and firme assurance to which purpose the Apostles vsed these wordes to the Lord Encrease our faith And to this agreeth that which Oecumenius saith l Oecumen in Rom. 3. Hoc Dâ—◠〈◊〉 est 〈◊〉 nâ—m 〈…〉 tate excedentis ex sola videlicet fide nos peccatis ianc mortuos viuisicarâ—aâ— sâ—scitare c. Verùm ad quid viuisicatur inquit qui credidit Ad perfectâ—ssimam fide immutabiâ—e habitus fortitudinem Nam ex side in fidem est viuificatio This is the property of the iustice of God exceeding the kindnesse of man euen by faith only to quicken and raise vs vp that are dead in sinnes And whereto is he quickened that hath beleeued To most perfict faith and vnchangeable strength of the habit thereof For our quickening is from faith to faith Here is then the iustice of God that is the iustification of man before God described by the Apostle that it beginneth with faith and goeth forward by faith and is more and more to be apprehended by increase and growth of faith It is begunne by faith only and because the proceeding and perfecting thereof is according to the beginning from faith to faith therefore it is consummate and perfect in faith only And this phrase of speech the holy Ghost seemeth to haue directed purposely against the errour of the Papists who though they acknowledge the beginning of iustification to be by faith yet determine the processe and perfection thereof to consist in workes so that our iustification with them is not according to the wordes of the Apostle from faith to faith but contrary to the doctrine of the Apostle from faith to workes m Bellarm. Recognit lib. de Iustificat Charitas verè absolutè formalis iustitia est c. fides propriè simplicitèr iustificat per modum dispositionis forâ— malitèr autem simplicitèr absolutè non iustiâ— ficat Charity saith Bellarmine is truly and absolutely formall righteousnesse faith properly and simply iustifieth in manner of a disposition but simply and absolutely it doth not iustifie formally And againe n IdeÌ„ Recog lib. de Grat. lib. Arbit QuaÌ„uis fides spes necessariò requirantur ad iustificationem tameÌ„ id quod verissimè proprijssimèque iustificat tanquam vnica formalis causa charitas est Although faith and hope be necessarily required to iustification yet charity is it which most truly and properly iustifieth as the only formall cause So then where the Apostle saith that o Rom. 3. 22. the righteousnesse of God is by the faith of Iesus Christ and that p Vers 30. God iustifieth by faith we must thinke that he speaketh vnproperly he speaketh not formally neither doth he name that wherein the iustification of man most truly consisteth Thus doe they take vpon them as the old Heretikes did to be q Iren. lib. 3. cap. 1. Audent dicere gloriantes emendatores se esse Apostolorum correctours of the Apostles to reforme their ouersights and to better their termes and phrases euen where they speake most vniformely and constantly to deliuer the doctrine of true faith But we will not hearken to them nor be led by them but rather take that which the Apostle teacheth vs that the iustification before God which is taught vs by the Gospell is from faith to faith that it beginneth in faith and continueth in faith and from the beginning to the end consisteth in faith only And hereto agreeth that which the Apostle saith elsewhere r Gal 2. 16. We who are Iewes by nature and not sinners of the Gentiles knowing that a man is not iustified by the workes of the law but by the faith of Iesus Christ euen we haue beleeued in Christ that we might or may be iustified by the faith of Christ and not by the workes of the law because by the workes of the law no flesh shall be iustified Where wee see the processe of iustification plainly described as we haue said from faith to faith the Apostle professing to haue beleeued in Christ not thenceforth to be iustified by workes as Popery teacheth but to be iustified by faith because being now beleeuers they knew that by the workes of the law no flesh should be iustified And this meaning is further confirmed by the proofe which the Apostle bringeth of the wordes whereof we speake Å¿ Habac. 2 4. as it is written saith he The iust shall liue by faith For although those wordes of the Prophet doe seeme to attribute iustification and life to faith yet no otherwise doe they inferre it to be from faith to faith but in that sort as I haue said Certaine it is that but by faith no man can attaine to be called a iust man and therefore in the very name of the iust is an implication of faith The Prophet then teacheth that a man being by faith become a iust man is not thenceforth to expect life by his iustice but to goe on from faith to faith the iust saith he shall liue not by his iustice but by his faith For this cause doth he expresse it not by the present The iust doth liue as the vulgar corruptly readeth but by the future tense The iust shall liue by faith as to note that the iustice of God that is the iustice for which God accepteth and iustifieth vs as it beganne so proceedeth euen to the attainement of euerlasting life not by workes but by faith only And of all this we haue a notable example in our father Abraham who is set before vs as the patterne and example of all the faithfull of whom after that t Gen. 12. 1. 2 c. Heb. 11. 8. by faith he had obeyed God to goe out of his owne Countrey and had wrought many workes of iustice and righteousnesse yet to shew this continuation of the righteousnesse of God from faith to faith it is said u Gen. 15. 6. Abraham beleeued the Lord and hee counted that to him for righteousnesse He was not first iustified by faith to be afterwards iustified by workes but still his faith was it for which he was reputed righteous in the sight of God By all this then we see a direct opposition betwixt the doctrine of the ancient Roman Church and the doctrine of the Papists The Papists say that the righteousnesse of God beginneth with faith but the perfection thereof is in workes and that it consisteth most properly and truly in the righteousnesse of works and that the iust man though he become iust by faith yet must afterwards with God be iustified and attaine to life by workes But the old Church of Rome was farre otherwise minded that iustification before God beginneth in faith and is determined in faith and that the iust man be he neuer so iust must liue not by his iustice but by his faith it being true of iust men as Hierome telleth vs which is said x Hieron adu Pelag. l 2. Pro
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 publiâ—â—eth 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 vaineâ—y 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 fiâ—ium 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 hâ—c fides regni câ—lestis babet â—lâ—ues 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 Anâ—brose 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 aâ—t 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 Iâ—SVS 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 〈◊〉 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 Hiâ—rome 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 â—dificari totaâ— Ecclesiam quid dicturus es de Ioanne filio tonitrâ—i Apoâ—lolorâ—â— vnâ— quoque Quin alioqui num audebimus dicere quòd aduersus Petrum vnum noÌ„ prâ—ualiturâ— sinâ— portâ— inferorâ— aduensus caeleros auâ—â— Apostolos praeualiturae sinâ— ac noÌ„ potius in omnibus singuliâ—â—orum fit illud quod dictum est super 〈◊〉 Petram c. Quòd si dictum hoc Tiâ—i dabo claues c. câ—teris quoque commune est cur non simul omnia quae prius dicta sâ—nt quae sequuntâ—r 〈◊〉 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
z Aug. cont Faust Manich. l. 15. c. 2. Vetus testamentum recte intellâ—gentibus propheâ—a 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 Prophâ—tae c. quod semper est creditâ—m 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 〈◊〉 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
namely he saith Idem Moral l. 10. c. 8. Saepe â—ontingit â—t fides in menâ—e iam viâ—eat sed tamen ex parte aliqua in dubietate contabâ—scat Vnam candemque mentem cerâ—â—uao solidae sidâ—i roborat tamen ex aliquantula mutabilitate perfidâ—e 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 â—â—lerabat 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 dâ—strustfull 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 Dâ—us est enim c. si ergò Deus operatur â—â—te 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 qâ—od significat non superbiant sed humiâ—es sint c. exultent Deo sed cum tremoâ—e in nullo gloriantes quando nostrum nihil sit vt qui gloriatur in Domino gloriâ—tur ne perâ—ant de via iusta in qua iam ambulare coeperâ—t dum sibi â—oc ipsum assignant quò◠in ea sunt His verbis vsus est Apostolê° vbi ait cum timore c. ostendens quare cum timore tremore ait dâ—us est â—â—m 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
mouth full of blasphemic a Syluest Prier cot Luther conclus 56. Indulgentiae non innotuêre nobiâ— authorâ—tate Scripturae sed authoritate Ecclesiae Romanae Romanorumque Pontificum quae maior est Indulgences or Pardons haue not beene knowen to vs by the authority of the Scriptures but by the authority of the Church of Rome and Bishops of Rome which is greater then the Scriptures b Alphons de Cast adu haer lib. 8. tit Indulgentiae Inter omnes res de quibus in hoc opere disputamus nulla est quam minùs apertè sacrae literae prodiderint de qua minùs vetusti scriptores dixerint Et post pro indulgentiarum approbatione sacrae Scripturae testimoniâ— apertum deest There is nothing saith Alphonsus de Castro which the Scriptures haue declared lesse plainly or whereof the old writers haue said lesse There is no plaine testimony of Scripture for the approuing of them And yet M. Bishop no skimmer ouer the Scriptures I warrant you but a man of great obseruation and insight into them will take vpon him to haue found where S. Paul teacheth of Pardons not obscurely or darkely but in very formall termes He citeth to this purpose the wordes of S. Paul concerning the incestuous excommunicated Corinthian now much humbled by repentance and hauing giuen thereof great satisfaction and testimony to the Church c 2. Cor. 2. 10. Whom you haue pardoned any thing I so doe also for my selfe also what I haue pardoned for your sakes I haue done it in the sight of Christ that we be not circumuented of Satan Here he saith that the Corinthians and S. Paul himselfe did giue a pardon he did release some part of the penance of that incestuous Corinthian which is properly to giue pardon or indulgence Iust as well fitted as if he had put a Goose quill to a Wood-cocks taile Hee might euen as well haue alleaged our Bishops as giuers of Popish Pardons because they doe release to men vpon occasion some parts of penance inioyned them for criminall demeanours and had he not made a great speake if he had so done What are we come to vnderstand by the Popes Pardons the releasing of Penitents from the bond of excommunication for the restoring of them againe to the communion of the Church It is true which he saith of this that if S. Paul could so doe S. Peter could doe as much and other principall Pastours of Christs Church haue the same power and authority who doubteth hereof But we speake of a power which the Pope challengeth as proper to himselfe to giue Pardons and Libels of Indulgence or to giue authority to others to giue the same out of the Church treasury of the supererogations of Saints not for absoluing Penitents in foro Ecclesiae but in foro Coeli for releasing of soules from Purgatory and for giuing of them remission for so many dayes or yeares or hundreds or thousands of yeares not only to men for themselues liuing but also for their friends dead and that for doing such and such deuotions or paying so much money for such or such vse or aiding him in his wars against Christian Princes or doing any other worke and seruice that he requireth A lewd and wicked deuise and practise of the Popes of some latter ages and as lewdly coloured by M. Bishop by pretense of that that doth in no sort appertaine vnto it For all that the Apostle intendeth in the words alleaged is that which St. Ambrose briefly expresseth thus d Ambros in 2. Cor. 2. Orat ne adhuc exulcerato aduersum illum animo durum esset illis habere cum illo coÌ„munionem Ecclesiae Hee prayeth them that they would not any longer by a minde exasperated against him bee hard to haue with him the communion of the Church This is the forgiuenesse this is the pardon that he desireth in his behalfe that inasmuch as he hath sufficiently shewed himselfe penitent for his fault they will no longer forbeare to haue Christian society and fellowship with him M. Bishop therefore would neuer haue brought vs this place for Popes Pardons but that by a resolute course of impudency he maketh choise to say any thing rather then to say the truth W. BISHOP §. 8. THe last of M. Abbots instances is That S. Paul saith nothing of traditions wherein hee sheweth himselfe not the least impudent for the Apostle speaketh of them very often Hee desireth the Romans to marke them that make dissentions and scandals Rom. 16. ver 17. contrary to the doctrine which you haue learned and to auoide them but the doctrine that they had then learned before S. Paul sent them this Epistle was by word of mouth and tradition for little or none of the new Testament was then written wherefore the Apostle teacheth all men to be auoided that dissent from doctrine deliuered by Tradition And in the Acts of the Apostles it is of record how S. Paul walking through Syria and Silicia confirming the Churches Commanded Act. 15. vers 41. them to keepe the precepts of the Apostles and of the Ancients Item when they passed through the Citties they deliuered vnto them to keepe the decrees Act. 16. vers 4. that were decreed by the Apostles and Ancients which were at Hierusalem and the Churches were confirmed in faith c. Where it also appeareth that those decrees were made matter of faith and necessary to be beleeued to saluation before they were written Hee doth also charge his best beloued Disciple Timothy To 1. Tim. 6. ver 20 keepe the Depositum that is the whole Christian doctrine deliuered vnto him by word of mouth as the best Authours take it auoiding the prophane nouelty of voices and oppositions of falsly called knowledge Againe he commandeth him to commend to faithfull 2. Tim. 2. vers 2. men the things which thou hast heard of me by many witnesses Was not this to preach such doctrine as he had receiued by Apostolike tradition without writing And further which suppresseth all the vaine cauils of the sectaries he saith Therefore Brethren stand and 2. Thess 2. v. 15. hold the Traditions which you haue learned whether it be by word or by our Epistle where you see that some Traditions went by word of mouth from hand to hand as well as some others were written and were as well to be holden and stood too as the written proceeding from the same fountaine of truth Gods spirit Thus much in answere vnto the instances proposed by M. Abbot which he very ignorantly and insolently auoucheth to haue no proofe or sound of proofe out of S. Paul R. ABBOT HEre M. Bishop playeth the Iugler againe and casteth a mist before his Readers eyes by altering the state of the question betwixt vs and them For the question is not whether the doctrine of truth haue beene at any time deliuered by Tradition that is by word of mouth without writing but whether
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 recâ—nsuerit 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 hâ—c 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 â—oqui 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 â—dde 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 Canâ—nicall 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 coÌ„â— 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 coÌ„t 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
if thou wouldest be a iudge only and wouldest not be mercifull but wouldest marke all our iniquities and seeke after them who could endure it who could stand before thee and say I am innocent who should stand in thy iudgement Our only hope therefore is for that with thee there is mercy If then with the iust iudge there be no hope without mercy then surely it is not for merit that the iust Iudge rendereth vnto vs the crowne of iustice but according to the law of faith he crowneth his owne gifts in vs and vs in them euen for his owne mercies sake M. Bishops arguments therefore are all vanished into winde and the indifferent Reader may well perceiue that the Protestants cause is better strengthened by St. Paul then that it neede to stand in feare of such Popish deluding sophismes A blinde shift he hath vnder pretence of g 2. Pet. 3. 16. some things in St. Pauls Epistles hard to be vnderstood to colour his cauilling at those things which are professedly disputed and most plainly and clearely spoken In all his Epistles saith he being vnderstood as he meant them there is not one word or syllable that maketh for the Protestants But how I maruell should wee attaine to vnderstand them as he meant them May we learne it of M. Bishop or are we to goe to the Pope to know it of him Surely a mad meaning shall we haue of St. Pauls Epistles if we will yeeld to take them after their meaning What way hath M. Bishop or the Pope to vnderstand St. Pauls meaning that we should not vnderstand it as well as they or what reason can they giue vs why we should not by St. Pauls wordes vnderstand his meaning as well as by their words we vnderstand theirs Was St. Paul so hard of speech as that he wanted wordes to declare his meaning or was he so desirous to conceale his meaning as that he would speake one thing and meane another yea the contrary to that hee spake Would hee bee a Protestant in wordes when in meaning he intended to be a Papist They bewray hereby what they are be thou out of doubt gentle Reader that they are no welwillers to the Apostles meaning that teach so many things contrary to the Apostles wordes We see how perspicuously frequently constantly hee teacheth the same that wee teach where to giue a meaning different from that which he saith is no other but maliciously to peruert his meaning Neither doe we affirme any thing by his wordes wherein we haue not the certaine testimony of the ancient Church concurring with vs as M. Bishop in all these points seeth to his owne confusion when as in the meane time it is enough with him to cite texts but whether they make any thing for proofe of that for which he citeth them it skilleth not And this we shall see in that plenty of plaine texts which he saith he hath to produce for their vncatholike faith which when I shall haue examined it will easily appeare to the Reader whether his discourse or mine bee the more idle If the tast that hee will giue vs bee no better then that which vvee haue already tasted it will vtterly distast the Reader vnlesse hee bee such a one as hath lost his tast CHAP. XIIII That the Scriptures are loosely and impertinently alleaged by the Papists for proofe of their false doctrines as namely of Iustification before God of Free-will of the Merit of single life of Relikes and Images of the Masse and Transubstantiation and sundry other such like ANSWERE TO THE EPISTLE PAul saith nothing for those points for the deniall whereof M. Bishop condemneth vs c. to Well M. Bishop let vs leaue Peter and Paul c. W. BISHOP §. 1. WE haue here a dainty dish of M. Abbots cookery a large rhetoricall conclusion deducted out of leane thinne and weake premises He assayed to make a shew out of the Apostle that there was not a little which would serue the Protestants turne and cited to that purpose certaine sentences out of him but so properly that some of them indeede seemed to sound for him though they had in truth a farre different sense others had neither sense nor sound nor sillable for him Neuerthelesse as though he had gotten a great conquest he singeth a triumph and striketh vp a braue victory that all in Peter and Paul is for the Protestant nothing for the Papist Afterward as it were correcting himselfe he addeth nothing but in shew at least serueth the Protestants turne which is one of the truest words he there deliuereth The Protestants indeede be iolly nimble witted fellowes that can make any thing serue at least for a shew of their cause and when all other things faile them Ad fabulas conuertuntur they turne their eares away 2. Tim. â— vers 4. from truth as the Apostle speaketh and fall to fables and one Robin good-fellow I woene for lacke of a better is brought vpon the stage to spit and cry out Fie vpon Peter fie vpon Paul that had not remembred to say one word for Popery but all for the Protestant Fie I say vpon such a cause that must be vnderpropt with such rotten baggage stuffe What shadow of likely-hood is there that one should tell the Pope such a tale to his face or that Erasmus who was in most points a Catholike should report it or could there be any poore Robin excepting M. Abbots himselfe so simple and poore-blinde that in all the writings of those blessed Apostles he could not finde one word that gaue any sound or shew for the Catholike cause You haue heard already that I haue to euery place picked by M. Abbot out of S. Paul in fauour of their religion opposed another out of the same Epistle that speaketh more plainly against them for vs I will here out of the abundance of testimonies which the same S. Paul whom the simple Protestants take to be wholly for them beareth to our doctrine set downe some store euen in defence of those very points which Master Abbot hath made speciall choise off to obiect against vs. R. ABBOT WE note well M. Bishop that no Cooke can fâ—t your diseased appetite but such a one as is brought vp in the Popes kitchin whilest you like better a Numb 11. 5. the fish and leekes and oinions and garlicke of Aegypt then Manna that came from heauen We see it commonly so as hath been before said that corrupt stomackes are best pleased with the most grosse and vnwholsome meates and as the horse-leach sucketh out of the body the most noisome and putrified bloud and the Spider in the garden or otherwhere gathereth that only which may be turned to venime and poison so you out of the body of the Church draw that only which is noisome and poisonfull and nothing pleaseth your humour but what serueth for the corrupting both of your selfe and other men This is the cause why my premises
there is no shadow of likelyhood that one should tell the Pope such a tale to his face or that Erasmus being in most points a Catholike would report it But for the inducing of his Reader to this opinion see a trick of this honest man For if he had truly quoted the place as he found it by me set downe he thought his Reader would perhaps looke the place and so would finde it to be as I had said But to preuent this whereas I had noted in the margent Erasm de rat Concion lib. 3. hee setteth downe in steede thereof Erasmus de ratione that the Reader vvhen he should search for such a booke of Erasmus and finde no such written by him might thinke me to be as very a cozener as Doctor Bishop himselfe now is found to be Let me tell him once againe that Erasmus hath written a vvorke entituled Ecclesiastes or de ratione Concionandi in g Pag. 291. as it was printed at Basil by Frobenius 1535. the third booke whereof he hath left to future memory those vvorthy stories of Robertus Liciensis which I haue before reported For conclusion of this passage he termeth me a poore Robin simple and poore-blinde that can finde nothing in the Apostles writings for their Catholike cause telling vs that he hath shewed the contrary already and will further shew it in those very points which I my selfe haue made choise of But what he hath done already we haue seene it remaineth to examine the rest that follow that it may appeare whether the simple Protestants doe well or not in taking the Apostle St. Paul to be wholly for them W. BISHOP §. 2. TO beginne with the first there is plaine testimony that we are iustified before God by workes which I cited before VVith God the doers of the law shall be Rom. 2. vers 13. iustified There is much for free-will witnesse this Let not sinne therefore raigne in your mortall body Ibid. 6. vers 12. 13. that you obey the concupiscence thereof but neither doe you exhibite your members instruments of iniquity vnto sinne but exhibite your selues to God of dead men aliue and your members instruments of iustice to God for sinne shall not haue dominion ouer you for you are not vnder the law but vnder grace See how the Apostle maketh it in the power and will of euery man indued with Gods grace either to doe well or to doe euill and that sinne hath no such dominion ouer them but that they may doe well if they will concurre with Gods grace Item that it is not grace which doth all but a man must worke with grace and exhibite the powers of his soule as instruments towards the producing of good workes which is flatly our doctrine of free-will And before we depart from this matter of iustification as M. Abbot doth very quickly you shall heare more of it out of the same Apostle he teacheth expresly that a man in the state of grace may fulfill the law in these wordes For that which was impossible to the law Ibid. cap. 8. v. 3. in that it was weakned by flesh God sending his Sonne in the similitude of the flesh of sinne euen of sinne damned sinne in the flesh that the iustification of the law might bee fulfilled in vs who walke not according to the flesh but according to the spirit Which is seconded in the thirteenth Chapter where he concludeth loue to be the fulnesse of the law hauing Ibid. v. 9. 10. before said that he who loueth his neighbour fulfilleth the law And as for that certainty of saluation which many Protestants bragge of the Apostle doth wholly dispossesse them of it first in the place before cited where he willeth them that stand right in the true Rom. 11. ver 20. faith to beware that they fall not and assureth them that they shall fall as others had done before them if they did not diligently looke vnto it Elsewhere he aduiseth vs with feare and trembling to worke our Philip. 2. ver 12. saluation Marke how two points of the Protestant doctrine be wounded in one sentence and two of ours confirmed both that we must worke our saluation it comes not then by only faith and that with feare and trembling we are not then assured of it before hand by the certainty of faith which excludeth all feare and doubt of it Now that we ought to haue a firme hope of saluation S. Paul teacheth vs VVe haue accesse through faith Rom. 5. vers 2. into this his grace wherein we stand and glory in the hope of the Sonnes of God Also For by hope we Ibid. 8. vers 24. are saued Item we giue thanks to God c. for the Clooss 1. vers 5. hope that is laid vp for you in heauen With whom S. Peter consorteth Blessed be God and the Father of 1. Pet. 1. vers 3. our Lord Iesus Christ who according to his great mercy hath regenerated you into a liuely hope vnto an incorruptible crowne c. laid vp in heauen Not to prosecute all the particular points of iustification which haue euery one good ground in the Apostle S. Paul as in that question may be seene the very faith whereby Abraham was and we are iustified is no such kinde of faith as the Protestants claime to be iustified by that is by an apprehension and drawing of Christs righteousnesse to themselues but that faith whereby we beleeue all things to be true which God hath reuealed as S. Paul declareth in the fourth to the Romans where he reporteth Abraham Rom. 4. vers 19. 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 so that finally there is not a word in S. Paul which in his owne meaning maketh for any one peece of the Protestants iustification but heapes of testimonies for euery branch of iustification as we beleeue it R. ABBOT H 〈…〉 M. Bishop beginneth to muster his abundance of 〈◊〉 like an armie of men whereof some want aâ—mes some legges some looke another way some turne quite about and fight against him He setteth downe a number of places but whether they hit or crosse or come short what careth he let the Reader looke to that He saith they proue this or that but how they proue it id populus curet scilicet he is too busie to trouble himselfe about it As for example There is plaine testimony saith he that we are iustified before God by workes namely a Rom. 2. 13. with God the doers of the law shall be iustified But it doth not follow that because the doers of the law shall be iustified with God therefore we are iustified before God by workes because it doth not appeare that we are doers of the law Let him put in for his minor proposition But we are doers of the law and then his absurdity appeareth because
Creatio in libertatem voluntatis facta est sine nobis the creating of vs to freedome of will is wrought without vs that our freewill following he may â—oe with vs that good whereto we are now become willing And againe in the same place u Gregor Moral vt supra Diuina nos bonitas innocentes faciat praeucnit eandem gratiam nostrum liberum arbitrium sequitur The goodnesse of God prâ—â—tenteth vs to make vs innocent and our free-will followeth the same grace Thus x August de Grat. lib. Arbit cap. 5. Vt coÌ„uerteretur gratia Dei eraâ— sola our conuersion as St. Austin saith of the Apostle Paul is the grace of God only but when by conuersion he hath reformed our will and wrought in vs the loue of righteousnesse vve by this worke of grace in vs doe thenceforth apply our selues to worke with grace and the worke that we doe is Gods worke and it is our worke but no otherwise ours but that by the gift of God it is wrought in vs and so becommeth ours Therefore vve doe not say that the grace of God so doth all as that we doe nothing but whatsoeuer we doe the grate of God it is that worketh in vs to doe it y August coÌ„t a Epist Pelag. lib. 1. c. 6. Nos quidem ambulamus verum est nos obseruamus nos facimus sed ille facit vt ambulemus obseruemus faciamus We walke saith Austin it is true we obserue we doe but he maketh vs to walke to obserue to doâ— Euen so we suffer not sinne to reigne in our mortall bodies as the Apostle teacheth vs but it is â—â— that maketh vs not to suffer it to reigne We giue the poâ—ers of our soules as instruments to the producing of good workes as M. Bishop speaketh but it is he that maketh vs to giue them to be so who z August de Praedest sanct cap. 11. Promittit facturum se vt faciaÌ„t quae iubet vt fiant promiseth to cause vs to doe those things which he commandeth to be done Therefore â—ee pâ—each to the people of God as Leo Bishop of Rome did a Leo in Epiphan serm 5. Cooperatores simus gratiâ— Dei operaÌ„tis in nobis non enim dormientibus proueâ—it regnum coelorum nec otio deâ—â—d aâ—â— torpentibus beatâ—tudo â—ternâ—tatis ingeritur Let vs be ioynt-workers with the grace of God that worketh in vs for the Kingdome of heauen befalleth not to sleepers neither is the blisse of eternity thrust vpon idle and slothfull persons But yet withall we say with Gregory that b Gregor Moral lib. 29. c. 13. Quòd verba praedicationis dâ—i ab auribus ad corda desâ—eÌ„ lunt solo diuino munere agitur c. Per internam gratiam solus omnipotens Deus praedicantium verbis ad corda aud 〈…〉 um inutsibilitèr aditum prâ—stat it is by the only gift of God that the words of the preacher doe descend from the care to the heart that it is only the almighty God who by inward grace inuisibly giueth passage for the wordes of the preacher to the hearts of them that heare Yea with Leo himselfe we say that c Leo de Quadrag serm 101 Quod deitatis habâ—tacuâ—um licet inchoari perfici sine suo authore non possit habet tamen ab 〈…〉 sicante donatum vt etiam labore proprio quaerat augmentum the habitation and temple of God which is euery faithfull man which can neither be begunne nor finished without the authour of it hath it giuen of God by it owne labour to seeke it owne furtherance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It vvoâ—kein then with God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it selfe to God but it hath it giuen to â—â— of God 〈◊〉 to worke with God By it owne labour it seeketh it owne encrease but it is the gift of God vvhereby it laboureth for this increase In a vvord vve say with Fulgentiâ—â— d Fulgent â—d 〈…〉 brâ—ter prohibemtam in nostra side quà m in nostro opere â—tanquam nostrum nobâ—t aeliquid vendcare We in no sort sâ—ffer nay we by who 〈◊〉 doctrine fâ—rbidden 〈◊〉 in our suit or in our workes to chalenge to our selues any thing for our owne Nothing is ours but in 〈◊〉 sort as Gregory faith e Gregor Moral l. 24. cap. 5. Iustitia nostra dicieâ—r non quae ex nostro nostra est sed quae diuinâ—â—argitate fit nostrâ— It is called our righteousnes which â—â— not ours as of our owne but which by the gift of God is made ours or as Hierome saith f Hieron Epist ad Demeâ—riad Velle nolle nostrumest ipsamque quod nostrum est sine miseratione Dei nostrum non est To will and to nill is ours but that which is ours without the mercy of God is none of ours This was the doctrine of the old Church of Rome concerning free-will this we approue and teach and because we approue this therefore we detest the doctrine that is now taught in the Church of Rome which is quite contrary to this But here M. Bishop being come away from iustification and fallen to a new matter yet bethought himselfe vpon a sodaine that he had some what further to say of it and therefore leapeth backe againe He was departed from it to free-will and yet before we depart from iâ— faith he you shall heare more of â—â— out of the same Apostle And vvhar shall we heare He teacheth expresly saith he that it man in the state of grace may fulfill the law The vvordes which he citeth for this purpose are these g Rom. 8. 3. that that was impossible for the law in that it was weakened by the flesh God sending his some in the similitude of sinnefull flâ—sh and for sinne condemned sinne in the flesh that the iustification of the law might be fulfilled in vt which walke not after the flesh but after the spirit Concerning which place I haue giuen full answere and satisfaction h Of Iustification sect 38. 43. before to which Preferre the Reader all 〈…〉 it shall not be amisse here also to say somwhat of it And first it is worth the while to obsâ—rue with vvhat discretion he bringeth this place to proue in â—s here an ability to fulfill the law vvhen as the place ministreth to vs a certaine and infallible argument to proue the contrary For the Apostle here affirmeth an impossibility in the law to iustifie and saue vs not by any defect of it selfe but by reason of the weakenesse of the flesh So long then as this weakenesse of the flesh continueth so long must the same impossibility continue also But this weakenesse of the flesh continueth so long as we liue here So long therefore as we liue here there shall be an impossibility of being iustified by the law For i Rom. 8. 7. the flesh is not subiect vnto the law of God nor can be k Rom. 7. 23. it