweth well that the Scripture hath nothing at all to giue testimony thereof Well though hee bring nothing out of Scripture yet he hath that out of Hierome that will serue his turne c Hieron ad Damas Ego nullum primum nisi Christum sequens beatitudini tuae id est Cathedrâ Petri communione consocior super illam petram aedificatam Ecclesiam scio quicunque extra hanc domum agnum comedcrit prophanus est siquis in Arca Noe non fuerit peribit regnante diluâiâ I following no chiefe but Christ saith he to Damasus Bishop of Rome ioyne my selfe to your blessednesse that is to the communion of Peters chaire vpon that Rocke I know the Church to be built whosoeuer eateth the Paschall Lambe out of this house he is prophane whosoeuer is not in the Arke of Noe shall perish by the floode By these wordes M. Bishop would beare vs in hand that Hierome beleeued a perpetuall necessity of hauing communion of faith with the Bishop and Church of Rome But tell vs M. Bishop in good sooth doe you thinke that Hierome not long before would haue said the same to Liberius that here he saith to Damasus He saith of Liberius that d Idem in Catalog Liberium Romanae vrbis Episcopum pro fide ad exilium pergentem primus solicitauit fregit ad subscriptionem haereseos compulit by the perswasion of Fortunatianus he was ouercome and brought to subscribe the heresie of Arius and would he then haue ioyned in communion with him If he would in this case haue disclaimed Liberius then certainly he could not meane to Damasus that it standeth for a perpetuall rule in the Church that who so will be saued must ioyne in communion with the Bishop of Rome But Hierome dealt aduisedly by expounding himselfe in his first wordes though M. Bishop list not to take knowledge of it He professeth to giue primacy to none but to Christ himselfe to make none the Authour or Lord of his faith but only Christ Notwithstanding in communion and fellowship of faith he professeth to ioyne with Damasus But how farre or in what sort I ioyne in communion with your blessednesse that is with Peters chaire Not simply then with Damasus Bishop of Rome but with Damasus sitting in Peters chaire Now as e Mat. 23. 2. the sitting in Moses chaire importeth the teaching of the doctrine of Moses so the sitting in Peters chaire importeth the teaching of the doctrine of Peter Damasus at that time did so and maintayned against the Arians the confession of Peter f Mat. 16. 16. Thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God This Hierome well knew and therefore what hee would not haue yeelded to Liberius though Bishop of Rome because hee sate not in Peters chaire that hee yeeldeth to Damasus because he did so and desireth by him to be instructed whether the vse of the word hypostasis might stand with the truth of the confession of Peter It is therefore communion with Peters chaire which Hierome commendeth that is with the faith and doctrine which therein Peter taught but he doth not tell vs that the Bishop of Rome doth alwaies and infallibly sit in Peters chaire For of Peters chaire at Rome we deeme the same as of Peters chaire at Antioch and Alexandria both which Gregory Bishop of Rome maketh
g Gregor lib. 6. Epist 37. Sedes Apostolorum Principis in tribus locis vnius est vnius atque vna est sedes cui tres nunc Episcopi praesident Idem lib. 4. Epist 37. Apostolicam sede regis Idem lib. 6. vt supra Petri Cathedram tenet one with Peters chaire at Rome and saith of the Patriarchs there to the one that he gouerned the Sea Apostolike and to the other that he possessed Peters chaire But Hierome in the place alleaged disclaimeth Paulinus the Patriarch of Antioch that he might ioyne himself to Peters chaire signifying that Paulinus though succeeding Peter at Antioch yet sate not in Peters chaire because he taught not the faith of Peter Now if to be Bishop of Rome where is the place of Peters chaire be infallibly to sit in Peters chaire then to be Bishop of Antioch should be so also because there also is the place of Peters chaire Which appearing by Hierome to be vntrue it followeth that to be Bishop of Rome likewise is not necessarily to sit in Peters chaire because a man may be Bishop as of Antioch so of Rome and not teach the same as Peter did Of Peters faith and confession then it is that he saith Vpon that Rocke I know the Church to be built Erasmus very well noteth thereat h Erasm in Schol. Epist ad Damas Non super Romam vt arbitror nam fieri potest vt Roma quoque degeneret sed super cam fidem quam Petrus professus est Not vpon Rome as I suppose for it may be that Rome also may degenerate but vpon that faith which Peter professed euen as Gregory himselfe Bishop of Rome expoundeth i Greg. lib. 3. Epist 33. In petra Ecclesiae hoc est in consessione beati Petri. The Rocke of the Church to be the confession of St. Peter The communion of this faith is the house wherein Christ our Paschall Lambe must be eaten the Arke of Noc wherein who so is not shall be drowned If the Bishop of Rome shall thus sit in the seate of Peter wee are ready to accord with him and so farre as he doth so we still hold communion with him but that hee shall alwaies sit there we haue no warrant and we are sure that now hee doth not sit where Peter sate Now sith M. Bishop can giue vs no warrant that the Pope and Church of Rome shall alwaies continue in the faith of Peter his conclusion is but a fond and vaine presumption that out of the communion of the Church of Rome there is no saluation and no otherwise chalenged to the Church of Rome then by the Donatists to their Church Now albeit I see that I much offend M. Bishop in making this comparison betwixt the Papists and the Donatists yet that it may more fully appeare that there was some cause why I did so I will to those resemblances that I haue already set downe adde some few more whereby it may be discerned how directly they walke in the same steps And first of Donatus the Pope of the Donatists Op tatus recordeth that k Optat. lib. 3. âùm super Imperatorem non sit nisi solus Dâ qui fecit Imperatorem dum se Dânatus super Imperatorem extollit iam quasi bâminum excesserat metas vt se vt Deum non vt hominem âstimaret c. Quamuis non sit vsus hac voce Ego sum Deus tamen aut fecit aut pasâ siâ est quod defectum huitu vocis impleret c. tantum sibi ipsuâ exegit vt eum noÌ minori metu omnes venerarentur quà m DeuÌ c. Primus Episcoporum quasi plus esset ipse quà m caeteri exaltauit cor suum c. vt nullum hominem sibi comparanduÌ arbitraretur he exalted himselfe about the Emperour and thereby made himselfe more then man and euen as it were a God because aboue the Emperour there is none but God that made the Emperour and although he vsed not those wordes I am God yet hee either did or suffered to bee done to him that which might supply the want of those wordes requiring so much to himselfe as that all stoode in no lesse awe of him then they did of God himselfe being the first Bishop that aduanced himselfe as if he were more then the rest and did thinke no man comparable to himselfe Now is there not in this Pope of Africa a very iust and liuely description of the Roman Pope Hee hath made himselfe more then all other Bishops and no man comparable to himselfe He hath lifted vp himselfe aboue the Emperour and thereby as Optatus concludeth made a God of himselfe Hee hath not only done and suffered to be said and done to him such things as whereby in effect he hath taken vpon him to be God as namely in dispensing against the law of God and disannulling the institution of Christ but in very wordes hath yeelded to be so called and in the Glosse of his Canon law where he professeth to haue corrected such things as were amisse yet hee hath suffered this title giuen to him to stand still l Extrauag Ioan 22. Cum interim in Glossa Credere Dominum Deum nostrum Papam non potuisse c. haereticum censeretur Paris anno 1601. cum priuileg Gregor 13. c. Our Lord God the Pope He bath made men to stand in no lesse awe of him yea more then of God himselfe whilest hee hath made shew to haue Gods anger at his command to inflict it where he will Secondly the Donatists tooke vpon them that m Collat. Carthag 3. c. 165. Cum pacis Ecclesia Dei possessores semper fuerimus ac simus they had alwaies beene possessors and owners of vnity and of the Church of God in so much that they reckoned n Aug. cât lit Petil. l. 2. c. 92. In vestriâ exemplis aduer ãâ¦ã Imperatââes quaÌ plures ac Iudices vestros persecutioneÌ nobis facieÌdo perijsse vt relinquam N ãâ¦ã Domitianâ TraianuÌ Variâ c. Nero Domitian Traian Varius Decius Dioclesian and the rest to haue beene persecutors of their Church whereas their beginning whereby they were Donatists was after the time of those persecutions and had they beene then o Ibid. August Isti omnes vniuersalitèr Christianum nomen pro suis idolis persecuti sunt c. Vnitatem ipsam vel vnde nos sicut vos putatis vel vnde vos sicut Christus docet exijstis totam persequebantur had not suffered any thing for being partakers with Donatus but for professing the name of Christ No otherwise doe the Papists take vpon them to haue beene alwaies the Church of God and that it was their Church that was persecuted that they were their Martyrs that were slaine by the same Tyrants whereas their beginning whereby they are Papists which properly they are for worshipping their Lord God the Pope yea and that whole forme of doctrine almost which
is properly theirs is of farre latter time and though they had beene then yet had beene persecuted only for that profession of Christ which is common both to vs and them The Donatists alleaged that p Aug. cont Epist GaudeÌt l. 2. c. 30. Per iustitiam non veraÌ sed vestram ad Imperatorum curam pertinere cause huiusmodi non deberent Emperours and Princes had nothing to doe in Church matters And q Idem Epist 48. Vos quibus crimen videtur de inimicis communionis nostra Christiono Imperatori aliquid conqâeri held it for a great fault in the Catholike Bishops to complaine to the Emperour of them r Optat. lib. 3. Quid est Imperatori cum Ecclesia What hath the Emperour to doe with the Church saith their Pope Donatus and so his followers Å¿ Aug. in psal 57. Quid nobis Regibus inquiunt Quid nobis Imperateribus What haue we to doe with Kings what haue Emperours to doe with vs for the teaching of the people of Israel t Idem cont Gaudent Epist l. 2. c. 26. Ad docenduÌ populum Israel omnipotens Deus Prophetis pr ãâ¦ã ium dedit non Regibus imperauit Saluator ammarum Dominus Christus âd insi ãâ¦ã dam fidem piscatores non milites misit saith Gaudentius God gaue charge to Prophets and not to Kings and our Lord Christ the Sauiour of soules sent Fishermen not Souldiers for the planting of the faith thus vpbraiding the Emperours for condemning their Schisme and for vsing power and force of armes for repressing the infinite rage of their madde-brained Circumcellions Thus they say to Marcellinus the Tribune whom the Emperour had appointed to be Iudge in the conference at Carthage u Capit. gest collat Caââhag 3. c. 295. Si Christus non es cur de Sacerdâtibus iudicas Hoc iudicium Christo seruandum est If thou bee not Christ why doest thou iudge of Priests this iudgement must be reserued for Christ And another of them that x Aug. Epist 162. Non debuit Episcopus Proconsulari iudicio purgari a Bishop should not haue his purgation at a Lieutenants iudgement and therefore Donatus their Patriarch writeth contemptuously to Gregory one of the Emperours Officers y Optat. lib. 3. Adquem sic scribere minimè dubitauit Gregori macula Senatus dedecus Praefectorum caetera talia Gregory the blot of the Senate the disgrace of Lieutenants with other termes of the same kinde as Optatus hath reported Of the same humour are the Papists who make the Prince z Dist 96 Si Imperator Filius est non Praesul Ecclesia quod adreligionem coÌpetit discere ei conuenit non docere c. Ad Sacerdotes Deê° voluit quae Ecclesiae disponenda sunt pertinere non ad seouli Potestates c. Imperatores Christiani subdere debânt executiones suaâ Ecclesiasticis Praesulibus non praeferre a sonne only and not a Gouernour of the Church who must learne and not teach what appertayneth to religion because God would haue Church matters to belong to Priests not to the secular powers and Christian Emperours are to submit their executions to the rulers of the Church Therefore they hold the Commissioners and Officers of Princes to bee incompetent Iudges in their causes they carry themselues contemptuously and despightfully towardes them they thinke it lawfull by equiuocations and mentall reseruations to abuse them because they will not acknowledge any subiection to them The Donatists a Aug. Epist 48. Multis adituÌ intrandi obserebaÌt rumores maledicoruÌ qui nescio quid aliud nos in Altare Deiponere iactirabaât by false rumours discouraged and terrified men from comming to Church and amongst other thinges gaue out of the Catholike Bishops that some of them b Optat. l. 3. 7. Dicebatur venturos Pâulum Macarium qui interessent Sacrificio vt cum Altaria solenitèr aptarentur profeârent illic imaginem quam primò in Altare ponerent sic Sacrificium offerretur Hoc cùm acciperent aures percussi sunt animi c. vt omnis qui hoc audierat diceret Qui degustat de sacro gustat at the time of the celebration of the Sacrament did set an Image vpon the Altar or Communion table whereat the minds of men were greatly moued and euery one said He that tasteth thereof tasteth of a prophane thing so contrary was it holden to religion then which c Of Images sect 9. M. Bishop approueth now to set Images vpon the Altar But in this also the Papists are their followers who in the like sort deuise rumours and tales of our diuine Seruice and put strange conceipts thereof into the minds of men that without cause they may abhorre to haue any communion with vs. The Donatists alleaged their d August Epist 162. Prolata sunt à partibus vestris gesta quaedam quibuâ recitatum est c. Temerarium Concilium quamlibet numerosissimum owne Councels assembled by their owne authority and managed wholly by themselues for defence of their cause both against the e IdeÌ in psal 57. Lectum est Concilium Bagaitanum vbi damnati sunt Maximianistae Et coÌt lit Petil. l 2. c. 43. Plenarij CoÌcilij vestâi ore damnasâis Maximinianists their owne Schismatikes against the Bishops and Pastors of the Catholike Church Euen so doe the Papists alleage against vs their owne partiall conuenticles wherein they themselues haue been both accusers witnesses and iudges and wherein none hath beene suffered to sit but only such as haue first been sworne solemnly to the Pope The Donatists f Aug. Epist 137. Non habendo in causa sua diuâsionis quod defendant non nisi hominuÌ crimina colligere affectant âaipsa plura falsissimè iactant vt quia ipsam diuiâa Scripturae veritatem c. criminari obscurare non possunt homines per quos pradicatur adducaÌt in odâuÌ not knowing how sufficieÌtly to make good their cause and rent from the Church by argument and reason sought to make themselues the more plausible by deuising and publishing crimes and slanders against them who in the behalfe of the Church were aduersaries to them that men disliking the persons of men might consequently thinke the worse of the truth of God that was maintained and defended by them In the same steps the Papists walke with whom nothing is more common in all their bookes then to labour by strange odious imputations to blemish the names of Luther Caluin Beza and all other by whom the gospell of Christ hath beene specially defended yea generally of the Bishops and Ministers of our Church that bringing men into hatred and detestation of the men they may cause them to like the worse of the faith and religion which they did or doe teach g Collat. Cartag 3. c. 30. Dânatistââ nos appellaÌdos esse credunt cum si nominum paternorum
Catholike Church from the errour of perfidiousnesse the obseruance or obedience almost of the whole world ioyned to his name and honour in which manner âarmenian also though he held the Church d Optat. lib. 2. Eam tu apud âos solos esse dixisti to be with them only yet pretended e Ibid. post Offerre vos dicitis pro vna Ecclesia quae sit in totâ terrarum orbe dissusa to offer or pray for one Church which is dispersed ouer the whole world Euen so the Papists also albeit they know that it is but a small part of the world wherein the communion of the Bishop and Church of Rome is accepted or acknowledged yet take pleasure to babble and prate as if the Popes triple crowne were so wide as to compasse the whole earth and his scepter so long as to reach to the worlds end Thus much then M. Bishop hath gained by being angry at my comparing the Papists to the Donatists that whereas I mentioned but fiue resemblances before I haue now added twelue more and so like are they in all these that I doubt not but by obseruation they may be found like in many moe As for the retortion of this comparison which he hath vsed in his answere to my Epistle Dedicatory as it is wholly forced and violent in it selfe so it argueth only malice and folly in him I will set downe the branches of the Donatists heresie as he hath noted them and adde the application that he hath made of euery of them First he f Reproofe pag. 42. saith they held that the true Church of Christ was perished all the world ouer sauing in some coastes of Africa where their doctrine was currant Well and what is that to vs The Protestants saith he teach euen as they did that Christs visible Church was perished for nine hundred yeares at the least all the world ouer and is now wholly decayed in all other parts of the world sauing where their doctrine is embraced and this he saith was the maine point of the Donatists heresie To shew why he nameth the visible Church he putteth in a parenthesis thus for the inuisible Church the Donatists held could not perish as St. Austin witnesseth in Psal 101. Which is a very lie neither is there any thing to be found in St. Austin to that effect But as touching the visible Church where doe the Protestants hold or affirme that it was or is perished in that sort as he saith Why doth he not cite vs some authour of this assertion Well whether we say so or not it skilleth not g Bellarm. de notis Eccles c. 9. Ecclesiam visibilem a multis seculis perijsse nunc solum esse in septentrionalibus partibus vbi ipsi sunt doceât omnes Bellarmine hath told him that we all say so and that is enough for him Yet that we doe not all say so M. Bishop may sufficiently vnderstand by that that hath beene before handled at large as touching this point in the answere h Sect. 17. to the Preface to his second part whither I referre the Reader for further satisfaction hereof Here I briefly answere him that we hold in all that time wherof he speaketh one only Catholike church whereof the Church of England was a part and the Church of Rome another part and the Greeke Church another part and so the rest throughout the whole world The Church in these parts was in that time blemished with many corruptions and errours whilest first the Teachers in steede of i 1. Cor. 3. 18. siluer and gold and pearle built hay and straw and stubble vpon the foundation and secondly the Pastors more and more k Ierem. 10. 21. became beasts as the Prophet saith and sought not the Lord nor had any vnderstanding to teach Gods law by meanes whereof ignorance encreased and of ignorance grew superstition and one idolatry begat another till the whole face of the Church was berayed with the filth thereof l Mat. 24. 15. the abhomination of desolation standing in the holy place and the man of sinne tyraÌnizing ouer the Church and giuing strength to all abuse and corruption for his owne gaine So grosse were the enormities and superstitions which in this time had growen into the Church as that the great Rabbines of the Church of Rome could not for shame but in some part acknowledge the same and tooke vpon them to correct sundry things m Trident. CoÌcil sess 22. de Missa celebr Quae siue temporum vitio siue hominum incuria improbitate irrepserunt in Missam ipsam which either by the corruption of times or by the carelesnesse and naughtinesse of men were crept into the very Masse And thus the Pope himselfe confessed concerning their Offices and Primers that n Offic. Beatae Mariae per Pium V. in Summar constitut indulgent c. Vanis superstitionum erroribus alia ferè omnia huiusmodi officia etiam Latino sermone referta esse deprehensum fuit c. Credant ijsdeâ alijs âfficijs multas sub falsis confictis sanctorum nominiê° confictââ orationes fuisse insertas they were found to be stuffed with vaine errours of superstitions and that many counterfaite praiers were inserted into them vnder false and counterfaite names of Saints Of these errours and superstitions they reformed what they list and purged their bookes and Seruice of many things that were amisse and what will any man say hereupon that they became another Church We proceeded further and voided the Church of the rest of those abhominations which ignorance and errour had brought in which they were not willing to haue medled with because the same were gainfull to them and shall we be said hereupon to deny that there was any visible Church before and to beginne a new Church No we say that the Church hath continued still from the time that it was first planted we affirme it to haue been the house of God the garden and vineyard of the Lord but we say that the husbandmen had long dealt wickedly and vnfaithfully in the vsage of it they drest not the Lords vine but suffered it to grow wild they let this garden be ouergrowen with briars and weedes and Foxes and Swine had liberty to tread it downe and to destroy it All that we haue done hath beene but to loppe and prune the vine to dresse and water the garden that lay wast to plucke vp the weedes and thornes to driue out the noysome beasts and to repaire the fence that they may be kept out Therefore we doe not take vpon vs to be another Church but the same Church reformed neither haue we gone about to bring in a new religion but only to reforme that which they call the old retaining still the same Scriptures which they acknowledged the same articles of faith the same Sacraments of Baptisme and the Supper of the Lord the same forme of diuine Seruice saue
Hymnis Psalmis canendis ipsius Domini Apostolorum habemus documenta praecepta exeÌpla De hac re tam vtili ad mouendum piè animuÌ accendendum diuinae lectionis affectum varia consuetudo est c. Donatista nos reprehenduÌt quòd sobriè psallamus in Ecclâsia diuina cantica ProphetaruÌ cum ipsi ebrietates suas ad canticum PsalmoruÌ humano ingenio compositorum quasi tubas exhortation is inslaÌment Quando autem non est tempus cum in Ecclesia fratres congregantur Sancta cantandi nisi cum legitur aut disputatur aut antiââites clara voce deprecantur aut communis oratio voce Diaconi indicitur singing Hymnes and Psalmes we haue lessons and examples and precepts of the Lord himselfe and his Apostles It is a thing profitable to stirre vp the minde to piety and to kindle deuotion and affection towards the lessons that are read from God Of the Donatists contrarywise he saith The Donatists reprehend vs for that we soberly sing in the Church the holy songs of the Prophets whereas they by singing of songs deuised by men as it were by trumpets of encouragement doe inflame and prouoke themselues to drinking vntill they be drunke Against this he saith When is it out of time when the brethren are gathered together in the Church to sing Psalmes but when there is reading or preaching of when the Ministers doe pray with loud voice or when by the voice of the Deacon warning is giuen of common prayer That the Donatists vsed those songs in the Church or before their Seruice and Sermons St. Austin saith not that is M. Bishops lye his wordes import that as their t August coÌt lit Petil. l. 1. c. 24. Mitto prophanas bacchationâs âbriâtâtuÌ drunken meetings and feastings which elsewhere he obiecteth to them they vsed such songs as the manner is of carnall prophane men at their meetings and merry-makings by vaine and wanton and lewd songs to cheare and sport themselues But out of St. Austins words it is easie to be gathered whether of vs in this behalfe are more like the Donatists either we that retaine the same religious custome of singing Psalmes which St. Austin commendeth and not he only but also Leo Bishop of Rome witnesseth that u Leo de collect ser 4. Psalmi Dauidici per vniuersalem Ecclesiam cum omni pietate cantantur the whole Catholike Church with all deuotion then vsed or the Papists who reproue vs for the same and haue wholly abandoned it both out of their Churches and houses and can better brooke to solace themselues with secular and prophane rimes and sonnets yea with filthy and vncleane ribawdries insomuch that some of their owne as touching their Seruice haue complained that x Cornel. Agrip de vanit scient cap. 18. Hodie cum Missa ipsius Canone obscânâ cantiunculae pares vices habènt obscene and filthy songs had their course and turne therein as well as the Canon of the Masse Very vnfortunately therefore hath M. Bishop entred into the retorting of this comparison nothing fitteth nothing serueth his turne his ball reboundeth vpon himselfe but neither in doctrine nor in manners can hee truly alleage any thing reproueable in the Donatists that can be fastened vppon vs. W. BISHOP §. 6. 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 and lying he must looke vnlesse he repent to haue his part with all lyars in the poole burning with Apocal. 21. v. 8. fire and brimstone And if it please the Reader to heare at what great square the Donatists were with the Church of Rome to which M. Abbot doth so often resemble them I will briefly shew it out of the best records of that time S. Augustine speaketh thus to the Donatist Petilian What hath the Church or Sea of Rome Lib. 2. cont Peâil cap. 51. done to thee in which Peter did sit and now sitteth Anastasius 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 Optatus Bishop of Mileuitan saith thus Whence Lib. 2. cont Parmeni is it that you Donatists contend to vsurpe vnto you the keyes of the Kingdome and that you wage battaile against the chaire of Peter presumptuously and with sacrilegious audacity If they waged 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 He neede not to care for the multitude August Epistola 162. of his conspiring enimies the Donatists when he saw himselfe by communicatory letters ioyned with the Roman Church in which alwaies the principality of the Apostolicall chaire flourished c. So we at this time neede as little to care for the bitter reproches and deceitfull arguments of the Protestants so we stand stable and firme in the like society of faith and religion with the same Church of Rome R. ABBOT I Wish M. Bishop to take heede lest the doome which he pronounceth vpon me be returned vpon himselfe by the sentence of the Gospell a Luke 19. 22. Out of thine owne mouth will I iudge thee thou euill seruant Mistake I did in a circumstance but lye I did not because b Mentiri est contra mentem ire to lye is to goe against a mans owne minde and knowledge which it is plaine I did not for that my errour was disaduantage to my selfe in that I alleaged the Papists to be like the Donatists only whereas by more perfect relation they are found to be like both Rogatists and Donatists But now to make the matter the more goodly for himselfe he for conclusion notably playeth the Skoggin and most grosly deludeth the simple Reader that hath not discretion to espie his fraude Forsooth he will shew at what great square the Donatists were with the Church of Rome But trouble not your selfe M. Bishop about that matter wee know it and will acknowledge it alwaies as farre as you only we desire to know what that maketh to the matter here in hand What because the Donatists in the time of Optatus and Austin were at great square with the Church of Rome doth it follow that there can be no cause now to compare the Papists to the Donatists When M. Bishop was clapt vp in prison at Rome there was great enmity betwixt the Seculars and Iesuits and doth it therefore follow that they are not friends now What is it M. Bishop but your legerdemaine to pretend a comparison made by me betwixt the Donatists and the Church of Rome that was of old when as my comparison concerneth only Romanists
and Papists that now are who are farre departed from that way wherein that Church of old did walke Why doe you in this case alleage to vs Optatus and Austin to disproue this resemblance as if they were able so long before hand to tell vs that the Papists now in the points alleaged are not like the Donatists The Donatists of old were at square with the Church of Rome for resisting their claime of the propriety of the Church neither doe we doubt but that if they were now in being the Church of Rome would be at square with them for challenging that to Africa which they hold properly to belong to Rome but this squaring on the one side or the other hindereth not but that Papists now in their kinde are like to Donatists in their kinde each tying the Catholike Church respectiuely to their owne place and faction wherein the condemning of the Donatists of old by the Church of Rome for so tying it to Africa is an instruction to vs to condemne the Papists now for doing the like to Rome But M. Bishops purpose of cosenage doth more liuely appeare in the first citation which he here bringeth out of Austin where purposely he omitteth a part of the sentence whereby the Reader should perceiue that it maketh nothing for his purpose To Pâtilian the Donatist condemning all Churches saue their owne he saith c Aug. cont lit Petil. l. â c. 51. Cathedra tibi quid fecit Ecclesiae Romana in qua Petrus sedit in qua âodiâ Anastasius sedet vel Ecclesiae Hierâsâlymitana in qua Iacobus sedit in qua bodie Joannes sidet quibus nos in Catholica vnitate connectimur à quibus vâs nefariâ furâre separastis Quare appellas Cathedram pestilentia Cathedram Apostolicam What hath the chaire of the Church of Rome done to thee wherein Peter sate and wherein at this day Anastasius sitteth or the chaire of the Church of Ierusalem wherein Iames sate and in which Iohn at this day sitteth to which we are ioyned in Catholike vnity and from which you haue seuered your selues by wicked fury Why doe you call the Apostolike chaire the chaire of pestilence Now what doe these wordes make more for the Church of Rome then for the Church of Ierusalem The Donatists were then at square with the Church of Ierusalem and yet that hindereth not M. Bishop will confesse but that the Church of Ierusalem may be now Schismaticall and the Donatists were then at square with the Church of Rome what is there here to hinder but that the Church of Rome may be now Schismaticall as the Donatists were then The Church of Ierusalem is by St. Austin termed an Apostolike chaire or Sea as all the Churches planted by the Apostles are by him stiled d Aug. Epist 162. Possent Apostolicarum Ecclesiarum iudiciâ causam suam integraÌ reseruare Apostolike Churches as well as the Church of Rome The Church of Ierusalem M. Bishop will not deny both might be and hath beene since St. Austins time a chaire of pestilence And doth St. Austin say any thing there to let but that the Church of Rome also may be since become the chaire of pestilence though it were then the chaire of vnity and peace Yea what he saith here concerning the Churches of Rome and Ierusalem the same he saith elsewhere of other Churches also e Ibid. Quid tibi fecit 6 pars Donati quid tibi fecit Ecclesia Corinthiorum Quod autem de ista dicâ de omnibus âaââbus tam longè positiâ intelligi vâlâ quid vobis fecerunt c. O yee Donatists what what I say hath the Church of the Corinthians done to you What I say of it I would haue to be vnderstood of all such and as farre distant Churches what haue they done vnto you c. with all which the Donatists were at as great square as they were with the Church of Rome and yet M. Bishop will not yeeld to any of them any prorogatiue thereby But all mention of the Church of Ierusalem and the rest he thought it behouefull for him to suppresse because if he had set it downe he knew well that the Reader would easily see that in all this great shew hee had said nothing And by the premises it appeareth that he hath said as little in producing the wordes of Optatus for be it that the Donatists did then cruelly wage battell against the Church of Rome and there were no agreement betwixt them what is that to that that I say concerning the Church of Rome now what hindereth that I say still but that there may be now a iust resemblance betwixt the Papists and the Donatists His conclusion therefore is ridiculous that because Austin saith that Cecilianus needed not to care for the Donatists so long as he saw himselfe ioyned with the church of Rome therefore they neede not to care so long as they stand in the like society of faith and religion with the same Church of Rome For seeing the Church of Rome is not the same now that it was then as in the processe of this booke God willing shall plainly appeare there may be iust cause in many things now to forsake the communion of the church of Rome though it were piety and religion to hold it then But it is not to be omitted how falsly he dealeth here againe in alleaging the wordes of Austin as if he spake of being ioyned with the Church of Rome only whereas he nameth other Churches as well as the Church of Rome f Aug. Epist 162. Qui posset non curare conspirantem multitudinem inimicorum cùm se âideret Romanâ Ecclesiae in qua semper Apostolicâ Cathedââ viguit principatus câteris terris vnde Euangelium ad ipsam Africam venit per communicateââ as literas esse coniunctum He needed not care saith he for the conspiring multitude of his enemies when he saw himselfe ioyned by communicatory letters both to the Church of Rome where the principality or chiefty of the Apostolike chaire hath alwaies flourished and to other nations whence the Gospell came into Africa What is here more for the communion of the Church of Rome then for the communion of other Churches Why doth M. Bishop thus deceiptfully appropriate to one that which St. Austin maketh to concerne many Doe we finde it in St. Austins words which he pretendeth that it shall be alwaies an infallible rule of safety to hold communion with the Church of Rome He will say that there is there attributed a principality to the Church of Rome Be it so a principality of honour not of power as I haue g Chap. 1. §. 2. before made plaine by Austin himselfe but doth it follow that because the principality of the Apostolike chaire had flourished there till that time therefore it should be necessary or safe to communicate with that church for euer vntill the worlds end These are loose and
vaine collections meere mockeries of simple and credulous persons very vnfit to stablish and resolue the conscience of any sober or aduised man CHAP. III. That the name of Catholikes is abused by the Papists and is in their abuse a Donatisticall and hatefull name of faction and schisme ANSWERE TO THE EPISTLE THere was reason why Austin should be moued with the name of Catholike c. to Now as of this Catholike Church c. W. BISHOP §. 1. SAint Augustine indeede was so much moued with the name of Catholike that he alleageth Cont. Epist Fund c. 4. De vera Relig. c. 7. it to haue beene one principall cause which kept him in the lappe of the Church And elsewhere very often exhorteth all 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 selfe same reason alleaged by M. Abbot himselfe which caused that most holy wise and learned Father to esteeme so highly of that title Catholike is now of great force to perswade all reasonable men to make themselues members of the Roman Church for by ioyning in society of faith with the Church of Rome they shall communicate with the Church spred ouer the whole world because the faith and religion of the Church of Rome hath beene generally receiued all the world ouer as our aduersaries themselues doe confesse The name Catholike is by the Protestants Donatistically applied to their schismaticall congregation that neither are nor euer were scattered all the world ouer but be inclosed and confined within certaine Countries of Europe is the Donatists were within the bounds of Afrike Most sottishly then to vse his owne wordes doth M. Abbot affirme the name Catholike to be applyed by vs of the Roman religion vnto the particular Church of Rome when as we call all other Churches of what Countrey soeuer that with the Church of Rome keepe intirely the same faith Catholike And men of all other nations doe we call Catholikes as well as those who are Romans borne because they all beleeue and confesse the same one Catholike faith that is extended ouer all the world R. ABBOT THe name of the Catholike Church might iustly moue St. Austin to continue in the society thereof when vnder that name a August coÌt Epist Fundam cap. 4. Tenet ipsum Catholica nomen quod non sine causa inter tam multas hârescs ista Ecclesia sola obtinuât Catholike he saw the communion of a Church successiuely continued from the time of the Apostles throughout the world and that only communion euery where termed by that name There was reason for him to exhort men b Idem de vera relig cap. 7. Tenenda est eius Ecclesiae communicatio quae Catholica est Catholica nominatur non solum à suis verumetiam ab omnibus inimicis to hold communion with that Church which was thus Catholike or Vniuersall and so called both of the friends and of all the enimies thereof and thereby to be fortified against all hereticall distractions and separations as knowing that to draw them away from this communion should bee to draw them away from the Church of Christ The appellation of Catholikes according to the originall of it as I haue c Chap. 2. § 4. before noted importeth an interest holden by them that are so called in this vniuersall communion without renting themselues by heresie or schisme from the common society and fellowship of the Church In this only meaning is it rightly vsed and they are meere vsurpers of it who take it to themselues without this or in any other sense Now whereas M. Bishop according to that sense as he pretendeth telleth vs that that name is of great force to perswade all reasonable men to make themselues members of the Roman Church he is greatly deceiued himselfe and doth but seeke to deceiue others therein because they wholly faile in the ground of it the Church of Rome being neither Catholike indeede as St. Austin requireth nor so called by any other but only by it selfe Who is there in the world so madde as to call the Roman Church the Catholike Church but only they that are drunke by drinking of the same cup He saith that we confesse that the faith and religion of the Church of Rome hath beene receiued all the world ouer but that is both waies a lye because neither doe we confesse so much neither was it euer so And therefore whereas he saith that by ioyning in society of faith with the Church of Rome we shall communicate with the Church spred ouer the whole world hee againe abuseth his Reader there being at this day no Church in Asia or Africa that holdeth communion with the Church of Rome to say nothing of the Greeke Church and sundry other in Europe that doe detest the fellowship thereof I am not ignorant how they seeke to gull the world in this behalfe and what goodgeons they giue men by telling and writing tales from Rome of d Gentillât in Exam. Concil Trident. Patriarches and Metropolitans of the Aegyptians the Assyrians the Armenians the Aethiopians and such other like comming to Rome to submit themselues and to be reconciled to the Pope these iests are now growen stale these suborned and counterfait Patriarkes haue beene discryed and were they not men absurdly impudent they would neuer practise the like cosenage againe And yet my friend e And. Eudoem adu R. Abbat Respon lib. 3. sect 6. Aegyptius Câphtorum Patriarcha à quâ Aethiopia petit pracepta fidei ad communionem Catholicam nuper Clemente octauâ Pontifice redijt Cacâdaemon telleth vs in sadnesse of the Aegyptian Patriarch vpon whom all the Churches of Aethiopia depend his name is neither knowen to him nor me that now very lately in the time of Clement the eight he returned to the communion of their Catholike Church the wise man not considering that thereby he doth intimate vnto vs contrary to other fables and tales which they haue giuen out before that therefore before that time he was a stranger to them Thus by reason that these submissions and reconciliations are still to seeke and the world seeth no appearance nor effect of them they are euery while put to their shifts to deuise new rumours hereof and to stuffe the old coate of some Gibeonite with straw setting him vp vpon a poles end vnder the name of the Patriarch of some farre Countrey so to feede the humours and fancies of them that doe yeeld themselues content to be gulled and deluded by them But against this foolery the Catholike Bishops truly noted against the Donatists that f Collat. Carthag 1. cap. 55. Non in vnum aliquem terra locum ex alijs locis ad Deum gentes venturas esse praedictum est sed in ocis suis âum adoraturas it was not foretold by the Prophets that the nations should
from other places come to God into any one place of the earth but that in their owne places they should worship him This they held to be enough and knew no needâ of hunting or seeking to this place or that place either to Rome or to Africa as vnder the ouerture whereof they might haue readier accesse to God because all places were alike to him Where if M. Bishop will say that they doe not require that euery one shall come to Rome to worship God there I answer him that when the Donatists did require g August coÌt Crescon GraÌ mat lib. 3 c. 34. Tot populi quid fecerunt quicùm ista nescirent tamen à vâbis rebaptizandi censentur all nations to be rebaptized by them they were not so madde as to thinke that it should concerne all men personally to come into Africa but would haue thought it sufficient that though not immediately by themselues yet mediately by their rebaptizers though not in person yet in deuotion and affection they had beene there that in the meane time they did respect it as the rocke from whence in their conuerters they were digged as the roote of their Christianity the oracle of their doubts the place of their appeales the sanctuary of piety from whence by communicating with it all their Seruices and Sacrifices should ascend to be acceptable vnto God Such as would haue yeelded them this regard they would neuer haue doubted though they had neuer come into Africa to adiudge them true members of their Church and therefore the Fathers in denying any one place to which the nations should need to come that they might come to God either spake idlely against the Donatists or else must be vnderstood to deny any such one place as I haue said But the Papists not content to attribute that to their Rome which the Donatists did to Africa haue further made it a matter of so great merit and moment with God to come to Rome to doe deuotion there as that to them that doe so or doe by money redeeme the necessity of going thither thereby to be esteemed as if they did goe they haue proclaimed the full pardon and remission of all their sinnes Sith then the Catholike Church importeth the vniuersall communion of h 1. Cor. 1. 2. all that call vpon the name of our Lord Iesus Christ in euery place through the world and the communion of the Roman Church is extremely short of being extended ouer the whole world being limited to one place and being particular and priuate only to one sect and sort of men out of the number and company whereof are innumerable Christians and Christian Churches which as the case standeth neither haue nor desire to haue any portion therein yea vndoubtedly a number that neuer haue heard either of the Pope or of the Roman Church it must needes follow that as they deale absurdly who call the Roman Church the Catholike Church so they deale as absurdly who appropriate the name of Catholikes to the communion of the Roman Church which cannot arise but from the communion and fellowship indifferently of the vniuersall Church And hereby it appeareth that though some of them had dispersed themselues into all nations yet they could no more take vpon them thereby to be Catholikes then the Donatists in the like case could haue done For as the Donatists though they had set foote into all other Countries as they did into Italie and Spaine and out of Africa particularly so called into many parts and Prouinces of Africa at large yet could not for that haue beene called Catholikes because through the whole world they should haue beene but a part of the whole Church i Aug. Epist 161. Pars vestra quae Donati dicitur c. Pars Donati Donatus his part depending vpon one man and diuided vnder his name from the common society of the Church euen so the Papists also though they should spread themselues in the same sort yet should not thereby obtayne the right of the name of Catholikes because they should be but a part of the whole the Popes part depending vpon him and vnder his name diuided from an innumerable multitude of all nations who though they disclaime the Pope yet doubt not to haue interest in the Church as well as they and therefore where they are are no other but a faction and schisme renting the vnion and communion of the Church of Christ Surely if anciently there had beene any such dependence of the Church vpon the Bishop of Rome as the Papists pretend now the Donatists being offended as St. Austin witnesseth k August coÌt lit Petil. l. 2. c. 39. Quia vos de parte Donati essedicimus quâritis hominem de cuius parte ãâã esse dicatis that they were called Donatists or Donatus his part and seeking to entitle their aduersaries vnder the name of another part would neuer haue beene to seeke herein but being at so great square with the Church of Rome as M. Bishop hath alleaged would haue giuen them a name from the Bishop of Rome to whom as their Prince and chiefe they were as fast tyed as they themselues were to l Collat. Carthag 3. cap. 32. Petil. Nâc nunc abnuo esse mihi principem ac fâisse beatissâmâ santaeque memoris Donatum their Prince Donatus But because there wânted ground and occasion of so doing the Church then standing in the liberty whereunto Christ had called it and neither addicting it selfe to any one place nor yeelding it selfe seruant to any moââall man therefore they diuised otherwise as occasion and stomacke led them sundry names which they applied vnto them m Aug. Epist 164. Nos Macarianos appellatis Macarians n Collat. Carthag â cap. 30. Petil. Palam aperteque designo Mensuris ãâ¦ã cos Ceci ãâ¦ã istas esse Mensurists Cecilianists of Macarius Mensurius Ceciltanus euen in the like manner as the Papists being offended that we call them Papists for tying their deuoââon wholly to the Pope seeke to returne the same obiection of partiality vpon vs by calling vs Zwinglians Lutherans Caluinists whereas we yeeld no more either to Zwinglius or Luther or Calum then we doe to all other learned men so farre only to regard them as their proofes goe yea and doe determine that whosoeuer in adhering to any one place or any one man doe affirme themselues only in that communion to be the Church of Christ they are no other but Donatists they are no other but Schismatikes meere breakers and disturbers of Christian peace Whence it followeth as I haue said that the Papists are no other who limit the name of Catholikes and of the Catholike Church only to the communion of the Pope and of the Roman Church Which M. Bishop here doth who though he say that all other Churches of what Countrey so ãâ¦ã r may be called Catholike maketh restrâint of his âll in this sort that with the Church of
mihi cogita de similitudinibâs quae sââât in Euangelio as images and pictures doe not on all parts and in all respects fit to those things which they represent so neither doe those similitudes that are vsed in the Gospell It is sufficient alwaies in this case that the resemblance stand good in that in respect whereof the similitude is taken Now therefore albeit the name of Iew doe import a people of one race and kindred and the name of Catholike doe not so yet the name of Iew implyeth withall a certaine profession of religion and deuotion towards God according to the oracles of God deliuered vnto that people and therin it agreeth with the name of Catholike which amongst Christians hath done the like The name of Iew importing of old a prerogatiue of being the people of God and of hauing the knowledge of God and of true religion was a name of honorable respect as I haue shewed and therein the name of Catholike is answerable to it hauing beene wont to signifie the true professors of Christian faith liuing in the vnity and fellowship of one Catholike Church being thereby partakers of the honour that belongeth to the same Church The name of Iew though in it selfe a gracious and louely name yet by the infidelity and apostasie of them who for carnall propagation only continued it to themselues without regard of the spirituall duty thereto annexed became a name of curse and reproch What hindereth but that I might also say the thing being so that the name of Catholikes also though honorable and desireable in it selfe and in that vse whereto it was of old applied yet being abused by vniust vsurpers of it is in them and in their abuse a name of curse and infamie so as that when we heare such a man call himselfe a Catholike we take him thereby to be a man of shame and to carry the marke of an Apostata and an Heretike Yea but the law of the Iewes saith he was to continue but for a time and to end at the comming of Christ whereas the name of Catholike shall neuer faile It is true that the law of the Iewes as touching the outward ceremonies was to end at the comming of Christ but in the spirituall vse and doctrine thereof accomplished in Christ it was to remaine for euer Wherein if the Iewes had continued by faith their name and they themselues had continued in honour but q Rom. 11. 20. by vnbeliefe they were broken off and thereby their name grew to that detestation spoken of Euen so the faith for which men at first were called Catholikes shall remaine without end wherein if they had continued that assume to themselues that name it should haue beene to them still as of old it was a name of honour but hauing seazed vppon the name only by externall and carnall succession and hauing banished that faith which they professed who of old were called Catholikes the name according to their vnderstanding of it is odious and hatefull neither doth any faithfull man ioy to be called a Catholike lest he should seeme to be partaker with them in their perfidious apostasie from the faith of Christ For the better clearing whereof and better discouery of M. Bishops fraude who to deceiue the simple hudleth and confoundeth all it is to be obseâued that the word Catholike in our common speech is taken sometimes adiectiuely and sometimes substantiuely Adiectiuely as when we say the Catholike Church the Catholike Faith the Catholike Doctors and Fathers and thus we forbeare not to vse the name but it is common in our mouthes and in all our writings neither will we make it any doubt or question with M. Bishop but that the Church hath beene from the beginning and shall be to the end called the Catholike Church But it is otherwise taken substantiuely and put absolutely to designe the persons that are stiled by the name of Catholikes as when a Papist saith that he is a Catholike and that they generally are Catholikes in which sort it was not vsed from the beginning and therefore there is no necessity of the continuance of it to the end For the space of three hundred yeares after Christ vntill the time of Constantine and the arising of the heresie of the Donatists I doe not thinke it can be shewed that Christians of true beliefe were accustomed any where to be called by the name of Catholikes I would intreate M. Bishop for my learning to bring me Tertullian or Origen or Athanasius or Clemens Alexandrinus or Cyprian or Euscbius or any other of those times by whom it may appeare that there was any such vse thereof Nay Athanasius certainly knew it not who to expresse the true professors of the faith vseth no other names but to call them r Athanas Apolog 2. Epist Sardic Concil Omnes vbique Orthodoxae fidei homines Men of the orthodoxe or right faith or more briefly to the same effect Å¿ Ibid. Ab Eusebianis contra Orthodoxos acta Epist proxima Toti in hoc sunt vt Orthodoxos eijciant The Orthodoxe or elsewhere t Ibid. Epist Iulij Ferè omnes Clericos Populos Ecclesiae Catholicae insidijâ appeti The Clergie and People of the Catholike Church or such like and found no generall or vsuall name to that purpose but only Christians Which appoareth very plainly where arguing against the Arians from their very name of Arians he saith thus u Athanas coÌt Arian Orat. 2. Nunquam populus ab Epiâcopis suis sed à Domino in quem credidit nomen accepit Certè à beatis Apostolis preceptoribus nostris ministrisque Euangelij Saluatoris nostri appâllationes adepti non sumus sed à Christo Christiani sumus nuncupamur Illi verò qui alâunde originem suae fidei deducunt meritò authorum suorum cognomenta vt ad quos pertineant praeseserunt Quaproptèr cùm omnes à Christo Christiani essemus diceremur explosus est Morcion inuentor haereseos reliqui autem qui cum Marcionis explosore remansere Christiani titulum retinuerunt qui verò secuti sunt Marcionem non iam inde Christiani sed Marcionistae appellati sunt Ita quoque Vaâentinus Basilides Manichaeus Simon Magus sectatoribus sua vocabula impertierunt indâque factum vt alij Valentiniani alij Basilidiani c vocitati sint Ita Melctius eiectus à Petro c. suos qui ipsum sequebantur non Christianos postea sed Meletianos denominauit Eadem it erum ratione Alexandro Arium eijciente ij qui Alexandro adhaeserunt remanserunt Christiani illi verò qui vnà cum Ario recesserunt nomen Saluatoris nostri Alexandro cum suis relinquentes Ariani deinceps appellati sunt Quinimò ecce âtiam nunc post mortem Alexandri qui eiusdem communionis sunt cum Athanasio Alexandri successoâe quibus ipse Athanasius communione coniunctus est omnes eundem pariter characterem
habent neque ille suis nomen indit aut à suis recipit sed omnes vt antea consuetâ more Christiani nominantur Neuer any people tooke name of their Bishops but of the Lord in whom they beleeued We haue not taken names from the holy Apostles our Masters and Ministers of the Gospell of our Sauiour but of Christ we both are and are called Christians but they who deriue the originall of their faith from any other doe worthily beare the names of their authours as to whom they doe belong When as therefore we all were and were called Christians of Christ Marcion the inuentor of heresie was worthily exploded The other which remained with him by whom Marcion was exploded retayned the name of Christians but they who followed Marcion were no longer called Christians but Marcionites And thus Valentinus Basilides Manicheus and Simon Magus gaue names to their followers and thence it came that some were called Valentinians other Basilidians other Manichees other Simonians other Cataphrygians of their Countrey Phrygia other Nouatians of Nouatus Thus Meletius being eiected by Peter a Bishop and Martyr named them that followed him not any more Christians but Meletians In the same sort when Alexander eiected Arius they who cleaued to Alexander remayned Christians but they who went away with Arius leauing the name of Christians to Alexander and his were thenceforth called Arians Moreouer euen now after the death of Alexander they who are of the same communion with Athanasius the successor of Alexander and with whom Athanasius himselfe is ioyned in communion they all still keepe the same marke he neither giueth any name to them nor they to him but all as before according to the accustomed manner are called Christians This place I haue set downe at large that the Reader may see that Athanasius here could not haue omitted the name of Catholikes there being such occasion to draw it from him if it had been then in vse and that the common names of opposition were then not Catholikes and Heretikes but Christians and Heretikes euen as Cyprian also vseth it saying of Stephanus x Cyprian ad Pompeium Qui haeretâcoruÌ causâm contra Christianos contra Ecclesiam Dei esscrere conatur He goeth about to maintaine the cause of Heretikes against Christians and against the Church of God the word Catholike being neuer found in either of them personally taken or substantiuely as before was said but only that Athanasius mentioneth one surnamed y Athanas Epist ad solitariam vitam agentes Faustinus Catholicus homo genere Bithyâus opinionibus haereticus Catholicus an Arian Heretike and a persecutor of the faith We may therefore well thinke that there was little discretion riueted to M. Bishops head that would tell vs that the name so taken is so fast ioyned and riueted with Christian profession and religion as that it cannot be separated from it for if it were not so riueted then how commeth it to passe that it is so now The originall thereof was as we may well coniecture by occasion of the heresie of the Donatists who challenged the name of the Church to a part in Africa or elsewhere which were followers of Donatus against whom they that defended the Church Catholike were thereof in processe of time termed by the name of Catholikes The first vse then of the name of Catholikes stood in opposition betwixt Catholikes and Donatists albeit custome soone transported it to make a generall opposition betwixt Catholikes and Heretikes Now the name thus arising accidentally and only by occasion who doubteth but that without preiudice of Christian profession it may by occasion be let fall againe And what greater occasion can there be then the Popish abuse thereof who make a Catholike to import the same in effect now that a Donatist did then For with them a Catholike is no otherwise taken but for a Roman Catholike and because the whole Church is not Roman but a part only what is this Roman Catholike but one who vnder the false name of a Catholike diuideth himselfe from the whole Church as the Donatists did to cleaue to a part thereof What is the name of a Catholike then with them but a Donatisticall name schismaticall and factious and therefore wicked and hatefull and in their sense wholly to be abandoned out of the Church of God Hereby it may appeare how idlely M. Bishop saith that the Apostles did ascribe and appropriate the name Catholike to true Christianity for although they taught vs to beleeue the Church to be Catholike that is vniuersally extended through the world yet did they neuer teach neither was it for a long time after them accustomed that true Christians were called by the name of Catholikes and therefore without wrong to any thing which the Apostles taught we may rightly say that the name according to the Popish abuse thereof is become the proper badge and marke of Apostataes and Heretikes And therefore although if we had beene in the time of Austin we would with him z August in Ioan. tract 32. Catholico nomine fide gaudemus haue reioyced in the Catholike name and faith yet now we cannot with the Papists reioyce in the name of Catholikes and without any blasphemy we reiect it because vnder that name they haue diuided themselues from the Catholike Church and haue destroyed the true Catholike faith Who though they be no other but proud and false fellowes as M. Bishop speaketh and meere vsurping companions and their insolent and audacious folly haue beene both rebuked and conuicted yet doe still impudently and infinitely persist in their absurd claime and doe leaue vs no way but only to desist from the communion of the name which we cannot free from that abuse Now whereas I say further that a Rom. 2. 28. the Apostle denyeth the name of Iewes to them who yet according to the letter were so called because of the circumcision of the flesh and applyeth the truth of the name to them who were so according to the spirit albeit according to the letter they were not so named M. Bishop very discreetly answereth that the name Iew being taken in the Apostles sense for one of what nation soeuer that fulfilleth the iustice of the law neuer was nor shall be a name of reproch But what is this I pray to that that I say Doe my words import that the name of a Iew in that sense is or hath beene a name of reproch When I say that the Apostle applyeth the truth of the name to the faithfull would he conceiue me that the Apostle applyeth to them a name of reproch My words plainly signifie that the name in vulgar and literall construction applyed to them who by propagation of nature are the seede of Abraham is become a name of reproch and shame but that as it hath implication of spirituall circumcision and conformity with Abraham it is a name of honour though they to whom it
Resurrection of our Lord Iesus This is our religion and herein their example iustifieth vs but their doctrines of transubstantiation and reall presence and concomitancy and sacrifice propitiatory for quicke and dead with the rest of that kinde are additions of theirs whereof the institution of Christ which togither with vs they recite maketh no shew at all If they should haue disclaimed redemption and remission of sinnes by the bloud-shed and death of Christ Christian people would haue defied them therefore they left the name thereof in the Church which is our religion but they defeated the power of it by briâging in a thousand other deuices wherby men should redeeme themselues and purchase the remission of their owne sinnes It is our religion to acknowledge Christ to be the Mediator betwixt God and Man and this they would neuer disauow but to Christ they haue ioyned the Saints also to be our Mediators It is our religion to teach that God is to be worshipped and all spirituall deuotion is to be done vnto him and this they cannot deny but they haue added hereto the worshipping of Saints and Saints Images and thereby haue defiled the worship of the immortall God They deny not grace which our religion teacheth but they put to it the power of nature and free will They dare not but confesse Christ to be the head of the Church which our religion teacheth but they haue added the Pope to be another head and so haue made the Church a Monster with two heads Thus in euery point of doctrine take away those patcheries and additions of theirs which are things not taught vs by the word of God and euen in their religion that which remaineth is our religion the very truth of the Gospell of Iesus Christ For these and such other propositions of true faith the Diuell could neuer abolish out of the Church only by Antichrist he suppressed the knowledge and vse of them and to this wholsome wine put such abundance of his corrupt and poisoned waters as might frustrate the power and effect thereof Wherein notwithstanding he could not so farre preuaile but that the light here and there brake forth by such chinks and lattises as were remaining which many of our forefathers in the time of that Aegyptian darkenesse did discerne and see to their euerlasting comfort and soules health Yea M. Bishop knoweth well that there were in those times both Pastors and Flocks not in one only Countrey but in many who detested those blendings and mixtures of theirs and kept themselues either wholly or for the most part to the entire truth of our religion the light whereof euen then shined vnto them out of the very darkenesse of the Church Which notwithstanding we wonder not that he pretendeth not to know who will seeme not to know that our religion hath spred it selfe into Italie and Spaine when as all the world knoweth that the Inquisition hath shed the bloud of many thousands there only for the profession of our religion Yea the principles of our religion are so residing will they nill they in the very bowels of Popery as that they are forced to vse many sinister courses to drowne and stifle them and to keepe the people from taking knowledge thereof because they see that if there be but winde to blow away the ashes our fire will straightwaies burne amongst them and the flame presently ascend to the consuming of their roofe they see that if men be but stirred a ãâ¦ã awaked out of their sleepe they will be forthwith ready out of the very common instinct of Christianity to beeleeue as we doe In Greece in Africa in Asia wheresoeuer the Gospell is there is no other but our Gospell because there is no Gospell but that which the Euangelists and Apostles haue recorded in the writings of the Gospell neither is Christ any where knowen but where he is knowen by that Gospell Therein hath our Gospell beene spred ouer the whole world therein we communicate with the Church of the whole world wheresoeuer this Gospell is free there our religion is not bound but thereby euen amidst errour and apostasie b wisedome is iustified of her children and God Mat. 11. 19. according to the purpose of his grace giueth light vnto euerlasting life As for the Indians lamentable experience haue they had of the Popish Gospell Neuer any Apostle or Euangelist carryed their religion abroade as the Papists haue done thither and they haue cause to wish that the Roman Church had neuer beene so Catholike as to extend to them Vpon some few of the remainder of them they haue forced baptisme some of their ceremonies but they haue taught them nothing of religion nothing of the Gospell of Iesus Christ How otherwise their religion hath beene spred ouer the whole world enough hath beene said already in briefe I say here that they can alleage no age nor time wherein they can make good that it hath so beene We know they can talke at will but farre are they from proofe that their doctrines of the Popes Supremacy his Pardons and Iubilees of Purgatory of Transubstantiation of their priuate Masse and halfe Communion with a number of such other were euer or at any time receiued throughout the whole world CHAP. IIII. That the Church before Christ euen from the beginning was a part of the Catholike Church and that the faith and religion of the new Testament differeth not in substance from the old A BRIEFE DEFENCE OF THE KINGS SVPREMACY ECCLESIASTICALL ANSWERE TO THE EPISTLE NOw as of this Catholike Church from the beginning to the end there is c. to Now whereas he alleageth c. W. BISHOP §. 1. WE agree in this that there is but one faith one baptisme one spirituall foode and one religion in the Catholike Church but M. Abbot is fouly ouer-seen about the time when the true Church beganne first to be called Catholike which was not before Christs time but afterwards according to that alleaged out of Pacianus an ancient Author who writeth of the name Catholike saying Pacian Epist ad Simphor de nomine Catholico Christian is my name 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 and did cleaue fast vnto the whole body of the Church were intituled Catholikes to distinguish them from Heretikes that did not ioyne with the vniuersall corps of Christians in faith and religion which M. Abbot before did in plaine words confesse see his text afore where 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 were right and according to the will of God for that time because Catholike signifieth that which is spred all the world ouer and receiued of all nations so was not the law of Moyses and the manner of seruing God therein prescribed but was peculiar
vnto the children of Israel and as it were confined within the limits of one land and countrey wherefore it could not be called Catholike and Vniuersall R. ABBOT MAster Bishop is fouly ouerseene to make it a question here what time it was that the Church beganne to be called Catholike it being sufficient to my purpose that the Church before the time of Christ albeit it were not then called Catholike yet was a part of that Church which hath beene so called since the time of Christ euen as the arme which comming first out of the wombe beareth not the name of the child and yet is a part of the child which is afterwards called by that name Therefore St. Austin diuiding mankinde into a Aug. in psal 61. Vna ciuitas vna ciuitas Babylonia vna Hierusalem vna Illa rege Diabolo ista rege Christo c. Illa incepit à Cain haec ab Abel two Cities the one vnder the Diuell as King thereof the other vnder Christ the one Babylon the other Ierusalem b Heb. 12. 22. the heauenly Ierusalem c Gal. 4. 26. Ierusalem which is aboue which is the Mother of vs all beginneth Ierusalem at Abel as he doth Babylon at Cain and maketh d Aug. in psal 86. Ciuis inde Propheta ciuis inde Apostolus the Prophets as well as the Apostles cittizens thereof and by another similitude calleth the Christian Church e Idem in psal 79. Quid est expectandii secundae vincae in mò eidem vineae ipsa est enim non enim altera est one and the same vineyard with the Church of the Iewes And if M. Bishop will not learne this of Austin let him learne it of Gregory Bishop of Rome saying that God f Gregor in Euang hom 19. Habet vineam vniuersalem scilicet Ecclesiam quae ab Abel âusto vsque ad vltimum electum qui in fine mundi nasciturus est quot sanctos pretulit quasi tot palmitâs misit hath his vineyard euen the vniuersall Church which yeeldeth so many branches as it bringeth forth Saints from righteous Abel vnto the last Elect that shall be borne in the end of the world and againe that g Idem in Ezech hom 15. Vna est Ecclesia electorum praecedentium atque sequentium there is but one Church of the Elect both before and since the time of Christ Or if he be loth to turne so great a volume as Gregories workes let him looke into their owne Roman Catechisme where he shall finde that it is one cause why the Church is called h Catechism Roman part 1. cap. 10. sect 16. Praeterea omnes fideles qui ab Adam in hunc vsque diem suerant quiâe futuri sunt quamdiu mundus durabit veram fiâem profitentes ad eandem Ecclâsiam pertinent Catholike because all the faithfull who haue beene from Adam till this day and shall be to the worlds end professing the true faith doe belong vnto it What hath M. Bishop beene so long a Doctor of Diuinity and yet doth he not know that the Catholike Church though it were not called Catholike till after the comming of Christ yet now is vnderstood to contayne all the faithfull from the beginning to the end Vndoubtedly he knew it well enough but my collection galled him and he saw there was no way but by cauilling to make shew to shift it of But if he did not let him haue wit to learne it now and let him take my words accordingly that as of the Catholike Church from the beginning to the end there is but one body euen as one Lord one God and Father of all so there is also but one spirit which quickneth that one body and i Ephes 4. 4. one faith whereby we are all partakers of that spirit both which the Apostle ioyneth togither when of the faithfull both of the old and new Testament he saith that they haue k 2. Cor. 4. 13. the same spirit of faith Of this one spirit Gregory saith that l Greg. in psal 5. Poenitent Sicut est vna anima quae diuersa corporis membra viuisicat ita totam simul EcclesiaÌ vnus spiritus sanctus vegetat illustrat as it is but one soule which quickneth the diuers members of the body so one holy spirit giueth life and light to the whole Church Whether we respect them that were before the incarnation of Christ or them that come after they both make but one body and therefore the holy Ghost as the soule is but one and the same to both So of faith Gregory telleth vs that m Gregor in Ezech. hom 16 âadé sides âpes charitas in antiquis patribus quae in nouis Doctoribus fuit in the old Fathers was the same faith hope and charity as in the new teachers namely the Apostles and the rest So likewise Leo Bishop of Rome saith that n Leo in Natluit Dom. ser 3. Fides qua viuimus nulla fuit aetate diuersa the faith whereby we liue was neuer different in any age but o IdeÌ de Pass Dom. serm 14. Vna fides iustificat vniuersoruÌ temporuÌ sanctos one faith saith he iustifieth the Saints of all times p Aug in Ioan. tract 45. Tempora variata sut non fides c. In diuersis signis eadem fides There is difference of the times saith Austin but not of the faith in diuersity of signes there is the same faith q Idem Epist 89. Sacramenta variata sunt vt alia essent in veteri Testamento alia in nouo cùm fides varia non sit sed vna sit The Sacraments are altered one sort in the old Testament other in the new whereas faith is not diuers but one still Now though the signes and Sacraments were diuers yet because there was the same faith and the same spirit therefore the effects of faith and of the spirit were the same so that what we receiue spiritually in Baptisme and the Lords Supper they also though in other Sacraments receiued the same so that they were spiritually baptized they did eate the flesh of Christ and drinke his bloud as well as we as was before intimated in my answere and M. Bishop giueth occasion to declare further in the next section Of the originall of the name Catholike and Catholikes I haue spoken before that that may suffice and though M. Bishop haue drawen it in it is impertinent here to stand vpon it W. BISHOP §. 2. ANd M. Abbot was greatly deceiued or else goeth about to deceiue others when for proofe of communicating with the Catholike Church hee recoileth backe vnto the beginning of the world Why did he not rather shew that their new Gospell flourished in all Countries assoone as the Christian faith was planted and that it hath continued in all ages since the Apostles dayes vntill our time that had beene to haue spoken directly to the purpose
which he seldome vseth But hee saw that to bee a worke too hard for Hercules and therefore to delude his Reader and to leade him from the matter he flieth vp to the old farne-daies of Abel Noe Abraham c. as though they had reuealed vnto them all those particular points of faith which Christ taught his Apostles and the same religion and manner of worshipping God that wee Christians haue which is flatly opposite to the doctrine of S. Paul who testifieth That the mistery of Christ vnto Ephes 3. vers 4. 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 looking a farre off at the dayes of Hebr. 11. v. 13. Christ the light of the world did not discouer so distinctly the mysteries of the Christian faith as the Apostles who were * Ioh. 6. v. 45. taught by his owne mouth and made to know a Ioh 15. v. 15. all his Fathers secrets and had b Rom. 8. v 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 words Many Prophets and iust men haue Math. 13. v. 17. desired to see the things that you see and haue not seene them and to heare the things 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 thousands of yeares before there was any Church Catholike Secondly in auouching the ancient founders of the first world to haue beleeued clearly and particularly all the articles of faith that we 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 full growth They did not saith he worship Idols and Images they did not pray to Saints c. But good Sir did they beleeue that all their children were to be baptised and that all persons of riper yeares among them were to receiue the holy Sacrament of Christs 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 without 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 which we 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 R. ABBOT I Was neither deceiued my selfe M. Bishop neither did I goe about to deceiue others the case being so plaine as that a man of vnderstanding cannot easily be deceiued therein If the Catholike Church be but one from the beginning to the end and of this Church from the beginning to the end there be but one faith as hath beene shewed who is so blind as that he seeth not that the Catholike faith now must be the same with the faith of all the Patriarchs and Fathers since the world beganne It was not Catholike then because it was peculiar only to some few whom God enlightened or to one only nation which he specially selected but it was the very same which afterwards became Catholike by being preached and spred ouer the whole world Now then most cleare it is that if our faith be the same with the faith of Abel of Enoch of Abraham and the rest of those times then our faith is the Catholike faith euen the faith which the Apostles preached through the world and if the faith of Popery be not the same then is Popery falsly termed the Catholike faith M. Bishop blameth me for recoiling to the beginning of the world and telleth me what it is that I should haue proued when by recoiling if I must so call it to the beginning of the world I proue that which he requireth howsoeuer he vnder pretence of calling for proofe would make his Reader beleeue that he seeth no proofe But he well enough seeth the worke too hard for Hercules as he calleth it by this proofe very readily dispatched for if there be but one faith of the Church from the beginning to the end and our faith be that which was in the beginning then is our faith that which was spred ouer the world and shall continue to the end As though saith he they had reuealed vnto them all those particular points of faith which Christ taught his Apostles and the same religion and manner of worshipping God that wee Christians haue I answere him that all particular points of faith were reuealed vnto them but not all circumstances of all particular points nor so clearly as to vs and the same religion and manner of worshipping God in substance was deliuered vnto them though in outward rites and ceremonies we differ from them Christ was a Apoc. 13. 8. the Lambe slaine from the beginning of the world b Aug. Epist â ChristuÌ DeuÌ in carne venturum morituruÌ resurrecturum in coelum ascensuruÌ c. inque illo remissionem peccatorum salutemque aeternam credentibus futuram esse omnia gentis illius promissa omnes prophetiae Sacerdotia Sacrisicia templâ cuncâa omninò Sacramenta sonuerunt All the promises of that time saith St. Austin all the Prophecies the Priest-hood the Sacrifices the Temple and all the Sacraments did tell them that Christ should come God in the flesh that he should die that he should rise againe and ascend into heauen and that all that beleeue should haue remission of sinnes in him These are particular points of faith and these they beleeued albeit the manner and circumstances of the Birth the Life Death Resurrection and Ascension of Christ were not reueiled vnto them as they are in the Gospell liuely described and set forth to vs. For as in the first draught of the painter there is to be discerned the whole feature proportion and parts of the body which he hath in hand to paint which remaine afterwards by filling and garnishing to bee brought to full and perfect forme so the whole frame of Christian faith was in the beginning made knowen to the Patriarchs and Fathers of the first world though the same remained more and more clearly to be reueiled vntill by the comming of Christ it should receiue full and perfect light It skilleth not therefore which he saith that those ancient Patriarchs did not so distinctly discouer the mysteries of Christian faith as the Apostles
and perfection which is now presumed of them Of these M. Bishop is silent he can say nothing he can shew nothing there is no example no intimation of any such beleeued or practised in the Church I will not say for two thousand as before but for the space of foure thousand yeares as by his owne confession interpretatiuè we argue because he alleageth none His instance of workes of supererogation is only in legall vowes which albeit in the ceremony they were in some sort arbitrary yet carryed alwaies an implication of spirituall necessary duties which to make their vowes acceptable vnto God were then to be performed by them and are now still remaining to be performed by vs. The vow of the Nazarite did by certaine obseruations shadow forth what ought spiritually to be the holinesse and purity of them who either then were or now are by the calling of the grace of God separated vnto God And so it stood with all other vowes which were of things appointed by the law to bee offered and sacrificed which serued to aduertise both them and vs of that x Leo in Anniuersar suo ser 3. Vniuersi spirituales rationales Christiani Sacerdotalis officij consortes c. Quid tam sacerdotale quaÌ vouere Domino conscientiam puram immaculatas pietatis hostias de Altari cordis offerre Priestly duty as Leo calleth it common to all Christians to vow vnto God a pure conscience and vpon the Altar of the heart to offer vp vnspotted sacrifices of piety vnto him What is there here then for Popish vowes and why doth he goe about to build his works of supererogation vpon a foundation so vnfit for the bearing of them But of these matters I haue y Of Vowes sect 1. 5. confut of the Answ to M. Perk. Aduert sect 16. spoken also sufficiently before and haue handled those texts which as there so here againe he citeth to no end Very ill doth it sort that when I alleage that they vowed no vowes of Monkery he answereth me by texts that concerne vowes of sacrifices and ceremonies belonging only to that time But being offended at my terme of Monkery fearing it belike to be a charme to turne their Monkes into Monkeis he setteth himselfe to be reuenged on me by bringing a proofe ineuitable for the antiquity of them amongst the Patriarchs and Fathers of the old Church Forsooth Iosephus a graue authour amongst the Iewes witnesseth that there liued in the time of the law many thousands called Esseni who were contemners of riches liued in common hauing neither wiues nor seruants Similes habent labra lactucas Like matter like proofe Ridiculous man who for the iustifying of their Monkish vowes would bring vs the example of lewish professed Heretikes so recorded to haue beene by z Philast de haeres cap. 6. Philastrius and a Epiphan haeres 19. Epiphanius and by his owne authour Iosephus set downe for such another sect as were the other two of b Ioseph Antiquit ludaic l. 18. c 2. Iudai in trâs sectas diuisi Essenorum Saducaeorum Pharisâorum the Pharisees and Saducees Why did he not as well alleage the Pharisees and Saducees but specially the Pharisees amongst whom he might haue found some shew for their c Epiphan haeres 16. Quidam ipsorum ââm se exerââbant praescribebat decânnium aut octennium âut quadrienââum virginitatis siue continentiae vow of continency and chastity but that their names being knowen out of the Gospell hee knew it would easily bee discerned what kinde of weapon he had brought to fight against me These Essees d Philast vt supra Christâm Dominum Dei silium non expectantes c. Sed Prophetam aut iustum hominem sâlum credântes expectant beleeued not that Christ the Messias should be the sonne of God but only some Prophet or iust man as Philastrius writeth of them Iosephus saith of them e Ioseph de bell Iudaic. l. 2. â 7. Opinio apud illos sirmata est corruptibilia esse corpora ma teriamque ãâ¦ã um non essâ perpetuam anim is autem immortales semper manere quasi careeribus ita corporibus implicari c. qâum verò fuerint à carnalibus releuate vinculis quasi de seruitute longissiâa liber âas ââa ãâã âetaâi c. Bonas pronunciant vltra Oceanum degere c. illic qâippe esse regâonem que neque imbribus neque niuibus neque aestibus aggrauetur c. malis autem animabus procellosa loca hyberna delegant that they beleeued the immortality of the soule but the resurrection of the body they beleeued not into which they said according to Origens opinion that the soule was brought as into a prison and shall greatly reioyce when it is freed therefrom They dreamed that the soules of the iust haue a place of rest beyond the Ocean where there is no raine nor snow nor heate and on the other side that some stormy and winter quarters were designed for the euill In the place cited by M. Bishop he sheweth further that f Idem Antiq. l. 18. cap. 2. Ad templum donaria mutentes sacraibinon faciunt quòd sanctioribus vtantur ceremonijs quapropter exclusi â communi sano seorsum sacrificant they sent gifts to the Temple but did no sacrifice or deuotion there for that they vsed more sacred and holy ceremonies namely then were appointed by God himselfe for which cause being from thence excluded they sacrificed apart which was a thing contrary to the commandement of God Now whereas M. Bishop saith that they had neither wiues nor seruants though it were true in some of them yet it was not so in all For Iosephus noteth that there was one sort of them which though g Idem de bello Iudaico l. 2. c. 7. Est autem aliud etiam Essânorum collegium cibos quâdâ mores legesque fimiles cum prioribus habens distans verò opinione de conââgio Maximam siquidemvitae hominum partem successionem scilicet amputare qui abstineant nuptijs arbitrantur c. they agreed with the rest as touching diet and orders yet differed from them in the opinion of marriage thinking that they that did forbeare marriage did cut off a great part of the life of men by taking away succession and therefore they did marry But it is not to be omitted how M. Bishop graceth these Essees with liuing in the time of the law making shew to the ignorant Reader as if they had had some great continuance of good and approued times whereas h Funcc Chronolog Anno mundi 3833. the beginning of them as of the Pharisees and Saducees was in the very declination of true piety and religion amongst the Iewes some two hundred yeares before the time of Iosephus about a hundred and forty yeares before the birth of Christ Neither in the law of Moses nor in any of the Prophets is there mention
grace the substance and truth being reueiled they ought to cease This was the very reason why the Apostles taught the Church x Col. 2. 17. 20. to be disburdened of those rites because they were shadowes of things to come the body whereof is in Christ. But M. Bishop telleth vs by another spirit that therefore the Church of Rome reteineth them because they were shadowes of things to come because they were types and figures of the law of grace and reproueth them of vndiscreet zeale that are minded otherwise Sith then he can obserue vndiscreet zeale in the Apostles I may not maruell that he deemeth my sore eyes darkened with strange defluxion and distillation of corrupt humours but such indeede is the case of mine eyes that in the law of Moses and in the Prophets I cannot see that religion which we call Popery which standeth in those points of faith whereof the question is betwixt them and vs. The rest of his wordes I passe ouer as idle talke What hee hath declared wee see and we see so much folly in it and so little weight as that we cannot but aduise him to take longer time and goe ouer the same againe W. BISHOP §. 5. ANd much more reprâchfull is it to hold as he doth That we worship God after the same manner as they did for then should we sacrifice to him Beefs Muttons Calues and Lambs and our sacrificers should be of Aarons issue and order and we all circumcised I omit all their ceremonies because M. Abbot excepteth them And if the Protestants doe altogether pray as they did and in the same termes as M. Abbot affirmeth them to doe they sometimes then doe pray vnto God to remember Exod. 32. v. 13. Abraham Isaac and Iacob and for their sakes to make mercy on them for to that effect and in those termes prayed the Prophet Moyses and that according vnto those Patriarkes expresse order and commandement Genes 48. v. 16. Whereunto if it please the Protestants to ioyne that other prayer of the Psalmist Remember O Lord Dauid Psal 131. and all his mildnesse let them tell mee whether this small prayer with which they finde so great fault Tu per Thomae sanguinem c. Thou O Lord for that blouds sake which thy seruant shed in defence of thy holy Church take compassion vpon vs be not warranted for good by example of the like recorded in the old Testament For if they then did desire God to remember the excellent vertues of his seruants and for their sakes to shew mercy to others why may not we doe the same now why may we not as well beseech God to remember the constant fortitude of S. Thomas as they did the mildnesse of Dauid I will not dwell vpon these impertinent and loose follies which all that be not babes may of themselues easily discry but doe out of the premises inferre first that no religion was to be called Catholike before the Gospell of Christ was preached or to be preached to all nations and therefore the law of Moyses being peculiar to one people and countrey could not be called Catholike secondly that the Roman faith and religion is very conformable to that of the Patriarks and Prophets as the verity is to the figure whence it followeth that the Protestants new deuices hold no due correspondence with them I haue already confuted this his assertion That Christ at his comming confirmed the faith and religion of the Iewes without any additions of his owne and commended it simply and nakedly only stripping it of types and shadowes to be preached to all nations And here I adde that then Christians may yet haue many wiues together as the Iewes had or giue their wiues vppon any displeasure a libell of diuorse for these were no shadowes nor ceremonies And briefly it should follow thereof that all that part of their law that doth belong to iustice and iudgement stands still in full force and vertue among vs Christians which is most opposite to the determination of the Apostles in the first Councel holden at Hierusalem where it was plainly decided that we Christians Act. 15. vers 28. were not bound to keepe the old law Againe if the Apostles were simply and nakedly to preach vnto the Gentiles the law of Moyses stript of types and shadowes why were they commanded to preach vnto them the Sacrament of baptisme or of our Lords Supper which are no where commanded in the law of Moyses Well let this then passe as a most notorious and grosse ouersight But the Apostles saith he added nothing of their owne which is very false for many things were left by our Sauiour to their disposition whereupon Saint Paul saith Caetera cum venero disponam I will dispose 1. Cor. 11. v. 3â of the rest when I come and was further bold to say Haec dico ego non Dominus For the rest I say 1. Cor. 7. v. 12. not our Lord. M. Abbot goes on belying the Apostle and saying And they preached only the Gospell Rom. 1. promised before by the Prophets where he corrupteth the Text by adding the word only and weaueth into that Text to the Romans these wordes out of the Acts of the Apostles saying none other things then those Act. 26. v. 22. which the Prophets and Moyses did say should come where he both mangleth the Text and also breaks off in the middest of a sentence that it might seeme applyable to all points of the Apostles preachings which the Apostle applyeth only to Christs death and resurrection and the preaching and carrying of light vnto the Gentiles It is a peece of strange alchymie to distill out of these wordes of the Apostle that they preached nothing but the same faith and religion which the Iewes embraced S. Paul saith that he had preached nothing of Christs death and resurrection and that he was the light of the Gentiles but that which the Prophets did speake should come to passe M. Abbot of his owne head enlargeth this his speech to all other points of our faith Againe all is besides the purpose for the Apostle saith not that hee taught any one article which the common sort of the Iewes did beleeue but such things as the Prophets said should come to passe Who knowes not that they foresaw and fore-told many things that were no articles of faith in their dayes and touching these very particulars how many of the Iewes did beleeue that their Messias should die so shamefull a death or that Moyses law should be abrogated by their Messias and that the Gospell of Christ should be preached vnto all nations all these were great nouels and exceeding scandalous to the body of the Iewes wherefore though some better learned among them and more religiously affected might vnderstand the Prophets speaking of those points yet were they farre from the common reach and perswasion of that people of the Iewes from these points that the Iewes beleeued
all that Christ taught and all that he commanded his Apostles to deliuer to all nations R. ABBOT THe wordes of mine answere are As they worshipped God so sauing ceremoniall obseruations we also worship him Consider now I pray thee gentle Reader from what braine M. Bishops illation proceedeth Then should we sacrifice to him Beefs Muttons Calues Lambs and our sacrificers should be of Aarons issue and order and we all circumcised Why M. Bishop are not all these in the number of ceremoniall obseruations Forsooth no I omit all their ceremonies saith he because M. Abbot excepteth them But did not M. Abbot in excepting all their ceremonies except circumcision and sacrifices and the whole Priest-hood of the law What is M. Bishop ignorant that circumcision and sacrifices and the whole rites and rules of the Leuiticall Priest-hood doe all belong to the ceremoniall law and that our Sauiour Christ in abrogating the ceremoniall law is vnderstood to haue abolished all these Is he to be set to schoole againe to learne what is meant by the name of ceremonies It were a shame to send a Doctor of Diuinity to his Catechisme for his credits sake I will referre him to a greater booke of Thomas Aquinas where he saith that a Tho. Aquin. sum 12. q. 101. art 4. Per tot In veteri lege singula praedicta Sacrificia Sacramenta sacra obseruantiae ceremoniae vocantur in the old law Sacrifices Sacraments sacred vtensils and implements and obseruances of singular or speciall conuersation are all called ceremonies and this I would haue him learne against the next time His next exception is against that I say As they prayed so and in the same wordes we also pray Then saith he they doe sometimes pray vnto God to remember Abraham and Isaac and Iacob and for their sakes to take mercy on them as Moses did Which in part we acknowledge and professe to doe to pray God in like manner as Moses did to remember Abraham and Isaac and Iacob and for their sakes to take mercy vpon the seede of Abraham but not to take mercy vpon vs. God bound himselfe to the seede of Abraham b Genes 17. 7. by an euerlasting couenant to be their God by reason whereof we beleeue that in this forlorne estate wherein they now be God still standeth entirely respectiue to the preseruation of that nation and though c Rom. 11. 28. as touching the Gospell they be enimies for our sakes yet as touching the election as the Apostle faith namely whereby God of old elected them to be his people they are beloued for their Fathers sakes Their present infidelity then is an interruption only not any finall reiection of them and the time will come when the effect of that loue will appeare by restoring that nation againe to the society and fellowship of the Church of Christ What hindereth then but as they are beloued for their Fathers sakes so we may pray God to remember their Fathers Abraham and Isaac and Iacob and for their sakes to shew his loue and to returne vnto them in mercy and compassion d 2. Cor. 3. 15 16. To take away the veile that is laid before their hearts that they may bee turned to the Lord Which notwithstanding we say not for our selues because God hath made no promise to vs properly and personally in Abraham but only e Genes 22. 18. ãâ¦ã ls 3. 25. in the seede of Abraham f Gal. 3. 16. which is Iesus Christ by whom and in whom it is and not by Abraham himselfe that we are become the children of Abraham As for the text which he alleageth to proue that it was the expresse order and commandement of the Patriarchs that their posterity should so pray hee sheweth his ignorance in the abusing of it because no otherwise did Iacob say g Genes 48. 16. Vulg. Innocetur super cos nomen meam Let my name be named vpon them and the name of my Fathers Abraham and Isaac then as seuen women in a time of desolation are brought in by the Prophet saying to one man h Esa 4 1. Vulg. Innocetur nomen tuum super nos Let thy name be named vpon vs these women hereby crauing that they might be called the wines of such a man and the Patriarch desiring that Ephraim and Manasses should be seuerally reckoned for Tribes of the seed of Abraham and Israel as if they had beene immediately descended from him euen as Iacob himselfe a litle before expresseth his owne meaning saying i Genes 48. 5. Thy two sonnes Manasses and Ephraim which are borne vnto thee in the land of Aegypt before I came to thee into the land of Aegypt shall be mine as Ruben and Simeon are mine But now vpon this that hath beene said that they prayed God for those Fathers sakes to be mercifull to them M. Bishop being resolutely impudent to make all good that is starke naught groundeth a defence of a diuellish and horrible blasphemy which the Church of Rome had brought of old into the seruice of the Church Concerning Thomas Becket Archbishop of Canterbury in the time of King Henry the second slaine then without due and lawfull proceeding but yet dying no other but an insolent rebell and traitour to his Prince they haue beene wont to pray thus k Breuiar in traÌslat S. Thomae Cantuar. Jesu Christe per Thomae vulnera Quae nos ligant relaxa scelera Tu per Thomae sanguinem quem pro te impendit Fac nos Christe scandere quò Thomas ascedit O Iesus Christ by Thomas his wound Release the sinnes wherewith we are bound By the bloud of Thomas which for thee he did spend Make vs O Christ to climbe whither Thomas did ascend In which prayers wee see how by the wounds and bloud of this holy Saint of theirs they aske at Gods hands remission of sinnes and euerlasting life which Christian faith abhorreth to aske by any other but only the bloud of Iesus Christ Yea so harshly it soundeth in Christian eares and so contrary is it to the common sense of Christian profession as that the Rabbines of the Roman Synagogue were content euen for very shame to blot it out of their Portesse thereby acknowledging that it was by apostasie and errour that it came first in But M. Bishop a man more wise and learned or rather a man of harder fore-head then they were taketh vpon him to assure vs that there was nothing amisse in that praier and that it might very conueniently and lawfully haue beene retayned still And why Marry because of old time they prayed thus Remember Abraham and Isaac and Iacob and againe Lord remember Dauid and all his mildnesse For saith he if they did then desire God to remember the excellent vertues of his seruants and for their sakes to shew mercy vpon others why may not we doe the same now why may we not as well beseech God to remember the constant fortitude
will teach you when I come some new doctrine and points of faith which Christ hath not taught or commanded me to teach but I haue added of mine owne If he thinke so let him tell vs that we may wonder at him If he doe not thinke so to what end is it that he alleageth those wordes Surely he who a little before so religiously telleth them that o Vos 23. he receiued of the Lord that which he deliuered to them should not seeme likely presently after to say that he would hereafter teach them other matters of his owne which he had not receiued of the Lord. M. Bishop therefore should haue vsed his discretion to put a difference betwixt matter of order and matter of faith so to vnderstand that though the Apostles might as the Church alwaies may prescribe orders for decency and conueniency in the publike assemblies and gouernement of the Church yet that in doctrine and faith neither they then nor the Church now may adde any thing to that which Christ our Lord commanded and deliuered both to them and vs. Of the same kinde is his other proofe out of that which the Apostle faith for aduice to the vnmarried so still to abide concerning which he professeth to haue receiued p 1. Cor. 7. 12. 25. no commandement from the Lord for what is this to shew that the Apostle hereby added a new point of faith when as whether the married or the vnmarried whether they that follow his aduise or they that follow it not all are saued by the same faith Aduise is of things arbitrary to be done faith is of things necessary to be beleeued The Apostle therfore might giue wholsome aduise without coÌmandement of the Lord and yet cannot hereupon be said to teach a new article of faith I said further in my answere that the Apostles preached only q Rom. 1. 2. the Gospell promised before by the Prophets in the holy Scriptures M. Bishop telleth me that I belye the Apostle and corrupt the text by adding the word only But I set downe the word only in a letter distinct from the wordes of the text as appeareth in my booke though he would not obserue it but hudleth all together and therefore there was no cause for him to charge me with corrupting the text And what will he say notwithstanding that it was not meant that they preached only the Gospell promised in the Scriptures Surely the Apostle noteth his calling and seruice to haue bin to preach the Gospell of God This Gospell of God he saith God had promised before by his Prophets in the holy Scriptures Now if M. Bishop will say that though the Gospell were there promised yet the whole Gospell was not promised he wrongeth the Apostle by making his wordes partly true and partly false true in one part of the Gospell because one part was promised false in another part because that other part was not promised Which to auoide he must confesse that the whole Gospell was promised in the Scriptures of the Prophets and because the Apostles preached only the Gospel of God therefore they preached only the Gospell promised in the Scriptures And thus in the end of the same Epistle the Apostle speaketh againe to the same effect that r Rom. 16. 26. the myslerie of the Gospell was published amongst all nations by the Scriptures of the Prophets We doe not thinke he dallied in so saying as to meane the Gospell is published that is to say a part thereof but not the whole but the Gospell entirely and perfectly is preached by the Scriptures of the Prophets Therefore elsewhere he professeth that in preaching the Gospell f he said no other things but what the Prophets and Moses did Acts 26. 22. say should come But here M. Bishop saith I mangle the text and breake off in the midst of a sentence that it might seeme appliable to all points of the Apostles preachings which the Apostle applieth only to Christs death and resurrection and the preaching and carrying of light to the Gentiles But he himselfe rather doth wrong in so abridging the wordes of the Apostle contrary to the practise of the Apostle who though here he name only a briefe of some principall points as accuslomably is done yet vnder these as the chiefe comprehendeth the whole doctrine which he taught He vsed the wordes to take away the offence which was generally conceiued against his preaching and seeing he did not preach these only particulars which are here set downe neither were they offended only at these therefore he must be so vnderstood as that the wordes must be applyed to all the rest and that taken as put in steede of all whereat they were offended most of all And if we doe not so take them we make him subiect to calumniation because he could not affirme that he said no other things then the Prophets and Moses did say should come if in any other points he taught any thing that had not the testimony of Moses and the Prophets Yea when the same Apostle saith generally of t Rom. 3. 21. 22 the righteousnesse of God by the faith of Iesus Christ that it hath the witnesse of the law and the Prophets how can M. Bishop perswade vs that in the preaching of the righteousnesse of God by the faith of Iesus Christ he should teach any thing but whereof hee had witnesse and warrant of the law and Prophets especially when wee see him as in other of his Epistles so specially in the Epistle to the Romans instifying all points of faith accordingly And that this is a truth not to be contradicted we will take witnesse of Gregory Bishop of Rome who saith that u Gregor in Cant c. 5. Apo ãâ¦ã a Pro ãâ¦ã âruân dâctis vt ãâã persisterent fidem integram ãâ¦ã the Aposiles receiued the whole faith from those things that were spoken by the Prophets And againe x Idem in Ezech hom 6. Qued praedicat lâx hoc âiani Prophete quod dânuilciant Prophatae âoâ ãâ¦ã bât ãâã quod exââourt Euangelium hoc praediâaâerunt Apostoââ per mundum Looke what the law preacheth the same also doe the Prophets and what the Prophets teach the same the Gospell hath exhibited and what the Gospell exhibited the Apostles preached through the world Thus the law and the Prophets and the Gospell and the preaching of the Apostles haue all deliuered only one and the same thing Therefore he saith that y Ibid. Vâraque Testamenta in nullo a se dâscrepant c. Inâst testamento veteri testamentum noâum c. Prophetia testamenti noâi testamentum vetus est expositio testamenti veteris testamentum nouum the two Testaments differ not in any thing one from the other that the new Testament is contained in the old that the old Testament is a prophecio of the now and the new Testament the exposition of the old The same had St. Austin said before that
z Aug. cont Faust Manich. l. 15. c. 2. Vetus testamentum recte intellâgentibus propheâa est noui testamenti the old Testament to them that rightly vnderstand it is a prophecie of the new that a Idem de Catechiz rudib c. 4. In veteri testamento est occultatio noui in neuo testamento est manifestatio veteris in the old Testament is the hiding of the new and in the new the manifesting of the old To be short Leo faith b Leo in Natiuitat Dom. serm 3. Quod praedicauerunt Apostoli hoc annunciauerunt Prophâtae c. quod semper est creditâm What the Apostles preached the same the Prophets haue declared and the same hath alwaies beene beleeued Now if the Apostles receiued the whole faith of the Prophets and the same haue alwaies beene beleeued if the preaching of the Prophets and Apostles be the same if the two Testaments differ in nothing one from the other and the new be contained and hidden in the old then haue I rightly affirmed that the words of St. Paul are generally true that in preaching the Gospell he said no other things but those which the Prophets and Moses did say should come In the rest of this diuision we may thinke that M. Bishop was scant sober when he wrote it or else wrote in a dreame when he neither knew what was said to him nor what he was to say The Apostle saith not that he taught any one article which the common sort of the Iewes did beleeue And what then To what end M. Bishop doe you here tell vs a tale of the common sort of the Iewes Who spake of them or gaue you occasion to make any mention of them The matter is what the Prophets taught and the elect of God beleeued not what the common sort of the Iewes beleeued who commonly beleeued not the Prophets but killed and stoned them when they were sent vnto them How many saith he beleeued that their Messias should die so shamefull a death or that Moses law should be abrogated by the same Messias or that the Gospell of Christ should be preached vnto all nations All say I that vnderstood and beleeued the Scriptures of Moses and the Prophets in which they were forewarned of these things The vnbeliefe or ignorance of the rest I trow hindereth not but that these things were then contained in the faith of the Church and in the doctrine of that time vnlesse M. Bishop will say that in Popery those are no articles of faith which the common sort of their Christians doe not conceiue who haue only the Colliars faith to beleeue iust as the Church beleeueth when they neither know what the Church beleeueth nor what they themselues ought to beleeue In a word the Prophets then foretold nothing for matter of faith which was not matter of faith then as well as now W. BISHOP §. 6. MAster Abbot runneth like a wandering Planet to a third that all which the Apostles taught they committed to writing which is notwithstanding as false as any of the former for many of them who neuer ceassed to preach left not one sentence in writing behinde them and he that wrote most did not write the hundreth part of that which he taughtly word of mouth We know well that they left the Gospell in writing and many other most diuine and rare instructions in their Epistles wherfore he needed not cite Ireneus to witnesse that which no man is ignorant of but that they wrote all which they preached or all things necessary to saluation Ireneus saith not a word but plainly signifieth the contrary where he most sagely counsaileth all men when any controuersie in religion ariseth to make their recourse to Euseb ãâã Eccles lib. 5. c. 19. the most ancient Churches where the Apostles had conuersed amongst which he commendeth the Roman for principall of all the rest and from them to take their resolution he then was of opinion that the decision of all controuersies were not to be searched out of the written word but rather to be taken from the resolution of the Church Oh but Tertullian saith That beleeuing De Praescriptionibus this we desire to beleeue no more because we first beleeue that there is nothing else for vs to beleeue Beleeuing this beleeuing what the written word only nothing lesse for in that very Treatise his principall drift is to proue that Heretikes cannot be confuted out of the written word but by ancient customes and traditions which he calleth Praescriptions but saith he when we beleeue the whole doctrine of Christ both written and deliuered by Apostolicall tradition then we desire to beleeue no more of any vpstart Heretikes new deuices To S. Augustine I answere first that those be not his formall wordes which he citeth Secondly admitting the sense if it be rightly taken I say that these wordes If Galat. 1. any man or Angell shall preach any thing besides that which is written where he alludeth to the Apostles like wordes are to be vnderstood as S. Augustine himselfe expoundeth those of the Apostle that is If any man shall preach contrary to that which is written For this is his owne interpretation The Apostle saith not Aug. lib. 17. cont Faust cap. 3. more then you haue receiued but otherwise then you haue receiued for if he had so said he had preiudiced himselfe who desired to come to the Thessalonians to supply what was wanting to their faith He that supplies addeth that wanted but doth not take away any thing that was before so that you see when he saith that nothing is to be preached besides that which is written his meaning is nothing which is contrary to it allowing withall that much more conformable to it may be added for a supply to make it full and perfect R. ABBOT THe Planets though in respect of other Starres they seeme to wander because in their orbe they change their place yet in their wandering and change doe alwaies obserue a certaine and constant course I seeme to M. Bishop to wander by going from a Prosyllogisme to a Syllogisme and from a maior to a minor but yet he seeth to his griefe that I inferre a direct and certaine conclusion as I haue before briefly declared in the first Chapter I came by processe of speech to shew that our faith and not Popery is the Apostolike faith To proue this I alleaged that what faith and Gospell the Apostles taught they committed the same to writing and because ours accordeth fully with that which they wrote therefore ours is the Apostolike faith It offendeth M. Bishop that it should be said that all which the Apostles taught they committed to writing Well what is his instance to proue the contrary Forsooth many of them who neuer ceased to preach left not one sentence in writing behinde them and he that wrote most wrote not the hundreth part of that which he taught Where we see the
true picture of a very wilfull and absurd wraâgler who seeketh by vaine cauillation to obscure that which by reason and truth he cannot disproue What though all the Apostles did not write when as the writings of some might sufficiently set forth the preaching of all because they all preached the same thing And what though none of them wrote particularly all the words which he vttered when as it sufficeth vs that amongst them they wrote all the points of faith which they vttered in those wordes If M. Bishop were asked whether they haue not in Scripture and Tradition all which the Apostles taught would he not say yea And can he then tell vs particularly all the speeches and discourses and sermons that they made from day to day Peter amongst the Iewes and Paul amongst the Gentils at Rome at Corinth at Ephesus in Galatia and the rest Iohn in â sia Thomas in India Matthias and Andrew in Aethiopia and the other Apostles otherwhere If he would thinke him a foole that should aske him this question and doth hold it sufficient that they haue all the points of doctrine though they haue not all the wordes he must giue vs leaue to thinke him scant wise that when wee say what the Apostles taught they committed all to writing would vnderstand vs otherwise And this meaning he himselfe that it may appeare that he doth but famble and palter presently declareth when yeelding of his courtesie that the Apostles left the Gospell in writing and many other most diuine and rare instructions in their Epistles a rare commendation of them as if he spake of Granatensis his Dux peccatorum or Parsons Resolution and therefore that I needed not cite Irenaeus to witnesse that he addeth his exception but that they wrote all which they preached or all things necessary to saluation Irenaeus saith not a word So then he knoweth well enough that when we say that all which the Apostles taught they committed to writing wee meane thereby all things necessary to saluation all points of faith and doctrine by them preached and which it concerneth vs to know and beleeue vnto eternall life But of this saith he Ireneus saith not a word The wordes of Ireneus which I cited are these a Iren. adu haer lib. 3. c. 1. âon enim per alios dispositionem salutis nostrae cognouimus quà m per eos per quos I uangâlium peruenit ad nos quod quidem tunc praeconiauerunt postea verò per Dei voluntatem in scriptaris nobis tradiderunt fundamentum columnam sidei nostrae futurum By no other haue we knowen the order or way of our saluation but by them by whom the Gospell came to vs which verily they then preached and afterwards by the will of God they deliuered the same to vs in the Scriptures to be the foundation and pillar of our faith Now I hope M. Bishop will not deny but that the gospell which the Apostles preached contained all points of faith necessary to saluation If therefore they haue deliuered vnto vs in writing the gospell which they preached surely they haue deliuered to vs in writing all points of faith necessary to saluation He playeth vpon a distinction betwixt the Epistles and the Gospell as if the Epistles were no part of the Gospell which the Apostles preached but if they be not so he should tell vs what they be and how the Apostle professeth b Phil. 3. 1. to write in his Epistle the same things which he had before preached and how Christ preached c Mat. 4. 23. the Gospell of the Kingdome and taught men d Mar. 1. 15. to beleeue the Gospell before there was any written Gospell and before the greatest part of the history was in act and how St. Paul challengeth the Galathians for being e Gal. 1. 6. remoued to another Gospell when yet they receiued no other story concerning Christ but doctrine contrary to that which is contained in the Epistles f Aug. de Ciu. Dei l. 17. c. 17. Fatentur ex Sion missam suisse legem Christi quod Euangelium nos vocamus The Gospell as St. Austin telleth vs is the law of Christ and are the Epistles of the Apostles no part of the law of Christ The Gospell is called by St. Paul g 2. Cor. 5. 19. the word of reconciliation and is expounded by St. Ambrose to be h Ambros in Rom. c. 1. Euangelium Dei est bonum nuncium Dei quo peccatores ad indulgentiaÌ conuâcantur the glad tidings sent from God whereby sinners are called to pardon and forgiuenesse and doe not the Apostles in their Epistles teach this word of reconciliation and glad tidings from God If then the Apostles left the Gospell in writing and the Gospell containe all points of faith necessary to saluation then that which the Apostles left in writing containeth all points of faith necessary to saluation Albeit to follow M. Bishop in his owne distinction if we take the Gospell as he doth for the writings of the foure Euangelists St. Austin saith thereof that i August in Ioan. tract 49. Ipse sanctus Euangelista testatur multa Dominum Christum diâisse socisse quâ scripta non sunt Electa sunt autem quae scriberentur quae saluti credentium sufficere videbantur of those things which our Lord Iesus said and did choise was made of so much to be written as seemed sufficient for the saluation of them that beleeue And to the same purpose Cyril also saith k Cyril in Ioan lib. 12. c. 68. Non igitâr omnia quae Dominus fecit conscripta sunt sed quâ scriâââtes sufficere putarunt tam ad mores qâà m âd dogmaâa vt recta fide operibus vir ãâ¦ã rutilântes ad regnum coelorum perueniamus All things which Christ did are not written but what the writers thought sufficient both for manners and doctrine that shining with true faith and vertuous workes we may attaine to the heauenly Kingdome The Gospels then containe that doctrine and faith that is sufficient to saluation albeit God would prouide for vs not only sufficiently but abundantly and hath in the Epistles of the Apostles giuen vs large and cleare declaration of the doctrine of Christ that is contained in the Gospels As for that which M. Bishop alleageth vnder the name of Ireneus to proue the contrary it is a most wilfull and impudent falsification He most sagely counsaileth all men saith he when any controuersie in religion ariseth to make their recourse to the most ancient Churches where the Apostles had conuersed and from them to take their resolution He citeth for this Euseb hist Eccl. lib. 5. cap. 19. But that which is of Ireneus is by my Booke Cap. 18. and no matter at all tending to that effect as hee alleageth Ireneus is there brought in mentioning l Euseb hist l. 5. cap. 18. Cum puer adhuc in Asia
inferiore apud Polycarpum essem c. Commemorarequeam quomodo se cum Joanne ac reliquis qui DominuÌ viderunt conuersatum esse dixerit sermones eorum memorauerit quae ex illis de Domino audierit de virtutibus eius doctrina tanquam ex ijs qui ipsi verbum vite viderant percepta cuncta sanctis Scripturis consona recânsuerit that he had beene in his childhood with Polycarpus and that he had heard him tell how he had beene conuersant with Iohn and the rest that had seen the Lord and remembred their speeches and what he had heard of them concerning the Lord and his miracles and doctrine as receiued from them who themselues had seene the word of life and reported all things agreeable to the holy Scriptures Here is a commendation of the Scripture and an intimation giuen that tradition ought to be no other but consonant and agreeable to the holy Scripture but of referring to the Churches in cases of controuersie not so much as one word But though his head here failed hiâ yet I know well what the place is that he meant to cite which followeth in the booke whence I alleaged the sentence to which he answereth And yet there is nothing in that place fitting to his purpose Ireneus hauing there to doe with Heretikes who being reproued by the Scriptures reiected the triall of the Scriptures vpon the like pretences as the Papists now doe and therefore being forced to vse against them the testimony of the Churches from the time of the Apostles for proofe of those things which were cleare by the writings of the Apostles as we now doe against the Papists but saying nothing at all as to deliuer a rule that when cases of controuersie doe arise we should alwaies haue recourse to such testimony of the Church Of that place of Ireneus I haue spoken sufficiently m Answere to Doctor Bishops Epistle to the King sect 11. before and therefore I will not here againe trouble the Reader any further therewith In what sort also he attributeth principality to the Roman Church I haue already declared in the n §. 2. first Chapter of this booke Now as he is impudent in answering Ireneus so in his answere to Tertullian he is much more impudent The sentences of those two Fathers I cited as depending one vpon another Ireneus saith that the Gospell which the Apostles preached they afterwards deliuered to vs in the Scriptures Tertullian saith o Tertul. de Praescript Nobis non est opus curiositate post Christum nec inquisitione post Euangelium Cum hâc credimus nihil desideramus vltrà credere hoc enim prius credimus non esse quod vltrà credere debemus Wee neede no curiosity after Christ nor further enquiry after the Gospell when we beleeue this we desire to beleeue nothing further for this we first beleeue that there is nothing further for vs to beleeue Marke well gentle Reader the coherence of these wordes The Apostles committed the Gospell to writing we neede no further inquiry after the Gospell we desire to beleeue nothing further we beleeue that there is nothing else for vs to beleeue To this what doth M. Bishop say Beleeuing this beleeuing what the written word only nothing lesse The Gospell M. Bishop it is the Gospell you see of the beleefe whereof he speaketh and beside which or after which he desireth to beleeue nothing yea beleeueth that there is nothing further to be beleeued Seeing then the Gospell is written as Ireneus saith it followeth by Tertullian that beside the written word there is nothing else to be beleeued Nothing lesse saith M. Bishop And why For in that whole Treatise saith he his principall drift is to proue that Heretikes cannot be confuted out of the written word but by ancient customes and traditions which he calleth Prescriptions Where he most shamefully abuseth that worke of Tertullian expounding Prescriptions to be meant of old customes and traditions whereas Tertullian hath nothing to that purpose but by Prescriptions meaneth grounds of reasons and arguments whereby to proceede and deale against Heretikes for the reprouing and conuincing of them Neither doth he goe about to proue that Heretikes cannot be confuted by the written word but only sheweth that it was to no purpose to deale with them by the Scriptures or written word because they receiued and reiected Scriptures as they list did put in and blot out alter and chop and change so that whatsoeuer made against them should goe for no Scripture Yea the matters of their heresies were touching those articles of our faith which are clearely and manifestly testified by the Scriptures and therefore M. Bishop dealeth very lewdly with Tertullian to make him to say that they could not be confuted thereby I neede not stand hereupon hauing p Of Traditions sect 10. before at large discouered M. Bishops dishonesty herein and shewed out of the matter of the booke how falsly he fathereth that drift vpon Tertullian Only it is here to be noted what a prety meaning he maketh of those wordes which I cited thence namely this When we beleeue the whole doctrine of Christ both written and deliuered by Apostolicall tradition then we desire to beleeue no more of any vpstart Heretikes new deuises Where I pray thee to note how his two answeres agree together He told vs before to Ireneus that the Apostles left the Gospell in writing Here to Tertullian speaking of the Gospell he answereth that the Gospell signifieth the whole doctrine of Christ both written and vnwritten So when he list the Gospell is written and when he list the Gospell is vnwritten and he cannot tell certainly what it is If the Gospell were left in writing then the Gospell is no doctrine vnwritten or if the Gospell doe signifie also vnwritten doctrine then the Apostles did not leaue the Gospell in writing but only a part and parcell thereof But we beleeue that the Apostles left vs a perfect written Gospell and therefore we say to M Bishop and his fellowes as Athanasius said to the Arian Heretikes q Athanas de Incar Christi Si Discipuli estis EuangelioruÌ ne loquamini contra Deum iniquitateÌ sed per scripturas cedite Quòd si diuersa à scripturis fabulari vultis cur nobiscum concertatis qui neque âoqui neque audire sustinemus quod extraneum sit ab istis dicente Domino c. If yee be Schollers of the Gospell speake not iniquity against God but goe by the Scriptures but if you will babble things diuerse from the Scriptures why doe you meddle with vs who endure neither to speake nor heare any thing which is strange from the Scriptures our Lord Christ telling vs If yee abide in my word then shall yee be free indeed Now to shew that beside the written Gospell and word of God there is nothing else to be receiued I alleaged a peremptory sentence of St. Austin r Aug.
him bring in Iacob 5. v. 14. the Priests of the Church and let them pray ouer them anoiling them with Oile in the name of our Lord c. Confesse therefore your sinnes one to Ibidem 16. another These and an hundred more plaine texts recorded in that fountaine of life wherein our Catholike Roman doctrine is deliuered in expresse tearmes to wit Thereall presence of Christs body in the Sacrament That Priests haue power to pardon sinnes That Christ built his Church vpon S. Peter That good workes doe in iustice deserue eternall life That we are iustified not by faith alone but also by good workes That in extremity of sicknesse wee must call for the Priest to anoile vs with holy Oile That we must confesse our sinnes not to God alone but also vnto men these and diuers such like heads of our Catholike faith formally set downe in holy Scripture the Protestants will not beleeue though they bee written in Gods word neuer so expresly but doe ransacke all the corners of their wits to deuise some âdde shift or other how to flie from the euidence of them Whereupon I conclude that they doe not receiue all the written word though they professe neuer so much to allow of all the bookes of Canânicall Scripture For the written word of God consisteth Lib. 2. de Trinitate ad Const not in the reading but in the vnderstanding as S. Hierome testifieth that is it doth not consist in the bare letter of it but in the letter and true sense and meaning ioyned togither the letter being as the body of Scripture and the right vnderstanding of it the soule spirit and life thereof he therefore that taketh not the written word in the true sense but swarueth from the sincere interpretation of it cannot be truly said to receiue the written word as a good Christian ought to doe Seeing then that the Protestants and all other sectaries doe not receiue the holy Scriptures according vnto the most ancient and best learned Doctors exposition they may most iustly be denyed to receiue the sacred written word of God at all though they seeme neuer so much to approue all the Bookes Verses and Letters of it which is plainly proued by S. Hierome vpon the first Chapter to the Galathians R. ABBOT I Haue noted a §. â before in this Chapter that St. Austin faith of the Prophets and faithfull of the people of the Iewes that though not in name yet in deede they were Christians as we are As they were Christians then with vs so are we now Iewes with them not according to M. Bishops vnderstanding of the name of Iewes to whom I may well say as Austin said to Iulian the Pelagian b August coÌâ Iulian. l. 4. c. 3. Cùm insana dicis rides phrenetico es similis When thou speakest madly and laughest thou art like to a frantike Bedlem but according to the Apostles construction thereof c Rom. 2. 29. He is a Iew which is one within and d Phil. 3. 3. we are the circumcision which worship God in the spirit and reioyce in Christ Iesus and haue no confidence in the flesh We must be Iewes by vnity of faith with them as they were Christians with vs because they with vs and wee with them make but one body and one Church whereof though there be diuers Sacraments yet there is but one faith from the beginning to the end receiued first by the Patriarches written afterwards by the Prophets written againe more clearly by the Apostles so that e Ephes 2. 20. vpon the foundation not foundations but one foundation because one euen one written doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets the houshold of God are built and our faith resteth wholly thereupon I haue walked no rounds I haue broken through no brakes of thornes but haue kept a direct and euen way and haue so strongly builded all this as that I scorne M. Bishops poore paper-shot as much too weake to throw it downe To him I know these things are rounds and mazes he knoweth not which way to get out of them they are brakes of thornes he lyeth fast tyed in them God giue him grace to yeeld to that which he seeth himselfe vnable to reproue He is very angry it seemeth as touching the last point that I should say that the Protestants receiue and beleeue all the written word He saith that therein I begge that which is principally in question and thinketh that I haue little wit or iudgement to thinke that they would freely grant me that But our vsage and debating of questions with them is sufficient to put that out of question We vse the Scriptures our selues we translate them for common vse we reade and expound them publikely in our Churches we exhort men to reade them priuately in their houses wee instruct them to receiue no doctrine but what they see there wee make the same written word the soueraigne Iudge of all our controuersies wee defend the authority and sufficiency thereof against the impeachments and disgraces which Papists haue cast vpon it What may we doe more to make M. Bishop beleeue that we receiue and beleeue the written word Surely if I tell him that the Sunne shineth at noone day he will not beleeue it if it seeme to him to sound any thing against the Pope But he will giue instance to proue that we doe not so first for that we reiect diuers bookes of the old Testament Wherein he saith vntruly for the bookes of the old Testament are the bookes of Moses and the Prophets the Psalmes f August coÌt Gaudent lib 2. cap. 23. Non habent Judaei sicut legem Prophetas Psalmos quibus Dominus testimonium perhibet tanquam testibus suis To which saith Austin our Lord Iesus gaue testimony as his witnesses of which we reiect none the other bookes that are adioyned to these we doe not reiect but we reade them and commend them yea we say as much of them as M. Bishop vouchsafeth to say of Pauls Epistles and the rest that they contayne many most diuine and rare instructions but yet we giue them no authority for confirmation of matters of faith because Christ and his Apostles haue giuen no testimony or witnesse of them and the primitiue Church in that respect hath expresly disclaimed them as I haue shewed at large g Of Traditions sect 17. before and resteth hereafter in this booke to bee shewed againe Secondly he bringeth sundry texts of the new Testament to proue that we doe not rightly vnderstand and beleeue all that is written in Gods word wherein he saith their Catholike Roman doctrine is deliuered in expresse termes First to proue the reall presence of Christs body in the Sacrament he citeth the wordes This is my body which shall be giuen for you c. But if the Romish doctrine be here deliuered in expresse termes how is it that their owne Scotus saith that
h Scotus apud Bellarm. de sacra Eucharist lib. 3. cap. 23. Dicit nullum extare loâum scripturae tam expressum vt sine Ecclesiâ declaratione euidentèr câgat transubstantiationem admittere Atque id non est omninâ improbabilâ c. an ita sit meritâ dâbitarâ potest cum homines doctissâââ acutissâââ qualis inprââis Scotus fuit contrarium sââtiaât there is no place of Scripture so expresse as that it euidently forceth to admit transubstantiation without their Churches declaration Yea Bellarmine himselfe saith that this is not improbable and that it may worthily be doubted whether there be any such because very learned and acute men such as Scotus specially was doe thinke the contrary Let him first goe and agree with Scotus and Bellarmine and those other so learned and acute men and then tell vs what he hath to say and we will answere him albeit of this matter I haue i Confuâaâ of the aâswere to M. Perkinâ his AduertisemeÌt sect 48. 59. already answered him so much as will suffice for the clearing thereof For his second instance he citeth the wordes of Christ thus whose sinnes yee shall forgiue on earth shall be fârgiuen in heauen and maketh it here deliuered in expresse termes that Priests haue power to pardon sinnes True it is M. Bishop accordingly as you cite on earth but not in heauen in the Court of the Church but not in the Court of conscience for restitution to the outward society of faithfull men not immediately for reconcilement to God As for forgiuenesse of sinnes spiritually with God the Priest hath the ministery only not the power thereof by k 2. Cor. 5. 18. 19 the word of reconciliation not by any forme of absolution neither can he say any further I forgiue thee then he saith I baptise thee who baptiseth not by any inward effect to God which is only the worke of God but only by outward Sacrament to the Church of God Therefore for the Popish challenge of the power of absolution with God our Sauiour Christ saith nothing he speaketh only for that power of absolution which professeth only to take away the barre that standeth against reconcilement to God who in publike sinnes lying vnder publike censure admitteth of no penitency for forgiuenesse in heauen that is not testified and declared for obtayning forgiuenesse and pardon vpon earth It needeth not that I speake so much hereof hauing so largely handled this point l Answere to the Epistle to the King sect 28. and to the Preface of his second part sect 3. before Thirdly he alleageth the words Thou art Peter and vpon this Rocke will I build my Church and the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it from whence he inferreth that Christ hath built his Church vpon St. Peter But it was of Petra the Rocke that Peter had that name giuen him to be called Peter and therefore it cannot be that Peter himselfe should be the Rocke m Gregor in Psal 5. Poenitent Ipse est Petra à qua Petrus nomen accepit super quaÌ sâ ad âicaturum Ecclesiam dâxit Christ himselfe is the Rocke as Gregory saith of which Peter tooke his name and vpon which he said he would build his Church Albeit we deny not but that the Church was in some sort built vpon Peter but vpon Peter as one of many not vpon Peter aloâe because of the City of God there are n Apoc. 21. 14. twelue fâundations wherein are the names of the Lambes twelue Apostles not only Peters name See hereof also that which hath beene o Chap. 1. §. 2. before said His fourth text is Call the workemen that had laboured in the vineyard and pay them their hire which hee bringeth to proue that good workes doe in iustice deserue eternall life But is this in expresse termes deliuered in those wordes Surely it seemeth to me a very long conclusion to be drawen out of so short a speech I haue handled this text p Of Merits sect 14. 17. before and haue shewed out of the very circumstance of the place that it is so farre from prouing that which he saith as that the contrary is very manifestly and infallibly euicted thereby The briefe is that if things had beene there measured by desert then greater worke should haue had greater wages whereas there all haue alike that it might be vnderstood of all as there I haue cited out of Prosper that q Prosp de vocat Gent. l. 1. c. 5. Vt intelligant dânum se gratiâ non operli accepisse mercâdem they receiued a gift of grace not a wages for their workes For his fift instance he bringeth the wordes of St. Iames Doe you see that a man is iustified by workes and not by faith only Hence he inferreth that we are iustified not by faith alone but also by workâs And who denyeth but that by workes also we are iustified and must necessarily so be Wee say with Saint Iames that wee are not iustified by faith only but also by workes as Abraham was but yet we say with St. Paul also that r Rom. 3. 20. Gal. 3 11. before God or in the sight of God we are iustified by faith and not by workes and Å¿ Rom. 4. 2. if Abraham were iustified by workes he denyeth him not so to be he had to reioyce but not with God For the further handling of this point also I referre the Reader to that that I haue said t Of Iustification sect 36. before Againe to proue that in extremity of sicknesse we must call for the Priest to anoile vs with holy oile he citeth St. Iames 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. But if their Sacrament of Extreme vnction be here so expresly deliuered how is it that their owne Cardinall Caiâtanâ could not see it who saith that u Caietan in Iac. cap. 5. Nec ex verbis nec ex effectu verba haec loqâuntur de sacramentali vnctione extremâ vnctionis sed magis de vnctione quam institâât Dominus in eâangelââ exârcendam in âgââtâs neither by the wordes nor by the effect doth the Apostle here speake of their sacramentall vnction but rather of that which the Lord instituted in the Gospell to be vsed by his Disciples to them that were sicke He iustifieth that which we say that the annointing whereof St. Iames speaketh was no other but a ceremony annexed to x 1. Cor. 12. 9. the gift of healing of which we reade in the Gospell spoken of Christs disciples y Mar. 6. 13. They annointed many that were sick with oile and healed them which gift and power of healing being ceased in the Church the ceremony must be reputed idle and the vsing thereof in that manner and to that end as the Papists doe is no other but an imitation
of the Valentinian Heretikes and Heracleonites as I haue z Answere to the Preface of the second part sect 20. before shewed St. Iames doth not say Is any man in extremity of sicknesse past hope of life and now departing out of the world as M. Bishop in part speaketh and as they wholly vse that new deuised Sacrament but he saith absolutely Is any man sicke Againe St. Iames maketh the effect of that annointing to be bodily health saying that the Lord shall raise him vp or giue him ease which is the sauing or preseruing of which he speaketh namely from the perill and danger of sicknesse as a Bellarm. de Extr. vnct c. 8. Incipit à sanitate corporali cum ait Oratio fidei saluabit infir ãâ¦ã Bellarmine himselfe expoundeth it whereas the effect of Sacraments is no corporall benefit but only inward and spirituall grace For albeit the water of Baptisme haue an effect to cleanse the body and bread and wine in the Lords Supper to nourish and feede the same yet these are no Sacramentall but only naturall effects belonging to these creatures without any Sacrament whereas the proper effect of that whereof St. Iames speaketh is bodily recouery and therefore by b OEcumen in Iac. 5. Hoc etiam Domino adhuc inter homines conuersante Apostoli sacrebant vngentes aegrotos olâo sanantes OEcumenius is made all one with that which the Apostles did as I haue alleaged whereof health is noted to haue ensued His last text is to proue that we must confesse our sinnes not to God only but also to men because the same St. Iames saith Confesse your sinnes one to another And who denyeth this who gainsayeth it when as our Sauiour Christ so plainly instructeth him that hath c Luke 17. 4. sinned against his brother to returne to him and say It repenteth me that so there may be reconciliation and peace betwixt them We make no question of confessing repentantly and charitably one to another but we question the necessity of confessing auricularly to the Priest by particular enumeration of all our sinnes and so farre is the text which M. Bishop citeth from deliuering expresly this as that his Masters of Rhemes doe plainly tell him that d Rhem. Testam Annotat. Iam. 1. 16. it is not certaine that St. Iames speaketh here of sacrament all confession who notwithstanding would haue bin glad if they could haue had any ground wherupon to affirme that he did so Now what did he then meane thus to heape together such a number of places as wherein their Roman doctrine is deliuered in expresse termes when as there is not one of them that doth iustifie their Roman doctrine and his owne fellowes doe confesse so much of sundry of them What neede we to ransacke all the corners of our wits to deuise odde shifts to auoide the âuidence as he calleth it of such places which without any shifts at all are so easily and plainly cleared as these are Yet according to his wonted and wise manner he concludeth that the Protestants doe not receiue all the written word who notwithstanding receiue all these places reade them cite them expound them acquaint the people vsually with them which they by no meanes dare to doe Yea but the Scriptures are not in reading but in vnderstanding and we doe not take them in the right sense Silly fellow what hindereth but that we should be thought able to vnderstand the Scriptures as well as he Forsooth we receiue not the Scriptures he saith according to the most ancient and best learned Doctors exposition But be thou Iudge gentle Reader whether in this whole worke to goe no further I haue not brought the most ancient and best learned Doctors exposition more frequently and firmely then he hath done He talketh of the Doctors for shew to blinde simple men but the true cause of their griefe is that wee receiue not the Romish exposition nor bee content to submit the whole Scriptures to the Popes will But because we finde no such rule amongst the most ancient and best learned Doctors that the Popes mouth should be any oracle of Scripture-sense we leaue his babling of the exposition of Scripture as partiall and idle and doe wish him to learne more wit then to take Scriptures in such sort as they that are at Rome are faine to doe W. BISHOP §. 8. NOw to draw towards the end of this clause not only neuer a one of M. Abbots assertions whereby hee went about to proue themselues and their Church to bee Catholike is true as hath beene shewed before but ouer and besides his very conclusion conuinceth himselfe euen by the verdict of himselfe to fall into the foule fault and errour of the Donatists Our faith saith he because it is that which the Apostles committed to writing is the Apostolike faith and our Church by consanguinity and agreement of doctrine is proued to bee an Apostolicall Church c. and is the only true Catholike Church c. see you not how he is come at length to proue their Church to be Catholike Ex perfectione Page 16. lin 5. doctrinae By perfectnesse of their doctrine which was as he himselfe in this very assertion noted a plaine Donatâsticall tricke reproued by S. Augustine whom in that point he then approued What doating folly is this in the same short discourse so to forget himselfe as to take that for a sound proofe which he himselfe had before confuted as hereticall We like well of Tertullians obseruation That our faith ought to haue consanguinity and perfect agreement with the Apostles doctrine but that is not the question at this time but whether our doctrine or the Protestant be truly called Catholike that is whether of them hath beene receiued and beleeued in all nations ouer the world that is to be proued in this place M. Abbot if he had meant to deale plainly and soundly should not haue gone so about the bush and haue fetched such wide and wilde windlesses from old father Abrahams dayes but should haue demonstrated by good testimony of the Ecclesiasticall Histories or of ancient Fathers who were in the pure times of the Church the most Godly and approued Pastors thereof that the Protestants religion had flourished since the Apostles dayes ouer all Europe Afrike and Asia or at least had beene visibly extant in some one Country or other naming some certaine Churches in particular which had held in all points their faith and religion which he seeing impossible for any man to doe fell into that extrauagant and rouing discourse which you haue heard concluding without any premises sauing his owne bare word that in the written word There is no mention made of the Pope or his Supremacy nor of his Pardons c. Belike there is no mention made of S Peter nor ought said of his singular prerogatiues It hath not peraduenture That whatsoeuer hee should loose on earth should bee loosed in
heauen The other points were touched before and shall be shortly againe But I would in the meane season be glad to heare where the written word teacheth vs that Kings and temporall Magistrates are ordained by Christ to be vnder him supreme Gouernours of Ecclesiasticall affaires because M. Abbot made choise of this head-article of theirs for an instance that the written word was plaine on their side he should therefore at least haue pointed at some one text or other in the new Testament where it is registred that Princes are supreme Gouernours of the Church Nay are temporall Magistrates any Ecclesiasticall persons at all or can one that is no member of the Ecclesiasticall body be head of all the rest of the Ecclesiasticall members or is the state Secular higher and more worthy then the Ecclesiasticall and therefore meete to rule ouer it though they be not of it to say so is to preferre the body before the soule nature before grace earth before heauen or is it meete and decent that the lesse worthy-member should haue the supreme command ouer the more honourable where the Christian world is turned topsie-turuy that may be thought meete and expedient but in other places that will not be admitted for currant which in it selfe is so disorderly and inconuenient without it had better warrant in the word of God then that new position of theirs hath R. ABBOT THe truth of mine assertions hath hitherto appeared by my defence of them but let them no further be taken for true then he is here found to be false that is the oppugner of them He saith that my conclusion conuinceth me euen by the verdict of my selfe to fall into the foule fault and errour of the Donatists To proue this he maketh me to speake in my answere in this sort Our faith because it is that which the Apostles committed to writing is the Apostolike faith and our Church by consanguinity and agreement of doctrine is proued to be an Apostolicall Church c. and is the only true Catholike Church c. Hauing set downe all these as my words he inferreth thus see you not how he is come at length to proue their Church to be Catholike by perfection of their doctrine which was as he himselfe in this very assertion noted a plaine Donatisticall tricks reproued by St. Austin c. But I pray thee gentle Reader to looke where thou canst finde those wordes by me set downe And is the only true Catholike Church Aske M. Bishop if thou meete with him where he found them and if he cannot tell thee aske him in sadnesse what spirit he thinketh it was wherewith he was led when he set them downe for my wordes Fie M. Bishop fie for shame doe you talke so against lying and will you in the meane time lye so wittingly and willingly so as that there is no meanes to salue it no colour to excuse it I did not say that ours is the only true Catholike Church I made no shew of prouing it by perfection of doctrine to be the Catholike Church I neuer wrote it I neuer thought it and therefore once againe I wish you to bethinke your selfe of your words whereof I remembred you before a Reproofe pag. 283. The diuels cause it is that needeth to be bolstered out and vnderpropped with lyes Surely it is beyond doating folly it is desperate fury that draweth men on to such courses To let that goe foule and shamefull as it is he telleth vs next that he liketh well of Tertullians obseruation that our faith ought to haue consanguinity and perfect agreement with the Apostles doctrine But he curtolleth Tertullians obseruation by this recitall of his because Tertullian doth not only say what our faith ought to haue but telleth vs that b Tertul. de Praescript Quae licet nullum ex Apostolis vel Apostolicis authoreÌ suum proferaÌt vt mââtò posteriores quae denique quotidiè instituiâtur tamen in eadem fide conspirantes non mââus Apostolicae depâtantur pro consanguinitate doctrinae those Churches which cannot bring any of the Apostles or Apostolike men for their authour as being much later euen the Churches which daylie are begunne yet according in the same faith are for this consanguinity or agreement of doctrine reputed Apostolike Churches no lesse then the rest Hence I concluded that our Church because it agreeth in faith and doctrine with the Apostles is therefore to be reckoned an Apostolike Church But that saith M. Bishop is not the question at this time And what then is the question Marry saith he whether our doctrine or the Protestants be truly called Catholike that is whether of them hath beene receiued and beleeued in all nations ouer the world But did not he see that the one of these directly followeth of the other for the faith of the Apostles is it that was spred ouer the whole world Our faith is the same with the faith of the Apostles because it is that which is recorded in the Scriptures of the Apostles Therefore our faith it is that was spred and beleeued through the world Abrahams faith was it that was spred ouer the whole world for Abraham is c Rom. 4. 12. 16 the father and patterne of all that beleeue both circumcised and vncircumcised Our faith is the same with Abrahams faith Therefore againe it is our faith that was generally receiued throughout the world At this M. Bishop biteth the lip it troubleth him that he knoweth not what to say to it He seeth this proofe to be most certaine and impregnable aboue all other and therefore he seeketh by all meanes to diuert and turne away his Reader from listening to it He telleth him that I doe not deale plainly and soundly that I goe about the bush that I fetch wide and wild windlesses from old father Abrahams daies But I answere him that I haue so gone about the bush as that I haue scratched him with it and my wide and wild windlesses haue so inclosed him as that he cannot finde which way to get out againe Well if my course like him not what would he haue me doe I should he saith haue demonstrated by good testimony of the Ecclesiasticall histories or ancient Fathers that the Protestants religion had flourished since the Apostles daies ouer all Europe Afrike and Asia I haue done already sufficient to demonstrate that I haue astonished him and choaked him with the euidence of Scriptures Stories Councels Fathers so as that hitherto he hath left all that he hath written to the question of religion without defence I shall make further demonstration thereof in this booke euen in the Roman Church What am I the nearer with him by that that I haue done What shall I be the nearer when I haue all done for he hath resolued himselfe to a wicked course and therefore though the light shine into his eyes yet he will sweare that he seeth it not He blameth me for concluding without
any premises that in the written word there is no mention made of the Pope of his Supremacy of his Pardons c. Wisedome what premises should I vse to proue the negatiue in this case It concerneth you to proue that there is mention made of them and to designe vs the places where for me it is enough to say that there is none See now what proofe he bringeth that there is Belike saith he there is no mention made of St. Peter nor ought said of his singular prerogatiues it hath not peraduenture that whatsoeuer he should loose on earth should be loosed in heauen Wisedome what is this for answere to me I say there is no mention made of the Pope and doe you tell me of St. Peter And if it were said to St. Peter d Mat. 16. 19. Whatsoeuer thou bindest on earth shall be bound in heauen was it not also said to all the Apostles e Mat. 18. 18. Whatsoeuer yee binde on earth shall be bound in heauen What prerogatiue is here to St. Peter more then to all the rest of the Apostles or if there were any prerogatiue to St. Peter what is that to the Pope He would be glad to heare where the written word teacheth vs that Kings and temporall Magistrates are ordained by Christ to be vnder him supreme Gouernours of Ecclesiasticall affaires But he saith vntruly he would not be glad to heare it but how glad would he be if he could out of the written word say so much for the Pope as we can for the King We finde the Apostle St. Paul saying f Rom. 13. 1. Let euery soule be subiect to the higher powers and St. Peter expounding what is meant by those higher powers g 1. Pet. 2. 13. whether vnto the King as to the supereminent or chiefe or vnto Gouernours as sent by him thereby giuing absolutely to the King a superiority ouer euery soule and requiring euery soule h Chrysost ad Rom. hom 23. Etiam si Apostolus sis si Euangelista si Propheta siue quisquis tandem fueris euen the Prophet the Apostle the Euangelist as Chrysostome obserueth to be subiect to the King But he will say it is not here said in Ecclesiasticall affaires I answere him Neither is it said here only in temporall affaires The supremacy then being simply giuen will M. Bishop dare to set downe a limitation where God himselfe hath set none The office of a King is declared by those Apostles to be i Rom. 13. 3. 1. Pet. 2. 14. for the punishment of them that doe euill and for the praise of them that doe well and if well doing and euill doing doe extend as well to Ecclesiasticall as Temporall affaires what warrant hath M. Bishop to restraine the Kings power from gouerning in them both Are temporall Magistrates saith he any Ecclesiasticall persons at all Let the Emperour Constantine giue him answere hereof who told his Bishops thus k Euseb de vita Constant l. 4. c. 24. Vos inquit intra Ecclesiam ego extra Ecclesiam Episcopus à Deo constitutus sum You are Bishops within the Church but without the Church God hath appointed me to be a Bishop signifying thereby that the acting and administring of diuine offices Sacraments did belong to them but that otherwise the gouernement of the Church and the power of commanding all for the preseruation of religion and well ordering of Church affaires did belong to him Though temporall Magistrates then be no Ecclesiasticall persons in the former sense yet a King as a Christian is a member of the Church and as a King by Constantines iudgement is appointed of God to bee externally the Ruler and Gouernour thereof Wherefore to call the state of Kings as M. Bishop doth a secular state as hauing to meddle only with secular and temporall things is a secular and prophane interpretation of the office of Kings and a meere begging of the point in question And of that presumption he inferreth another when he saith Is it meete and decent that the lesse worthy member should haue the supreme command ouer the more honourable I will not here stand vpon his absurd crossing of himselfe who hauing euen now made the state Ecclesiasticall and Secular two distinct bodies doth make them here members both of one body To let that passe who will grant him that the King is the lesse worthy and the Priest the more honourable He will say that matters of the soule which are of highest nature are administred by Priests Be it so and matters of the soule which are of the highest nature are commanded by Kings and the commanding power as we suppose is alwaies more honourable then the administring office The very Heathens thought that the deuotions to their Gods which were acted by their Priests were of greatest respect and yet they were not so fond as to conclude hereof that the person of the Priest was more honourable then the King In the policy ordered by God himselfe we finde l 2. Kings 23. 4. the Priests commanded by the King but we doe not finde the King commanded by the Priest We finde the Prophet stiling himselfe m 1. Kings 1. 24. 26. 27. the Kings seruant and the King his Lord but we doe not finde the King giuing that honour to the Prophet We know that in the naturall body the heart ministreth life vnto the head and yet the supremacy of honour resteth in the head euen for the gouernement and direction of things belonging to that life which is administred by the heart Euen so albeit the ministring of those things which concerne the saluation and life both of Prince and people belong to the Priest yet that hindereth not but that the highest honour and dignity resteth in the Prince so farre as to command for the due vsage and execution of those things which concerne the saluation both of himselfe and of his people This is saith M. Bishop to preferre the body before the soule nature before grace earth before heauen Full wisely spoken as if a Christian King were nothing but body and nature and earth but a Priest no other but spirit and grace and heauen Yet we doubt not but that many Kings are more spirituall and gracefull and heauenly then many Priests and many Priests euen Popes themselues more sauouring of the body and nature and earth then many Kings and how doe we then by giuing the soueraignty to Kings preferre the body before the soule nature before grace earth before heauen Forsooth the matters of the soule and of grace and of heauen he will say are managed by Priests Be it so make comparison then of the things but make no comparison thereby of the persons Say he that preferreth the things that belong to the Kings affaires before those things that are ministred by the Priest preferreth the body before the soule c. but we say we may in outward state of gouernement giue the supreme honour
That we are not to imitate our fore-fathers descendeth to the subsequent to wit That his Maiesties Progenitours Kings of England and Scotland were not of our Roman faith which he will proue hereafter at more leasure that is to say neuer For he doth not deny but that the religious and holy man Augustine sent into our country by Gregory the Great Bishop of Rome to conuert our Ancestours the Saxons and English to the Christian faith did then teach the same Roman faith which we now professe so that aboue this thousand yeares by his owne confession his Maiesties Progenitours haue beene of our Catholike Roman faith and religion and very few Kings now liuing I weene can deriue their pedegree much further Afterward he doth rake out of the chanels of Bale Iewel Hollinshead and such like Page 198. late partiall writers which any man not past all care of his reputation would be ashamed to cite for sufficient witnesses in matters of controuersie wherein they themselues were parties that there was great disagreement betweene Augustine the Italian Monke as he speaketh and the Churches of England and Scotland whereas venerable Bede a most approued authour and neare vnto those times who did as most diligently trace out those matters so record them most faithfully he I say whose authority is sufficient to put downe an hundreth late writers interessed in the cause affirmeth that there was no variance betwixt them in any one article of faith but only in some few points of ceremonie namely in these two Vpon what day the feast of Easter was to be kept Beda lib. 2. histor cap. 2. and about the rites of Baptisme For S. Augustine offered them to beare with all other their different rites if they would yeeld vnto him in these two points Vt Pascha suo tempore celebretis That yee would keepe Easter-day at the due time appointed by the Councell of Nice and minister the Sacrament of Baptisme after Euseb in vita Const lib. 3. 17. Epiphan lib. 3. Haeres 70. the manner of the Roman Apostolike Church And concerning these two points who can thinke but that the Sacrament of Baptisme was like to be administred in those daies in the most renowmed City of Rome after a more decent and deuout manner then among the Britans that liued in a corner of the world Now for the other of keeping the feast of Easter the fourteenth day of the first Moone with the Iewes It was many yeares before condemned in the first most famous generall Councell of Nice and therefore it cannot be denyed but that those Britans were either very ignorant in the Canons of the Church if they knew not so solemne a decree or else too too contentious and wilfull in refusing to yeeld vnto it A third clause was added by S Augustine that the Britans would ioyne with him and his fellowes Beda ibidem in preaching the word of God vnto the English nation which also argueth yet more strongly that they agreed together in all articles of faith or else they would not haue required their helpe in instructing others in matters of faith And this is not only registred by S. Bede that holy Historiographer but also reported by their owne late writers Hollinshead and * M. Godwine Volum 1. page 103. * Page 6. in his Catalogue of the Bishops of England S. Bede also witnesseth further in the place aboue said that the same Britan Christians euen then confessed that they did perceiue that to be the true way of iustice which Augustine did preach Furthermore the principall Preachers and most godly men that liued not long before S. Augustines arriuall among the Britans as namely S. Dulcitius and S. Dauid were brought vp at Rome and one of them the Popes Legate too as the aduersaries Iohn Bale in their liues themselues confesse Whereupon it followeth clearely that not only for these later thousand yeares but also in the former hundreths all his Maiesties Ancestors both English and Britans embraced and maintayned the same Catholike Roman faith which we now doe R. ABBOT MAster Bishop kindly threapeth vpon me that I denie not but that Austin the Monke sent hither by Gregory Bishop of Rome did then teach the same Roman faith that they now professe whereas I doe not only deny it to be so but also doe bring a Answ to the Epistle to the King sect 31. diuers instances to proue directly that it is not so Of those diuers let one only here suffice The religion brought in by Austin the Monke continuing here till the time of Charles the Great though it approued the hauing of Images yet condemned the second Nicene Councell for that it approued the worshipping of them The thing by Roger Houeden is thus reported that b Roger. Houeden Annal. p. 1. Anno 792. Carolê° Rex FraÌcorum misit Synâdalem librum ad Britanniam sibi à Constantinopoli directum in quo libro beu proâ dolor multa inconuenientia verâ fidei coÌtraria reperiebantur maximè quòd penè âmnium Orientalium Doctorum non minus quà m trecentorum vel âo amplius Episcoporum ânanima assertione confirâatum fuerit Imagines adorari debere quod omninò Ecclesia Dei execratur Contra quod scripsit Albinus EpistolaÌâx authoritate diuinarum Scripturarum mirabilitèr affirmataÌ illamque cum âodâm libâo ex person 1 Episcoporum ac Principli nostro ãâ¦ã ârancorum ãâ¦ã t. in the yeare 792. Charles the King of France sent ouer into Britaine a synodall booke or booke of a Councell directed to him from Constantinople in which booke alas for woe many things were found inconuenient and contrary to true faith specially for that by agreement of all the Easterne Doctors no lesse then three hundred Bishops and more it was decreed that Images should be worshipped which thing the Church of God wholly accurseth Against which saith he Albinus wrote an Epistle wonderfully strengthened by authority of holy Scriptures and brought it together with the booke to the King of France in the name or behalfe of our Bishops and Peeres The Roman faith which Austin brought condemned that Nicene Councell Tho Roman faith which M. Bishop bringeth approueth that Councell for so hath he done in his c Sect. 12. Epistle to the King Therefore the Roman faith which M. Bishop bringeth is not now the same that Austin brought He cannot doubt but that Austin being sent hither by Gregory did teach the same faith here which Gregory himselfe taught at Rome But the faith which Gregory taught at Rome shall be shewed if God will in this booke in many particulars to haue beene contrary to that faith that is now taught from Rome As for our writers Bale Iewell Hollinshead and such like I cite them not as sufficient witnesses in matters of controuersie as he vainly cauilleth but I name them only as recording matters of history which they haue taken out of former stories and writers when mine owne Library
doth not furnish me with some bookes which they haue followed in which case I may as well vse their names as Papists may vse the names of Baronius Surius Genebrard and other their owne authours as I haue d Aduertisement concerning D. Bishops Reproofe sect 6. before shewed more at large As touching the disagreement betwixt Austin the Monke and the British Bishops I referred the Reader to Beda as well as to any other and by him it appeareth that there was variance betwixt them not only in some few but in very many things c Beda hist l. 2. c. 2. Sed alia plurima vnitati Ecclesiae coÌtraria faciebaÌâ Qui cum longa disputatione habita neque precibus neque hortamentis neque increpationibus Augustini ac sâciorum eius ossensum praebere voluissent c. Dicibat eis quòd in multis quidem nostrae consuetudini coÌtraria gâritis tamen si in tribus his mihi obseperare vultis c. caetera aequanimitèr âuncta tolerabimus wherein he sought by disputing by intreating by exhorting by reprouing to draw their assent vnto him Which when hee could not obtaine he made offer to beare with all other differences so that in three things they would yeeld to him to obserue Easter and to celebrate Baptisme after the manner of the Church of Rome and to ioyne with them in Preaching to the infidell Saxons M. Bishop here will giue reason why the Britans should haue yeelded to the Roman manner of Baptising because forsooth it was likely to be administred more decently and deuoutly in the most renowmed city of Rome then amongst the Britans in a corner of the world But if it must be presumed that at Rome because of the renowme of the place all things were done more decently and deuoutly then otherwhere why did Gregory aduise Austin that f Ibid. l. r. c. 27. Mâbi placât vt siue in Romana siue in Gallâaru siue in qualibet Ecclesia aliquid inuemsti quod plus omnipotenti Deo posâit placere so ãâ¦ã e âlâgaâ custodiamus consuctudines commendat whether in the Church of Rome or in the Church of France or in any other Church he should finde what might better please God he should make choise of it Surely it was an absurdity in Austin that when things might be better as g Ambros de Sacram. l. 3. c. 1. Quod alibi rectiùs seruatâr nos rectè Ambrose also saith in other Churches then in the Church of Rome he should notwithstanding seeke to force other Churches to the example of that Church Yea and it was a token of his ignorance that he needed to write to Gregory to be resolued as touching h Beda vt supra Cùm vna sit sides cur sunt Ecclesiarum diuersae c. the diuers customes and obseruations of diuers Churches not knowing that i Euseb hist lib. 5. cap. 23. Dissonantia ieiuny fidei concordiam difference of ceremonies commendeth the vnity of faith as Ireneus spake particularly of fasting and therefore that there was no cause for him so to labour other men to conformity to their rites Albeit it may be likely that the Sacrament of Baptisme was administred amongst the Britans with greater simplicity and lesse ceremony then at Rome and that for that cause they made choise rather to continue their old forme knowing that abundance of ceremonies breedeth commonly abundance of superstitions and k Aug. Epist 119. Quamuis neque hoc inueniri possit quomodâ contra fidem sint ipsam tamen religioneÌ c. seruilibus oneribus premânt c. though it be not seene how they make against the faith yet they are as St. Austin saith the clogge and burden of religion oppressing it first and then eating out the very heart of it And this we take to be the chiefe cause why they so stifly refused Austin for that albeit they acknowledged that he taught the true Christian faith yet they saw him ioyne therwith not in baptisme only but otherwise also so many humane traditions and inuentions which they held to be so many prophanations of the true Christian faith If some of them acknowledged so much as M. Bishop vrgeth out of Beda we will not sticke to acknowledge the same in such sort as they did neither will we stand to question whether Dulcitius he would say Dubricius as I take it or Dauid principall preachers of the Britans in their times were brought vp at Rome though Bale whom he citeth in his lesser worke which only I haue doe not say so much or that either of them was Legate to the Bishop of Rome but be it so yet it followeth not that all his Maiesties Auncestours both English and Britaines embraced that Roman faith that now is because it shall appeare as I haue said that the Roman faith is not the same now that it was then As touching the obseruation of Easter what reasons might moue the Britans to continue their former custome we cannot tell It may be that they were ignorant of the Nicene decree and what of that Surely Hilary a learned and godly Bishop of France protesteth that he l Hilar. de Synod adu Arian Fidem Nicenam nunquam ââsi exulaturus audââi neuer heard of the Nicene Councell till the time that he went into banishment which as appeareth by Hieromes Chronicle was about the twentieth yeare of Constantius the Arian Emperour which was thirty yeares after the time of that Councell Now if it were so long vnknowen or so little knowen in France no maruell if in Britanny it were lesse knowen and where it had not caused a change within that time it was not likely afterwards to preuaile much specially with a nation so much afflicted and troubled with warres and inuasions as the Britans thenceforth were in which case no alteration might be likely to take place amongst them Moreouer they could remember that in the time of Lucius their King Eleutherius sent ouer some preachers hither for the conuerting and instructing of the King and his people who yet required not to haue Easter obserued after the manner of the Roman Church but left them to keepe it according to the custome that they had vsed from the time of the Apostles whereupon they might resolue that there was no cause why Austin comming from Rome should now goe about to alter that custome more then they had done In a word the Britans were not too contentious in refusing to yeeld to a sodaine alteration of things so long continued but Austin rather shewed himselfe contentious and vndiscreet in that he did so vnseasonably and without cause so strongly vrge the same W. BISHOP §. 4. THe same might as easily be proued of the Churches of Scotland who acknowledge Palladius and Patritius for two of the chiefe founders of the Christian faith in that country who 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 was from S. Gregory into England From which the Scots Church neuer swarued vntill 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 were so farre off from denying the Popes authority ouer them in causes Ecclesiasticall that they did acknowledge him to be also their Protectour in temporall affaires For when King Edward the third would haue giuen them Iohn Balial for their King they answered him That they would not accept of him for such Walsingham in vita Edw. Anno 1292. 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 perill ergo he did not acknowledge the Popes authority By the like argument one might proue that King Philip 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 perill The Popes Legates then when they be sent about affaires that doe seeme to the Prince and his Councell preiudicious to the temporall slate may be refused without disparagement to the Popes supreme authority in causes Ecclesiasticall And the King of Scots had reason to refuse that Cardinall Legate whose speciall arrand was to collect money to maintaine the warres of the holy Land which was not to be spared in his Countrey Besides the very entertainement of such a great State so accompanied was reputed as needlesse so ouer costly for that poore Countrey 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 magnificall and braue shew to dazell the eyes of them that are not well acquainted with their lewde and naughty dealing R. ABBOT a Bale Script BritaÌnic Cent. 1. oper minor PAlladius and Patritius were sent into Scotland by Celestinus Bishop of Rome to instruct the Scots against the doctrine of Pelagius the Heretike which is a certaine argument of the apostasie of the Church of Rome inasmuch as the Church of Rome now patronizeth and defendeth the doctrine of Pelagius as I haue b Of Free will sect 5. before shewed Little doth M. Bishop gaine by all this alleagement of teachers then sent from Rome We know what was then the religion of the Church of Rome and we know that the streame the longer it ranne the more soile it gathered but yet it was very pure and tollerable then in comparison of that that now it is There followeth now an assertion of mine that it was twelue hundred yeares after the incarnation of Christ ere the Popes authority could get any acknowledgement in Scotland which he saith I doe most impudently or ignorantly affirme But how doth it appeare that I so doe Forsooth in the very same hundreth yeare by him named saith he they were so farre off from denying the Popes authority ouer them in causes Ecclesiasticall that they did acknowledge him to be their Protectour in temporall affaires Marke well gentle Reader that I name twelue hundred yeares and he saith in the very same hundreth yeare and yet for the thing which he reporteth of the Scots alleaging that the Pope had their Countrey in protection he noteth the yeare 1290. which was almost a hundred yeares after the time by me set downe Be it M. Bishop that at the end of twelue hundred and ninety yeares they had receiued the Pope to be the Protectour of their Countrey that nothing hindereth the truth of my speech that for twelue hundred yeares they acknowledged not any authority of the Pope amongst them in Church affaires You should haue brought vs some records to shew that within the compasse of those twelue hundred yeares the Pope had without controllement exercised in the Realme of Scotland Ecclesiasticall and ordinary iurisdiction which seeing you doe not you iustifie my assertion and the impudency whereof you speake must be the staine of your owne face who will take vpon you to contradict me with such an impertinent and sleeuelesse tale To proue that there was no such iurisdiction acknowledged I referred the Reader to the King of Scots owne wordes who as Matthew Paris reporteth c Math. Paris in Henrico 3. Anno 1237. Volenti autem Domino Legato intrare regnum Scotiae vt ibi de negotijs Ecclesiasticis tractaret sicut in Anglia respondit Rex Scotiae Non memini Legatum in terra mea vidisse nec opus esse iquem esse vocandum Deo gratias nec adhuc opus est omnia benè se habent Nec âtiam tempore Patris mei vel alicuius AntecessoruÌ meorum visus est aliquis Legatus intâoitum habuisse nec ego dum mei compos suero tolerabo when the Lord Legate was desirous to enter into the Kingdome of Scotland there to deale in Ecclesiasticall matters as he had done in England answered him I doe not remember that I haue seene any Legate in my Countrey nor that there hath beene any neede thanks be to God that any should be called neither is there any neede all things are well No nor in the time of my Father or of any of my Predecessours hath any Legate beene seene to haue had any entrance there neither will I suffer any so long as I am in my right wits This euidence is cleare none had entred in his time none had entred in the time of his Father or any of his Predecessours none should enter so long as he could keepe him in his right minde and though things were amisse yet none had authority to enter but as he should be called and warranted by him The same in effect he alleaged two yeares after when the Legate againe was attempting to goe into that Countrey and though after much adoe vpon intercession of the Nobles of England and Scotland he was content for once to admit him that he might not haue the disgrace of being repulsed yet it was with condition as I haue d See the Aduertisement concerning D. Bishops Reproofe sect 15. formerly declared that the said Legate should put in caution vnder his hand and seale that his entrance should not be drawen to a matter of example whereupon to presume the like another time This matter is more plaine then that M. Bishops paltry shifts can put it off King Philip and Queene Mary respited the entrance of a Legate for a time but wholly to deny him entrance for ordering matters
Christ her Lord and head and most entire in the faith and doctrine which shee had receiued from him Of this flourishing and best estate we must consider in the next Chapter and therefore I cease here to speake any further thereof CHAP. VII Of the flourishing and best estate of the Church of Rome and of the testimony of Theodoret concerning the fulnesse of doctrine contained in the Epistle to the Romans and that the Apostle there condemneth Popery of Idolatry in worshipping of Saints and Images ANSWERE TO THE EPISTLE VVE hope you vvill not deny but the Apostle S. Paul vvas one principall pillar c. to Chap. 8. Paul saith and vve say the same that c. W. BISHOP §. 1. WHat a worthy graue Preface he vseth to assure men that we will not deny S. Paul nor his Epistle to the Romans which neuer were called in doubt by any man But good Sir whiles you muse and busie your head so much vpon bables you forget or wilfully mistake the very point of the question Was the Church of Rome at her most flourishing estate when S. Paul wrote that Epistle to the Romans was her faith then most renovvmed ouer all the vvorld as you write nothing lesse for not the ten thousand part of that most populous Citty was then conuerted to the faith and they that had receiued the Christian faith were very nouices in it and stoode in great neede of the Apostles diuine instructions Any reasonable man would rather iudge that the Church of Rome then came first to her most flourishing estate when Idolatry and all kinde of superstition was put to silence and banished out of her when the Christian religion was publikely preached and conntenanced by the Emperours authority which was not before the reigne of Constantine the Great our most glorious countrey-man wherefore M. Abbots first fault is that he shooteth farre wide from the marke which he should haue aimed at principally The second is more nice yet in one that would seeme so acute not to be excused It is that he taketh an Epistle written to the Romans for their instruction and correction as if it were a declaration and profession of their faith when as all men know such a letter might containe many things which they had not heard off before Further yet that you may see how nothing can passe his fingers without some legerdemaine marke how he englisheth Theodorets wordes Dogmatum pertractationem The handling of opinions is by him translated all points of doctrine whereas it rather signifieth some then all opinions or lessons But I will let these ouer-sights passe as flea-bitings and follow him whither he pleaseth to wander that euery man may see when he is permitted to say what he liketh best that in truth he can alleage out of S. Paul nothing of moment against the Catholike faith R. ABBOT WEe see here what great cause there was that his Maiesty should adde the wordes now spoken off And from Christ her Lord and head because it might be doubted what construction they or any other might make of the flourishing and best estate of the Church of Rome I say that St. Paul wrote his Epistle to that Church when the faith thereof was most renowmed through the world This M. Bishop denieth and will not haue that to be taken for the flourishing and best estate of the Roman Church And why First not the ten thousand part of that most populous Citty was then conuerted to the faith and secondly they who had then receiued the Christian faith were very nouices in it and stoode in great neede of the Apostles diuine instructions So then he will haue vs to vnderstand that then was the flourishing and best estate of the Church of Rome when there were in it the greatest number of Christians and they were so perfect in the faith as that they needed not the Apostles diuine instructions But when was that Not before the reigne of Constantine the Great saith he Well and was it then Nay he saith not so and we may well thinke that he knoweth not well when or what to say Certaine it is that Paganisme abounded in Rome after the time of Constantine who indeede for his time by lawes restrained the publike exercise thereof but yet a Relat. Symmach apud Ambros lib. 5. Epist 30 Diui ConstaÌtij factum diu non sletit that act of his saith Symmachus did not long stand good the people returning to their old superstitions and sacrifices vntill that by Theodosius and Gratian the Emperours of Rome they were repressed againe Which lawes of theirs Symmachus the Lieutenant of the city moued the next Emperour Valentinian in his owne name and in the name of the City and Senate of Rome to haue againe repealed who b Symmach vt supra Senatus me querelaruÌ suarum iussit esse I egatum c. Vt Praefectus vâster gesta publica prosequor vt Legatus ciuium mandata commendo though he pretended a farre greater number of Senatours to ioyne with him then did as Ambrose sheweth yet cannot be doubted to haue had a great number also partakers with him beside the common multitude of the City whose affection how it stood we may gather by that that Hierome saith not much distant from that time that c Hieron in Esai lib. 16. c. 57. âpsaque Roma orbiâ Domina in singulis insulis domibusque Tutela simulachrum cereis venerans ac lucernis quam ad tuitionem aedium isto appellant nomine Rome in euery house did with tapers and candles worship the image of Tutela whom they so called for the tuition and defence of their houses though elsewhere he testifie that d IdeÌ ad Marcel vt commigret Bethlehem Est ibi sancta Ecclesia c. gentilitate calcata in sublime se quotidiè erigens vocabulum Christianum Paganisme was decaying and the name of Christians arising and growing higher and higher from day to day But if it were yet growing then it was not at full growth and therefore when will M. Bishop say was the most flourishing and best time of the Church there Againe we desire to know of him when the time was that the Church of Rome stoode in no neede of the Apostles diuine instructions May we thinke M. Bishop that euer there was any such time Surely we know now what the cause is why the Apostles diuine instructions are so little set by at Rome They serued the Romans forsooth at first when they were but nouices in the faith but now they are growen ripe and haue no neede to be taught by him May we not thinke him a wise man that thus telleth vs that the Romans then stoode in neede of the Apostles diuine instructions as if there were any time since that they had not the like neede But I would aske him how it appeareth to him that the Romans were then but nouices in the faith The reason which his wordes imply is because
corruptible man O noble disputer and well worthy the whippe because we may not make false Gods or giue the glory of God vnto Idols may we not therefore yeeld vnto Saints their due worship might not S. Paul whiles he liued as all other most godly men be reuerenced and worshipped for their most excellent spirituall and religious vertues with a kinde of holy and religious respect euen as Knights and Lordes and other worldly men are worshipped and honored for their temporall callings and endowments with temporall worship without robbing God of his honour Is the Lord or Master dishonoured and spoiled of his due reuerence and respect if his seruants for his sake be much made off and respected yet with such due regard only as is meete for their degree This is so childish and palpable that if the Protestants were not resolued to sticke obstinately to their errours how grosse soeuer they be they would for very shame not once more name it R. ABBOT O Noble disputer saith hee and worthy the whippe Whereby he putteth me in minde that he hath before returned it vpon me to be one of the Kings horses and indeede Salomon saith that a Prou. 26. 3. to a horse belongeth a whippe but he addeth further that to an Asse belongeth a bridle and a rodde to the fooles backe I say in my answere that the Apostle to the Romans condemneth b Rom. 1. 23. the changing of the glory of the incorruptible God into the similitude of the image of a corruptible man and c Vers 25. the worshipping of the creature insteede of the Creatour I noted that the Apostle herein condemneth the Church of Rome which by her schoole-tricks teacheth men to worship God in the image of a man and by religious deuotions of prayers and offerings to worship Saints and Saints images in steede of God Where thou maiest see gentle Reader that as I cite the Apostles wordes double so I make a double application thereof Where hee condemneth the Heathens for changing the glory of God into the similitude of the image of a corruptible man I say it maketh against the Papists doing the like in teaching men to represent and worship God in the similitude and likenesse of a man Where he noteth it for sinne in the Heathens that they worshipped the creature in steede of the Creatour I say it condemneth the Papists who worship Saints and Saints Images in steed of God But M. Bishop playing the part of Danus to set all out of order taketh the former part of the Apostles wordes and putteth them to the latter part of my application making me to say thus First he condemneth the worshipping of Saints and Saints images in that he reproueth the Heathens for changing the glory of the incorruptible God into the similitude of the image of a corruptible man Thus he slippeth by a maine point of idolatry condemned in the Pagans and yet defended and practised by the Papists as if his heart failed him and he saw no way to salue their abuse against the words of the Apostle The Apostle giueth to vnderstand that by the ancient doctrine of the Church of Rome it was accounted an abhominable wickednesse and an abusing of the Maiesty of God to transforme him into the image of man The Church of Rome therefore now transforming God in that sort and setting him forth to be worshipped in the image of an old man doth that which was holden abhominable in the ancient Church of Rome What hath M. Bishop here to answere or what will he say Will he tell vs that the Heathens were to blame for that they were false Gods whom they represented in this sort But that the Apostle excludeth in that he noteth this as a dishonour done d Rom. 1. 19. 20. 21. 23. to the incorruptible God whom they knew by the creation of the world whom they should haue glorified and were punished for that knowing God they did not glorifie him as God but turned the glory of the incorruptible God into the similitude of the image of a corruptible man e Hieron in Rom. 1. Dicentes se esse sapientes quasi qui inuenissent quomodo inuisibilis Deus per simulachrum visibile coleretur calling themselues wise as Hierome saith for that they had deuised how the inuisible God might be worshipped by a visible image euen as M. Bishops wisedome hath done who though he hold f Of Images sect 7. that no image is to be made as to represent God to the quicke and as in himselfe he is yet resolueth that we may picture God and resemble him in such image as he hath appeared or in some similitude represent him by some actions or properties whereby to leade our vnderstanding to the better knowledge of him whereas the ancient true religion doth teach vs that God g Origen coÌt Cels l. 3. Communis sensus cogitare nos iubet non delectari Deum hoc honore imaginum quae âffigiem eius aut significationé repraesentent aliquam is not pleased with the honour of images which represent either shape or any signification of him or h Ibid. lib. 7. Quis sanae mentâ noÌ rideat cum qui. c. Per statuarum contemplationem tanquam signi alicuius conspicui conatur animu ârigere ad imaginationem intelligibilis numinis whereby to lift vp our minds to the cogitation of him Will he say that the errour of the Gentils was in this that they tooke the very images to be Gods But against this we must obserue that the Apostle there speaketh of them who tooke themselues to be wise euen the Philosophers and learned men who scorned to be taken for such idiots as to imagine a dead blocke to bee a God i Origen coÌt Cels l. 7. Quis alius nisi sit totâs fatâus haec deos credit non dijs dicatas statâas Who but very fooles saith Celsus take these to be Gods and not images dedicated to the Gods k August in Psal 113. Dicunt Nec simulacbrum nec dâmonium colo sed per corporale effigiâm eius rei signum intueor quaÌ colere debâo I neither worship the image nor the diuell saith another but by the bodily shape I behold the signe or token of that which I ought to worship They hold them to be as it were l Athanas coÌt Idola Simulachra pro elemântis literarum humano generi esse quae dum legunt Dei notitianâ condiscere possiat Alphabeticall letters which men might reade thereby to learne the knowledge of God and that m Arnob. cont Gentes lib. 5. Dicere quî conuenit ad incutiendaâ forâidmes vulgo deorum ãâ¦ã a simulacâra they were appointed to terrifie the vulgar sort M. Bishop hath no thing to except against it but that Pagans and Papists are both alike and both condemned by the ancient Roman Church for changing the glory of the incorruptible God into the similitude
vitae primordio in peccati fouâam iâcidi concupiscentiae carnalis sordibus inquinata natiuitatis meae initia contraxi Non in me illa quam nouitèr admisi sola viget iniquitas âabeo in me etiam ex veteri quod ignoscas Lord. I haue neede that thou haue mercy vpon me because euen from the beginning of my life I am fallen into the pit of sinne and haue drawen my first birth defiled with the vncleannesse of carnall concupiscence Not only that iniquity which I haue lately committed abideth in me I haue also in me fâr thee to pardon of the iniquity that was of old Thus he confesseth that we are not in the world without the sinne which we brought into the world that for originall sinne we still stand in neede of Gods mercy and haue still thereof remaining in vs that for which we must craue pardon at Gods hands This he spake according to the ancient doctrine of the Roman Church and shall we not rather beleeue him then M. Bishop who according to the new learning of their new Church telleth vs e Of Original sinne sect 10. that in him that is newly baptized there is no more sinne then was in Adam in the state of innocency and that originall sinne is vtterly extinguished and concupiscence in the regenerate is become no sinne Yea shall we not rather beleeue him then the Councell of Trent telling vs that f Concil Trident sess 5. In renatis nihil odit Deus c. ita vt nihil prorsus caâ ab ingressââ coeli remoretur in the regenerate there is nothing that God hateth nothing to stay them from entring into heauen These are absurd paradoxes of new and late deuice strange to true Christian eares and abhorred of all true Christian hearts contrary to the expresse and cleare determination of holy Scripture and fitting only them who haue learned to say g Psal 12. 4. With our tongues we will preuaile we are they that ought to speake who is Lord ouer vs CHAP. XII Of the spirit of adoption giuing witnesse to the faithfull that they are the sonnes of God ANSWERE TO THE EPISTLE SAint Paul saith of the spirit of adoption The same spirit beareth witnesse c. to Paul saith the sufferings of this time c. W. BISHOP ANd that we say vpon good consideration for we must not beleeue with the Christian faith which is free from all feare any thing that is not assured and most certaine Now the spirit of God doth not beare vs witnesse so absolutely and assuredly that we are the sonnes of God but vnder a condition which is not certaine to wit that we be the sonnes and heires of God Si tamen Rom. 8. vers 17. compatimur yet if we suffer with him that we also may be glorified with him but whether we shall suffer with him and constantly to the end beare out all persecutions we know not so assuredly because as our Sauiour fore-telleth There be some that for a time beleeue Luc. 8. vers 13. and in time of temptation doe reuolt Was it not then a tricke of a false merchant to strike off the one halfe of the Apostles sentence that the other might seeme currant for him now no man doth more plainly or roundly beate downe their presumption who assure themselues of saluation then S. Paul as in many other places so in this very Epistle to the Romans in these wordes Well because of their incredulity they the Iewes Cap. 11. vers 20. were broken off but thou Gentile by faith dost stand be not too highly wise but feare For if God hath not spared the naturall boughes least perhaps he will not spare thee neither see then the goodnesse and seuerity of God vpon them surely that are fallen the seuerity but vpon thee the goodnesse of God if thou abide in his goodnesse otherwise thou shalt also be cut off c. Can any thing be more perspicuously declared then that some such who were in grace once afterwards fell and were cut off for euer and that some others stand in grace who if they looke not ãâã to their footing may also fall and become reprobate the Apostle directly fore-warning those men who make themselues so sure of their saluation not to be so highly wise but to feare their owne frailty and weaknesse least otherwise they fall as many had done before them If this plaine discourse and those formall speeches vttered by the holy Ghost will not serue to shake men out of their security of saluation I cannot see what may possibly doe it R. ABBOT THis answere of M. Bishops is a Of the certainty of saluation sect 17. before examined and exploded and his new see thing of the same woorts will neuer proue to any good broth We must beleeue nothing he saith by Christian faith that is not assured and most certaine Well and therefore that which the faithfull beleeue that they are the sonnes of God is assured and most certaine because we are taught to beleeue it by Christian faith For that which the spirit of God testifieth we are to beleeue by Christian faith But the spirit of God testifieth to the faithfull that they are the sonnes of God Therefore by Christian faith they are to beleeue that they are the sonnes of God b Rom. 8. 15. We haue not receiued the spirit of bondage to feare any more saith St. Paul but we haue receiued the spirit of adoption whereby we cry Abba Father The same spirit beareth witnesse with our spirit that we are the sonnes of God The spirit of adoption is so called as by the gift whereof God actually adopteth vs to be his children By this spirit it is that we haue that inward conscience and feeling whereby we can goe vnto God familiarly and confidently as vnto our Father and say vnto him as with the mouth so with the heart Our Father which art in heauen Hereby haue we a testimony in our hearts that we are Gods children because if God be our father it necessarily followeth that we are the children of God This comfort then the holy Ghost giueth not by vocall speech but by impression of affection and not as of a thing to come but as of a thing already acted and done accordingly to that which the Apostle elsewhere saith c Gal. 4. â Because yee are sonnes God hath sent forth the spirit of his sonne into your hearts crying Abba Father Now hereby we see that M. Bishops answere that the spirit doth not beare vs witnesse absolutely and assuredly that we are the sonnes of God but vnder a condition which is not certaine is meerely absurd because the being of that that presently is cannot be said to depend vpon the being of any thing that is to come Of that that is we cannot say that it is not vnlesse such a condition be made good but setting aside all respect of the condition that that is must be acknowledged to
it is manifest and our consciences force vs to confesse that we are not doers of the law For to be a doer of the law requireth the doing of all that the law commandeth to be done For b Iam. 2. 10. he that keepeth the whole law and yet faileth in one point he is guilty of all that is he is a transgressour of the law which commandeth all and because he is a transgressour of the law therefore cannot be called a doer of the law We therefore who are all transgressours of the law cannot be said to be doers of the law and because we are not doers of the law therefore cannot by the law be iustified before God And thus the Apostle telleth the Iewes that c Rom. 2. 13. not the hearers but the doers of the law shall be iustified but chargeth vpon them that they were d Vers 17. c. not doers of the law and groweth to this conclusion that e Chapt. 3. 9. all both Iewes and Gentiles are vnder sinne and hence inferreth further f Vers 20. Therefore by the workes of the law shall no flesh be iustified in the sight of God Hath not M. Bishop now brought vs a goodly proofe that wee are iustified before God by workes when as the Apostle vseth those very wordes to enforce the contrary that we are not iustified by workes As handsomly doth he deale for the proofe of free-will There is much for free-will saith he witnesse this g Rom. 6. 12. 13. Let not sinne raigne in your mortall bodies that you obey the concupiscence thereof c. Hence he inferreth that it is in the power and will of euery man endued with Gods grace to doe well And who denieth but that it is so who maketh doubt but that the grace of God giueth vs a power and will to doe well The question only is whether there be in vs any such power of our selues which is not the effect of the grace of God Thereof we say with St. Austin h August de Peccat Merit Remiss l. 2. c. 18. LaboraÌt homines inuenire in nostra voluntate quid boni sit nostrum quod nobis non sit ex Deo quomodo inueniri possit ignorâ Men labour to finde in our will what good is ours which is not in vs of God and how it may be found we doe not know Otherwise we deny not free-will for vve say that vve are i Rom. 6. 22. freed from sinne and that k Iohn 8. 36. the sonne of God doth make vs free We deny not the power and vvill to doe well for vve say that l Phil. 2. 13. God doth worke in vs both to will and to doe But because we say that God doth worke it in vs and God doth make vs free therefore vve deny Popish free-will vvhich is a faculty and power of nature vvhereby by an act of our owne vvhich is not of God wee apply our selues to the grace of God and adioyne our selues to vvorke vvith it He againe collecteth that sinne hath no such dominion ouer vs but that we may doe well if we will concurre with Gods grace True it is but still the issue is vvhence we haue this vvill or vvhose worke it is that we doe concurre vvith the grace of God We say as St. Austin saith m August in Psal 77. Gratia facit sibi cooperantem hominis spiritum in opere bonorum factorum It is the grace of God that maketh the spirit of man concurrent with it in the doing of good workes and vvith St. Bernard n Bernard de Grat. lib. Arbit Coadiutorem facit cùm facit volentem hoc est voluntati suae conseâticuâem God maketh a man concurrent when he maketh him willing that is consenting to his will It is true then that man doth concurre vvith the grace of God but it is grace it selfe that vvorketh it in man to concurre vvith grace But to open himselfe further he saith that it is not grace which doth all but a man must worke with grace and exhibit the powers of his soule as instruments to the producing of good workes Where againe we admit the latter part of his wordes that we must worke with grace and exhibit the powers of our soules as instruments of good workes but we say againe that so to doe is the gift of God o Leo de ieiun ser 1. Vt in nobis formaÌ suae bonitatis inueniat dat vnde ipsi quoque quod operatur operamur Who saith Leo that he may finde the image of his goodnesse in vs giueth vs whence to worke or doâ the same that he doth But in the first part of the words he bewraieth his hereticall meaning taken out of the schoole of Pelagius when he saith it is not grace that doth all For hereby he will haue it vnderstood that man hath somwhat of his owne which is not any worke of grace and that by this power which he hath naturally of himselfe he worketh with grace and exhibiteth the powers of his soule vnto good workes But Gregory Bishop of Rome was not of this minde who saith of the elect and faithfull p Gregor in Psal Poenit. 7. Qui nihil boni sibi sed totuÌ gratiae Dei tribuunt scientes se nihil habere quod non acceperunt hoc enim operatus est in eis qui vasa misericordiae âecit eos They attribute no good to themselues but all wholly to the grace of God knowing that they haue nothing which they haue not receiued for he hath wrought it in them who hath made them vessels of his mercy It is not grace that doth all saith M. Bishop ââ the iust doe attribute all to grace saith Gregory See how well the doctrine of the new Church of Rome agreeth with the old What the old Church of Rome taught in this behalfe the same also we teach not that we haue a power of free-will in nature whereby we can follow whither grace doth leade but what Gregory saith of Paul the same is true in vs that q Gregor in Ezech. hom 9. Praeueniens gratia liberum in eo arbitrium fecerat in bono libero arbitrio eaÌdem gratiam est subsecutus in opere the preuenting grace of God maketh the will free in that that is good and then we by free-will doe in worke follow the same grace For r Idem Moral lib. 16. cap. 10. Superna pietas priùs agit in nobis aliquid sine nobis vt subsequente quoque nostro libero arbitrio bonum quod iam appetimus a gat nobiscum the heauenly grace saith he againe doth first of all without vs worke somewhat in vs which is that which St. Austin saith Å¿ Aug. de grat l. arbit c. 17. Vt velimus sine nobis operatur Without vs he worketh in vs to will and St. Bernard t Bernard de grat lib. arbit
namely he saith Idem Moral l. 10. c. 8. Saepe âontingit ât fides in menâe iam viâeat sed tamen ex parte aliqua in dubietate contabâscat Vnam candemque mentem cerââuao solidae sidâi roborat tamen ex aliquantula mutabilitate perfidâe aura dubictatis versat of the man before mentioned that u Ibid. Per sidem sperans per infidelitatem fluctuans dicebat c. Et exerare certus iam po sidem coeperat adhuc incertus vndas persidiae ex incredulitate ââlerabat hoping by faith and wauering by vnbeliefe he said Lord I beleeue helpe my vnbeliefe He beganne to pray saith he certaine now by faith and yet being vncertaine hee bare the waues of vnbeliefe Wee see here beside all that hath beene formerly said that saith and vnbeliefe certainty and vncertainty assurance and doubt bee blended together in one and the same man and why doth M. Bishop then professing to be a Romanist thus absurdly crosse the old doctrine of the Church of Rome why doth he tell vs so often that faith excludeth all feare and doubt But he committeth here a further errour in wresting x See hereof the question of the certainty of saluation sect 10. the Apostles wordes to doubting feare which is dâstrustfull of God whereas the Apostle speaketh of that godly feare whereby we are distrustfull of our selues that we may trust in God only The Apostle doth not say Worke your saluation in feare and trembling so as to bee alwaies in feare and doubt of your being saued but so as that you neuer dare trust to your selues or attribute any thing in this behalfe to your owne power or worke but alwaies to giue glory vnto God and to depend vpon him seeking to be enabled and strengthened by his arme because though you be willed to worke your owne saluation yet you must know that it is God that worketh in you both to will it and to worke it euen of his owne good will Dauid in the Psalme saith y Psal 2. 11. Serue the Lord in feare What meaneth this saith St. Austin z August in Psal 65. Quid hoc sihi vult Audi vocem Apostoli Cum timore inquit tremore c. Quare cum timore tremore subiecit causam Dâus est enim c. si ergò Deus operatur ââte Dei gratia benè operaris non viribus tuis Ergo si gaudes time ne fortè quod datum est humili auscratur superbo Heare what the Apostle saith with feare and trembling worke your owne saluation Why with feare and trembling He addeth the cause for it is God that worketh in you both to will and to doe If God then worke in thee thou workest well by the grace of God not by thine owne strength Where we see how St. Austin vnderstandeth feare in the Apostles wordes as he doth in the wordes of Dauid and would M. Bishop be so absurd as to vnderstand Dauid to say serue the Lord so as to be continually in feare and doubt of your owne saluation And whereas St. Austin saith that the Apostle to giue a reason why hee saith in feare and trembling addeth those other wordes for it is God that worketh in you both to will and to doe will M. Bishop be so madde as to couple these speeches in this sort Worke your saluation being alwaies in feare and doubt thereof because it is God that worketh in you both to will and to doe What is it a reason for vs to doubt of our owne saluation because it is God that worketh in vs both to will and to do The same St. Austin in another place citing the same words of the Psalme Serue the Lord in feare and reioyce vnto him with trembling saith that a August de corrept grat cap. â Quid ostendens nisi cos esse commonitos qui ambulant in via iusta vt in tiâ more Deo seruiant id est non altum sapiat sed timeant qâod significat non superbiant sed humiâes sint c. exultent Deo sed cum tremoâe in nullo gloriantes quando nostrum nihil sit vt qui gloriatur in Domino gloriâtur ne perâant de via iusta in qua iam ambulare coeperât dum sibi âoc ipsum assignant quòâ in ea sunt His verbis vsus est Apostolê° vbi ait cum timore c. ostendens quare cum timore tremore ait dâus est ââm c. they who walke in the right way are admonished thereby not to be proud but to be humble to reioyce vnto God but with trembling not glorying in any thing because nothing is ours that hee that reioyceth may reioyce in the Lord lest they perish out of the right way wherin they haue begunne to walke whilest they attribute it to themselues that they are in the way Whereupon he addeth The like wordes the Apostle also vseth With feare and trembling worke your owne saluation and to shew why with feare and trembling hee saith for it is God that worketh in you both to will and to doe The feare then which the Apostle commendeth to vs is not a doubting feare such as is contrary to assurance of faith but such as is contrary to presumption and pride and trust in our selues and importeth humility lowlinesse of minde distrust of our owne strength that wee may relie vpon the strength and power of God Why doth M. Bishop then forgoe a plaine and manifest construction to force a meaning vpon the Apostle which can by no meanes bee sitting or agreeing with the wordes from hence he goeth forward to proue that we ought to haue a firme hope of saluation But why doth he take such paines to proue that which we deny not or how is it that he seeth not that the proofe of that is his owne reproofe For if we must firmely hope for saluation then we must not stand in feare of our saluation But he saith b Of the certainty of saluation sect 10. we must stand in feare of our saluation we must feare whether we shall be saued or not Therefore we ought not firmely and stedfastly to hope for it These two cannot stand together we cannot firmely hope for saluation if we must stand in feare and doubt whether we shall be saued or not Last of all he quarrelleth vs as touching the nature of true faith The very faith saith he whereby we are iustified is no such kinde of faith as the Protestants claime to be iustified by What is it then Forsooth it is that faith whereby wee beleeue all things to be true which God hath reueiled And how doth that appeare Marry St. Paul declareth Abraham to haue beene iustified by beleeuing that God according to his promise would giue him a sonne and make him the father of many nations Which his base and vndiuine conceipt of Christian saith I haue exagitated c Of Iustification
himselfe notable in his art he telleth his Reader that that vow was not much vnlike to the vow of religious persons and biddeth him thereof to see the sixt Chapter of the booke of Numbers as if looking there he should finde it so to be Now for their pupils and scholers who must yeeld to enlarge their throats to swallow all their Masters googeons hee knew well enough that they would neuer nay they dare not looke the Chapter and as for others though they finde him a lyar what cares he for that He that looketh into that Chapter or any other what shall he finde that may giue him cause to thinke the vow of the Nazarites like to the vow of religious persons The vow of religious persons is a vow of perpetual pouerty chastity and obedience and what is there in the vow of the Nazarites that carryeth any semblance of these things h Num. 6. 2. 3. c. He was to forbeare wine and strong drinke and all things of the grape to suffer no razour to come vpon his head but to let the locks of his haire to grow to come at no dead body not his father his mother his brother or sister and by these ceremonies to separate himselfe to the Lord but of giuing away all his goods to liue in pouerty of forbearing marriage or the company of a wife of liuing vnder obedience to any mans rules or lawes there is nothing I say nothing to bee found Now who can thinke it safe to trust M. Bishop that is not ashamed thus wilfully to falsifie that which is so plainly reported by the holy Ghost As for Saint Pauls taking vpon him that vow of a Nazarite which Saint Luke recordeth it was but a yeelding for the time to the infirmity of the Iewes becomming i 1. Cor. 9. 20. 21 to the Iewes a Iew that he might winne the Iewes as he professeth otherwhere For although in the death and resurrection of Iesus Christ the ceremoniall law of Moses were at an end and now to be abolished yet there was a time to be yeelded for instruction and teaching of the Iewes thereby to withdraw them from the opinion of those things which so long and by so great authority euen from God himselfe both they and their fathers had obserued that the sodaine relinquishing thereof might be no scandall or offence vnto them St. Austin saith notably hereof that k Aug. Epist 19. Cum venisset fides qua priùs illis obseruationibus praenunciata post morte resurrectione Domini reuelata est amiserant tanquam vitam officij sui veruntamen sicut defuncta corpora necessarioruÌ officijs deducendae ââant quodammodo ad sepuituram nec simulatè sed religiosâ non autem deserenda continuò vel inimicorum obtrectationibus tanquam canum morsibus proijcienda when the faith fore-shewed by those ceremonies was after the death and resurrection of Christ reueiled they lost as it were the life of their office or vse but yet as the dead bodies of friends they were by the office or seruice of friends religiously to be brought to their buriall and not to be presently forsaken or cast to the slanders of enemies as to the bitings or gnawings of dogs But though l Ibid. Illo teÌpore quo primùm gratia fidei reuelata est hoc noÌ crat pernicioââ progressu verò temporis perniciosum erat nisi obseruationes illae ab omnibus Christ aniâ desererentur it were not hurtfull as he there saith againe that these ceremonies at the first preaching of the faith were for a while obserued yet in processe of time it had beene pernicious that they should not haue beene forsaken of all Christians yea it should haue been impious to retaine them And hath not M. Bishop then for proofe of their vowes made good choise of an example which it were pernicious and impious to retaine in the Church of Christ But hee found there the name of vow and that he thought was enough to soppe them who he knew would take any thing that he should tell them From vowes he âlarteth to praier for the dead and saith that it is not true that in St. Paul there is nothing for prayer for the dead And what is there I pray for it He teacheth saith he that some of the faithfull who haue m 1. Cor. 3. 13. built vpon the right foundation hay stubble and such like trash shall notwithstanding at the day of the Lord be saued yet so as through fire But what is this to prayer for the dead Marry the ancient Doctors doe take this to be the fire of Purgatory and if many while the drosse of their works is purged do lie in fire it will easily follow that euery good soule will pray for the release of them Thus he telleth vs what some Doctors doe thinke and what he himselfe gathereth thereof but otherwise of St. Paul himselfe he can tell vs nothing It appeareth not by St. Paul himselfe that that fire is Purgatory fire it appeareth not by St. Paul himselfe that we are to pray for the dead therfore in all this M. Bishop hath said nothing because it is not the question what some haue gathered of an obscure sentence of St. Paul but what St. Paul himselfe hath deliuered and that in the Epistle to the Romans where Theodoret witnesseth as I haue said all doctrines of faith to be contained But he dealeth here after the very manner of Heretikes who are wont to make choise of some figuratiue and allegoricall and darke speeches of Scripture which they may construe at their owne pleasure and alleage them according to their owne construction to proue their falshoods and heresies by them when as notwithstanding the plaine and euident testimonies of Scripture doe make against them St. Paul speaketh of purpose to giue instruction of our carriage towards the dead where of Purgatory or praier for the dead he teacheth nothing n 1. Thess 4. 13. I would not brâthren haue you ignorant saith he concerning them which are asleepe that yee sorrow not as other which haue no hope for if we beleeue that Iesus is dead and is risen euen so them which sleep in Iesus wil God bring with him And then shewing in what sort God will bring them with Iesus he concludeth Wherefore comfort your selues one another with these words Is it possible that the Apostle should here omit to giue charge of praying for the dead if it were religion to pray for them Nay he telleth vs of the faithfull departed that they sleepe in Iesus and of them that sleepe in Iesus o Apoc. 14. 13. the spirit saith Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord which sleepe in Iesus for they rest from their labours and if they be blessed and at rest then they are not labouring in the restlesse fire of Purgatory and therefore neede none of our prayers for release Albeit if vve grant M. Bishop his Purgatory yet
what is hee the nearer for prayer for the dead seeing they tell vs that Purgatory is p Rhem. Testam Annoâ Mat. 5. 26. in marg the prison spoken of by our Sauiour Christ from which there is no comming forth vntill thou haue paied the vttermost farthing If there be no comming forth vntill the vtmost farthing be paied why doe we vainly trouble our selues in praying for them When they haue paied all then they shall come forth but till that be done there is no release This were a lamentable hearing at Rome yea and throughout the whole Popish clergie for by this meanes there shall be no vse of all their Offices and Obsequies and Pardons for the dead and thereby what a large collop shall be cut from them They are the cause of it themselues they tell vs that Purgatory is the prison whence there is no redemption till thou not till another for thee but till thou haue paied the vttermost farthing But yet let them alone grant them Purgatory and they will shift they will make their aduantage good enough The worst is that in the words of St. Paul there is not strength enough to draw it in The old Father Origen in an approued worke of his hath laid a shrewd blocke in M. Bishops way who citing the wordes of the Apostle q 1. Cor 3. 12. If any man build on this foundation gold siluer precious stones timber hay stubble euery mans worke shall be made manifest for the day shall declare it because it shall be reueiled by fire and the fire shall trie euery mans worke of what sort it is saith hereupon r Origen coÌt Celâ lib. 4. Si quis docore potest corporalitèr intelligendum esse malos superstrucre lignum foenââ stipulam apparebit etiam materialem ignem intelligendum sensibilem quòd si euidentèr figurata est locutio dum mali hominis opera significantur lignoruÌ foeni stipularuÌque nomine qui fit vt noÌ statim succurrat quomodo ignis accipieÌdus sit qui contumat âigna huiusmodi If any man can shew that it is corporally to be vnderstood that euill men doe build vpon the foundation wood and hay and stubble it shall appeare that we are also to vnderstand a materiall and sensible fire but if it be euidently and apparantly a figuratiue speech in that the workes of euill men are signified by the name of wood and hay and stubble how is it that we conceiue not how the fire is to be vnderstood that consumeth these things Indeede it is in common sense very vnprobable that the wordes of foundation building gold siluer pearles wood hay stubble should all be construed as figuratiuely spoken and the name of fire only should be vnderstood properly of a materiall Purgatory fire specially when as the Apostle himselfe forceth it to another vnderstanding by saying Yet so as it were by fire for what is that but as to say not by fire indeede but in such sort as may fitly be resembled and set forth by fire Yet it is true that some haue expounded those wordes of a temporary purging fire as Austin Ambrose and Gregory whom M. Bishop citeth for as for Hierome he wrongeth him who only mentioneth Å¿ Hieron adu louin lib. 2. Ipse saluabitur non tamen absque probatione ignis triall of fire according to the letter of the text but saith nothing to expound what that fire is But as they expound it of Purgatory fire so some other there be that expound it of hell fire as namely Chrysostome Theophylact and Photius in Oecumenius who where it is said Hee himselfe shall be saued doe vnderstand it that he shall be reserued and not consumed to nothing and so take the meaning to bee t Oecumen ex Phot. in 1. Cor. 3. Ad hoc manet seruatur vt per ignem puniatur in seculum Sic Chrysost Theophylact ibid. that he abideth and is kept to be punished by fire for euer Now it may fall out shrewdly on M. Bishops part if where hee looketh for Purgatory hee finde Hell but hereby it certainly appeareth that there was no tradition of the Church to draw Purgatory out of those wordes of the Apostle Which notwithstanding shall much better appeare if wee shall further consider the variablenesse and vncertainty of writers in expounding that place euen of them who haue expounded and applied it in that sort First Saint Austin though in a Sermon to the people he yeelded to their conceipt then growing of Purgatory fire and were content thereto to make application of the Apostles wordes here in question yet in diuers other places where with due meditation hee pondereth and waigheth the same wordes hee still maketh other construction of them As namely when Dulcitius propounding certaine questions to him he by occasion falleth vpon the handling of these wordes hee deriueth thither what he hath spoken in two other places concerning the same now approuing it the third time that u August de 8. Quaest Dulcit q. 1. ex lib de Fide Operibus c. 16. Si circa diuitias suas carnali quâdam teneretur affec tu c. propter carnale vt dixi quem in eis habebat affectum quo talibus bonis fine dolore carere non posset âdificaret super fundamentum lignum foenum sââpulam c. Quoniam affectu dilecta carnali non sine dolore amittuntur c. in corum amissione passi detrimentâ per ignem quendam doloriâ perueniunt ad salutem by hay and wood and stubble the Apostle meant the too much carnall desire and loue of temporall things which is often found in the faithfull though not in so high degree but that when they come to triall they are content rather to forsake all then to forsake Christ These he saith are saued for the foundations sake which is Christ whom they so preferre before all but x Ibid. ex Enchirid ad Laurent c. 68. Est quidem ignis tentatio tribulationis c. Isle ignis in hac interim vita facit quod Apostolus dixit c. salâus est quidem sic tamen quasi per ignem quia vrit eum rerum dolor quas dilexcrat amissarum yet so as by fire whilest they are vexed with the griefe and sorrow of the losse of those things which they haue too much loued For fire he saith is the temptation of tribulation and this fire in this life doth that which the Apostle saith In the very like sort doth he againe in another place expound it y Idem de ciuitat Dei lib. 21. cap. 26. Sic quasi per ignem quod enim sine illiciente amore non habuit sine vrente dolore non perdet Yet so as by fire because what he hath not had without entising loue he will not loose without vexing griefe And that it may appeare that he afterwards did not like that exposition which M. Bishop citeth he vpon
stubble and hay is thereby consumed and brought to nought And thus Cyril saith as Aquinas alleageth him o Cyril apud Tho. Aquin. in Luc. 12. Ignem veni mittere c. Mos est sacrae Scripturâ ignem quandoque dicere sacros diuinos sermones that it is the manner of the holy Scripture to call the sacred wordes of God by the name fire and Chrysostome one where alluding to the wordes here handled expoundeth p Chrysost de PoeniteÌt hom 8. Igne examinemus verbo scilicet doctrinae fire to be the word of doctrine who though they both make the application of that construction to reformation of manners yet considering what hath beene said doe both iustifie the same construction to our vse Now all these things being well waighed it well appeareth how little hold Popish Purgatory hath in those wordes of the Apostle and because in the fall of Purgatory is the fall of prayer for the dead therefore M. Bishop hath yet said nothing out of St. Paul for prayer for the dead W. BISHOP §. 4. I Come now to Images and Relikes of which he affirmeth that S. Paul saith nothing where was the goodmans memory when he wrote this or remembring the matter well enough was he so fiercely bent to deceiue others that he cared not what vntruth he vttered The Apostle maketh honourable mention of the Images of Heb. 9. v. 4. 5. the Cherubins placed gloriously in the vppermost part of the Israelites Tabernacle which for the holynesse thereof was called Sancta Sanctorum Further that within the Arke of the Testament standing in the same place were reserued pretious Relikes as the rodde of Aaron that blossomed a golden pot full of that Angelicall foode Manna which God rained from heauen and the Tables of the Testament to which if you ioyne the sentence of the same Apostle That all hapned to them in figure and were written 1. Cor. 10. v. 11. for our instruction may not we then gather thereby that Images are to be placed in Churches and holy Relikes in golden shrines And the same Apostle in the same Epistle declaring that Iacob by faith adored the Heb. 11. ver 21. toppe of Iosephs rodde which was a signe of his power doth he not giue all iudicious men to vnderstand that the Images of Saints for their holy representation ought to be respected and worshipped R. ABBOT THou maiest not wonder gentle Reader if it grow wearisome to me to follow the sent of this Fox who only casteth dust in mine eyes to stoppe me from pursuing him too fast as being afraide to be otherwise sodainly griped to death Obserue I pray thee what proofes hee hath here brought for Images and Relikes Hee doth not only omit wholly the Epistle to the Romans whence hee was required the proofe but bringeth arguments so ridiculous so idle so impertinent as that euen hereby it is easily to bee discerned that it is a desperate cause which hee hath in hand For Images hee saith that St. Paul maketh honourable mention of the Images of the Cherubims where hee putteth in the Images as thinking it should bee some grace to him that the Reader not looking the place should beleeue that the Apostle had named Images But see further how hee stuffeth this skar-crow with his litteâ of idle wordâs Hee maketh honourable mention of the Images of the Cherubins placed gloriously in the vppermost part of the Israelites Tabernacle which for the holynesse thereof was called Sancta Sanctorum A simple man would thinke that this strowting tale should certainly import some speciall matter but it is like the picture of Beuis that makes a great shew and strikes neuer a stroke a Heb. 9. 5. Ouer the Arke saith the Apostle were the glorious Cherubins shadowing the mercy seate but what is this to M. Bishops purpose Marry saith he the same Apostle saith b 1. Cor. 10. 11. that all things happened to them in figure and were written for our instruction Be it so and what then May not wee then gather thereby saith hee that Images are to be placed in Churches You may indeede M. Bishop but it shall bee no otherwise then as Spiders doe which gather poison of sweet flowers It is true though it bee not proued by the wordes which hee vnduely citeth that all things happened to the Israelites in figure but did the Cherubins prefigure the hauing of Images in our Churches If they did wee desire that he make it appeare to vs which I thinke hee hath not so little wit as to vndertake If they did not what a foolish conclusion hath hee made that because there were the Cherubins in the Iewish Tabernacle figuring something for our instruction therefore wee may set vp Images in Churches c Heb. 9. 11. The Tabernacle as the Apostle teacheth vs prefigured the body of our Lord IESVS Christ The Arke was the place where God yeelded d Exod. 25. 22. Numb 7. 89. his presence to his people to dwell amongst them and from which hee spake and declared his will vnto them The Cherubins as e Of Images sect 8. M. Bishop himselfe acknowledgeth betokened the Angels prest and ready in the presence of God to doe his will What shall now the thing figured be but that God in Iesus Christ is alwaies present with vs and his Angels still assisting in his presence to receiue commandements for our behoofe being f Heb. 1. 24. ministring spirits as the Apostle saith sent forth to minister for their sakes which shall be heires of saluation And must we now let this truth goe that ministreth strength and comfort to our faith that wee may giue M. Bishop roome for his blinde Idols But see withall how handsomely this matter is peeced together The Cherubins did represent the Angels What the shape or fashion of those Cherubins was neither M. Bishop can tell nor any man else as I haue g Of Images sect 8. before shewed They were set in the Sancta Sanctorum as he confesseth where they were wholly out of sight and whither no man came but h Heb. 9. 7. the high Priest only once euery yearâ And doth not hee then very fitly and substantially alleage the example of these Cherubins for their Images of Men and Women to bee set vp openly in Churches not only that the people may behold them but that they may also fall downe to them worship them pray to them offer and burne incense to them according to all the abhominations of the Heathen accustomed to their Idols Doth hee finde that the Iewes tooke thereby warrant to set vp in the Temple the Images of Abraham and Isaac and Iacob and other holy Fathers to doe the like to them Doth he not know that he abuseth his Reader hereby and will hee yet goe forward so to doe But for an expresse and briefe answere to him I cannot say any thing more fitly then that which Tertullian of old answered to them
mandauerunt c. the bodies of the iust and faithfull which the holy Ghost hath vsed for instruments and vessels to all good workes are not to be despised and cast away inferreth that therefore the funerals of the iust of old were with all officious piety regarded their exequies celebrated and their buriall prouided for and they themselues whilest they liued gaue charge to their children for the burying of them or else for transferring them from the place where they were to be buried otherwhere He alleageth examples that Tobie in burying the dead is commended to haue pleased God that our Sauiour Christ commended the good worke of the religious woman which powred the pretious ointment vpon his body as of purpose for his buriall that they are laudably mentioned in the Gospell who tooke the body of Christ from the Crosse and vsed care to haue it diligently and honorably buried And thus Origen professing q Origen coÌt Cels lib. 8. Solas rationales animas honorare nouimus earli instrumenta solenni honore sepulturae dignamur Meretur enim rationalis animae domicilium non temerè proijci sicut brutorum cadauera praesertim quod fuit anima benè ac sanctè instrumento suâ in certaâinibus vsae receptâculum to honour only the soules endued with reason sheweth what this honour is Their instruments that is their bodies we vouchsafe the solemne honour of buriall For the habitation of the reasonable soule is of more worth then carelesly to be cast away like the carkasses of brute beasts specially that which hath beene the receptacle of a soule that hath in spirituall fights and combates well and holily vsed the body Now if it be the honour that is to be done to the bodies of the Saints to bury them in the ground then is it a barbarous dishonour that is done to them in Popery vnder the name of piety to pull them out of their graues and to rent them in peeces and carry one peece this way and another another way the skull to one place the toe or finger to another one tooth hither and another thither as amongst them hath beene accustomed to be done Wherein how farre they haue departed from the ancient Church of Rome appeareth by Gregory Bishop of Rome who for his time affirmeth that r Gregor lib. 3. Epist 30. In Romanis totius OccideÌtis partibus omnino intolerabile est atque sacrilegum si sactorum corpora tagere quisquam fortassè praesumpserit Quod sl praesumpserit certum est quia bâc temeritas impunita nullo mâdo remanebit in the Roman Church and whole Westerne parts it was a thing altogether intollerable and a matter of sacriledge to presume to touch the bodies of the Saints and if any man doe presume so to doe saith he certaine it is that his rashnesse shall by no meanes remaine vnpunished And hauing shewed diuers examples of them who aduenturing too neare to the stirâing or touching of the bodies of some holy persons were thereupon greatly frighted or by death miscarried he concludeth Å¿ Ibid. Quis tam temerarius possit existere vt hâc sciens âorum corpora non dico tangere sed vel aliquatenùs praesumat inspicere Who then knowing these things can be so rash as that he will presume I will not say to touch the bodies of such but in any sort to looke vpon them How is the world now changed in the Church of Rome that they dare not only looke vpon such buryed relikes but pull them out of their graues touch them kisse them carry them about as hath beene before said and will M. Bishop still notwithstanding be so impudent as to say that the religion of the church of Rome is now the same that of old it was For conclusion of this passage he alleageth t Heb. 11. 21. that Iacob adored the toppe of Iosephs rodde which was a signe of his power which he saith giueth all iudicious men to vnderstand that the Images of Saints for their holy representation ought to be respected and worshipped But what a spiâe hath the Apostle put him to thus to seeke for Images vpon the toppe of Iosephs rodde What meant he to be so sparing in the behalfe of the Roman Church as that hee would not name so much as one holy man to whom an Image had beene set vp to be worshipped in his name But the Apostle knew no such Marry M. Bâshop is able by a Romish art to supply that want by fetching an image out of the toppe of Iosephs rodde He had heard of Garnets image in the straw and hee thought the toppe of a ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã rodde or staffe to bee much more capable of an image But for the bringing of this about hee betaketh himselfe to a translation which is manifestly false the Greeke text not saying that he worshipped the toppe of his rodde but â he worshipped vpon the toppe of his rodde that is as we translate it hee worshipped God leaning vpon the end or toppe of his staffe This Thomas Aquinas acknowledgeth and telleth vs the whole reason hereof u Tho. Aquin. in Heb. 11. sect 5. Super fastigium vt habetur in Graeco c. Ipse erat senex ideò portabat virgam vel recepit sceptrum Joseph donec iârasset antequam redderet ei adorauit non ipsam virgam nec Joseph vt quidam malè putaueruÌt sed ipsum Deum innixus ad cacumen vel super fastigium virgae cius Iacob was an old man saith he and therefore carried a rodde or staffe or else he tooke the scepter of Ioseph vntill Ioseph had sworne namely that he would bury his father in Canaan according to his desire and before he restored it to him he worshipped not the rodde nor Ioseph as some haue thought amisse but God himselfe leaning at the toppe or vpon the toppe of his rodde We neede no more this is enough to dash M. Bishop out of comfort and to bereaue him of all hope to finde any succour for his Images in this place But if any man desire further satisfaction let him see this place handled at large in the question of Images the sixteenth section W. BISHOP §. 5. WIth as great facility and no lesse perspicuity we doe collect out of S. Paul that the Saints in heauen are to be prayed vnto for he doth hartily craue the Rom. 15. ver 30. Romans to helpe him in their prayers and hopeth by the helpe of the Corinthians prayers to be deliuered 2. Cor. 1. ver 11. from great dangers Whence we reason thus If such a holy man as S. Paul was stood in neede of other mens prayers much more neede haue we poore wretches of the prayers of Saints S. Paul was not ignorant how ready God is to heare vs nor of the only mediation of Christ Iesus and yet as high as he was in Gods fauour and as well informed of the office of
the body of our Lord Moreouer he speaketh of the Church of Rome being then but in her cradle most honourably saying Your faith is Rom. 1. vers 8. renowmed in the whole world and after Your obedience Rom. 16. ver 19. is published into euery place But no maruaile to the wise though he did not then make mention of her Supremacie for that did not belong to the Church or people of Rome but to S. Peter who when S. Paul wrote that Epistle was scarse well setled there neither did that appertaine to the matter he treated of R. ABBOT NOw to the Masse sâith M. Bishop but there is no wise man that readeth what he hath here written but would thinke that hee had done much more wisely to keepe him from the Masse I cannot tell whether more to pitty his folly or to detest his wilfulnesse See with what a graue preface he entreth to a most ridiculous and childish proofe The same profound diuine St. Austin with other holy Fathers who were not wont so lightly to skimme ouer the Scriptures as our late new Masters doe but seriously searched them and most deeply pierced into them did also finde all the parts of the Masse touched by the Apostle St. Paul in these wordes I desire that obsecrations prayers postulations thanks-giuings be made for all men This phrase of skimming ouer the Scriptures he learned of his Masters of Rhemes who vpon those words of St. Paul alleaging by that place of Austin and some other Fathers that all those kinds of prayers were publikely vsed in the Lyturgie of the Church conclude thus a Rhem. Testam Annot. 1. Tim. 2. 1. So exactly doth the practise of the Church agree with the precepts of the Apostle and the Scriptures and so profoundly doe the holy Fathers seeke out the proper sense of the Scriptures which our Protestants doe so prophanely popularly and lightly skimme ouer that they can neither see nor endure the truth So then it seemeth we must diue very deepe to finde the Masse in the Scriptures but wee are in doubt that they which goe about to diue so deepe will certainly bee drowned and neuer finde that that they seeke for And tell vs in good sooth M. Bishop did St. Austin in your opinion finde in those wordes all the parts of your Masse Nay did he finde that at all to which the name of the Masse is by you properly referred You hold the Masse to be a proper reall sacrifice of the very naturall body and bloud of Christ offered to God for propitiation of the sinnes both of quicke and dead and doth St. Austin speake any thing to that effect or could he finde all the parts of the Masse without finding this Yea that the impudency of him and his Rhemish Masters may the better appeare doth St. Austin say any thing there but what properly belongeth to our Communion and not to their Masse Thou shalt vnderstand good Reader that Paulinus wrote to Austin to be instructed by him of the difference of those sorts of prayers which St. Paul commendeth to Timothy in the wordes aforesaid St. Austin answereth him that b Aug. Epist 59. Illa planè difficillimè discernuntur c. Aliqua singulorum istorum proprietas inquirenda est sed ad âa liquidò peruenire difficile est Multa quippe hinc dici possunt quae improbandâ non sint sed eligo in his verbis hoc intelligere quod omnis vel penè omnis frequentat Ecclesia vt precationes accipiamus dictas quas facimus in celebratione Sacramentorum antequam illud quod est in Domini mensa incipiat benedici orationes cum benedicitur sanctificatur ad distribuendum coÌminuitur quam totam petitionem ferè omnis Ecclesia Dominica oratione coÌcludit Interpellationes siue postulationes fiunt cum populus benedicitur Tunc enim antistites velut aduocati susceptos suos per manus impositionem miserecordissimae offerunt potestati Quibus peractis participato tanto Sacramento gratiarum actio câncta concludit they are very hardly discerned that there is some propriety of euery of them to be enquired of but very hard it is certainly to attaine vnto it For many things saith he may be said hereof which are not to be disliked but I make choise to vnderstand in these wordes that which the whole Church or almost the whole accustometh to take those to be called precations obsecrations as M. Bishop termeth them out of their vulgar Latin which we make in the celebration of the Sacraments before that which is vpon the Lords table beginne to be blessed Prayers those which are vsed when the same is blessed and sanctified and broken to be distributed all which petition almost the whole church concludeth with the Lords prayer Intercessions or postulations which are made when the people is blessed for then the Priests as aduocates doe offer to the most mercifull power them whom they haue receiued by imposition of hands All which being done and after the participation of so great a Sacrament thanks-giuing concludeth all Now what is there in all this that doth concerne the Masse M. Bishop telleth vs that St. Austin findeth all the parts of the Masse here touched by the Apostle and see saith he all the parts of it very liuely painted out but can any man but thinke that he was scant sober when he looked vpon the place and therefore his eyes being troubled thought hee saw that which hee saw not Here is the celebration of a Sacrament the setting of bread and wine vpon the table of the Lord the blessing and sanctifying thereof the breaking of it to be distributed to the people the peoples participating of the Sacrament and in the meane while prayers supplications intercessions giuing of thanks the very true description of our Communion but who seeth any thing here appertaining to the Masse What M. Bishop is there no end of your trifling will yee still goe on to play the wiseman in this sort But to helpe the matter he telleth vs that though he calleth not that celebration of the Sacrament by the name of Masse yet he doth giue it a name equiualent Sacri Altaris oblatio the oblation or sacrifice of the holy Altar It is true indeede that St. Austin nameth the oblation of the holy Altar but nothing at all to M. Bishops vse For willing to giue a reason why the prayers vsed in the very act of the administration of the Sacrament are termed ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã he taketh the same from the composition of the word and because ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is often vsed to signifie a vow therefore he saith that c Ibid. Ea propriè intelligenda est oratio quam facimus ad votum c. Vouentur autem omnia quae offeruntur Deo maximè sancti Altaris oblatio quo Sacramento praedicatur aliud nostrum votum maximum quo nos vouimus in Christo esse mansuros id est
repâaesentaret the representation of his body as Saint Hierome vnderstandeth it g Gelas cont Eutych Nestor Imago similitudo corporis sanguinis Domini in actione mysteriorum celebratur the image and similitude of his body as Gelasius termeth it h Chrysost in Mat. Op. imperf hom 11. Non verum corpus Christi sed mysterium corporis eius not his very body but the mysterie of his body as Chrysostome most expresly teacheth For conclusion of this section he poppeth without any diuision into a speech of the Church of Rome I made it a wonder that S. Paul writing to the Romans should say neuer a word of the prerogatiue of that Church or of the Pope M. Bishop for answere to this saith that he speaketh of the Church of Rome being but then in her cradle most honourably And how forsooth he saith to them i Rom. 1. 8. Your faith is renowmed in the whole world and againe k Rom. 16. 19. Your obedience is published into euery place In which places wee see a great testimony and commendation of their faith that then was but yet we see no priuiledge or prerogatiue of that Church What he said of the Râmans the same he said of the Thessalonians l 1. Thess 1. 8. Your faith which is towards God is spred abroade in all places and what hath the Church of Rome to challenge therâ by more then the Church of Thessalonica Wee see M. Bishop doth as his fellowes doe hee will needes bee saying something though that which he saith be as good as nothing He saw well enough that he had said nothing but marke how therevpon he bewrayeth his owne shame No maruaile saith he to the wise 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 O wisedome and what hindered that hee spake nothing of S. Peters supremacy in that Church Marry because as yet he was scarsly well setled there neither did that appertaine to the matter hee treated of Iust the naile on the head In all his booke he hath not vttered a truer speech the supremacy of S. Peter did not indeed appertaine to the matter the Apostle treated of I shewed before out of Theodoret that the Epistle to the Romans containeth all kinde of Christian doctrine The supremacy of S. Peter appertained not thereto and therefore the Apostle hath said nothing of it in that Epistle But if it had beene a part of Christian doctrine had it not beene as pertinent to the matter he treated of to write somewhat of it as it was to write m Rom. 16. 3. 5. c. so many salutations to so many priuate and particular men Was it appertaining to the matter he treated of to coÌmend to the church of Rome n Ibid. Vers 1. Phoebe a seruant of the Church of Cenchrea and did it not appertaine thereto to commend vnto them Saint Peter the supreme Pastor and Bishop of the whole Church And what though hee were not as yet well setled there would not S. Paul therefore put to his helping hand that he might be setled He saith for Phoebe o Vers 2. that yee receiue her in the Lord as it becommeth Saints and that yee assist her in whatsoeuer businesse shee hath neede of your aide and would he not request them as much for the receiuing of S. Peter to his place and assisting him therein And what though the supremacy belonged not to the Church or people of Rome but to Saint Peter did it not yet concerne the Church and people of Rome to know the supremacy of S. Peter And though the supremacy belonged to S. Peter did there no prerogatiue thereby grow to the Church of Rome Pope Benedict saith that p Extrauag comm l. r. tit 3. Sancta Romana Mater vniuersorum Christi fidelium Magistra the Roman Church is the Mother and Mistresse of all that beleeue Pope Nicholas the third saith of Peter and Paul q Sext. de clect c. Fundamento lsti sunt qui Romanam Ecclesiam in haÌc gloriam prouexerunt vt sit gens sancta populus electus câuitas Sacerdotalis Râgia per sacraÌ bâalt Petri sedâ caput totius orbis effecta These are they who haue aduanced the Roman Church to this glory to be a holy nation an elect people a Priestly and Kingly City being by the holy sâate of S. Peter made the head of the whole world and what should the Apostle then meane if this be true to say nothing of all this glory M. Bishop himselfe hath told vs before that r Chapt. 1. §. 2 the church of Rome is the Rocke vpon which the whole Church is built and against which the gates of hell shall neuer preuaile that all Churches ought to agree with the Church of Rome for her more potent principality that falshood in matters of faith can haue no accesse vnto the See of Rome Could all these things be so and yet the Apostle writing to them to say nothing hereof Surely M. Bishops dunghill reasons giue me leaue gentle Reader so to call them as they be are very vnsufficient to satisfie any wise man but that the Apostle in that large Epistle would certainly haue said somewhat of the dignity of the Roman Church and the Supremacy of St. Peter and the Bishops there if it had beene so Å¿ Bellarm. Epist ad Blacwel Archipresbyt Vnum ex prâcipuis fidei nostrae capitibus religionis Catholicae fundamentis chiefe a point of Catholike religion as they would now haue it taken to be W. BISHOP §. 7. OF Pardons S. Paul teacheth in formall tearmes which both the Church of Corinth and hee himselfe gaue vnto the incestuous Corinthian that then repented these be his words And whom you haue pardoned any 2. Cor. 2. vers 10. 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 Which 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 principall Pastours of Christs Church haue the same power and authority R. ABBOT MAy wee not thinke it strange that M. Bishop should thus dare in the sight of God and the world to abuse the holy word of God He knoweth well that in the Scriptures there is nothing to giue any signification of the Popes Pardons It is an abhomination brought into the Church of latter time a thing vnknowen to the ancient Fathers and neuer heard of for a thousand yeares or more after the time of Christ Syluester Prierias one of the Popes great champions confesseth with a
those decrees were written when they were first made Did you not reade that Iames so propounded p Acts 15. 19. 20. My sentence is that we write vnto them c. Did you not finde that it was executed afterwards accordingly q Vers 23. They wrote letters after this manner c. and namely to the brethren that were in Syria and Cilicia of whom you speake But all is one any thing will serue the turne to tell them that will neuer search whether you lie or not With as much discretion and fidelity doth he alleage the other places which follow Paul chargeth his Disciple Timothy r 1. Tim. 6. 20. to keepe the depositum that is saith he the whole Christian doctrine deliuered vnto him by word of mouth as the best Authours take it But who are those best Authours that so take it Forsooth Doctor Allen and the rest of his Rhemish Masters for other hee can name none wee should certainly haue heard of them if he could Againe Paul saith to Timothy Å¿ 2. Tim. 2. 2. Commend to faithfull men the things which thou hast heard of mee by many witnesses Was not this saith he to preach such doctrine as hee had receiued by Apostolike Tradition without writing No M. Bishop there is no necessity to take it so He receiued the doctrine of the Gospell by the preaching of the Apostle but it doth not follow that therefore he receiued it not in writing yea the Apostle euen there telleth him as I haue before alleaged t 2. Tim. 3. 15. The Scriptures are able to make thee wise vnto sâluation through the faith which is in Christ Iesus To answere him in a word as touching that depositum and the things which Timothy had heard of Paul hee himselfe will not doubt but that those things which are written doe appertaine thereto The wordes then hauing a necessary construction of those things that are written how will he make it appeare to vs that they haue further reference also to some things that are not written They must perforce grant that a great part of those things is written and how doe they proue that not the whole The same doe I answere him and haue answered him before concerning the wordes which he citeth to the Thessalonians u 2. Thess 2. 15. Hold the Traditions the things deliuered vnto you which you haue learned whether by word or by our Epistle He calleth Traditions those things which hee had written to them in that Epistle Hee had not set downe in that Epistle all the doctrine of the Gospell which is contained in other Scriptures which all notwithstanding hee had by word preached vnto them Hee willeth them therefore to hold fast both the things which hee had written to them in his Epistle and all the things which hee had preached vnto them which are written otherwhere this we are sure of but how may we bee sure that hee meant to commend to them the holding fast of those doctrines which are neither written in that Epistle nor otherwhere Surely if the wordes may haue a sufficient meaning being vnderstood of those things which are written though not in that Epistle yet in other either Gospels or Epistles then vainely are they alleaged as a necessary proofe for receiuing of doctrines which are not written any where And therefore whereas M. Bishop inferreth You see that some Traditions went by word of mouth from hand to hand aswell as some others were written he sheweth that he himselfe seeth not what he saith because the place proueth only that the Apostle wrote not all in the Epistle whereof hee speaketh but that all otherwise is not written it proueth not and that all is written that is necessary to eternall life I haue before sufficiently proued out of the very doctrine it selfe of the ancient Roman Church Now therefore it is neither ignorance nor insolency nor impudency in me to say that the Apostle saith nothing for Popish Traditions but it is M. Bishops trechery to bring texts to that purpose to deceiue thereby simple men when as they haue plaine and cleare construction otherwise W. BISHOP §. 9. I Could were it not to auoide tediousnesse adde the like confirmation of most controuersies out of the same blessed Apostle as that the Church is the pillar and 1. Tim. 3. ver 15. ground of truth wherefore any man may most assuredly repose his faith vpon her declaration That Christ gaue Pastors and Doctors to the edifying of that his mysticall Ephes 4. vers 11. 13. body vntill we meete all in the vnity of faith c. Therefore the Church shall not faile in faith vntill the day of iudgement nor be inuisible that hath visible Pastors and Teachers Also that Priests are chosen from Hebr. 5. vers 1. among men and appointed for men in those things that appertaine to God that they may offer gifts and sacrifices for sinne That Preachers and Priests are 1. Cor. 3. vers 9. Gods coadiutors and helpers and not only idle instruments That S. Paul and Timothy did saue other 1. Cor. 9. ver 23. men and therefore no blasphemie to pray to Saints to helpe and saue vs. That S. Paul did accomplish those 1. Tim. 4. v. 16. things that want to the passions of Christ in his flesh for Christs body which is the Church therefore Christs passion doth not take away our owne satisfaction That he gloried in preaching the Gospel of free cost * Coloss 1. v. 24. which was a worke of supererogation That a Ephes 5 v. 32. Marriage 1. Cor. 9. ver 16. is a great Sacrament That b 1. Tim. 4. v. 23. grace was giuen to Timothy by the imposition of the hands of Priest-hood whence it followeth that Matrimony and holy Orders bee true and perfect Sacraments But what doe I I should be too long if I would prosecute all that which the Apostle hath left in writing in fauour and defence of the Roman faith This I doubt not will suffice to confront his shamelesse impudency that blusheth not to affirme there was not a word in S. Paul that sounded for the Catholike but all in shew at least for the Protestant As for S. Peter I will wholly omit him because the Protestants haue small confidence in him Here I may be bold I hope to turne vpon M. Abbot this dilemma and forked argument which S. Augustine framed against the Manâchean Adimantus Hoâ si Lib 1. cont Adimant imprudens fecit nihil caecius si autem sciens nihil sceleratius If M. Abbot did ignorantly affirme Saint Paul to haue said nothing for the Roman Catholikes what could be more blinde then not to be able to discerne any thing in such cleare light if he said it wittingly knowing the contrary then did he it most wickedly so to lie against his owne conscience to draw after him selfe other men into errour and perdition R. ABBOT MArke here I pray
amputatis quae superflua leuia falsa blasphema ridicula phantastica videbantur false blasphemous ridiculous n Pius 5. Offic. Beat. Mar. in Princip Huiusmodi ferè omnia officia vanis superstitionum erroribus reserta erroneous superstitious were brought into the seruice of the Church and o Liâdan apud Espenc vt supra Preces secretae mendis turpissimis conspurcatae the prayers thereof were filthily corrupted or when p Cor. Agripp de vanit scient cap. 17. Hodie tanta in Ecclesijs Musicae licentia est vt âââam vnà cum Missae ipsius Canone obscoenae quaeque cantiunculae interim in organis parâs vices habeant filthy songs had equall place or course with the Canon of the Masse And what will not M. Bishop say as all his fellowes doe that the Pastors and Doctors of all the Easterne parts haue gone astray will hee not acknowledge that all those Churches haue failed in faith What is become of the Church of Ephesus to which the Apostle wrote these words now in question What of the Church of Corinth of Colosse of Thessalonica and the rest If this the truth of the Apostles wordes reserued might befall to them what saith he for other Churches more then he doth for them If M. Bishop will say that the wordes haue some speciall reference to the Pastors and Doctors of the Church of Rome we hold him a most ridiculous man that taketh vpon him to see that which amongst so many ancient interpreters of the place neuer any man saw before him Once againe I say that Christ hath giuen Pastors and Doctors to his Church as of old q Ezech. 3. 17. 33. 7. he gaue watchmen to the house of Israel Hee hath prescribed them their office and duty and appointed the worke that they shall doe When they performe their duty faithfully and carefully they are the saluation of the people and bring many vnto glory But if they neglect their duty and leaue the worke of God vndone the people perish vnder them and they become guilty of their destruction And thus it befalleth often in the publike state of the Church euen to the ruine thereof that theeues and robbers thrust themselues or creepe by stealth into the places of Pastors who sometimes cannot sometimes will not teach and sometimes teach errour and lies in steede of truth whilest they measure their teaching by r Tit. 1. 11. filthy lucre and by Å¿ Rom. 16. 18. Thil. 3. 19. seruing their bellies in steede of seruing Iesus Christ The Apostle doth not say they cannot erre hee doth not say that the Church vnder them cannot faile in faith Only God amidst all ruines and desolations prouideth for his Elect and in the want and default of ordinary Pastors raiseth vp other spirits and vseth other meanes for the effecting of his good purpose concerning them so guiding them not as that they neuer erre in faith they erre often greeuously and are misled with the customes and superstitions of their times but so as that they neuer erre finally as touching any truth the knowledge and faith whereof hee hath made necessary to eternall life Now whereas M. Bishop concludeth out of the same place that the Church shall neuer be inuisible as which hath alwaies visible Pastors and Teachers hee therein sheweth his absurd loosenesse and carelesnesse of arguing because though the Apostle affirme Pastors and Teachers in the Church yet he doth not so much as intimate any way that they are alwaies visible What is there in the Apostles wordes whence hee should in any sort gather that there is a perpetuall visible state and succession of Pastors and Teachers Be it that there is a perpetuity of succession to be gathered from hence yet it doth not follow that there is a perpetuall visibility thereof It is enough here thus to reiect him as an idle Sophister and indeede not worthy of so much as the name of a Sophister that will bring a conclusion there where he hath no slâew of footing for it otherwise of the visibility or inuisibility of the Church I haue spoken sufficiently t Part. 3. Answere to Doct. Bishops Preface sect 17. and CoÌfutat of his Answere to M. Perkins Aduertisement sect 6. otherwhere and it were too long to dispute here His next matter is a bare recitall of a text without any collection made therefrom imagining in his blinde vnderstanding that it is a plaine assertion of that that hee would proue by it Hee maketh St. Paul to say that Priests are chosen from among men and appointed for men in those things that appertaine to God that they may offer gifts and sacrifices for sinne Where it is first to bee noted how to serue his owne turne he falsifieth the Apostles text and readeth Priests are chosen from amongst men for that the Apostle saith Euery high Priest is chosen from amongst men By saying Priests hoe would extend the wordes as to be vnderstood of their Popish Priest-hood in the Gospell whereas the Apostle by naming a high Priest appropriateth his wordes to Aarons Priest-hood in the law For euen in the Popish Priest-hood there is no high Priest the power of sacrificing being indifferently common to them all and no more belonging to Popes and Bishops then to the meanest hedge-Priest or Curate in the world Seeing then the Apostle speaketh of a Priest-hood which admitteth a high Priest which the Popish Priest-hood doth not certaine it is that the wordes can haue no reference to Popish Priest-hood Therefore the Fathers vniuersally apply this text as the drift of the holy Ghost most plainly leadeth them to the Leuiticall Priest-hood only neither did they euer dreame of any Euangelicall Priest-hood intended herein Ambrose declareth the purpose of the Apostle to be this u Ambros in Heb. 5. Vt consueto SacerdotuÌ more qui in lege fuit ad altius id est Christi sacerdotium eos perdâceret qui adhuc infirmi fueruÌt propterea modum carnalis Pontificis introducit that by the accustomed manner of the Priests in the law he might bring them being weake to the higher or more excellent Priest-hood of Christ therefore saith hee doth hee bring in or set downe the manner or condition of the carnall high Priest Theodoret saith x Theodoret. ibid. DoceÌs quòd etiam in lege non Angelus vt pro hominibus sacerdotio fungatur electus est sed homo pro hominibus c. Haec dixit Apostolus non nobis Pontifiâatus regulas volens ostendere sed ad dicendum de Pontificatu Domini viam muniens He teacheth that euen in the law there was not an Angell chosen to execute the office of Priest-hood for men but a man was chosen for men and The Apostle saith he speaketh these things not to set downe rules of the high Priest-hood but to make way to the Priest-hood of Christ Wee see they both take the wordes as spoken of the Priests in the law
Gospell to the Corinthians of free cost though he omitted therein a liberty which God by speciall prouision and ordinance hath yeelded in that case yet the occasion waighed where he did it he did no more then in generality of duty God requireth and commandeth who will haue his fauours so to be a commodity vnto vs as that they be no wrong to him and our liberty so to be vrged and vsed as may stand with charity that it bee not a snare to our brethren or a wound to them whom wee should seeke to heale M. Bishop therefore is yet to seeke for his workes of supererogation St. Paul will yeeld him no helpe for them and a simple man would I hold him for alleaging this text for the proofe thereof but that I know he is tyed to goe that way that other Roman Hackneis haue gone before him Next and for conclusion he commeth to the Sacraments and although he cannot bring colour for their whole fiue superadded Sacraments yet he sheweth his good will by alleaging somewhat for two of them but still hath ill happe and commeth too short of the marke that he aymeth at For marriage he alleageth the wordes of St. Paul as commonly they doe y Ephes 5. 32. This is a great Sacrament Sacrament say they out of their vulgar Latin whereas considering the vse of the word Sacrament that now is they should rather say mysterie or secret as we doe Albeit if the very word Sacrament in their vulgar translation be sufficient to proue a Sacrament in that sense wherein the number of Sacraments is questioned betwixt vs and them they may tell vs of a greater number then now they doe and adde z Ephes 1. 9. the Sacrament of the will of God a Ephes â 9. the Sacrament hidden from the ages past b 1. Tim. 3. 16 the Sacrament of Godlinesse c Apoc. 1. 20. the Sacrament of seuen Starres d Apoc. 17. 7. the Sacrament of the woman sitting vpon the Beast and sundry other of which their interpreter vseth the word Sacrament as well as hee doth concerning Marriage But the Masters of Rhemes acquit themselues in this behalfe affirming that e Rhem. Testam Annot. Ephes 5. 32. they doe not gather this only of the word Mysterie in Greeke or Sacrament in Latin both which they say they know haue a more generall signification and that in the Scriptures also which being so how idlely doth M. Bishop deale only to bring vs the very word for proofe that Matrimony is one of the Sacraments properly so called of the grace of Christ But the greater is his fault and the fault of his fellowes also in drawing this text to that purpose inasmuch as the Apostle expresly declareth that the mysterie or secret which he intendeth is concerning Christ and his Church This is a great mysterie but I speake concerning Christ and his Church that is saith Hierome in his lesser Commentary f Hieron in Ephes 5. Ego hoc inquit in Christo intelligendum dico in Ecclesia I say that this is to be vnderstood in Christ and in the Church And thus Leo Bishop of Rome wholly vnderstandeth it saying g Leo Epist 22. Quicunque in Christo non confitetur corpus humanum nouerit se mysterio incarnationis indignum nec eius Sacramenti habere consortium quod Apostolus praedicat dicens Quia membra sumus corporis eius c. Et exponeâs quid per hoc significaretur adiecit Sacramentum hoc magnum est ego autem dico in Christo in Ecclesia Whosoeuer confesseth not in Christ an humane body let him know himselfe vnworthy of the mysterie of the incarnation and that he hath no participation or fellowship of that Sacrament whereof the Apostle speaketh saying for we are members of his body of his flesh and of his bones for this shall a man leaue Father and Mother and shall cleaue to his wife and they two shall be one flesh and expounding what was signified hereby he addeth This is a great Sacrament but I speake of Christ and of the Church He vseth the word Sacrament as the Latin Fathers commonly doe as it extendeth to all things that are mysticall and spirituall but as touching the place is so farre from conceiuing Marriage here intended to be made a Sacrament as that he referreth the Sacrament or secret here spoken of altogether to the mystââie of the incarnation and the spirituall coniunction and vnion betwixt Christ and his Church To the very same effect speaketh St. Austin and much more to the purpose because he toucheth the very point in hand h August in Ioan. Tract 9. Illud vnum quatum mysterium de Christo continet quod praedicat Apostolus dicens Et erunt duo in carne vna Sacramentum hoc magnum est Et nequis istam magnitudinem Sacramenti in singulis quibusque hominibus vxores habentibus intelligeret Ego aâtem dico in Christo c. Quod est hoc Sacramentum magnum Erunt duo in carne vna Cum de Adam Bua Scriptura Geneseos loqueretur vnde ventum est ad haec verba Propterea ââlinquet homo patrem c. That one thing which the Apostle mentioneth saying They two shall âe one flesh this is a great Sacrament how great a mysterie doth it containe concerning Christ And that no man should vnderstand this greatnesse of Sacrament in all men that haue wiues he saith But I speake of Christ and of the Church What is this great Sacrament saith he They two shall be one flesh Marry when the Scripture of Genesis spake that whence it proceedeth to those wordes for this cause shall a man leaue Father and Mother c. In which wordes wee see that St. Austine is so farre from M. Bishops Popish construction and application of this Text as that hee plainely denyeth the matter of Sacrament here spoken of to appertaine to the common Marriage of Men and Women and referreth the same wholly vnto Christ and his Church figured and resembled in our first Parents Adam and Eue and that in some things proper to them only Hereto belongeth that which hee saith i Ibid. Paulò pòst Dormit Adam vt fiat Eua moritur Christus vt fiat Ecclesia Dormienti Adâ fit Eua de latere mortuo Christo lancea percutitur latus vt proâluant SacrameÌta quibus formetur Ecclesia Adam sleepeth that Eue may be made and that the Church may bee made Christ dyeth Whilest Adam sleepeth Eue is made for him out of his side and the side of Christ being now dead is striken through with a speare that the Sacraments may issue forth by which the Church is framed Whereof Leo also addeth in the place before cited k Leo vt supr Quae de Sponsi âarne prodijt quando ex latere crucifixi manaÌte sanguine aqua Sacramentum redemptionis regenerationis accepit The Church came out
sensibly apprehended as appeareth by that that is said of Simon Magus that c Acts 8. 18. he saw that through laying on the Apostles hands the holy Ghost was giuen and is otherwise also plainly to be perceiued Very absurdly therefore doth M. Bishop apply this place to their Sacrament of Orders where it is manifest that no such grace is giuen yea and to proue it to be a Sacrament because here is mention of grace giuen whereas the grace of Sacraments is no temporary gift but that inuisible eternall grace of remission of sinnes and sanctification of the holy Ghost whereby the inner man is renewed from day to day and the soule prepared and furnished vnto eternall life And thus we are come to an end of his proofes of their religion out of St. Pauls Epistles He telleth vs that he should be too long if he would prosecute all but be thou assured gentle Reader that he hath made here as good choise of his proofes as his wit would serue him and thou seest what they are and maiest by these esteeme what all the rest would be impertinent idle detorted wrested strained carrying no shew no colour when they are looked into of any such matter as he pretendeth Albeit thou art also to remember that all this while he hath sitten beside the cushion the thing propounded being that of Theodoret that the Epistle to the Romans containeth in it all kind of doctrine whence I inferred that sith the doctrine of Popery teacheth so many things whereof there is nothing to be found in the Epistle to the Romans it cannot be that doctrine which was at first deliuered to the Church of Rome To this he should haue directly answered and haue shewed vs that their Popery is to bee proued by the Epistle to the Romans But from this he stealeth away and to dawbe vp this breach as well as he can he maketh a scambling shift out of the rest of the Epistles and catcheth here and there a sentence as much to the purpose as if he had said nothing But the trimmest iest of all is his answer to that which I vrged as touching St. Peter whom they haue made the founder and head of their Church that it is strange that he should forget the triple crowne that he should say nothing for Popery no not a word that nothing hindereth in either of his Epistles but that he must be taken for a Protestant What doth M. Bishop say to this Marke it well gentle Reader for it is a learned answere and such as may giue thee great satisfaction in the cause As for St. Peter saith hee I will wholly omit him because the Protestants haue no confidence in him Where I may very well vse the words of St. Austine as touching the like dealing of Petilian the Donatist d Aug. contlit Petil. lib. 3. cap. 57. Videatis quà m inuictè positum sit contra quod ille nihil tutius inuenire potuit quâm silentium Marke how inuincibly this is set downe against which he could finde no way more safe then to say nothing What St. Peter to be theirs so nearely so entirely and yet to say nothing for them to be wholly the same that the Papists now are and yet writing two Epistles to write nothing tending thereto to say nothing at all but what we say Looke vpon the Epistles which they attribute to the Bishops of Rome that succeeded and what a worke is there in them concerning the exaltation of St. Peter concerning the dignity and authority of the Church of Rome by him ouer all other Churches and what is it not strange that St. Peter himselfe if hee had beene of the same spirit should say nothing thereof nothing of all the religion which is now proper to the Church of Rome nothing but what wholly standeth with the Protestants religion Will M. Bishop thus ridiculously babble that the Protestants haue no confidence in St. Peter when as he can alleage nothing that St. Peter saith against them or can we be perswaded that the Papists haue any confidence in him when as they can tell vs nothing that he hath said for them M. Bishop you obiect to me in this matter shamelesse impudency but I wish the Reader to consider by this answere of yours to whom the title of shamelesse impudency doth most iustly belong As for your forked argument I doubt not but you your selfe see and know that I am out of the danger of it but I feare that the one graine of it hath already giuen you a deadly wound I am afraide that it will be found that you haue wittingly and wilfully rebelled against God I feare there is a sting in your conscience pricking and vexing you day and night which howsoeuer you for the present violently oppresse yet you are not able to pull out Take heede and beware in time if you doe not glorifie God by your conuersion and confession of his truth God will certainly glorifie himselfe in your destruction FINIS Errata PAge 18. line 24. so reade to p. 19. l. 11. for all r. for all ibid. l. 33. you r. your p. 27. l. 11. accordeth r. accorded p. 28. l. 2. in marg scrip sit r. scripsit p. 66. l. 19. in marg Part. 1. r. Chapt. 1. p. 144. l. 2. Achan only r Achan only p. 179. l. 10. in marg cedite r. incedite p. 214. l. 33. these Kings to whom haue they r. these Kings to whom they haue p. 245. l. 34. in marg creatum quae r. creatum secundum piam fidem quae p. 291. l. 21. they they r. then they p. 334. l. 19. widomes r. widowes p. 363. l. 21. a matter r. matters
you know not what to say because you see it sorteth absurdly whatsoeuer you say Well let vs omit this because M. Bishop is willing so the vpshot of his answere is that it is a fiule fault in arguing when one thing is said to be another by a metaphore to attribute all the properties of the metaphore to the other thing And this he handleth very grauely by example of Christs being called a Lyon whence notwithstanding hee saith it is not to bee argued that hee hath foure legges and therefore that M. Abbot must bee an vnreasonable creature who shifteth from that propriety of the metaphore Head which was to purpose vnto others that are cleane besides the purpose Now here a simple man who commonly admireth that most which hee vnderstandeth least imagineth that M. Bishop hath shewed himselfe a learned man and hath told a worthy tale when as that which hee hath said is as much to the matter as if hee had told vs in great sadnesse that a bird bolt hath no braines Vndoubtedly hee dreamed very strongly that I had said that the Church of Rome because it is the head must haue a nose in the middle of the face or because it is old must haue wrinckles in the browes or must haue long eares because it is become an Asses head If not who can take him for any other but a foure-legged creature that thus impertinently commeth in with a tale of foure legges What property of a head doe I speake of that he should say that I shift from that propriety which was to the purpose to others that are beside the purpose My wordes are these To speake by their rule the Roman Church is the head and all other Churches are membârs vnto it I name no property of a head at all let it bee what it will or what they will haue it it shall bee all one to mee for in whatsoeuer respect they will make the Church of Rome the head of all Churches in the same respect they must make all other Churches the members and body to this head Let it bee that property of a head which he mentioneth and which I intended as meant by them that all other Churches are to bee directed and gouerned by the authority of the Church of Rome as the members of the body by the head accordingly my argument shall proceede that the Church of Rome by their learning is the head of all other Churches and all other Churches are as the members and body to this head but the Catholike Church comprehendeth all euen the whole both head and body To say then that the Roman Church is the Catholike Church is all one as if a man should say that the head is the whole body Who can speake hereof more clearely then I haue done and who can answere more absurdly then hee hath done And albeit hee haue thus egregiously played the foole and hath bewraied plainly that hee was here put to his trumps and knew not what to say yet to flourish and face the matter hee admirably vaunteth and insulteth vpon my insufficiency in ârguing and telleth mee of being hissed oât of the Schooles and making my selfe a mocking-stocke and that my writings are more meete to stoppe mustard-pots then likely to stoppe any meane Schollers mouth You say well M. Bishop You shall doe well to stoppe your mustard-pot with some part thereof that your mustard may bee kept quicke and strong to cleare your head for if it bee alwayes as dull as you haue shewed it here it may very well bee said that such a head hath but a little wit As for your mouth it may bee it will not bee stopped because you are sicke of Pisoes disease b Hieron ad Ocean Pisoniano vilio cum lâqui nesciret tacâre non potuit Who though hee knew not what to say yet could not hold his peace A man may well thinke that your mouth is not easily stopped who rather then you would say nothing would tell such a wise tale as you haue here done CHAP. II. The comparison betwixt the Donatists and the Papists is iustified and enlarged ANSWERE TO THE EPISTLE IT is therefore a meere Vsurpation whereby the Papists call the Roman Church the Catholike c. to There was reason why Austin should c. W. BISHOPS REPROOFE Pag. 95. §. 1. 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 which were 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 full of falshood and childish follies that any other man I weene would 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 bee at Rome in Italie 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 all the world ouer they that it was wholly included within the straight bounds of Cartenna in Mauritania and her confines so that whosoeuer was conuerted in any other Countrey must goe thither Epistola 48. to bee purged from their sinnes as S. Augustine testifieth in expresse termes in the very place by M. Abbot allâaged False also in the principall point that the Donatists held the Catholike Church to bee at Cartenââ for there dwelt only the Rogatists who were as Saint Augustine there speaketh Breââssimum frustum dâ frusto maiore A most small gobbet or fragment broken out of a greater peece that is to say a few Schismaticall 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 maintayned it not to bee there at all but held that congregation of Cartenna to bee wholly Schismaticall and no true member of the Catholike Church This first part then of the comparison is most vgly and monstrously false R. ABBOT IN this comparison betwixt the Donatists and the Papists I must confesse that I committed some little ouer-sight by vnderstanding that generally of the Donatists which belonged only to a part of them and thereby affirming that wholly of Cartenna in Mauritania which is to be referred to that which properly and particularly is called Africa I obserued the errour my selfe long since and meant in another edition if any should be to correct it and in the meane time to haue noted it in the Preface of my third part But now since it falleth out to be first noted by M. Bishop
did they did discouer them though not so distinctly they saw them though it were as it were c Hebr. 11. 13. a farre off Euen as we see those things that are taught vs concerning the end of the world the resurrection of the dead the day of iudgement and the life to come which yet distinctly we doe not see so did they see those things which since by the effecting of them in Christ are become distinct and plaine to vs. Therefore St. Austin saith d August de nat grat c. 44. Ea sides iustos sanauit antiquos quae sanat nos id est mediatoris Dei âemiâum hominis Jesâ Christi fides sanguinis eius sides crucis eius sides mortis resurrectionis ãâã The same faith saued the iust of old that saueth vs the faith of the Mediator betwixt God and Man euen the man Iesus Christ the faith of his bloud the faith of his crosse the faith of his death and resurrection hereby signifying that they beleeued all these points of faith as well as we though being things to come they were not as yet so cleare and manifest vnto them As for the Scriptures which he alleageth because they make nothing against this therefore they make nothing against vs. He bringeth the Apostle saying that e Ephes 3. 5. the mysterie of Christ in other generations was not knowen vnto the sonnes of men as now it is reueiled vnto his holy Apostles and Prophets Be it so it was knowen then but it was not so knowen as it was reueiled and made knowen to his Apostles Let him take this from Thomas Aquinas so expounding the words f Tho. Aquin. in Ephes cap. 3. lect 1. ââet mysteria Christi Prophetis Patriarchis fuerint reuelata non tamen it a clarè sicut Apostolis Nam Prophetis Apostolis fuerunt reuelata in quadam generalitate sed Apostolis manifestata sunt quantum ad singulares determinatas circumstantias Though the mysteries of Christ were reueiled to the Patriarchs and Prophets yet not so clearly as to the Apostles for to the Prophets and Patriarchs they were reueiled in a kinde of generality but tot he Apostles they were manifested as touching particular and definite circumstances And hereby the answere is ready to the words of our Sauiour Christ g Mat. 13. 17. Many Prophets and iust men haue desired to see the things which yee see and haue not seene them and to heare those things which yee heare and haue not heard them For h Aug. cont lit Petil. l. 2. c. 37. Omnes superiorum temporum iusti Prophetae cupicbant videre coplâtum quod reuelante spiritu futurum esse cernebant vnde ipse Dominus ait Quoniam multi iusti c. they desired clearly and perfectly to see those things which they beleeued and with their eyes to behold the promised Sauiour in whom all their hope and ioy was fixed and to heare the gracious words that should issue from his mouth which notwithstanding they obtayned not i Iohn 8. 56. Your father Abraham saith our Sauiour elsewhere desired to see my day and he saw it and reioyced He saw it and yet still desired to see it because as yet he saw it not as he did desire to see He desired to see with his eies Christ come in the flesh but so he saw him not yet by faith he so foresaw his comming as that it was great ioy and gladnesse to him Three other Texts he quoteth not to proue his purpose but only to let vs see that he is able for a neede to cite the Scripture Two of those he appropriateth to the Apostles which appertaine to all the faithfull To shew that the Apostles were taught by Christs owne mouth he alleageth the wordes of Christ citing a sentence of Esay the Prophet k Iohn 6. 45. It is written in the Prophets And they shall be all taught of God whereas it is plaine that the words are spoken not of being outwardly taught by the mouth of Christ but of being inwardly taught by l Mat. 16. 17. the reuelation of the Father nor contayne any thing peculiar to the Apostles but common to all the Elect as both by the course of Christs speech appeareth and by the words themselues as they are set downe by the Prophet m Esa 54. 13. All thy children shall be taught of the Lord. So to the Apostles also he referreth the words of St. Paul of n Rom. 8. 23. hauing receiued the first fruits of the spirit whereas to be partaker of the first fruits of the spirit is the condition of euery regenerate man in which manner St. Austin generally applyeth it o August de Peccat Merit Remiss l. 2. c. 7. Nunc ei similes esse iam coepâmus primitias habentes spiritus Wee haue now begunne to bee like him by hauing the first fruits of the spirit and not only in the new but in the old Testament also because of vs both the Apostle witnesseth as we haue heard before that p 2. Cor. 4. 13. * John 15. 15. we haue the same spirit of faith In the third place Christ saith to his Apostles â I haue called you friends for all things that I haue heard of my Father haue I made knowen to you But what will M. Bishop conclude hereof Will he argue that because Christ taught his Apostles all points of faith more plainly and clearely therefore the ancient Patriarchs knew not all points of faith Nay we will argue to the contrary that sith Christ maketh knowen to his friends all his fathers secrets as M. Bishop speaketh therefore God made knowen all those secrets to Abraham because Abraham was q Esa 41. 8. Iames 2. 23. called the friend of God and such a friend as that he saith of him r Genes 18 17. Shall I hide from Abraham the thing that I will doe And seeing Abraham is called Å¿ Rom. 4 11. 12. the Father of all that beleeue as in the steps of whose faith we are to walke how can we doubt but that God reueiled vnto him all that faith which concerneth vs vnto eternall life In a word St. Austin saith againe of all those fathers and of vs t Aug. cont 2. Epist Pelag. l. 3. c. 4. Eadem sides in illis qui nondum nomine sed reipsa fucrunt Christiani in illis qui non solum sunt sed ââcantur in vtrisque eadem gratia per Sp. Sanâum There is the same faith both in them who before-time not yet in name but indeede were Christians and in them who not only are but also are called so and in both the same grace by the holy Ghost From which words it may be obserued what will become of those two absurdities which M. Bishop hath taken vpon him to obserue in me For first if those old Fathers were indeede Christians and therefore members of
the Catholike Church as well as we what tergiuersation doe I vse or how doe I leape backe from the point in question when by affirming our communion with them I affirme consequently our communion with the Catholike Church Forsooth the Church was not then Catholike Bee it so but it was then the same Church which was afterward to become Catholike a part of the Catholike Church and in com ãâ¦ã nicating with a part of the Catholike Church we communicate with the whole because of the whole there is but one and the same saith Secondly if they were Christians by the same faith whereby we are so what absurdity do I commit in saying that they beleeued all the articles of faith that we beleeue so clearly I doe not say because they beleeued them not in those particular circumstances which by the story of the Gospell are knowen to vs but yet all the same and as clearly as wee beleeue those points of faith which are of those things that are yet to come And if they did so what hindereth but that we rightly conclude that those branches of the Roman faith which were not then sprung vp are only Romish additions and not any parts of the true Catholike faith Against this M. Bishop excepteth But good Sir did they beleeue that all their children were to be baptized and that all persons of riper yeares among them were to receiue the holy Sacrament of Christs body I haue answered him before that as touching outward signes and Sacraments there is difference betwixt them and vs and I now answere him further that as touching the power and effect of Sacraments they were in their Sacraments spiritually baptized as well as we and spiritually partakers of Christs body and bloud as well as we For u Leo in Natiu Christi ser 3. Verbi incaânatio haec contulit facienda quae facta c. Hoc magna pietatis Sacramentum quo totus iam mundus impletus est tam potens etiam in suis significationibus fuit vt non minùs adepti sine qui in illud credidere promissum quà m qui suscepere donatum the incarnation of Christ being yet to come saith Leo yeelded the same that it doth now being done and the great mysterie of godlinesse whereof now the whole world is full was so powerfull in the significations of it as that they attamed no lesse who beleeued therein being promised then they did who haue receiued it now giuen and performed And againe x IdeÌ de Pass Dom. ser 13. Sanguis vnius iusââ quem nobis pater donauitqui âum pro reconciliatione mundi credimus fusum hoc contulit patribus qui similitèr credidere fundââdum The bloud of one iust one which the father hath giuen vnto vs who beleeue the same to haue beene shed for the reconciliation of the world yeelded the same benefit to the Fathers who did beleeue that it should be shed Therefore we see that the Apostle as on the one side he saith of vs that we are y Col. 2. 11. circumcised because the effect of circumcision is with vs so saith of them also that they were z 1. Cor. 10. â baptised because the grace and effect of baptisme was with them And thus Gregory saith that a Greg. Mor. l 4. c. 3. Quod apud nos valet aqua baptâmatis hoc eâât apud veteres vel pro paruulis sola fides vel pro maioribus virtus sacrificij vel pro his qâi ex Abrahae stiâpe prodierant mysterium circumcisionis what the water of baptisme auaileth with vs the same with ãâã old Fathers did either faith only for infants or for them of elâââ yeares the power of Sacrifice or for them that came of the stocke of Abraham the Sacrament of circumcision And thus of their Sacraments whereto now answereth our Sacrament of the body and bloud of Christ the Apostle saith that therein b 1 Cor. 10. 4. they did eate the same spirituall meate and drinke the same spirituall drinke For their Sacraments and ours c August in Ioan. tract 26. Sacramenta illa fuârunt in signis diuersa sunt sed in re quae significatur pariâ sunt in signes are diuers faith St. Austin but in the thing signified they are both alike They that did eate Manna aright d Idem de vtil poââit cap. 1. Quicunque in Manna ChristuÌ intellexerunt âundem quem nos cibum spirituilem manducauerunt did vnderstand Christ therein and thereby did eate the same spirituall meate that we doe euen the flesh of Christ and they that did drinke of the Rocke aright did therein also drinke of Christ euen the bloud of Christ for the Rocke was Christ that is e IdeÌ de TeÌp sor 108. Petra illa typum habuit corporis Christi c. Quod vtique non ad dâuinâtatem ãâã sed ad caraâm relatum est quae siticntium corda populorum perenni riuâ sangâânis sui inundauit was the type or figure of the body of Christ saith Austin againe the same not being referred to his Deity but to the flesh which watered the hearts of the thirsty people by the euer-flowing riuer of his bloud f Idem de vtilit Poenit. cap. 1. Eundem ârgò cibum eundem pâtum sed intelligentibus credentibus Non intelligentibus autem illud solum Manna illa sola aqua ille cibus esurienti potus iste sitienti nec ille net iste credenti credenti autem âdem qui âââc There was saith he the same meat and the same drinke to them that had vnderstanding and faith but to them that vnderstood not the one was only Manna the other was only Water the one foode for the hungry the other drinke for the thirsty neither the one nor the other meate or drinke for the beleeuer but he that beleeued had the same that we haue now And if they had so if by Manna they did eate the body of Christ and by the Water of the Rocke they did drinke the bloud of Christ what hindereth then but that wee may say that though not by outward signe yet as touching inward grace and effect they were partakers of the Lords Supper Whereas he further asketh Can M. Abbot demonstrate that they had perfect faith of the Trinity beleeuing distinctly in three persons and one God I answere him that it may bee to him in âade of a demonstration that they did so because sundry Heathen Philosophers as g Cyril cont lulian lib. 1. Ex Hermete Orpâââ Porphyrio c. Vide Phil. Morn Plessi de verit Christ relig cap. 6. Cyril at large sheweth were not ignorant of this secret of the diuine nature who had no otherwise knowledge thereof but by some kinde of Tradition from the Fathers who had beene so instructed from God himselfe For can we thinke that it could be knowen to Philosophers and Pagans and that it was vnknowen to the Patriarchs
a Genes 14. 18. hee brought forth bread and wine and that as Ambrose and Hierome say out of the Hebrew writers b Ambros ad Hebr. cap. 7. Hieron ad Euagr Nec mirum si Melchâzedec victori Abraham obuiam processerit in reseââion em tam ipsius quam pugnatorum eius panesââmumque protulerit For the refreshing of him and his souldiers in which meaning c Ioseph Anâiq Iudaic. l. 1. â 11. Milites Iosephus namely Abrahami hospitalitèr habuit nihil âis ad victum decsse passus doth vnderstand it And if M. Bishop will needes haue it translated by the word of offering as his fellowes are wont greatly to wrangle to that intent yet Ambrose so also applyeth it that d Ambros de Sacram. l. 4. c. 3. Occurrit illi Melâlnsedec Sacârdos âbtulit ei paââe vinii he offered to Abraham bread and wine thereby excluding all necessity of construction of sacrifice to God But if yet we shall perforce take it of offering to God we conceiue of it according to that which Cyprian saith thatâ e Cyprian l. 2. Ep. 3. Domiâuâ noster Iesus Christus Sacrificium Dâo Patri obtulit obtulit hoc idâm quod Melchisedec obtulârat id est panem vinii suââ scilicet corpus sanguineÌ our Lord Iesus Christ offering a sacrifice to God the Father offered the very same that Melchisedec had offered that is bread and wine euen his owne body and bloud If the sacrifice of Christ and Melchisedecke be the very same and Melchisedecke also offered the body and bloud of Christ as these words import then cannot our sacrifice be a true and real sacrifice of Christs body and bloud because Melchisedecks was not so Christ as yet not hauing taken his body and bloud and therefore must both that and this be vnderstood to be only the mysterie and signification thereof And this interpretation of the sacrifice on both sides Hierome confirmeth when of our Sauiour Christs institution of the Sacrament he saith f Hieron in Mat. 26. Assumit panem ad verum Paschae traÌsgreditur Sacramentum vâ quomodo in praefiguratione eius Melchisedec suÌmi Dei Sacerdos panem vinii offerens fecerat ipse quoque veritatem sui corpâris sanguiniâ repraesentaret Christ taketh bread and goeth to the true Sacrament of the Passeouer that as Melchisedec the Priest of the high God in prefiguring of him offering bread and wine had done so he himselfe also might represent the truth of his body and bloud There is therefore both in the one and in the other not the very truth of the body and bloud of Christ but only a representation of the truth thereof euen as Chrysostome on the one side expresseth when he saith that g Chrys Op. imperfec hom 11 Haec vasa sactificata inquibus non âst verii coâpus Christi sed mysterium corporis eius continetur in the holy vessels is contained not the true body of Christ but the mysterie of his body And vnlesse it be thus it cannot stand which Ambrose concerning this offering of Melchisedec saith that h Ambros de Sacram. l. 4. c. 3. Intellige Sacramenta quâ accipis anteriâra esse quà m sint Moysi Sacramenta c. the Sacraments which we receiue are more ancient then the Sacraments of Moses for how can that be if our Sacraments be truly and really the body and bloud of Christ which Melchisedecks were not Againe where God by Malachy saith i Mat. 1. 11. In euery place incense shall be offered vnto me and a pure offering whose eyes are so sharpe as that in those words he can discerne the Popish sacrifice of the Masse We reade here of incense and a pure offering but this roome is too little for the building of so large a house their Masse cannot stand within the compasse of this ground And when we consider how the Fathers expound the same Tertullian one where generally of k Tertul. adu ludaeos Desacrisicijs spiritualibus addit dicens In omni loco sacrificia munda offerâtur spirituall sacrifices another where of l Idem cont Marc. l. 4. Sacrificium mundum scilicet simplex oratio de conscientia pura sincere prayer out of a pure censcience Hierome of m Hieron in Zacha. c 8. Sacrificium mundum nequaquam in victimis veteris Testamenti sed in sanctuate Euangelica puritatis the sanctity and holinesse of Euangelicall purity Eusebius of n Euseb de demonstrat Euang lib. 1. c 6. Sacrificium quod appellaturpurum facimus per puras actiones pure and godly doings Austin of o Aug. cont lit Petil. l. 2. c. 86. Viuum Sacrificium de quo dictum est Immola Deo sacrificium laudis the liuely sacrifices of praise and thanks-giuing Theodoret of p Theodoret. in Mal. c. 1. Debitum honorem praestabuÌt accomodatum cultum adhibebunt the due honour and conuenient worship of God exemplifying the same by the words of Christ q John 4. 23. The true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and truth and by the words of the Apostle r 1. Tim. 2. 8. Let men pray euery where lifting vp pure hands without wrath or doubting and Hierome by the words of the Psalme Å¿ Psal 141. 2. Let my prayer be set forth in thy sight as the incense and the lifting vp of my hands as an euening sacrifice these things I say considered may we not be thought to be out of our wits if we shall beleeue them that the place must needes be vnderstood of their monstrous sacrifice That Manna was a type of the body of Christ no Christian man doubteth but that it was a type of Christs body as really in the Sacrament no wise man beleeueth and the reason wherby t Answere to M. Perkins Aduertisement sect 56. See the Confutation elsewhere he goeth about to proue it is there declared to be vaine So haue I also u Of Traditions sect 21. formerly shewed that the example of the high Priest amongst the Iewes giueth no manner warrant to the supreme authority of one head ouer the whole Christian Church that the high Priest amongst the Iewes had no such supremacy as they claime to the Pope that reason teacheth such a supremacy to be the manifest and certaine danger of the Church and experience hath found it to be the very ruine and desolation thereof As for their according with the Iewish ceremonies in consecrating of Priests and hallowing of Churches and Altars and Vestments c. it is a slender proofe for the finding of their religion amongst the Iewes because they haue borrowed many ceremonies from the Pagans also and yet they will not say that their religion was amongst the Pagans Their emuâaââon of those ceremonies we iustly cry out against as preposterous and absurd because they being as M. Bishop saith types and figures of the law of