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
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
the Apostle wrote that Epistle to them But so did he write two Epistles to the Corinthians of whom notwithstanding he saith that e 1. Cor. 1. 5. in all things they were made rich in Christ in all kinde of speech and in all knowledge So did he to the Ephesians f Acts 20. 27. from whom he kept nothing backe but had shewed them all the counsell of God Yea and of the Romans the Apostle in that Epistle saith g Rom. 15. 14. I am perswaded of you that yee are filled with all knowledge and are able to admonish one another Neuerthelesse I haue somewhat boldly after a sort written vnto you as one that putteth you in remembrance It should seeme then that they were not nouices in the faith but fully instructed in all points and that the end of the Apostles Epistle was only to keepe the remembrance of those things which they had beene before taught Of that time Tertullian saith that h Tertul. de Praescript Foelix Ecclesia cui totam doctrinam Apostoli cum suo sanguine prosuderunt the Apostles Peter and Paul together with their bloud poured forth their whole doctrine all that they taught to that Church and shall wee thinke that when the Apostles deliuered all their doctrine to that Church that Church did not receiue and learne the same Of that time we haue a more sure and vndoubted testimony then we can haue of times following that i Rom. 1. 8. their faith was renowmed throughout the whole world That therefore doe we hold to be the best state of the Roman Church and the most flourishing because we measure not the flourishing of it by number of professours or by glory of outward state but by integrity of doctrine and truth of faith Neuerthelesse because flourishing may seeme to import a reference to that outward liberty and exaltation which that Church as the rest receiued by the reigne of Constantine and enioyed vnder other Christian Emperours after him therefore his Maiesty with great caution and aduisednesse added the other wordes spoken of before to signifie that we are so to respect her in that flourishing estate as that alwaies for more assurance we haue respect to that that shee was at the first immediately from the Apostles and from Christ her Lord and head the liuely picture and description whereof is set forth vnto vs in the Epistle to the Romans Here M. Bishop though he haue not yet proued any first fault yet taketh vpon him to note a second that I take an Epistle written to the Romans for their instruction and correction as if it were a declaration and profession of their faith Where the Reader seeth that saue only I say the Apostle in that Epistle wrote at large I say nothing thereof my selfe but report only what Theodoret saith who if he had affirmed that the Apostle in that Epistle did set downe a declaration of the faith which the Romans then professed had said nothing amisse the care of the Apostle therein being both to confirme them in the faith which they had receiued and to testifie to posterity what that faith was All men know saith M. Bishop that such a letter might containe many things which they had not heard off before But we question not what such a letter might containe that is an idle and dreaming supposall of his but the point is what we are to thinke that Epistle doth containe This I declared by the wordes of Theodoret who giuing a reason why the Epistle to the Romans though written after diuers other yet was put in the first place alleageth this to be it k Theodoret. Praefat. Epist Pauli Epistolam ad Romanos praeposuerunt vt quae in se omnis generis doctrinam accuratam copiosamque dogmatum pertractationem for that it containeth doctrine of all sorts or all kinde of doctrine and very exact and plentifull handling of the points of faith This place dazeled his eyes he stood astonished at it and knew not which way to shift He grew therefore to a desperate resolution â—lectere si nequeam superos Acheronta mouebo Sith God and truth doe vs forgoe I will trie the diuell what he can doe My wordes in my answere speaking of St. Paul writing to the Church of Rome stand thus He wrote at large comprehending therein as Theodoret saith Omnis generis doctrinam accuratam copiosamque dogmatum pertractationem Doctrine of all sorts or all kinde of doctrine and very exact and plentifull handling of the points thereof He in transcribing my text setteth it downe thus comprehending therein as Theodoret saith doctrine of all sorts or all kinde of doctrine Eâ— accuratam copiosamque dogmatum pertractationem An exact and plentifull handling of all points thereof Where note how he purposely leaueth out the Latin wordes Omnis generis doctrinam and whereas in Englishing Dogmatum pertractationem I say the points thereof he in steede of the points saith all points thereof From this latter he frameth his miserable answere which is only an accusation of me for legerdemaine in the Englishing of Theodorets words And why Dogmatum pertractationem The handling of opinions saith he is by him translated all points of doctrine whereas it rather signifieth some then all opinions or lessons Thus he ouerslippeth the words that carry weight and force to the point in question and to colour this that the Reader may not espy it hee busieth him the while with an opinion of my false translation whereas the false translation is none of mine but by himselfe very lewdly foisted in But the Beare though thus broken loose must be brought to the stake againe Remember M. Bishop what I told you and answere vs directly to it Theodoret saith that the Epistle to the Romans containeth Omnis generis doctrinam All kinde of doctrine and doth not say it once only but saith it againe that l Idem Praefat Epist ad Rom. Variam quidem omnis generis doctrinam per haec scripta exhibet Apostolus the Apostle therein deliuereth manifold and not only manifold but all kinde of doctrine Now if all kinde of doctrine that concerneth the Christian faith be contained in the Epistle to the Romans then Popery is not the true Christian faith which teacheth so many points of doctrine whereof nothing is contained in the Epistle to the Romans Nay it doth not only say nothing for Popery but it also saith against it and instructeth vs to call that apostasie and heresie which they falsly call the Catholike faith Whether any thing be there to be found of moment to that purpose we shall see in that that followeth W. BISHOP §. 2. SAint Paul saith he is vvholly against you and for vs. Quickly said but will not be so soone proued First he condemneth the vvorshipping of Saints and Saints Images in that he reproueth the Heathens for changing the glory of the incorruptible God into the similitude of the Image of a
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
I will take it here in his due place making it to appeare that this mistaking in a circumstance altereth nothing of the substance of that comparison which I had there in hand The first branch then of the comparison shall bee this The Donatists did set vp a particular Church to be the Catholike Church all of them first in the south of Africa some of them afterwards namely the Rogatists at Cartenna in Mauritania and so haue the Papists done at Rome in Italie Against this branch as it was before set downe hee giueth two exceptions First that they doe not hold it so to be at Rome aâ— the Rogatists did at Cartenna And what is the difference Marry they hold it to be so at Rome as that it is dispersed also all the world ouer but the Rogatists held it to be wholly included in the bounds of Cartenna and confines thereof The first part of which answere on their owne behalfe is false and the second part thereof concerning the Rogatists is vaine For it is false that hee saith that their Romish Church is dispersed all the world ouer and hee knoweth well that the Churches of Greece and all the Easterne Churches are holden by them to be Schismatikes because they disclaime subiection to the Church of Rome True it is they would haue it all the world ouer and they make simple fooles beleeue that it is so but they themselues know that the skirts of it are too short to reach so farre and that a huge part of the Church there is that will haue nothing to doe with them And this drew from Bellarmine that caution that I before mentioned in the first Chapter that a Supra cap. 1. §. 1. though one only Prouince did imbrace the true faith yet the same should truly and properly be called the Catholike Church so long as it could bee plainly shewed that it is one and the same with that which at any time or times was ouer the whole world Now hereof it followeth that the other part of his exception concerning the Rogatists is vaine For although the communion of the Church of Rome be farre larger then that was of the Rogatists at Cartenna yet doth neither of them containe any more but a part and their doctrine as touching their communion sorteth all to one For whereas M. Bishop saith that the Rogatists included the Church within the bounds of Cartenna and the Countrey thereabout it was not by position of doctrine that they so included it as if it could not be any where else but because they pretended that the Church was only in their communion and there were none in any other part of the world that tooke part with them it followeth of this defect that they so included it But though there were now not aboue b Aug. Epist 48. Tu cum decem Rogatistis quâ— remansistis c. ten or eleuen Bishops of them remayning as Saint Austin obiecteth to them yet by that hee vpbraideth them with this number remayning it appeareth that they had beene of greater number and extent and wee cannot doubt but that they would as willingly haue had the whole world to ioyne with them as the Church of Rome would Now inasmuch as they held themselues only to bee the Catholike Church And there were none of them otherwhere to bee found to Baptise and reconcile peâ—itents but only within the confines of Cartenna Saint Austin rightly obiecteth it as an absurdity ensuing thereof that c Ibid. Quisquis fâ—â—rit hac praedicatione commotus in qualibâ—t paâ—te orbis terâ—arum nisi quaesierit inuenerit latentâ—m in Mauritania Caesariensi Cartennensem Vincentium aut aliquem ex cius nouâ—m aut decem conâ—ortibus dimitti ei peccata non posâ—int c. Nisi Cartennas venerit aut in viâ—â—iam Cartennensium mundari omninâ—â— delictis suis non potâ—rit then whosoeuer there were in any part of the world that were moued with the preaching of the Gospell vnlesse he did seeke and finde out Vincentius Bishop of Cartenna lurking in Mauritania Caesariensis or some one of his nine or ten consorts he could not haue remission of sinnes or as otherwise hee expresseth it except hee came to Cartenna or into the Countrey neare adioyning hee could not bee clensed from his sinnes Now although the Roman Church as M. Bishop vnderstandeth it is of much larger extent and stretcheth it selfe into sundry Countries and Nations yet being but of small compasse in comparison of the whole world the exprobration of the same madde fancy lyeth vpon it that whosoeuer in the further parts of the world shall be moued with the preaching of the Gospell and conuerted thereby vnlesse hee come to Rome or into some part of the world where he may meete with a Popish Priest hee cannot bee baptised or reconciled to God hee cannot obtayne the remission of his sinnes it being by them resolued of themselues as by the Rogatists of themselues that out of their particular communion there is no saluation Therefore both Rogatists and Papists let them goe together and the truth is that in this behalfe there is no difference betwixt them As touching his second exception although it bee not generally true of the Donatists that they placed the Catholike Church at Cartenna yet it is not altogether vntrue because the Rogatists were Donatists d August vt supra Vos qui non solum cum illis communiter Donatistae a Donato verumetiam propriè Rogatisâ—â— a Rogatâ— appâ—llâ—nuâ— being in common with the rest called Donatists of Donatus as Saâ—nt Austin noteth and by a more proper name Rogatists of Rogatus For although they had in some spleene and vpon some peâ—uish quarrell diuided themselues from the rest yet the substance of their doctrine was still the same as before as appeareth by St. Austin who disputing against Vincentius the Rogatist chargeth him in effect with nothing else but the common positions of the Donatists and therefore they were all at once coÌ„monly comprehended vnder the name of Donatists The Donatists then though not all the Donatists but of them the Rogatists only placed the Catholike church at Cartenna and to the Rogatists then being a part of the Donatists the Papists are like who doe in the same sort place the Catholike Church at Rome Yea and although the Donatists in generall did not seate the Church at Cartenna yet M. Bishop is not ignorant that they in generall before some quarrelling fell amongst them did in effect the same thing by designing the place thereof in Africa properly so called so as that none should be called Catholikes in any part of the world but such as did communicate with that African Church of theirs For although they acknowledged that the Church by the preaching of the Apostles had beene dispersed ouer the world according to the manifold testimonies and prophecies of holy Scripture in that behalfe which they professed to beleeue â—et they said that c Aug. de
true picture of a very wilfull and absurd wraâ—gler who seeketh by vaine cauillation to obscure that which by reason and truth he cannot disproue What though all the Apostles did not write when as the writings of some might sufficiently set forth the preaching of all because they all preached the same thing And what though none of them wrote particularly all the words which he vttered when as it sufficeth vs that amongst them they wrote all the points of faith which they vttered in those wordes If M. Bishop were asked whether they haue not in Scripture and Tradition all which the Apostles taught would he not say yea And can he then tell vs particularly all the speeches and discourses and sermons that they made from day to day Peter amongst the Iewes and Paul amongst the Gentils at Rome at Corinth at Ephesus in Galatia and the rest Iohn in â— sia Thomas in India Matthias and Andrew in Aethiopia and the other Apostles otherwhere If he would thinke him a foole that should aske him this question and doth hold it sufficient that they haue all the points of doctrine though they haue not all the wordes he must giue vs leaue to thinke him scant wise that when wee say what the Apostles taught they committed all to writing would vnderstand vs otherwise And this meaning he himselfe that it may appeare that he doth but famble and palter presently declareth when yeelding of his courtesie that the Apostles left the Gospell in writing and many other most diuine and rare instructions in their Epistles a rare commendation of them as if he spake of Granatensis his Dux peccatorum or Parsons Resolution and therefore that I needed not cite Irenaeus to witnesse that he addeth his exception but that they wrote all which they preached or all things necessary to saluation Irenaeus saith not a word So then he knoweth well enough that when we say that all which the Apostles taught they committed to writing wee meane thereby all things necessary to saluation all points of faith and doctrine by them preached and which it concerneth vs to know and beleeue vnto eternall life But of this saith he Ireneus saith not a word The wordes of Ireneus which I cited are these a Iren. adu haer lib. 3. c. 1. â—on enim per alios dispositionem salutis nostrae cognouimus quà m per eos per quos I uangâ—lium peruenit ad nos quod quidem tunc praeconiauerunt postea verò per Dei voluntatem in scriptaris nobis tradiderunt fundamentum columnam sidei nostrae futurum By no other haue we knowen the order or way of our saluation but by them by whom the Gospell came to vs which verily they then preached and afterwards by the will of God they deliuered the same to vs in the Scriptures to be the foundation and pillar of our faith Now I hope M. Bishop will not deny but that the gospell which the Apostles preached contained all points of faith necessary to saluation If therefore they haue deliuered vnto vs in writing the gospell which they preached surely they haue deliuered to vs in writing all points of faith necessary to saluation He playeth vpon a distinction betwixt the Epistles and the Gospell as if the Epistles were no part of the Gospell which the Apostles preached but if they be not so he should tell vs what they be and how the Apostle professeth b Phil. 3. 1. to write in his Epistle the same things which he had before preached and how Christ preached c Mat. 4. 23. the Gospell of the Kingdome and taught men d Mar. 1. 15. to beleeue the Gospell before there was any written Gospell and before the greatest part of the history was in act and how St. Paul challengeth the Galathians for being e Gal. 1. 6. remoued to another Gospell when yet they receiued no other story concerning Christ but doctrine contrary to that which is contained in the Epistles f Aug. de Ciu. Dei l. 17. c. 17. Fatentur ex Sion missam suisse legem Christi quod Euangelium nos vocamus The Gospell as St. Austin telleth vs is the law of Christ and are the Epistles of the Apostles no part of the law of Christ The Gospell is called by St. Paul g 2. Cor. 5. 19. the word of reconciliation and is expounded by St. Ambrose to be h Ambros in Rom. c. 1. Euangelium Dei est bonum nuncium Dei quo peccatores ad indulgentiaÌ„ conuâ—cantur the glad tidings sent from God whereby sinners are called to pardon and forgiuenesse and doe not the Apostles in their Epistles teach this word of reconciliation and glad tidings from God If then the Apostles left the Gospell in writing and the Gospell containe all points of faith necessary to saluation then that which the Apostles left in writing containeth all points of faith necessary to saluation Albeit to follow M. Bishop in his owne distinction if we take the Gospell as he doth for the writings of the foure Euangelists St. Austin saith thereof that i August in Ioan. tract 49. Ipse sanctus Euangelista testatur multa Dominum Christum diâ—isse socisse quâ— scripta non sunt Electa sunt autem quae scriberentur quae saluti credentium sufficere videbantur of those things which our Lord Iesus said and did choise was made of so much to be written as seemed sufficient for the saluation of them that beleeue And to the same purpose Cyril also saith k Cyril in Ioan lib. 12. c. 68. Non igitâ—r omnia quae Dominus fecit conscripta sunt sed quâ— scriâ—â—â—tes sufficere putarunt tam ad mores qâ—à m â—d dogmaâ—a vt recta fide operibus vir 〈…〉 rutilâ—ntes ad regnum coelorum perueniamus All things which Christ did are not written but what the writers thought sufficient both for manners and doctrine that shining with true faith and vertuous workes we may attaine to the heauenly Kingdome The Gospels then containe that doctrine and faith that is sufficient to saluation albeit God would prouide for vs not only sufficiently but abundantly and hath in the Epistles of the Apostles giuen vs large and cleare declaration of the doctrine of Christ that is contained in the Gospels As for that which M. Bishop alleageth vnder the name of Ireneus to proue the contrary it is a most wilfull and impudent falsification He most sagely counsaileth all men saith he when any controuersie in religion ariseth to make their recourse to the most ancient Churches where the Apostles had conuersed and from them to take their resolution He citeth for this Euseb hist Eccl. lib. 5. cap. 19. But that which is of Ireneus is by my Booke Cap. 18. and no matter at all tending to that effect as hee alleageth Ireneus is there brought in mentioning l Euseb hist l. 5. cap. 18. Cum puer adhuc in Asia
inferiore apud Polycarpum essem c. Commemorarequeam quomodo se cum Joanne ac reliquis qui DominuÌ„ viderunt conuersatum esse dixerit sermones eorum memorauerit quae ex illis de Domino audierit de virtutibus eius doctrina tanquam ex ijs qui ipsi verbum vite viderant percepta cuncta sanctis Scripturis consona 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.
of that that we say that the best worke of the righteous man is stained with sinne you conclude Therefore as good to leaue all vndone as to doe any therefore all men are bound vnder paine of damnation neuer to doe any good deede I doe but only name those worthy disputes of yours referring the Reader to their proper places to see further the absurd inconsequence and vanity of them I might goe along your questions of that part and put you in minde of a great number of such illations but I will content my selfe to name an argument or two in the last only To proue the worshipping of Images e Of Images sect 16. you alleage out of the Psalme Cast downe your selues before his foote-stoole and conclude that much more Images may be worshipped Againe to proue that the Arke was worshipped you tell vs First none but the high Priest might come into the place where it was and it was carried before the campe with great solemnity when they were to fight against the Philistines they had great confidence in the presence of the Arke the Bethshamites were slaine for looking into it Oza was smitten of God for touching it You propound first that by these things it is euident that the Arke was worshipped and when you haue set them downe as it were to make your selfe ridiculous you demand Doth not all this conuince in what reuerence the Arke was had Anone f Sect. 17. after for confirmation of the same point that Images are holy and to be reuerenced you alleage that the place where Moses stood was holy ground that daies were called holy and worshipfull that the Priests Vestiments were holy from which wee wonder how you should dreame to deriue that conclusion which you intend Some man will haply excuse the matter that being towards the end of your booke you had spent your wits and knew not well what you said which we would easily admit but that we see that hauing refreshed your wits againe your arguments in this booke are found to be of the same stampe I require example out of the old Testament for the worshipping of Images and you answere that g Chap. 4. §. 3. the hauing of them in the Tabernacle and the Temple where it was neuer thought lawfull to set vp the Image of a man but only the Cheâ—ubins to vs vnknowen what they were and the pictures of Lyons and Buls and Palme trees and Flowers for garnishing the house and the sentence of the Psalmist Adore yee his foote-stoole and many such places and resemblances doe very strongly argue that Images are to be worshipped To proue the profession of Monkery amongst the Iewes you tell vs out of Iosephus of the Essees that were amongst them who with the Pharisees and Sadducees as I haue shewed were no other but Iewish Heretikes For example of Pilgrimages to Relikes and dead mens bones you answer vs that all the males amongst the Iewes were bound by the law to goe thrise in the yeare to the Temple of God at Ierusalem To make good that you may lawfully pray to haue your sinnes forgiuen by the bloud of Thomas Becket and by the same bloud to be brought to heauen you alleage that in the Psalme it is said h Ibid. §. 5. Lord remember Dauid and all his trouble To shew that St. Paul speaketh of the Masse you tell vs hereafter that i 1. Tim. 2. 1. he desireth that obsecrations prayers postulations thanks-giuings be made for all men What M. Bishop doe your iudicious Catholikes of whom you speake tell you that they like well of these proofes of yours And may not we then thinke that both you and they haue drunke of a spiced or rather an inchanted cup that will take such wilfull and affected Sophistications to be very vrgent and forcible reasons Surely M. Bishop with as much wit as you haue told vs here that some Catholikes like better of your booke then they doe of mine I might also tell you that many Protestants hauing seene these your collections and our solutions doe pitty your Catholikes that suffer themselues to be gulled and deluded with such reasonlesse reasons as before I affirmed them to be Yea so reasonlesse are they that when we haue shewed by answere how little reason there is in them we neuer doubt to commit them to the sight of all men And whereas you aske who are more circumspect then we are to keepe our followers from the reading of your bookes I aske of you what cause you your selfe haue to complaine in that behalfe Surely your bookes haue beene very openly and commonly sold and whereas you say that we imprison any that will helpe to print them you see your owne bookes printed for you and free for all men to buy that are desirous of them How many other of your books are there in the same sort common to the view of all men and by vs made common our care only being not to suffer poison to goe freely abroad without a preseruatiue therfore hauing ioyned answer to them we leaue euery one that list to reade at his liberty to iudge of both It would goe amisse with you M. Bishop if our books had that free passage amongst you that yours haue amongst vs. Your Kingdome would soone goe downe euen in Italie and Spaine if your men had liberty to reade our answeres togither with your books The last part of this passage concerneth his deliuery of a speech vttered by his Maiesty at the conference at Hampton Court That no Church ought further to separate it selfe from the Church of Rome in doctrine and ceremonie then shee hath departed from her selfe when shee was in her flourishing and best estate and from Christ her Lord and head In the rehearsall whereof I note him that subtilly he left out the last wordes And from Christ her Lord and head He telleth me that I shew no cause why I doe so and that indeede none can be shewed because they are needlesse wordes and comprehended in the former But we suppose that he needeth more vnderstanding that conceiueth those wordes to be needlesse which are no otherwise comprehended in the former then as the former are expounded by them For although in right meaning it be true which he saith that if the Church of Rome be not departed from her selfe when shee was in her flourishing and best estate shee cannot bee departed from Christ her Lord and head yet such a meaning he may make of her flourishing and best estate as that in that estate shee may be found somewhat to haue departed from Christ her Lord and head His Maiestie therefore to preuent this with great iudgement added And from Christ her Lord and head as to note that by her departing from Christ her Lord wee are to take knowledge of her departing from her selfe when shee was in her flourishing and best estate because then was her flourishing and best estate when shee was nearest to
Christ her Lord and head and most entire in the faith and doctrine which shee had receiued from him Of this flourishing and best estate we must consider in the next Chapter and therefore I cease here to speake any further thereof CHAP. VII Of the flourishing and best estate of the Church of Rome and of the testimony of Theodoret concerning the fulnesse of doctrine contained in the Epistle to the Romans and that the Apostle there condemneth Popery of Idolatry in worshipping of Saints and Images ANSWERE TO THE EPISTLE VVE hope you vvill not deny but the Apostle S. Paul vvas one principall pillar c. to Chap. 8. Paul saith and vve say the same that c. W. BISHOP §. 1. WHat a worthy graue Preface he vseth to assure men that we will not deny S. Paul nor his Epistle to the Romans which neuer were called in doubt by any man But good Sir whiles you muse and busie your head so much vpon bables you forget or wilfully mistake the very point of the question Was the Church of Rome at her most flourishing estate when S. Paul wrote that Epistle to the Romans was her faith then most renovvmed ouer all the vvorld as you write nothing lesse for not the ten thousand part of that most populous Citty was then conuerted to the faith and they that had receiued the Christian faith were very nouices in it and stoode in great neede of the Apostles diuine instructions Any reasonable man would rather iudge that the Church of Rome then came first to her most flourishing estate when Idolatry and all kinde of superstition was put to silence and banished out of her when the Christian religion was publikely preached and conntenanced by the Emperours authority which was not before the reigne of Constantine the Great our most glorious countrey-man wherefore M. Abbots first fault is that he shooteth farre wide from the marke which he should haue aimed at principally The second is more nice yet in one that would seeme so acute not to be excused It is that he taketh an Epistle written to the Romans for their instruction and correction as if it were a declaration and profession of their faith when as all men know such a letter might containe many things which they had not heard off before Further yet that you may see how nothing can passe his fingers without some legerdemaine marke how he englisheth Theodorets wordes Dogmatum pertractationem The handling of opinions is by him translated all points of doctrine whereas it rather signifieth some then all opinions or lessons But I will let these ouer-sights passe as flea-bitings and follow him whither he pleaseth to wander that euery man may see when he is permitted to say what he liketh best that in truth he can alleage out of S. Paul nothing of moment against the Catholike faith R. ABBOT WEe see here what great cause there was that his Maiesty should adde the wordes now spoken off And from Christ her Lord and head because it might be doubted what construction they or any other might make of the flourishing and best estate of the Church of Rome I say that St. Paul wrote his Epistle to that Church when the faith thereof was most renowmed through the world This M. Bishop denieth and will not haue that to be taken for the flourishing and best estate of the Roman Church And why First not the ten thousand part of that most populous Citty was then conuerted to the faith and secondly they who had then receiued the Christian faith were very nouices in it and stoode in great neede of the Apostles diuine instructions So then he will haue vs to vnderstand that then was the flourishing and best estate of the Church of Rome when there were in it the greatest number of Christians and they were so perfect in the faith as that they needed not the Apostles diuine instructions But when was that Not before the reigne of Constantine the Great saith he Well and was it then Nay he saith not so and we may well thinke that he knoweth not well when or what to say Certaine it is that Paganisme abounded in Rome after the time of Constantine who indeede for his time by lawes restrained the publike exercise thereof but yet a Relat. Symmach apud Ambros lib. 5. Epist 30 Diui ConstaÌ„tij factum diu non sletit that act of his saith Symmachus did not long stand good the people returning to their old superstitions and sacrifices vntill that by Theodosius and Gratian the Emperours of Rome they were repressed againe Which lawes of theirs Symmachus the Lieutenant of the city moued the next Emperour Valentinian in his owne name and in the name of the City and Senate of Rome to haue againe repealed who b Symmach vt supra Senatus me querelaruÌ„ suarum iussit esse I egatum c. Vt Praefectus vâ—ster gesta publica prosequor vt Legatus ciuium mandata commendo though he pretended a farre greater number of Senatours to ioyne with him then did as Ambrose sheweth yet cannot be doubted to haue had a great number also partakers with him beside the common multitude of the City whose affection how it stood we may gather by that that Hierome saith not much distant from that time that c Hieron in Esai lib. 16. c. 57. â—psaque Roma orbiâ— Domina in singulis insulis domibusque Tutela simulachrum cereis venerans ac lucernis quam ad tuitionem aedium isto appellant nomine Rome in euery house did with tapers and candles worship the image of Tutela whom they so called for the tuition and defence of their houses though elsewhere he testifie that d IdeÌ„ ad Marcel vt commigret Bethlehem Est ibi sancta Ecclesia c. gentilitate calcata in sublime se quotidiè erigens vocabulum Christianum Paganisme was decaying and the name of Christians arising and growing higher and higher from day to day But if it were yet growing then it was not at full growth and therefore when will M. Bishop say was the most flourishing and best time of the Church there Againe we desire to know of him when the time was that the Church of Rome stoode in no neede of the Apostles diuine instructions May we thinke M. Bishop that euer there was any such time Surely we know now what the cause is why the Apostles diuine instructions are so little set by at Rome They serued the Romans forsooth at first when they were but nouices in the faith but now they are growen ripe and haue no neede to be taught by him May we not thinke him a wise man that thus telleth vs that the Romans then stoode in neede of the Apostles diuine instructions as if there were any time since that they had not the like neede But I would aske him how it appeareth to him that the Romans were then but nouices in the faith The reason which his wordes imply is because
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
and conclusions seeme to you so leane thinne and weake which notwithstanding are hitherto found inuincibly grounded against all those silly oppositions wherewith you haue encountred them The sentences which I haue cited out of the Apostle how simply yea how shamefully are they discharged by you only with an odious reiteration of those things which in my former answere haue beene already troden to the ground Some of them you say seemed to sound for vs though they had in truth a farre different sense but what slender and miserable shifts haue you vsed to frame them to signifie otherwise then they sound Some haue neither sense nor sound nor syllable for vs and yet it is found that both syllable and sound and sense doe wholly sauour and sound out our doctrine against you Which is so plaine both in the thing it selfe and in those iustifications which I haue vsed thereof as that I doubt not but that in your owne conscience M. Bishop I haue gotten the conquest only it is with you according to that which St. Austin saith b August de Ciuit. Dei l. 6. c. 1. Ea putatur gloria vanitatis nullis cedere viribus veritatis This is esteemed the glory of vanity neuer to yeeld to any force of truth But here I wish thee gentle Reader to obserue what a confession he maketh of that that I said that St. Paul wrote nothing but what in shew at least serueth the Protestants turne It is saith he one of the truest words he there deliuereth But if it be true that all that St. Paul hath written doth in shew at least serue the Protestants turne then my wonder is acknowledged to be iust namely that St. Paul should be a Papist and yet should write nothing but what in shew at least serueth the Protestants turne M. Bishop will haue it thought that in sense and meaning St. Paul is euery where against vs but what a strange thing is it that St. Paul in meaning should be euery where against vs and yet that in shew and appearance of wordes he should speake altogether for vs Concerning this matter I noted what the Rhemists haue said aduertising their Reader that c Rhem. Testam ArgumeÌ„t of the Epistles in generall where any thing in St. Pauls Epistles soundeth to him as contrary to the doctrine of their Church he faileth of the right sense Herein M. Bishop ioyneth with them both confessing that St. Pauls wordes are against them but bearing men in hand that the meaning alwaies is otherwise then the wordes import Thus they gull and abuse the simplicity and folly of them that will hearken vnto them perswading that that is improbable incredible impossible that the holy Apostles directed by the spirit of God should speake one thing as if they were Protestants and yet meane another as if they were Papists that in beleefe they should be Papists and yet should say nothing for iustification of Popery saue only by secret and concealed senses which cannot be â—nforced or gathered by the wordes Iustly are they giuen ouer of God to errour and lyes that vvilfully blinde themselues from taking knowledge of such delusion Now here I vvas disposed to dally a little vvith M. Bishop and to tell him my imagination that for anger that Peter and Paul had said nothing in their behalfe they might haply fare as Robertus Liciensis did in another case before the Pope spitting and crying out Fie vpon Peter fie vpon Paul c. M. Bishop being offended at this iest as d 1. Kings 18. â—â— Baals Priests vvere at the iesting of Elias telleth his Reader for vvant of matter that I turne from the truth to fables as the Apostle speaketh a text very vntowardly applyed if there vvere occasion to examine it and that for lacke of a better I bring Robin good-fellow vpon the stage Novv that Robertus Liciensis a Franciscan Friar vvas indeede a right Popish Robin good-fellow of vvhom e Erasm de rat Concionandi lib. 3. Erasmus reporteth that preaching on a time very instantly and earnestly to stirre men vp to goe against the Turkes and Paynims and comming at length to lament that none offered themselues to be Captaines and leaders in this seruice professeth in the end that rather then there should be any vvant in that behalfe he vvould not sticke to cast off his Franciscan vveede and become himselfe a Captaine or a Souldier amongst them At vvhich vvordes he cast off his vpper garment and vnderneath vvas attired and furnished as a Souldier and so prosecuted this matter for the space of halfe an houre and being afterwards questioned vvhy hee thus did confessed that he did it for his Minions sake vvho had told him that shee disliked nothing in him but his Friars vveede Whereupon he demanding in vvhat attire he should best content her and shee answering that shee could best like of him in the habit of a Souldier he bid her be the next day at Sermon and shee should see him so and then played Robin good-fellowes part in that sort as I haue said In the same place Erasmus telleth of that Liciensis the storie to vvhich I before alluded f Erasm ibid. that being on a day to preach before the Pope and his Cardinals when he saw them come in with that Princely pompe and the Pope carryed in a chaire and all men doing worship to him without any other words beginneth to cry out Fie vpon St. Peter fie vpon St. Paul spitting and turning this way and that way and so gate him downe againe leauing all astonished at him some thinking him to be fallen madde and other some imagining him to be become an Heretike or a Pagan Being afterwards examined how he fell to such horrible blasphemie he answered that he had prepared a farre other matter to speake of which he imparted to them but when I saw you saith he come in with such pompe and liue so deliciously and withall considered with my selfe how meane how painfull and vnpleasing a life the Apostles led in whose places you succeede I gathered with my selfe that either they were fooles that went so hard a way to heauen or else that you goe the direct way to hell But of you saith he who haue the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen I could not misdoubt any euill It remained therefore that I should detest the folly of them vvho when they might haue liued gloriously and pleasantly as you doe would rather through their whole life with fasting and watching and labour torment themselues Now as in this case this Robertus Liciensis cryed Fie vpon Peter and Paul for their kinde of life so vnlike to the life of Popes and Cardinals so I thought it might be likely that M. Bishop and his fellowes in their anger might cry out vpon them for their kinde of doctrine so vnlike to the doctrine of Popery and containing nothing at all for the trash and trinkets of their profession M. Bishop saith that
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
the soule going from the body he shall hold it with him for euer without any change that neither being exalted it can come downe to punishment nor being drowned in eternall punishments can thence forth rise to any remedy of saluation If after death there be no deliuerance if there be no change but as the Angell either good or badde receiueth the soule out of the body so it continueth for euer either exalted to ioy or drowned in punishment then there can be no Purgatory then there can be nothing but either heauen or hell where they that come shall abide for euer Hee citeth for this the same wordes of Salomon that we doe and of which Olympiodorus a writer of the same time saith k Olympiodor in Ecclesi asâ— cap. 11. In quocunque loco seu illustri seu tene 〈◊〉 depreâ—edatur â—omo cum moritur mâ—ode gradu atque ordine poriâ—â—net in aeternum nam vel requieseâ—â— in lumine foelicitatis aeterae cum iustis Christo Domino vel in tenebris cruciatur cum iniquis huius mundi principâ— Diabolo In whatsoeuer place either lightsome or darke a man is taken when he dyeth in the same degree and order he abideth for euer for either he resteth in the light of eternall felicity with the iust and with Christ our Lord or else he is tormented in darkenesse with the wicked and with the Prince of this world the Diuell But Gregory againe writeth an Epistle to his friend Aregius a Bishop to comfort him concerning the death of some belonging to him wherin it is worthy to be obserued how consonantly he carrieth himselfe to the doctrine of the Scriptures Amongst other wordes wee reade these l Gregor lib. 7. indict 2. Epist 111. Indecens est de illis taedio afflictionis addâ—ci quos credendum est ad veram vitam moriendo perue nisse HabeÌ„t for sitan illi iustam longi doloris excusationem qui vitam alteram nesciunt qui de hoc seculo ad mâ—lius transitiâ— esse non confidunt nos autem qui nouimus qui hoc credimus docemus coÌ„tristarinimium de obâ—â—ntibus no debemus ne quod apud alios tenet pietatis speciem hoc magis nobis in culpa sit Nam dissidetâ—c quodamodâ— genus est cotra hoc quod quisque pradicat torqueri moestitia dicente Apostolo Nolumus autem vos ignorare fratres c. Hac itaque ratione perspecta studendum nobis est vt sicut dixâ—mus de mortâ—â—â— non esslâ—gamur sed affectuÌ„ viuentibus impendamus quibus pictas ad 〈◊〉 sit ad sâ—uct◠〈◊〉 It is vndecent for vs to giue our selues to long affliction of sorrow for them whom wee are to beleeue to haue come by death vnto the true life They haue haply iust excuse of long sorrow who know not any other life who doe not beleeue the passage from this world to be to a better world but wee who know who beleeue and teach this are not to be too heauy for the dead least that which with others carryeth a shew of piety be to vs rather a matter of blame For it is in a manner a kinde of distrâ—st to be tormented with heauinesse contrary to that which he himselfe doth teach Hereof he citeth the wordes of Saint Paul to the Thestalonians which I haue before set downe and then addeth This therefore seeing we know wee are to haue care as I haue said not to be afflicted for the dead but to bestow our affection vpon the liuing to whom our piety or denotion may be profitable and our loue may yeeld fruit Surely he leaueth no place for Purgatory that teacheth to beleeue that the faithfull in death doe attaine vnto true life and that their passage from this world is to a better neither doth he acknowledge any vse of Prayers of Masses and Trentals and other Offices and Obsequies for the dead who saith that our deuotion and loue yeeldeth no fruit or profit to them He would not haue bidden Aregius not to be afflicted for the dead but to bestow his affection vpon the liuing if hee had thought the dead to be in a Purgatory where they should and might be releeued by the deuotions of the liuing Thus he beleeued and taught where he taught aduisedly according to the Scriptures and thus wee beleeue accordingly and what hee casually taught otherwise wee reckon it for wood and straw and stubble which hee built vpon the true foundation which now the day-light of the Gospell hath reueiled and the fire of Gods word consumeth though hee himselfe by the faith of the said foundation hath attained peace And this wee hold to be the only true application of the Apostles wordes and most fitting to the processe of the text the Apostle making himselfe a builder by his preaching laying Christ for the foundation of his doctrine and therefore consequently vnderstanding gold siluer pearles wood hay stubble to be the rest of the doctrine that is preached concerning Christ either true signified by gold and siluer and pearles or false signified by wood and hay and stubble So did Tertullian of old vnderstand it m Tertul. coÌ„t Marc. l. 5. Super quod prout quisque superstruxerit dignam scilicet vel indignam doctrinam opus â—ius per ignem probabitur merces â—iâ—s per ignem rependetur As euery man saith he buildeth vpon the foundation doctrine worthy or vnworthy his worke shall be tryed by fire his reward shall be repaied him by fire In the like sort doth Ambrose expound it n Ambros in 1. Cor. 3. Tria genera posuit praeclara in mundo in quibus bonam doctrinam significauit c. Tria alia genera posuit sedfriuola In his corrupta vana doctrina designata di nâ—scitur He setteth downe three kinds of things that are excellent in the world gold siluer pearles by which he signifieth good doctrine three other things he setteth downe which are but base wood hay stubble and by these corrupt and vaine doctrine is designed Now if by these things doctrine bee designed then the fire whereby triall must be made of these things must be vnderstood accordingly That cannot be of the Popish Purgatory fire for it cannot in this sense bee fitted to Purgatory fire which the Apostle saith Euery mans worke shall be made manifest for the day shall declareâ— because it shall bee reueiled by fire for it is not declared or manifested by Purgatory fire whether doctrine bee true or false sith it selfe is so obscure and darke as that no man knoweth where it is Is it made manifest to vs by Purgatory fire whether ours or the Popish doctrine bee the more true Nay but by the word of God this triall is made and thereby it appeareth what is truth and what is falshood what is right and what is wrong and the truth as the gold and siluer is approued and iustified thereby but errour and false doctrine as wood and