the working of grace by Gods spirit and the willing of it in man goe togither Yet in regarde of order grace is first wrought and mans will must first of all be acted and moued by grace and then it also acteth willeth and moueth it selfe And this is the last point of consent betweene vs and the Roman Church touching free will neither may we proceede farther with them Hitherto M. PERKINS Now before I come to the supposed difference I gather first that he yeeldeth vnto the principall point in controuersie that is freedome of wil in ciuill and morall workes in the state of corruption and all good works in the state of grace for in his first conclusion distinguishing foure estates of man he affirmeth that in the third of man renued or as we speake justified there is libertie of grace that is grace enableth mans will to doe if it please such spirituall workes as God requireth at his handes Yet lest he be taken to yeeld in any thing Pag. 16. he doth in shewe of wordes contradict both these points in an other place For in setting downe the difference of our opinions he saith that mans will in his conuersion is not actiue but passiue which is flat opposite vnto that which himselfe said a litle before in his first conclusion that in the conuersion of a sinner mans will concurreth not passiuely but is co-worker with Gods grace The like contradiction may be obserued in the other part of libertie in morall actions for in his third conclusion he deliuereth playnlie man to haue a naturall freedome euen since the fall of Adam to doe or not to doe the acts of wisedome Iustice Temperance c. Pag. 19. and proues out of S. Paul that the Gentils so did Yet in his first reason he affirmeth as peremptorily out of the 8. of Genesis that the whole frame of mans hart is corrupted and all that he thinketh deuiseth or imagineth is wholy euill leauing him no naturall strength to performe any part of morall dutie See how vncertayne the steps be of men that walke in darknes or that would seeme to communicate with the workes of darknes For if I mistake him not he agreeth fully in this matter of free will with the Doctrine of the Catholike Church For he putting downe the point of difference Page 1 saith that it standeth in the cause of the freedome of mans will in spirituall matters allowing then freedome of will with vs in the state of grace whereof he there treateth for he seemeth to dissent from vs only in the cause of that freedome And as he differeth from Luther and Caluin with other sectaries in graunting this liberty of will so in the very cause also he accordeth with Catholikes as appeareth by his owne wordes For saieth he Papists say mans will concurreth with Gods grace by it selfe and by it owne naturall power we say that Mans will worketh with grace yet not of it selfe but by grace either he vnderstandeth not what Catholikes say or else accuseth them wrongfully For we say that Mans will then only concurreth with Gods grace when it is stirred and holpen first by Gods grace So that Mans wil by his owne naturall actions doth concurre in euery good worke otherwise it were no action of Man But we farther say that this action proceedeth principally of grace whereby the will was made able to produce such actions for of it selfe it was vtterly vnable to bring forth such spirituall fruite And this I take to be that which M. PERKINS doth meane by those his wordes that the will must bee first moued and acted by grace before it can acte or will Hee mistooke vs thinking that we required some outward helpe only to the will to joyne with it or rather that grace did but as it were vntie the chaynes of sinne wherein our will was fettered And then will could of it selfe turne to God Luc. 10. Not vnderstanding how Catholikes take that parable of the man wounded in the way betweene Ierusalem and Ierico who was not as the Papists only say but as the holy Ghost saieth lefte halfe and not starke dead Now the exposition of Catholikes is not that this wounded man which signifieth all Mankinde had halfe his spirituall strength left him but was robbed of al Supernaturall riches spoyled of all his originall Iustice and wounded in his naturall powers of both vnderstanding and will and therein lefte halfe dead not being able of his owne strength either to know all naturall truth or to performe all morall dutie Now touching supernaturall workes because he lost all power to performe them not being able so much as to prepare himselfe conueniently to them he in a good sence may be likened vnto a dead man not able to moue one singer that way of grace Luc. 15. and so in holy Scripture the Father said of his prodigall Son he was dead and is reuiued Yet as the same sonne liued a naturall life albeit in a deadly sinne so mans wil after the fal of Adam continued some what free in actions conformable to the nature of man though wounded also in them as not being able to acte many of them yet hauing still that naturall facultie of free will capable of grace also able being first both outwardly moued and fortified inwardly by the vertue of grace to effect and doe any worke appertayning to saluation which is asmuch as M. PERKINS affirmeth And this to be the verie Doctrine of the Church of Rome Cap. 1. is most manifestlie to be seene in the Councell of Trent where in the Session are first these wordes in effect concerning the vnablenesse of man to arise from sinne of himselfe Euerie man must acknowledge and confesse that by Adams fall we were made so vncleane sinnefull that neither the gentils by the force of nature nor the Iewes by the letter of Moyses lawe could arise out of that sinnefull state After it sheweth howe our deliuerance is wrought and howe freedome of will is recouered in speciall and wherein it consisteth saying The beginning of iustification in persons vsing reason is taken from the grace of God preuenting vs through IESVS CHRIST that is from his vocation whereby without any desert of ours we are called that we who were by our sinnes turned away from God may be prepared by his grace both raising vs vp and helping vs to returne to our owne Iustification freely yeelding our consent vnto the said grace and working with it So as God touching the hart of man by the light of the Holy Ghost neither doth man nothing at all receiuing that inspiration who might also refuse it neither yet can he without the grace of God by his free will moue himselfe to that which is iust in Gods sight And that you may be assured that this Doctrine of the Councell is no other then that which was taught three hundred yeares before in the very middest of darknes as heretikes deeme
of God whereby he accounteth and esteemeth that righteousnes which is in Christ as the righteousnes of that sinner which beleeueth in him By Christs righteousnes we are to vnderstand two thinges first his sufferings specially in his death and passion secondly his obedience in fulfilling the lawe both which goe together for Christ in suffering obeyed and obeying suffered And the very shedding of his bloud to which our saluation is ascribed must not onely be considered as it is passiue that is a suffering but also as it is actiue that is an obedience in which he shewed his exceeding loue both to his father and vs and thus fulfilled the lawe for vs. 3. Rule That iustification is from Gods mercies and grace procured onely by the merite of Christ 4. Rule That man is iustified by faith alone because faith is that alone instrument created in the hart by the Holy Ghost whereby a sinner laieth holde of Christs righteousnes and applies the same to him selfe There is neither hope nor loue nor any other grace of God within man that can doe this but faith alone now of the Doctrine of the Roman Church Because M. PERKINS settes not downe well the Catholikes opinion I will helpe him out both with the preparation and justification it selfe and that taken out of the Councel of Trent Where the very wordes concerning preparation are these Sess 6. c. 6. Men are prepared and disposed to this iustice when being stirred vp and helped by Gods grace they conceiuing faith by hearing are freely moued towardes God beleeuing those thinges to be true which God doth reueale and promise â—â—â—â—ely that he of his grace doth iustifie a sinner through the redemption that is in CHRIST IESVS And when knowledging them selues to be sinners through the feare of Gods iudgementes they turne them selues to consider the mercie of God are lifted vp into hope trusting that God will be mercifull vnto them for Christs sake and beginning to loue him as the fountayne of all iustice are there by moued with hatred and detestation of all sinnes Finally they determine to receiue baptisme to beginne a new life and to keepe all Christs commaundements After this disposition or preparation followeth Iustification and for that euery thing is best knowne by the causes of it all the causes of Iustification are deliuered by the Councell in the next Chapter which briefly are these The finall cause of the Iustification of a sinner is the glorie of God the glory of Christ and mans owne iustification the efficient is God the meritorious CHRIST IESVS Passions the instrumentall is the Sacrament of Baptisme the onlie formall cause is inherent iustice that is Faith Hope and Charity with the other giftes of the Holy Ghost powred into a mans soule at that instant of iustification Of the iustification by faith and the second iustification shall be spoken in their places So that we agree in this point that iustification commeth of the free grace of God through his infinite mercies and the merits of our Sauiours Passion and that all sinnes when a man is justified be pardoned him The point of difference is this that the Protestants hold that Christs Passion and obedience imputed vnto vs becommeth our righteousnes for the wordes of justice and justification they seldome vse and not any righteousnes which is in our selues The Catholikes affirme that those vertues powred into our soules speaking of the formall cause of iustification is our iustice and that through that a man is iustified in Gods sight and accepted to life euerlasting Although as you haue seene before we hold that God of his meere mercie through the merits of CHRIST IESVS our Sauiour hath freely bestowed that iustice on vs. Note that M. PERKINS comes to short in his second rule when he attributeth the merits of Christs suffringes to obedience whereas obedience if it had beene without charity would haue merited nothing at Gods handes And whereas M. PERKINS doth say that therein we raze the foundation that is as he interpreteth it in his preface we make Christ a Pseudochrist we auerre that herein we doe much more magnifie Christ then they doe for they take Christs merits to be so meane that they doe but euen serue the turne to deface sinne and make men worthie of the joyes of heauen Nay it doth not serue the turne but only that God doth not impute sinne vnto vs. We contrarywise doe so highly esteeme of our Sauiours inestimable merits that we hold them wel able to purchase at Gods handes a farre inferiour justice and such merits as mortall men are capable of and to them doe giue such force and value that they make a man just before God and worthy of the Kingdome of heauen as shall be proued Againe they doe great iniury to Gods goodnes wisedome and justice in their justification for they teach that inward justice or sanctification is not necessary to justification Yea their Ring-leader Luther saith That the iustified can by no sinnes whatsoeuer except he refuse to beleeue lose their saluation Wherein first they make their righteous man Like as our Sauiour speaketh to sepulchers whited on the out side with an imputed justice but within full of iniquity and disorder Then the wisdome of GOD must either not discouer this masse of iniquity or his goodnesse abide it or his justice either wipe it away or punish it But say they he seeth it well enough but couereth it with the mantle of Christs righteousnesse Why can any thing be hid from his sight it is madnesse to thinke it And why doth he not for Christes sake deface it and wipe it cleane away and adorne with his grace that soule whome he for his sonnes sake loueth and make it worthy of his loue and kingdome What is it because Christ hath not deserued it So to say were to derogate from the infinite value of his merits Or is it for that God cannot make such justice in a pure man as may be worthy of his loue and his kingdome And this were to deny Gods power in a matter that can be donne as we confesse that such vertue was in our first father Adam in state of innocencie And M. PERKINS seemes to graunt Pag. 77. That man in this life at his last gaspe may haue such righteousnesse If then we had no other reason for vs but that our justification doth more exalt the power and goodnes of God more magnifie the value of Christs merits and bringeth greater dignity vnto men our doctrine were much better to be liked then our aduersaries who cannot alleage one expresse sentence either out of holy Scriptures or auncient Fathers teaching the imputation of Christs righteousnesse vnto vs to be our justification as shall be seene in the reasons following and doe much abase both Christs merits and Gods power wisdome and goodnesse Now to their reasons M. PERKINS first reason is this That which must be our righteousnesse before God must satisfie the iustice of
often is without the sacred society of charity CHAPTER 5. OF MERITTES MASTER PERKINS saith By meritte vnderstand any thing or worke whereby Gods fauour and life euerlasting is procured and that for the dignity and excellency of the worke or thing done or a good worke binding him that receiueth it to repay the like Obserue that three thinges are necessary to make a worke meritorious First that the worker be the adopted Sonne of God and in the state of grace Secondly that the worke proceede from grace and be referred to the honour of God The third is the promise of God through Christ to reward the worke And because our aduersaries either ignorantly or of malice doe slaunder this our Doctrine in saying vntruely that we trust not in Christs merittes nor neede not Gods mercy for our saluation but will purchase it by our owne workes I will here set downe what the Councell of Trent doth teach concerning merittes Sess 6. cap. vlt. Life euerlasting is to be proposed to them that worke well and hope well to the end both as grace of mercy promised to the Sonnes of God through CHRIST IESVS and as a reward by the promise of the same God to be faithfully rendred vnto their workes and merittes So that we hold eternall life to be both a grace aswell in respect of Gods free promise through Christ as also for that the first grace out of which they issue was freely bestowed vpon vs. And that also it is a reward in justice due partly by the promise of God and in part for the dignity of good workes Vnto the worker if he perseuer and hold on vnto the end of his life or by true repentance rise to the same estate againe In infantes baptised there is a kinde of meritte or rather dignity of the adopted Sonnes of God by his grace powred into their soules in baptisme whereby they are made heires of the Kingdome of heauen but all that arriue to the yeares of discretion must by the good vse of the same grace either meritte life or for want of such fruit of it fall into the miserable state of death OVR CONSENTS WITH this Catholike Doctrine M. PER. would be thought to agree in two points First That merits are necessary to saluation 2. That Christ is the roote fountayne of all meritte But soone after like vnto a shrewd cowe ouerthrowes with his heele the good milke he had giuen before Renouncing all merits in euery man sauing onely in the person of Christ whose prerogatiue saith he it is to be the person alone in whome God is well pleased Then he addeth that they good Protestants by Christs merittes really imputed to them doe merit life euerlasting Euen as by his righteousnes imputed vnto them they are justified and made righteous To which I answere that we most willingly confesse our blessed Sauiours merittes to be infinite of such diuine efficacy that he hath not onely merited at his Fathers handes Both pardon for all faultes and grace to doe all good workes but also that his true seruantes workes should be meritorious of life euerlasting as for the reall imputation of his meritte to vs wee esteeme as a fayned imagination composed of contrarieties For if it be really in vs why doe they call it imputed and if it be ours only by Gods imputation then is it not in vs really Further to say that he only is the person in whome God is well pleased is to giue the lye vnto many playne textes of holy Scriptures Abraham was called the friend of God therefore God was wel pleased in him Iac. 2. Moyses was his beloued Dauid was a man according vnto his owne hart Eccles 45. Act. 13. Ioh. 16. Rom. 1. God loued Christs Disciples because they loued him Briefly all the Christians at Rome were truly called of S. Paul the beloued of God And therefore although God be best pleased in our Sauiour and for his sake is pleased in all others yet is he not onely pleased in him but in all his faithfull seruantes Now to that which he saith that they haue no other meritte then Christs imputed to them as they haue no other righteousnes but by imputation I take it to be true and therefore they doe very ingenuously and justly renounce all kinde of merittes in their stayned and defiled workes But let them tremble at that which thereupon necessarily followeth It is that as they haue no righteousnes nor meritte of heauen but only by a supposed imputation so they must looke for no heauen but by imputation for God as a most vpright judge wil in the end repay euery man according to his worth wherfore not finding any reall worthines in Protestants but only in conceipte his reward shall be giuen them answerably in conceipte only which is euidently gathered out of S. Augustine where he saith Lib. 1. de morib Eccles cap. 25 That the reward cannot goe before the merite nor be giuen to a man before he be worthy of it for saith he what were more iniust then that and what is more iust then God Where he concludeth that we must not be so hardy as once to demaund much lesse so impudent as to assure our selues of that crowne before we haue deserued it Seing then that the Protestants by this their proctour renounce all such meritte and desart they must needes also renounce their part of heauen not presume so much as once to demaund according vnto S. Augustines sentence vntill they haue first renounced their erronious opinions But M. PERKINS will neuerthelesse proue and that by sundry reasons that their doctrine is the truth it selfe and ours falshood First by a sorry short sillogisme cōtayning more then one whole page It is taken out of the properties of a meritorious worke Which must be saith he four First That the worke be done of ourselues without the helpe of another Secondly That it be not otherwise due debt Thirdly That it be done to the benefit of an other Fourthly That the worke and reward be equall in proportion These proprieties he sets downe pithagorically without any proofe But inferreth thereon as though he had proued them inuincibly that Christs manhood seperated from the Godhead cannot meritte because whatsoeuer he doth he doeth it by grace receiued should be otherwise due He might in like manner as truly say that Christs manhood vnited to the Godhead could not merite neither for he receiued his Godhead from his father whatsoeuer he doth is therefore his Fathers by due debt And so the good man if he were let alone would disapoint vs wholy of all merites aswell the imputed of Christs as of all ours done by vertue of his grace Wherefore we must a little sift his foure forged proprieties of merit and touching the first I say that one may by the good vse of a thing receiued by free gift merit and deserue much euen at his handes that gaue it For example the
A REFORMATION OF A CATHOLIKE DEFORMED BY M.W. PERKINS WHEREIN THE CHIEFE CONTROVERSIES IN RELIGION ARE METHODICALLY and learnedly handled Made by D.B.P. THE FORMER PART Take yee great heede of false Prophets which come to you in the cloathing of sheepe but inwardly are rauening Wolues By their fruits you shall knowe them MATH 7.15 Printed with Priuiledge 1604. TO THE MOST PVISSANT PRVDENT AND RENOWMED PRINCE IAMES THE FIRST BY THE GRACE OF GOD KING OF ENGLAND SCOTLAND FRANCE AND IREland Defendor of the Faith c. MOST GRATIOVS AND DREAD SOVERAIGNE Albeit my slender skill cannot afforde any discourse worthy the view of your Excellency neither my deadded and daylie interrupted and persecuted studies will giue me leaue to accomplish that litle which otherwise I might vndertake and performe Yet being enboldened both by your high Clemency and Gratious fauour euer shewed vnto all good litterature especially concerning diuinitie also vrged by mine owne bounden duetie and particular affection I presume to present vnto your highnes this shorte ensaying treatise For your exceeding Clemency mildenesse and rare modestie in the most eminent estate of so mighty a Monarche as it cannot but winne vnto your great loue in the hartes of all considerate Subjects so on the other side doth it encourage them confidently to open their mindes and in dutifull manner to vnfolde themselues vnto their so louing and affable a Soueraigne And whereas to the no vulgare prayse of your Majesties pietie you haue made open and often profession of your Vigilancie and care to aduaunce the diuine honour of our Sauiour Christ and his most sacred Religion Then what faithfull Christian should stagger or feare to lay open and deliuer publikely that which he assureth himselfe to be very expedient necessary and agreeable towardes the furnishing and setting forward of so heauenly a worke Moreouer if I your Majesties poore subject haue by studie at home and trauaile abroade attayned vnto any small talent of learning and knowledge to whome is the vse and fruit thereof more due then vnto my so gratious and withall so learned a Liege Finally for a proofe of my sincerity affection and dutifull loue towardes your Majestie this may I justly say that in time of vncertaine fortune when assured friends are most certainely tried I both suffered disgrace hinderance for it being stiled in Print A Scotist in faction therein farther employing my penne in A two-folde discourse which I hope hath beene presented to the viewe of your Majestie the one conteyning a defence of your Highnes honour the other of your title and interest of the Crowne of England And if then my zeale and loue of truth and obligation to your Majesty drewe me out of the compasse of mine owne profession to treate of lawe courses I trust your benigne Grace will now licence me out of the same fountaine of feruencie and like zeale vnto Gods truth no lesse respecting your Majesties eternall honour and heauenly inheritance something to say in matters of diuinity hauing beene the best part of my studie for more then thrise seauen yeares Whereinto I may conueniently enter with that golden sentence with which your Majestie beganne the Conference holden in Ianuary last betweene certaine of your subjects about some controuersie in Religion A loue principium Apoc. cap. 1.8 or conformable to that in holy writte I am Alpha and Omega that is The beginning and the end saith our Lord And applying it vnto Princes I may be bolde to say that nothing is more expedient and necessary for Kinges nothing more honourable and of better assurance for their estate then that in the very beginning of their raigne they take especiall order that the supreame and most puissant Monarch of heauen and earth be purely and vprightly serued aswell in their owne exemplare liues as throughout their Dominions For of Almighty God his meere bountie and great grace they receiue and holde their Diadems and Princelie Scepters and cannot possesse and enjoy them their mighty Forces and most prudent Counsailes notwithstanding one day longer then during his diuine will and pleasure Which that wise King witnesseth Prouerb 4 speaking in the person of Gods wisedome Per me Reges regnant By me Kinges doe raigne And Nabuchodonozer sometime King of Babilon Dan. 4. was turned out to grase with beastes for seauen yeares and made to knowe and confesse that the highest doth commaund ouer the Kingdomes of men and disposeth of them as pleaseth his diuine wisedome But I neede not stande vpon this point being so well knowne and duely confessed by your Majestie But sithens there be in this our most miserable age great diuersities of Religions and but one only wherewith God is truely serued and pleased as saith the Apostle One body one Spirit Ephes 4. as you are called into one hope of your vocation one Lord one Faith one Baptisme My most humble suite and supplication to your high Majestie is that you to your eternall good will embrace maintayne and set forth that only true Catholike and Apostolike faith wherein all your most royall progenitors liued and died or if you cannot be wonne so soone to alter that Religion in which it hath beene your misfortune to haue beene bredde and brought vp That then in the meane season you will not so heauely persecute the sincere professors of the other Very many vrgent and forcible reasons might be produced in fauour and defence of the Catholike Roman Religion whereof diuers haue bin in most learned treatises tendered to your Majestie already Wherefore I will only touch three two of them chosen out of the subject of this booke The third selected from a sentence of your Majesties recorded in the aforesaid Conference And because that argument is as most sensible so best assured which proceedeth from a principle that is either euident in it selfe or else graunted and confessed for true My first proofe shall be grounded vpon that your Majesties owne resolute and constant opinion as it appeareth in the said conference to witte Pag. 75. That no Church ought farther to seperate it selfe from the Church of Rome either in doctrine or ceremonie then shee hath departed from her selfe when shee was in her flourishing and best estate From whence I deduce this reason The principall Pillers of the Church of Rome in her most flourishing estate taught in all pointes of Religion the same Doctrine that shee now holdeth and teacheth and in expresse tearmes condemneth for errour and heresie most of those Articles which the Protestants esteeme to be the principall parts of their reformed Gospell Therefore if your Majestie will resolutelie embrace and constantly defend that doctrine which the Roman Church maintayned in her most flourishing estate you must forsake the Protestant and take the Catholike into your Princely protection To demonstrate vnto your Majestie that we now holde in all points the very same Doctrine which the most approued auncient Doctors and holy Fathers held and deliuered
Because it is to long for an Epistle I reserue it to the booke it selfe for the points it handleth and will here briefly note out of it some such old reproued errors that the Protestants doe reuiue receiue and avowe as the very sinnewes of their Gospell Martin Luther the ring-leader of the newe pretended reformation layeth for the ground-worke of his Religion That man is iustified by only faith and in this he is applauded and followed of all Protestants and yet as testifieth the most sound witnes of antiquity Au de side operibus ca. 14. S. Augustine that only faith is sufficient to Saluation was an error sprong vp in the Apostles dayes against which the Catholike Epistles of S. Peter and S. Iames and S. Iohn were principally directed And the authour of that error was that infamous Sorcerer Simon Magus Cap. 20. as the blessed Martir Ireneus hath recorded in his first booke against heresies Test Socr. ib. 1. hist cap. 17. S. Hier. pref lib. cont Pela S. Aug. de fide cont Manich. Epiph. her 64. PERKIN Pag. 29. Aug. retra lib. 2 c 22. here 82. PERKIN Pag. 163. An other principall piller of Fryer Luthers Religion consisteth in Deniall of free will wherein he jumpeth with the old rotten heretike Manes of whome the Manicheans were named One Proclus an erronyous Origenist taught that sinne was not taken away in Baptisme but only couered as is recorded by that holy man and auncient Father Epiphanius M. PERKINS in the name of Church of England affirmeth in like manner the originall sinne remayneth still and raigneth in the regenerate albeit it is not imputed vnto them Iouinian was accounted a Monster by S. Augustine for defending honest Marriage to be of equall vertue and meritte with chaste Virginity and saith further that this heresie was so sottish fleshly that it could not deceiue any one learned Priest but only some few simple carnall women Yet this our English champion blusheth not to affirme that marriage is not only equall but better also in diuers respects then Virginity The same olde reprobate heretike barked also against approued feasts and fasting dayes so doe most of our Ministers at this time Vigilantius was sharpely reproued by Saint Hierome in a booke written against him and hath beene euer since vnto this day esteemed a wicked hereticke for denying prayer to Saintes and honour to be donne vnto their Relikes And yet what pointe of Doctrine is more currant among the Protestants then this In like sorte one Aerius to the Arrian heresie added this of his owne That we must not pray for the soules of our friendes departed Aug. ad q. vult heres 53. as S. Augustine hath registred And doe not all Protestants embrace and earnestly defend the same A common custome it was of the Arrians and of other more auncient heretikes to reject all Traditions and to rely only vppon the written word Lib. 3. c. 20 Lib 1. con Maximinu as testifieth S. Ireneus and S. Augustine Doe not ours the same rejecting all Traditions as Mans Inuention Xenaias a Barbarous Persian indeed yet in shew a counterfeited Christian is noted for one of the first among Christians that inueyed against the Images of Saintes and the worship donne by true Christians vnto them Niceph li. 10. cap. 27. as both Nicephorus and Cedrenus in compendio doe recorde The reprobate Iewes indeede before him and after euen vntill this day the miscreant Turkes enemies of all Christianity doe dwell still in the same error And yet is not this most vehemently auerred by our Protestants and all Caluinists although they cannot denie but that aboue 900. yeares agoe in the second generall Councell holden at Nice they are by the consent of the best and most learned of the world for euer accursed that doe denie reuerence and worshippe to be giuen vnto the Images of Saintes I will omitte sundrie other heades of the Protestants Religion by all approued antiquity reproued and condemned that I passe not the boundes of an Epistle and seeme ouer tedious vnto your Majestie Especially considering that these are sufficient to conuince that those points wherein the Protestants affirme the present Church of Rome to haue so farre degenerate from the auncient are the very essentiall partes of faith then maintayned by the Romans And the contrary opinions nothing else but wicked heresies of old inuented and obstinately helde against the same Roman See euen as they are nowe in our time and of old also condemned by the same Church in her most flourishing and best estate Wherefore your most excellent Majestie being resolute in that singular good opinion that no Church ought farther to depart from the Church of Rome then shee is departed from her selfe in her flourishing estate must needes recall the Church of England from such extrauagant opinions to joyne with the Roman church in the aforesaid articles which shee in her best time helde for partes of pure faith And in all others also which they cannot directly proue in a lawfull disputation before your Majestie to haue beene altered by her particularly naming the point of Doctrine the author of the chaunge the time and place where when he liued who followed him who resisted him and such other like circumstances which all be easely shewed in euery such reuolte or innouation because the vigilant care of the Pastors of Christes flocke haue bin alwaies so great as no such thinges could be vnknowne let slippe or vnrecorded Thus much for my first reason collected from the vntruth of the Protestants religion The second shall be grounded vpon the vngodlines of it where I will let passe that high point of impiety that they make God who is goodnes it selfe the author of all wicked actions donne in the world And will besides say nothing of that their blasphemie against our Sauiour IESVS CHRIST that he ouercome with the paynes of his passion vpon the Crosse did doubt if not dispaire of his owne saluation being vnwilling to touch any other pointes then such as are afterwardes discussed in this booke The triumphant Citizens of heauen who enjoy the presence of God and happiest life that can be imagined are by Protestants disdaynefullie termed Deadmen and esteemed neither to haue credit with God to obtaine any thing nor any care or compassion on men among whom they once liued and conuersed so kindly And as for the poore soules departed who in Purgatory fire pay deare for their former delightes and pleasures they depriue them of all humane succour by teaching the world to beleeue that there is no such matter Concerning vs Christians yet liuing on earth there is no lesse impyetie in their opinions For they teach that the best Christian is no better in effect then a whited Sepulchre being inwardly full of all wickednes and mischiefe and onlie by an outwarde imputation of Christes righteousnes vnto them are accepted of God for just To thinke that there is
Priestes with many teares and great sighes powred out prayers for the good Emperours soule Againe at a solemne feast which he helde at the dedication of the Church built by him in Ierusalem some of his cleargie preached and expounded the holy Scriptures Ibidem de vita Const lib. 4. ca 45. and other some with vnbloudy Sacrifice and Mysticall consecrations appeased the Godhead and prayed for the health of the Prince Zozom lib 1. hist Eccl. cap 21. Moreouer this zealous Emperour reprehended Acasius a Nouatian heretike for saying that it was not in the power of Priests but of God only to forgiue sinnes Finally toward true Bishoppes the lawfull Pastors of Christs Church he caried such a reuerend respect Socr. hist lib 1. cap. 5. that being in the Councell of Nice he would not sitte downe before they had beckned vnto him so to doe And was so farre from taking vpon him to be supreame judge in causes Ecclesiasticall that he openly there professed that it did not belong to him to judge of Bishoppes but to be judged by them Ruffi lib. 1. hist cap. 2. If then this right Puissant Emperour and most sincere Christian reuerenced the Sacrifice of the Masse and beleeued that there was power in Priests to remitte sinnes that Saints were to be prayed vnto and that prayer was to be made for the dead and such like as appeareth by the euident testimonie of most approued Authors that liued with him hath your Majestie any cause to doubt but that in matters of faith he agreed with the present Roman Church Wherefore my hope and trust in Almighty God is that you in your high wisdome vpon mature and due consideration how many old condemned errors the Protestants hold and with all well weighing that the whole frame of their Doctrine tendeth to the disgracing of God and his Saints to the discouragement of men from well doeing and doth as it were loosen the reines vnto all fleshly liberty will in time make a most Godly resolution to imitate that famous Emperour Constantine He contrary to his former education embraced with all his power that same Romane Religion which we nowe professe And which is worthy to be obserued he feared nothing the contrary disposition of the multitude or greater parte of his subjects that were wholy ledde another way But following the blessed example of his most vertuous Mother S. Helena reposed himselfe in the powrefull assistance of the Almighty and chased all other Religions into corners setting vp and firmely establishing the Roman There can be no cause aleadged why your Majestie may not doe the like if it shall please God effectually to stirre vp your gratious minde and to bende your hart to vndertake it for at that time there was more likelyhoode of resistance then nowe and nowe much more helpe at hand if any resistance should be offered Pardon me deare Soueraigne if before I finish this argument I seeme ouer-bold here to present vnto your memorie that all your most gratious and Godly Progenitors and all our holy Predecessors who now assuredly stande before the tribunall of God doe demaund and expect no lesse at your handes For they founded not Bishopricks Deaneries and other spirituall liuinges they builded not Colleges and Schooles for Protestants or their fauourers Ponder well therefore I beseech your Majestie whether they doe not or may not justly chalenge of you to whome the administration of justice belongeth to see and prouide that such Churches Church-liuinges and spirituall rewardes of learning as they erected and bequeathed to Roman Bishops and Priestes be disposed of and bestowed according to their erections and foundations If it shall please the Protestants to erect any new Churches or bestowe any other reuennues towardes their Ministers mayntenance let them haue them hardly and enjoy them quietly only let them be content out of their equitie to leaue vs that which was prouided for vs and bequeathed vnto vs by our most Religious Auncestors If all these reasons and exceeding manie other which might be mustered and produced to the same purpose will not suffice to effect in your Majestie a loue and desire to embrace that auncient Roman faith which all your Renowmed Progenitors so highly reuerenced loued and esteemed Yet let me prostrate on my knee most humbly beseech your highnes in the name of thowsandes that so farre forth they may preuaile with you as you will not permitte those rigorous lawes framed against recusant Catholikes to be put in practize and executed For howe can it seeme conformable to reason in your Majesties deepe wisdome and judgement that your louing Subjects should by compulsion and constrainte vnder that intollerable penaltie of losse of all their goodes conforme them selues to such articles of Religion that by the purest antiquitie were censured to be erronious and execrable And what misery and pitty were it to driue them perforce either to swallowe downe the deadly poyson of their soules or else to endure besides the disgrace of the state the losse of their worldly wealth and liberty Consider and weigh with your selfe my most gratious Liege whether it will not be thought ouer great seuerity to presse men euen against humane nature and condition with patience to heare their owne profession and beleefe both vntruely slaundered and most bitterly reuyled and inueighed against as in most Ministers sermons it is commonly Yea to giue patient eare to them that blush not publikely to call our blessed Sauiours body in the holy SACRAMENT an abhominable Idole his glorious and immortall Saintes senceles dead Men his Vicar and Vicegerent on earth Antichrist and euery Catholike an Idolater With infinit other intollerable reproaches Our constant hope euen yet though against hope is that your Majestie out of your owne sweet naturall disposition and most milde carriage in gouernment hitherto will not onely moderate but suspende all such extreamity And not suffer it to be extended against them who in former doubtfull times were in manner the only men that defended and made manifest to the world your Title and interest to the Crowne of England and were no lesse willing to receiue you when the time came and as forward to haue assisted you if neede had required as anie sorte of Subjectes within the lande And neuer since wittingly offended your sacred Majestie in any thing It may be objected that they doe not conforme themselues vnto a statute lawe made against their Religion Be it so Then their Religion toward God not any contempt of their lawfull Superiour doth commaund them from the conformity which is pardonable Considering that they be no inuenters or followers of nouelties but onely hold on and perseuere in the faith of their forefathers And what subject is the among the most duetifull that doth not often transgresse and giue offence to one statute lawe or other yet for no other lawe men are so hardly dealt withall albeit they violate many of them together Only Catholikes are for the
the 7. heades of the beast to be aswell 7. Kings as 7. hilles But this notwithstanding to helpe you foreward I will graunt it you because some good writers haue so taken it And therefore omit as impertinēt that which you say in proofe of it What can you inferre hereupon Mary that the Roman Church is that whoore of Babilon fayre soft good Sir how proue you that thus The whoore of Babilon is a state of the Roman regiment ergo the Roman Church is the whoore of Babilon What forme of arguing call you me this By the like sophistication you may proue that Romulus Remus were the purple Harlot which to affirme were ridiculous or which is impious that the most Christian Emperours Constantine and Theodosius were the whoore of Babilon because these held also the state of the Roman Empire and regiment to make short the feeble force of this reason lyeth in this that they who hold the state and gouerne in the same Kingdome must needes be of like affection in Religion which if it were necessarie then did Queene Mary of blessed memorie and her sister Elizabeth carrie the same mindes towards the true Catholike faith because they sate in the same chaire of estate ruled in the same Kingdome See I pray you what a shamefull cauill this is to raise such outcryes vpon A simple Logician would blush to argue in the paruies so loosely yet they that take vpon them to controule the learnedst in the world often fall into such open fallacies Well then admitting the purple Harlot to signifie the Roman state we doe say that the state of Rome must be taken as it was then when these wordes were spoken of it that is Pagan Idolatrous and a hot persecutor of Christians Such it had beene a litle before vnder that bloudy Tyrant Nero and then was vnder Domitian which we confirme by the authority of them who expounde this passage of the Roman state The commentary on the Apocalips vnder Saint Ambrose name sayeth the great whoore sometime doth signifie Rome specially which at that time when the Apostle wrote this did persecute the Church of GOD but otherwise In c. 178. doth signifie the whole Citie of the Diuell And Saint Ierome who applieth the place to Rome affirmeth Libr. 2 cont Iouin that she had before his dayes blotted out that blasphemie written in her forehead because then the state was Christian which before had beene Heathen so that vnto the partie Pagan and not vnto the Church of God he ascribeth these works of the wicked Harlot which also the very text it selfe doth conuince Vers 6. for it hath That she was drunke with the bloud of the Martyrs of Iesus Now the Church of Rome hath not then by the confession of all men drawne any bloud of Christs Saints but in testimony of his truth had powred out abundance of her best bloud Wherefore it is most manifest that the harlot could not signifie the Church of Rome so pure and free from slaughter but the Roman Empire which was then ful gorged with that most innocent and holy bloud Againe that whoore is expounded Vers 18. To be a Citie which had kingdome ouer the Kings of the earth But the Church of Rome had then no kingdome ouer the earth or any temporall dominion at all but the Roman Emperours had such soueraigne commaundement ouer many Kings wherefore it must be vnderstood of them and not of the Church Now to take Kingdome not properly for temporall soueraignty but for spirituall Iurisdiction as some shifters doe is to flie without any warrant from the natiue signification of the word vnto the phantasticall and voluntary imagination And whereas M. PERKINS saith pag. 5. that Ecclesiasticall Rome in respect of state princely dominion and cruelty against the Saints is all one with the heathenish Empire he both seeketh to deceiue and is greatly deceiued he would deceiue in that he doth apply wordes spoken of Rome aboue 1500. yeares agoe vnto Rome as it is at this day and yet if that were graunted him he erreth foulie in euery one of his particles For first touching princely dominion the Roman Empire held then all Italy all France all Spayne all England a great part of Germany of Asia and also of Afrike hauing their Proconsulles and other principall Officers in all those Countries drawing an hundred thousand millions in mony and many other commodities out of them Wherefore in princely dominion and magnificall state it surmounted Ecclesiasticall Rome which hath not temporall dominion ouer the one halfe of that one kingdome of Italy more then an hundred degrees And as for persecution the Empire slewe and caused to be slayne more Saints of God in one yeare then the Church of Rome hath donne of reprobates and obstinate heretikes in 1600. yeares Hauing thus proued that the whoore of Babilon signifieth the heathen state of Rome and not the Ecclesiasticall let vs now heare vvhat you ay against it Marry that the distinction of the Empire of Rome and Church of Rome is foolish and coyned of late to serue our turne which to be farre otherwise I proue out of those very Authors who doe interpret that harlot to signifie Rome who are neither foolish nor of late dayes you haue heard it before out of S. Ambrose cōmentaries And farther we gather it out of S. Hierome in the Epistle which you cite for he hauing resembled Rome vnto Babilon for the multitude of the wicked which yet remayned in it pointeth out a more pure part saying There is in deede the holy Church there are the triumphant monuments of the Apostles and Martirs there is the true confession of Christ there is the faith praysed by the Apostle c. Be not there expressed two distinct parts of Rome Againe Tertullian who liued in the second hundreth yeare vnder those persecuting Emperours saith in one place that Babilon is a figure of Rome Lib. cont Iud. De prescript c. 16 in respect of her proude Empire and persecution of the Saints And in an other that Rome was most happie for her holy Church vnto which the Apostles with their bloud had poured forth their whole doctrine see a playne distinction betweene the Heathen Empire and the holy Church of Rome Which finally may be gathered out of the expresse word of God Where the Church in Babilon coelect 1. Pet. 5. is distinguished from the rest of that city which was Pagan You say but without any authour that Babilon there doth not signifie Rome but either a city in Egipt or Assyria But Eusebius lib. 2. his c. 14. S. Ierom de Eccles script vers Marcus with other Authors more worthy of credit doe expounde it of Rome And you your selues take Babilon for Rome where you thinke that any hold may be taken against it as in the 17. of the reuel but in S. Peters Epistle they wil none of it because it would proue too playnlie that S.
this wee must beleeue that there is nothing else which wee may beleeue ANSWERE By the Gospell there is vnderstood all our Christian doctrine written and vnwritten and not onelie the written worde of the foure Euangelists else wee should not beleeue the Actes of the Apostles or their Epistles no more than Traditions which Christian doctrine written and vnwritten we onely beleeue by diuine faith to all other Authors we giue such credit as their writings do deserue If anie man desire to see TERTVLLIANS judgement of Traditions let him read his booke of prescriptions against Heretikes where he auerreth that Traditions serue better than the Scriptures themselues to confute all Heresies Heretikes alwaies either not allowing all the bookes of Scripture or else peruerting the sense and meaning of the Scriptures And in his booke De Corona militis he formallie proposeth this question Whether Traditions vnwritten are to be admitted or no and answereth by manie instances that they must be receiued concluding thus For these and the like poynts if thou require law out of the Scriptures thou shalt finde none but Tradition is alleadged to be the Author of them Custome the confirmer and Faith the obseruer So that nothing is more certaine than that TERTVLLIAN thought vnwritten Traditions necessarie to be beleeued Come we now vnto his second testimonie out of S. IEROM * In cap. 23 Mat. who writing as he saith of an opinion that S. IOHN Baptist was killed because he foretold the comming of Christ the good-man would saye ZACHARIE S. IOHNS Father for the Scripture sheweth plainely why S. IOHN lost his head * Mat. 14 But S. IEROM there sayeth this Because it hath not authoritie from Scriptures may as easelie be contemned as approoued But of which particular M. P. shewing himselfe a doughtie Logician would inforce an vniuersall that sorsooth all may be contemned that is not proued by Scripture As if you would prooue no Protestant to bee skilfull in the art of true reasoning because M. P. behaues himselfe in it so vnskilfully But S. IEROM in the same place declareth why that might be as easely reprooued as allowed not hauing anie ground in the Scripture because saith he It is taken out of the dreames of some Apocryphall writings opposing Scripture to other improoued writings and not to approoued Traditions to which hee saith in his Dialogues against the Luciferians before the middle That the Church of God doth attribute the like authoritie as it doth vnto the written Law M. P. His third Author is S. AVGVSTINE * Lib. 2. de doct Chri. cap. 9. In those things which are plainely set downe in Scriptures are found all those poynts which containe faith and maners of liuing well ANSWERE All things necessarie to be beleeued of euerie simple Christian vnder paine of damnation that is the Articles of our Beleefe are contayned in the Scriptures but not the resolution of harder matters much lesse of all difficulties which the more learned must expressely beleeue if they will be saued which distinction S. AVGVSTINE else-where doth signifie * De peccatorū meritis cap. vlt. And is gathered out of manie other places of his workes as in that matter of rebaptizing them who became Catholikes after they had bene baptized by Heretikes He saith * Lib. 5. de bapt contra Donat. cap. 23. The Apostles truely haue commanded nothing hereof in their writings but that custome which was layed against S. CYPRIAN is to bee beleeued to haue flowed from an Apostolicall tradition as there be many things which the vniuersall Church holdeth and therefore are to be beleeued The same saith he of the custome of the Church in Baptizing infants * De genes ad litra lib. 10. cap. 23. And in his Epist 174. of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is not in the holy Scripture and yet neuerthelesse is defended to be vsed in the assertion of faith As also saieth he we neuer read in those bookes that the Father is vnbegotten and yet wee hold that he is so to be called * Lib. 3. cap 3. cont max Arianum And S. AVGVSTINE holdes that the holie Ghost is to be adored though it be not written in the word The like of the perpetuall Virginitie of our B. Ladie * Haeresi 4. out of which and many more such like we gather most manifestlie that S. AVGVSTINE thought many matters of faith not to be contayned in the written worde but to be taken out of the Churches treasurie of Traditions M. P. His last testimonie is taken out of Vincentius Lirinensis who sayth as he reporteth that the Canon of the Scripture is perfecte and fullie sufficient for all things ANSWERE I thinke that there is no such sentence to be found in him he saies by way of objection What neede we make recourse vnto the authoritie of the Ecclesiasticall vnderstanding if the Canon of the Scripture be perfect Hee affirmeth not that they be fullie sufficient to determine all controuersies in religion but throughout all his booke he prooues the cleane contrarie that no heresie can be certainelie confuted and suppressed by only Scriptures without we take with it the sense and interpretation of the Catholike Church Thus M. P. hauing ended with the Law Testimonie addeth in a postscript two other slender reasons vnto his former The first that Christ and his Apostles vsed alwaies to confirme their doctrine with the testimonies of Scriptures and not with Tradition ANSWERE Fist for our Sauiour CHRIST IESVS he out of his diuine wisdome deliuered his doctrine most commonly in his owne name But I saye vnto you And verie seldome confirmeth it with any testimonie out of the Law The Euangelists do often note how CHRIST fulfilled the old prophecies but neuer or very seldome seeke to confirme his doctrine by testimonies their owne they doe sometimes but to saye they neuer wrote any thinge out of Tradition proceedes of most grosse ignorance Where had Saint MATHEVV the adoring of the Sages S. IOHN Baptists preaching briefelie that was done before his owne conuersion but by Tradition S. MARK wrote the most part of his Gospell out of Tradition receiued from S. PETER as witnesseth EVSEBIVS * Lib. 2. hist cap. 14. S. LVLE testifyeth of himselfe that he wrote his whole Gospell * Cap. 1. as he had receiued it by Tradition from them who were eye-witnesses What desperate carelesnesse was it then to affirme that the Apostles neuer vsed Tradition to confirme any doctrine when some of them built not onely parcels but their whole Gospels vpon Traditions His other reason is that if we beleeue vnwritten Traditions were necessarie to saluation then we must aswell beleeue the writings of the auncient Fathers as the writings of the Apostles because Apostolicall Traditions are not else-where to be sound but in their bookes but that were absurde for they might erre ANSWERE That doth not follow for three causes First Apostolicall Traditions are aswel kept in
ignoble predecessors old condemned Heretikes to reject all Traditions and to flie vnto the only Scriptures FIRST OF VOWES M. PERK pag. 151. Is verie intricate and tedious in deliuering his opinion concerning Vowes I will in as good order as I can briefely correct his errors herein OVR CONSENTS IN This passage which hee intitleth of our consents he rangeth many things wherein we differ much as first in the definition of a Vowe which he defineth thus A Vowe is a promise made to God touching some duety to be performed to him This definition commeth too short of a Vow and agreeth vnto all other couenants made betweene God man and so ADAMS acceptance not to eate of the forbidden fruite should be a Vowe and NOES buylding of the Arke and briefely euery acceptance and promise to fulfill any of Gods commandements and consequenly euerie breach of them must needes be two seuerall sinnes the one of disobedience in such a precept the other of infidelitie by breaking our Vowe All which absurdities necessarily followe of M. P. his definition and be things vnheard of either in holy Scriptures or among the auncient Holy Fathers proceeding onely out of the drosse of their owne deuises and therefore with as great facilitie to be denyed of vs as they doe with audacitie auouch them To make vp then the definition we must adde that the promise to God be of some better good proceeding from our owne free choyse and libertie so that no Vowe is made without a mans free choyse to bynde himselfe ouer and besides all other necessarie bondes which to bee of the nature of a Vowe wee gather first out of holie Scriptures * Deut. 23 If thou make a Vowe bee not slowe to performe it but if thou wilt not promise thou shalt bee without sinne What can be more cleare then that a man may choose whether he will Vowe or no * 1. Cor. 7 which is confirmed in S. PAVL He that decreeth in his hart not hauing necessitie but hauing power ouer his owne will c. So that this libertie to promise or not to promise is of the substance of a Vowe and that if he list not to Vowe he doeth not sinne which were verie false if the acceptance of necessarie dueties were Vowes For hee that refuseth to accepte them doeth sinne as if a man should refuse to performe any of Gods commandementes Hence it followeth moste manifestly that the promise which we make to God in Baptisme of keeping Gods commandements is no Vowe if a Vowe be taken properly because it lyeth not in vs to refuse it without we will withall refuse the grace of Baptisme and remaine in the state of damnation And M. P. affirming it to be a Vowe and often repeating it doth not once confirme it with any shadow of proofe but takes that for granted which he knowes we do deny flatlie The second poynt of our supposed consent is that Vowes were some part of Gods worship in MOSES Law but are not so in the Gospel which we also denie M. P. prooues his assertion thus Vowes belonged to the ceremonies of MOSES Lawe but all those Ceremonies are abolished by Christs Passion ANSWERE That Vowes in themselues were no part of the Ceremonies of MOSES Law but true parts of the worship of God in all estates aswell in the state of Nature and the Gospel as in MOSES Law but this poynt M. P. handleth againe in the first poynt of our difference where it shall be discussed Thirdly hee saith that speciall Vowes may be made in the New law to performe some bodily exercise for some good ende as to fast to taske our selues to prayer or studie of holy Scripture and such like but many rules must then be obserued that we Vowe an honest thing agreeable to Gods word this we allowe Secondly that it be so made that it may stand with Christian libertie that is that it make not such thinges necessarie in conscience which Christian religion leaues at libertie This rule of his is flat repugnant to the nature of a Vowe contrarie to himself For he saith a little before that a Christian may Vowe Fasting Prayer almes-deedes I then demaunde hauing Vowed these things is he not bounde to performe them Yes or else hee breakes his Vowe with which God is highlie displeased * Deut. 23 An vnfaithfull promise displeaseth God Then is it manifest * Eccles 50 that all Vowes do abridge vs of our libertie and make that vnlawfull for vs which before our Vowe was lavvful which is so euident of it selfe that I maruaile where the mans wit and memorie was when hee wrote the contrarie His other rules that a Vowe be made vvith good deliberation with consent of our Superiours and not onely of things possible but also of the better sorte wee allovve for they are taken out of our Doctors See S. Thom. * Quest 88 Now to the poynts indifference FIrst the Church of Rome saith M. P. teacheth that in the New Testament we are asmuch bound to make Vowes as was the Church of the Iewes we say no Considering that the Ceremoniall Law is now abolished and we haue onely two Ceremonies by commandement to be obserued for parts of Gods worship Baptisme and the Supper of the Lorde ANSWERE What is not your Holie-day seruice which you call diuine seruice any part of Gods worship in your owne opinions Can a publike assembly instituted to honor God by prayer and thanksgiuing with externall ceremonie of time place apparrell kneeling standing and sitting be no parte of Gods worship In your irreligious Congregations assembled together against CHRIST and his Catholike Church be it so But admitting as you do your seruice to be good it could not truely be denyed to be long vnto the worship of God But to the matter of difference you grow very carelesse in your reports of our doctrine for we hold that neither in the Olde nor New law any man is bounde to Vowe but that it is and euer was a councell and no commandement neuerthelesse a thing of great deuotion and perfection in both states intrinsecallie belonging and much furthering the true worshippe of almightie God which wee prooue in this sorte In a Vowe are two thinges the one is the good which is Vowed called the naturall parte as for example Fasting c. The other the promise it selfe made to God which is the forme the materiall parts doe belong vnto their seueral vertues but this promise and performance of it be substantiall parts of Gods worship For by promising of any good thing vnto God we acknowledge professe that God is the soueraigne goodnesse it selfe and taketh great pleasure in all good purposes and determinations therefore to honour and worship him wee make that good promise againe In performing that good seruice of God we testifie that hee is most majesticall reuerend and dreadfull And consequently that all promises made to him are to be accomplished most diligently