saluationem tametsi erroneam hominem posse mereri per fidem erroneam etsi contingat vt adoret diabolū that the faith of a lay man worshipping an Host that is not consecrated though it be an erroneous faith yet sufficeth to saluation and that a man by an erroneous faith may merit although it fall out that he worship the diuell This speech is strange but yet M. Bishop now by his distinction teacheth vs how it may very wel stand because though a man materially worship the diuell yet by his intention hee doth formally worship God Now what ill happe had Ieroboam that he was not acquainted with these Romish schoole-trickes for he might well haue answered both for himself and for the people that though materially they errēd in the Calues yet their intention was pure and holy to worship the true God and therefore formally they were true worshippers Yea this distinction wil serue to cleere a great part of the idolatries of the Gentiles and Pagans because albeit the diuels did present themselues at their idols and images to receiue the sacrifices deuotions that were there performed as in Popery they haue also done yet this hindred not but that formally they were true worshippers because though they were materially mistaken as before was said in taking the diuell for God yet their formall meaning and intention was to doe seruice to the onely true and immortall God Thus shall they be excused of whom Christ saith d Ioh. 16.2 The time will come that whosoeuer killeth you will thinke that he doth God seruice Which many vndoubtedly thought in the crucifying of Christ being formally e Act. 22.3 zealous towards God but f Luk. 23.34 not knowing materially what they did So S. Austin saith of the Donatists g Aug. epist 48. Arbitrabantur se pro ecclesiae dei facere quicquid inquieta temeritate faciebant Whatsoeuer they did in their turbulent rashnesse and furie they thought they did it in behalfe of the Church of God The same we say of all schismes and heresies that the followers thereof at least many of them are formally true worshippers of Christ because they haue an vnfained intention and purpose to serue the Lord Iesus Christ howsoeuer materially they be mistaken in some things Thus doth M. Bishop make a hotch-potch and mixture of all religions and by his distinction of materialitèr and formalitèr a man may in any religion bee a true worshipper of God because hee may haue a zealous intention to serue God But if his learning and vnderstanding did not faile him he would remember that h Ioh. 4.23 the true worshippers doe worship God not onely formally in spirit but also materially in truth It was the religion of the Samaritanes i Ibid. vers 22. to worship they knew not what but the religion of the true Iewes of whom was saluation was to know what they did worship Our Sauiour would thereby instruct vs that there is no saluation where men worship they know not what God hath reueiled vnto vs the knowledge of himselfe and of his will that thereby we may be directed to serue him In this k Ioh. 17.3 knowledge is eternall life but l Os◠4.6 in the want of knowledge is perdition and destruction Intention zeale is good and in the seruice of God necessarily required but yet our intention and zeale is no other but furie and madnesse and fighting against God if it haue not knowledge to guide it materially in the way of God Now if it be idolatrie to worship that for God which is no God and yet it followeth not that God is heereby stiled an Idoll then surely it is likewise Idolatrie to worship the Sacrament vnder the name of the body of Christ when it is not the bodie of Christ and yet we doe not thereby stile our Sauiour Iesus Christ an idoll as hee fondly obiecteth against vs for blasphemie in the highest degree 19. W. BISHOP His third obiection is out of the fourth Commandement which as he saith giueth a libertie to worke six daies in the ordinarie affaires of our calling which libertie saith be cannot bee repealed by any creature the Church of Rome therefore erreth in that it prescribeth other set and ordinary festiuall daies to be obserued as straightly and with as much solemnitie as the Sabbath of the Lord. Answ Doth not the Church of England also prescribe the Natiuitie of our Sauiour and of S. Iohn Baptist the feasts of the Apostles and many others to be kept holy and command that no man worke in the affaires of their calling those daies doth their owne church also erre therein How say you then to the church of the Israelites which kept the feasts of Easter Whitsontide and of the Tabernacles as straightly and with as much solemnitie as they kept the Lords Sabbath was it also mis-led to the breach of Gods commandements or must we not rather thereby learne that six daies in the weeke were at the first left vs free to labour in but yet so that by the decree and commandement of our spirituall Gouernours any of them might vpon iust occasion be made festiuall and thereupon euery good christian bound to keepe them by their obedience vnto their Gouernours to thinke the contrarie is a high point of Puritanisme R. ABBOT M. Festiuall daies lawfully prescribed by the church Perkins intendeth nothing against the authoritie of the Church for the prescribing of some solemne and festiuall daies but condemneth the church of Rome iustly for prescribing such daies to be obserued as straitly and with as much solemntie he should haue said more straitly and with much more conscience and solemnitie than the Lords Sabbath day Yea it is a thing impious in the Bishop of Rome that hee taketh vpon him to make such daies in themselues a Bellar. de cultu sanct l. 3. ca. 10. Sunt dies festi verè alijs fanctiores sacratiores pars quaedam diuini cultus more sacred and holy than other daies and a part of the very true worship and seruice of God Whereas M. Perkins saith that it is not in the power of any creature to repeale the liberty of working six daies he saith rightly if we vnderstand it of the libertie of conscience for no creature may binde the conscience from the acknowledgement of a lawfulnesse with God to worke all and euery of the six daies in the affaires of our callings but yet in charitie and obedience we yeeld to our gouernours and to our brethren somewhat vpon occasion to refraine our libertie and to forbeare the doing of those things of which notwithstanding we know and are perswaded that in conscience and with God they are free and lawfull to be done 20. W. BISHOP Fourthly saith M. PER. the fift Commandement enioineth children to obey father and mother in all things specially in matters of moment as in their Marriages and choice of their calling
seruice M. Bishop sheweth himselfe to be a man of a leaud and dishonest tongue that will make any comparison of the Church of Rome to our Church And thus we are come to an end of his long preface wherein what mature iudgement he hath shewed concerning a matter of so great moment it remaineth for the Reader to iudge for my part I iudge he did very ill bestow his time in blotting so many papers with so much folly and vntruth But his transition is woorthy to be noted Now to the rest of his questions saith he according to his own â—â—â—der whereas of twelue questions consequently handled by M. Perkins he speaketh not a word but onely passeth to an aduertisement in the end where hee thought least harme might befall to him Heere is some want of plaine dealing which may iustly cause his Reader to bee suspicious and doubtfull of him A confutation to D. BISHOPS answer to Master PERKINS his Aduertisement W. PERKINS An aduertisement to all fauourers of the Roman religion shewing as he weeneth that the said Religion is against the Catholike principles of the Catechisme that hath beene agreed vpon euer since the daies of the Apostles by all Churches Which principles be foure The Apostles Creed the tenne Commandements the Lords praier the institution of two Sacraments Baptisme and the Lords Supper 1. COR. 11. v. 23. 1. W. BISHOP I Had once determined to haue wholly omitted this goodly post-script because it containeth in manner nothing else but an irkesome repetition of that which hath beene I will not say twice before but more than twenty times handled ouer and ouer in this former small treatise notwithstanding considering both how ready many are when they see any thing omitted to say that it could not be answered and also for that these pointes heere reiterated are the most odious that he could cull out of all the rest to vrge against vs I finally resolued to giue them a short answer And further also by prouing their new religion to be very opposite vnto those old grounds of the true religion to requite him with the like that I die not in his debt Thus he beginneth The Roman religion established by the Councell of Trent is in the principall points thereof against the very grounds of the Catechisme the Creede the tenne Commandements the Lords praier the two Sacraments THe Catholike religion embraced and defended by the Church of Rome was planted and established there by the Apostles Saint Peter and Saint Paul fifteene hundred yeeres before the Councell of Trent and hath been euer sithence by the Bishops of Rome their lawfull successours constantly retained and most sincerely obserued and maintained some articles thereof called into question by the Heretikes of this latter age were in that most learned generall Councell of Trent declared and defined And great meruaile it were if the principall points thereof should be against the grounds of the Catechisme which is in euery point most substantially expounded by the decree and order of the very same Councell Or is it credible that the Church of Rome with which all other ancient Churches and holy Fathers did desire to agree and which hath beene euer most diligent to obserue all Apostolicall traditions should in the principall points of faith crosse and destroy the very principles of that religion that hath been agreed vpon by all Churches euer since the Apostle daies as he saith Is it not much more likely and probable that the Protestants who slander all Churches euer since the time of the Apostles with some kinde of corruption or other and who hold no kinde of Apostolicall tradition to be necessary is not not I say more credible that they should shake those grounds of faith which come by tradition from the Apostles and haue beene euer since by all Churches agreed vpon I suppose that few men of any indifferent iudgement can thinke the contrary R. ABBOT M. Bishop is desirous to seeme to haue omitted nothing because many saith he are ready when they see any thing omitted to say that it could not be answered and yet he hath cunningly omitted the handling of twelue questions as I haue already noted which are more than the third part of the booke which he vndertooke to answer In that which here he hath sent vs he taketh vpon him as to answer M. Our religion and not Popery is the old religion Perkins so by way of requitall to prooue that our new religion as he calleth it is very opposite vnto the old grounds of the true religion But if his eies were open he would easily see that that new religion and the true religion are all one our new religon as to him it seemeth being indeed no other but that onely true religion whereby all the faithfull haue been saued from the beginning and so shal be to the worlds end And if he will haue our religion to be taken for a new religion he must first impeach those grounds of antiquitie wherby we haue hitherto iustified the same against his vaine and wilfull cauilations As for that which he saith that the religion now defended by the Church of Rome was planted and established there by the Apostles Saint Peter and Saint Paul it is the begging of the question a fond presumption an idle headed dreame who but fooles and madde men beleeue it when they see the writings of the Apostles Peter and Paul and therein finde no mention of the religion that is now at Rome neither of the Pope nor of Purgatorie nor Pardons nor Iubilies nor Masse nor Images nor any other of that filth If the successors of that See had constantly reteined the faith that by the Apostles was deliuered we should now haue that religion at Rome which is taught in the Epistle to the Romanes which now is our religion and was then the religion of the church of Rome Of that religion those heretikes whom no otherwise he so nameth but according to the a Act. 24.14 Iewish phrase called nothing into question they only questioned impugned those additions and alterations wherewith the church of Rome hath defiled and disgraced that religion The Councel of Trent a mockerie of the world The Councell of Trent which declared and defined against them was neither learned nor generall It was a base and a vile collusion and meere mockerie of the world partially assembled by the Pope guilefully managed by his Agents directed wholly by his intelligence nothing there to bee concluded but what hee first approued yet all in sine left at his will by that damnable clause neuer heard of in any former Councel b Conc. Trid. sess 7. in princip sess 25. cap. 21. de reformat Salua semper in omnibus authoritate sedis Apostolicae Sauing alwaies and in all things the authoritie of the See Apostolike Some Diuines there were of qualitie and worth who gaue their assistance in that businesse but as for the Bishops of which
the greatest number were Italians they deserued for the most part rather to bee accounted a heard of swine than a Councell of learned men His reason that the principall points of Poperie cannot bee against the grounds of the Catechisme because the same is expounded by the decree and order of that Councell maketh as much for vs as it doth for them For the Catechisme is by order expounded and taught by vs wee open to the people the Creed the ten Commandements the Lords Praier the doctrine of Sacraments M. Bishop therefore doth amisse to say that our religion is opposite to those old grounds of true religion If this argument auaile not for vs then neither shall it auaile for him but wee are still at libertie to conceiue that notwithstanding their expounding of those grounds they teach points of doctrine contrary thereunto And indeed that expounding of theirs was no otherwise begun but in emulation of our doings in that kinde for vntill it pleased God to stirre vp the spirits of some of our men to endeuour the reformation of the Church and to that end to bring the people so much as in them lay out of the thraldome of blindnesse and ignorance wherein they were then holden the vse of Catechisme was quite abolished out of the Church the people knew neither the Creed nor the Lords praier but onely that they spake them like a charme in a strange and vnknowen tongue But when they saw vs recalling them to the ancient order of Catechising and thereby training them to the knowledge of God and of faith towards him they held it necessarie for the satisfaction of the world that they themselues should make some shew of doing the like and thereupon in the Councell of Trent tooke order for a Catechisme to bee published though they neuer meant to make any great vse of it but onely where necessitie should enforce them for the countermining of our labours and the staying of manie whom otherwise the desire of learning and of the knowledge of God would haue caried away from them Into that Catechisme and the rest of theirs how they haue foisted in matters of faith and doctrine which the old expositours of the Catechisme neuer knew nor haue deliuered wee shall somewhat perceiue by examining the processe and particulars of this booke In the meane time we answer M. Bishop that it is verie credible and ready enough to be beleeued of them that are carefull to vnderstand it that the church of Rome albeit while it continued sound in the faith all ancient Churches and holy Fathers did desire to agree with it yet since being gon out of her * The church of Rome hath swaiued from the tradition of the Apostles ancient way doth indeed crosse and destroy those principles of religion which formerly haue beene agreed vpon by all Churches For whereas hee saith that that church hath been euer most diligent to obserue all Apostolical traditions it is a stale iest Bellarmine himselfe perforce acknowledgeth it to bee a lie For it being manifest by the testimonie of Anacletus an ancient Bishop of Rome that c De consecrat dist 2. cap. Peracta Peracta consecratione communicent omnes qui nolin◠eccleasisticis carere liminibus sic enim Apostoli statuerunt sancta Romana tenet ecclesia the Apostles decreed and the church of Rome then obserued that they should be excommunicate whosoeuer were present after consecration and did not receiue the Communion Bellarmine in the behalfe of the now-church of Rome reiecteth the same as a thing d Bellarm. de Missa lib. 2. ca. 10. Cortum est decreta ista quae sine dubio non diuini sed humani iuris erant si ad populum pertinebant progressis temporis abrogata fuisse in processe of time abrogated by the church being but a matter of humane only constitutiō decree So likewise we see in the Councel of Cōstance acknowledging that e Concil Const sess 13. Licèt Christus post coenam instituerit discipulis suis administranerit sub vtraque specie panis vini hoc venerabile Sacramentum tamen hoc non obstante c. Et similitèr quòd licèt in primitiua ecclesia huiusmodi Sacramentum à fidelibus reciperetur sub vtraque specie tamen haec consuetudo ad euitandum aliqua scandala pericula est rationabilitèr introducta quòd à laicis tantummodo sub specie panis suscipiatur c. vnde pro lege habenda est c. Christ administred the holy Sacrament to his disciples vnder both kindes and that in the Primitiue Church it was so receiued of the faithfull and yet this notwithstanding they decree it for a law that lay men shall receiuc only in one kinde Now when thus with our eies we see and they themselues tell vs the contrary will M. Bishop notwithstanding tell vs that the Church of Rome hath been euer most diligent to obserue all Apostolicall traditions Surely if they had failed but in these two they had not obserued al but now how many other things are there wherein they haue apparantly swarued from the example of the Apostles How then can we beleeue M. Bishop any further who doubteth not heere to affirme so grosse and manifest vntruth And to this vntruth he addeth another when hee saith that we slander all churches since the time of the Apostles with some corruption or other It is true that we note the corruptions of some churches and of some men accordingly as the history of the Church and the monuments of antiquity doe lay the same foorth vnto vs but wee cannot say that al Churches or al the Fathers of those times were guiltie of those corruptions For many Churches were there and many Bishops and Pastours of Churches of whom no memoriall is come vnto vs many whom we finde otherwise reported of than was true by the corrupting of those writings which they left vnto the Church and suborning other counterfets in their stead many who haue deliuered some exorbitant opinions of which notwithstanding it appeareth not that they had publike approbation in the Church many who haue left so little in record as touching points of faith as that it is hard by them to esteeme what the doctrine of the Church was As for the corruptions whereof we speake there are many of them such as that I doe not thinke M. Bishop to be so impudent but that hee will acknowledge the same as well as we there are none of them but that either by the word of God or by like warrant of antiquity we prooue them to be such as we report them His other tale that we hold no kinde of Apostolicall traditions to be necessary he himselfe knoweth to be vntrue because he knoweth that we receiue the Creede as necessarie which he saith came by tradition from the Apostles It hath beene also f Of Traditions sect 4. before giuen him to vnderstand that we reiect
greatest Saint onely hee hath perhaps better laid hold of this treasure that is hath stronger faith than I. Now what is heere as touching equalitie of glory in the world to come Heere is a common brotherhood in this life wherein none can challenge more than other but this hindreth not but that who in this brotherhood doth the greater worke shall heereafter receiue the greater reward Albeit if Luther doe affirme equalitie of glorie what is that to the impeachment of the article of life euerlasting when as by the common iudgement of the fathers life euerlasting is that u Matt. 20.2.12.13 Aug. de Sanct. Virgin cap. 26. Hiero. cont Iouinian lib. 2. Gregor Moral lib. 4. cap. 31. penny mentioned in the Gospell which in howsoeuer great difference of worke and labour yet is indeed equall and alike to all Now albeit M. Bishop haue heere said whatsoeuer his malice could deuise and more than truth and honesty would haue said yet he would make his Reader beleeue that he hath omitted many other particularities that he might not be ouer tedious but what his other particularities are may be esteemed by those that he hath heere set downe consisting more in lies and cauils than in any matters of moment and trueth Nothing hath he said whereby it may in any sort be conceiued that either our doctrine tendeth to infidelitie or that it is without cause that we cry out against the Antichrist of Rome for corrupting the puritie of the Gospel 16. W. BISHOP First saith Master PER. it is a rule in expounding the seuerall Commandements that all vertues of the same kind are reduced to that Commandement Hence it followeth that counsels of perfection are inioined in the law and therfore prescribe no state of perfection beyond the scope of the Law Answ None of the counsels of perfection are enioyned in the tenne Commandements though for some affinitie they may be reduced to some of them For example It is commanded that I shall not steale that is to take any of my neighbours goods against his will but to giue away all my own to the poore is beyond the compasse of the law so likewise it is commanded not to commit adulterie but wee are not commanded to vow perpetuall chastitie and obedience Such offices only that are necessarily required to the performance of any Commandement are comprehended within the same but no others though some men take occasion of the Commandement to treat of the counsels of perfection R. ABBOT a Psal 19.7 The law of the Lord is a perfect law All works of perfection prescribed by the lavv and therefore prescribeth whatsoeuer is necessary to perfection It requireth b Deut. 6.5 Luk. 10.27 all the heart all the minde all the soule all the strength and because beyond all there can bee nothing more therefore there is no vertue no righteousnesse no perfection that is not commanded therby It is commanded saith M. Bishop that I shall not steale but to giue all mine owne to the poore is beyond the compasse of the law But I answer him that where it is beyond the compasse of the law there it is not a work of perfection but an act of superstition If God command it then not to do it is sin if God cōmand it not there is no piety but folly in the doing of it because God casteth it off with that reprofe c Esa 1.12 Who required these things at your hands Let M. Bishop tell vs when Christ said to the rich man in the Gospell d Luk. 18.22 Goe sell all that thou hast and giue to the poore and thou shalt haue treasure in heauen come and follow me did hee sinne or not in refusing to doe as Christ aduised him If not why doth our Sauiour except against his entring into the kingdome of heauen If he did sinne then he brake the law for e Rom. 4.15 where there is no law there is no sinne and therefore the giuing of all his goods to the poore was within the compasse of the law Hee boasted that hee had kept the law but our Sauiour Christ would discouer how farre he was from louing the Lord with all his hart which the law requireth who had so tied his heart to his worldly wealth as that hee could not finde in his heart God so requiring for the reliefe of his neighbour whom hee should loue as himselfe to void himselfe of the possession thereof To giue all that a man hath to the poore is then a worke of righteousnesse when the calling of God and the following of Christ requireth it and then it is commanded by the law To doe it when dutie to God requireth it not may wel be called a worke of supererogation but work of perfection it is none We are not commanded saith he again to vow pertuall chastitie and obedience It is true and therefore those vowes are no matters of true deuotion and religion but of rash errour and presumption Such offices onely saith he as are necessarily required to the performance of any commandement are comprehended within the same and I answer him that no offices are at all required but what are necessarie to the performance of some commandement For notwithstanding all that can be said or alleaged for aduices and counsels and howsoeuer it may be pleaded that they may seeme in some particulars rightly so called yet circumstance and occasion alwaies maketh them necessary duties and the omitting of them is either the violation of the briefe of the first table Thou shalt loue the Lord thy God with all thy heart c. or of the second Thou shalt loue thy neighbour as thy selfe there being reason of the doing of them either for the glory of God or for the edification of our brethren of which neither can be neglected without trespasse of the law 17. W. BISHOP Secondly saith M. PER. the Commandement Thou shalt not make to thy selfe any grauen Image c. hath two seuerall parts the first forbiddeth the making of Images the second the adoration of them Hee concludeth out of Deuteronomy that the Images of the true Iehoua are forbidden in the Commandement and consequently the adoration of such Images Hence he will haue it to follow that to worship God in or at Images with religious worship is abominable Idolatrie Answ First if the Images of God onely be there prohibited and then worship done to them according to his owne exposition then it followeth most cleerely that there is no probibition for either making or worshipping the Images of any Saints and therefore with a very euill conscience doth he wrest the commandement against them Secondly I say though God had forbidden vs to worship Images yet doth it not follow therof that we must not worship God in or at Images For as God is euery where so may he be worshipped in all places and as wel at or before an Image as in the Church and before the communion table
these purposes or any other yea they serue to set the minde a wandring and to withdraw it from that stedfastnesse and deuotion which these spirituall offices and exercises doe require of vs. In a word Lactantius maketh it y Lactant. Inst l. 2. c. 19. Non est dubium quin religio nulla sit vbicunque simulachrum est a thing vndoubted that where Images are there is no religion and therefore very iustly do we affirme that the Popish vse and defence of Images is no furtherance as M. Bishop would perswade but the very bane and ouerthrow of all true religion 18. W. BISHOP But let vs heare the end of his discourse thus he argueth They that worship they know not what worship an Idol This exposition is false vnlesse they worship it with diuine honor But goe on the Papists worship they know not what I prooue it thus To the consecration of the Host there is required the intention of the Priest but they cannot haue any certainty of the Priests intention wherfore they are not certaine whether it be bread or the body of Christ ergo worshipping of it they worship they know not what Answ First heere is leaping from the Commandements to the Sacraments which is out of order secondly I returne his argument vpon himselfe To their seruice and in the administration of the Lords Supper the Ministers intention is required for if he intend to serue the Diuell and by giuing them the cōmunion to binde them the faster to him then do they in saying Amen to his praiers and receiuing the communion at his hands ioine with him in the Diuels seruice Now they haue no more certaintie of their Ministers meaning than wee haue of our Priests intention yea much lesse of many of them who are mad-merry fellowes and care not greatly whereabout they go nor what they intend must they therefore flie from their diuince seruice and holy communion because they be not certaine of their Ministers intention therein Surely they should if his reason were ought woorth But in such cases we must perswade our selues that Gods Ministers doe their dutie vnlesse we see great cause to the contrarie and thereupon are we bold to doe our dutie to the blessed Sacrament If he should faile in his yet our intention being pure to adore Christs holy bodie onely and nothing else there we should formally be the true worshippers of Christ though materially we were mistaken in that host which to tearme Idolatrie is to stile our Sauiour Iesus Christ an Idoll and therefore blasphemy in the highest degree R. ABBOT They that worship they know not what The Papists worship they know not not what saith M. Perkins do worship an idoll M. Bishop saith that this is false vnlesse they worship it with diuine honor But that worship wherof M. Perkins speaketh is no other but diuine honour and in the subiect whereto he maketh application of this rule which is the Sacrament M. Bishop himselfe doth no otherwise vnderstand it and therefore his exception is verie idle Neither is there heere any vnorderly leaping as he speaketh from the Commandements to the Sacraments but verie orderly and direct proceeding when as hauing in hand to set foorth their breaches of the Commandement he exemplifieth the same by their idolatrie committed in the Sacrament For proofe whereof M. Perkins vseth this argument They that worship they know not what doe worship an idoll This M. Bishop acknowledgeth if they worship it with diuine honor But the Papists in worshipping the Sacrament doe worship with diuine honour they know not what Therefore they worship an idoll That they know not what they worship it is euident and plaine because they cannot know whether it be bread or the bodie of Christ For they confesse that it is not the body of Christ a Bellarm. de Sacra in Gen. ca 27. sententia Catholicorum est requirs intentionem faciendi quod facit Ecclesia without the Priests intention in consecration to doe that which the Church doth But how can any man tell whether the Priest haue this intention or not who can looke into his heart to be assured of his meaning when as it is God onely that knoweth the heart If no man can search into the Priests heart to know his intention then can no man know whether the Sacrament be the body of Christ or not and therefore in the worshipping of it they worship they know not what which is no other but idolatrie With this argument M. Bishop is cruelly pinched and knoweth not which way to auoid the absurditie that is thereby cast vpon them and yet somewhat hee must say howsoeuer little helpe hee receiue by it First hee would returne the argument against vs as touching the intention of our Ministers but dealeth therein childishly and vainly because hee knoweth well that we hang not the Sacrament or any power thereof vpon the intention of the Minister but wholly vpon the word of Christ It may be that some Ministers be as the greatest number of their Priests haue beene woont to bee madde merry-fellowes that care not greatly whereabout they goe but this hindreth vs nothing who by the words of Christ himselfe by them deliuered do firmely apprehend that which Christ hath promised But to salue the matter the best he can he telleth vs that we must perswade our selues that Gods Ministers doe their dutie vnlesse wee see great cause to the contrarie Where hee should remember that the matter heere vrged is not determined by our perswasion but by the Priests intention We may be in charitie well perswaded but in our being well perswaded wee may be deceiued and therefore doe not yet know but that we commit idolatrie in that which M. Bishop calleth duty to the blessed Sacrament and the rather for that he himselfe b Sect. 63. afterwards confesseth that it is idolatrie in the Sacrament to worship for Christ that which is not Christ But now welfare a distinction to helpe at a pinch for if the Priest in his intention faile yet our intention being pure saith he to adore Christs holy body onely and nothing else we shall be formally the true worshippers of Christ though materially we be mistaken in that host Let him speake plaine English and tell vs that formally we shall be true worshippers of Christ but materially we shall be idolaters and then let him resolue vs how in one and the same act it may be iustified that wee are both true worshippers and idolaters what shal become of the formally true worshipper when for being materially an idolater he shal be adiudged to hel I haue wondered at a saying which I haue read cited out of the great Schooleman Robert Holcot thinking it to be more absurd than that any Christian man would vtter it namely c Humphred de vita obitu Iuelit pa. 120. ex Holcot Asserit fidem laici adorantis hostiam non consecratam sufficere illi ad
needs confesse themselues to be farre from it which hold that to be impossible and with the principall part of true religion which consisteth in offering a true reall and externall sacrifice vnto God as in that question hath beene prooued they are at vtter defiance R. ABBOT You haue shewed your owne folly M. Bishop and dishonestly The Protestants teach faith hope and charitie aright but for the peruerting of any articles of faith on our side you haue shewed nothing We teach faith hope and charitie as God hath taught them not as your schoole hath newly framed them We teach faith wherby a 1. Io. 5.10.11 to beleeue the record that God witnesseth of his Sonne that God hath giuen vnto vs eternall life and this life is in his Sonne We teach hope whereby b Rom. 8.25 to wait with patience for the reueilling of that which God hath giuen vs. Wee teach charitie whereby to performe c Eph. 2.10 those good works which God hath prepared for vs as the way wherein to walke to the receiuing of it True reall and externall sacrifice for propitiation of sin we teach none but the sacrifice of the passion of Christ because by d Heb. 9.28 10.14 being once offered he hath taken away our sinnes and made perfect for euer them that are sanctified Therefore the sacrifice which he intendeth is no other but sacriledge and idolatrie and because God hath condemned it therefore are we iustly at defiance with it I may not omit how he heere bobbeth his Reader with as in that question hath beene prooued whereas of that question hee hath said iust neuer a word 25. W. BISHOP 2 Touching the second Commandement after our account as God is honoured by swearing in iustice iudgement and truth so he is also by vowes made vnto him of godly and religious duties which the Prophet Dauid signifieth when he saith vow yee Psal 75.13 and render your vowes vnto the Lord your God Heereupon many Catholikes haue and doe continually vow perpetuall pouertie chastirie and obedience the more fully and freely to serue God which holy vowes the Protestants disallow wholly neither doe they allow of any other vowes for ought I haue heard they doe therefore diminish the seruice of God and pare away a part of that which is reduced to the second Commandement R. ABBOT We diminish not the seruice of God because we teach al that the word of God hath taught and with mens deuises God will not be serued Spirituall vowes admitted Popish vowes reiected The true spirituall vowes whereby we consecrate our selues to God we duly approoue but Popish vowes we reiect and detest not onely as superstitious but also as they teach them with opinion of merit and purchase of remission of sinnes for themselues and others most wicked and damnable There needeth heereof nothing more to be said then hath beene before deliuered in the handling of that question 26. W. BISHOP 3. And whereas in the third wee are commanded to keepe holy the Sabaoth day which is principally performed by hearing attentiuely and deuoutly that diuine seruice which was instituted by Christ and deliuered by his Apostles which is the holy Masse they may not abide it but serue God after the inuention of their owne braines with a mingle-mangle of some old some new odly patched together R. ABBOT What Christ instituted appeareth in the Gospell what the Apostles practised and deliuered appeareth by S. Paul holding himselfe entirely to that a 1. Cor. 11.23 which he had receiued of the Lord. What doe wee finde there that doth in any sort resemble the ougly monster of the Popish Masse Gregory Bishop of Rome saith that b Greg. ep l. 7 Indict 2. ep 63. Mos Apostolorum fuit vt ad ipsam solummodo orationem dominicam oblationis hostiam consecrarent the Apostles were woont with the Lords praier only to consecrate the sacred host and shall we then thinke the Apostles to haue been the authours of those gew-gawes and fooleries those turnings and windings and crossings blessings and murmurations and eleuations that are vsed in the Masse Iulius Bishop of Rome the first condemned the dipping of the Sacrament of Christs body in the cup of the bloud of Christ c De cons dist 2. Cum omne Quòd pro complemento communionis intinctam tradunt Eucharistiam populis nec hoc prolatum ex Euangelio testimonium receperunt c. because no witnesse heereof is brought out of the Gospell If nothing be to be done in the celebration of the Sacrament but whereof there is witnesse in the Gospel and d Cyp. l. 2. ep 3. In sacrificio quod Christus est nonnisi Christu sequendus est none as Cyprian saith be to be followed therein but only Christ we haue iust cause to reiect the Masse which hath so little of that that Christ did and so much that he did not The Masse therefore is no sanctifying but a prophaning of the Lords Sabaoth but the true sanctifying of the Sabaoth is in our diuine seruice wherein Gods word is read and taught praier is made to God in the name of Iesus Christ and the Sacraments are administred accordingly as Christ himselfe hath left the same vnto vs. Wherein we haue reteined whatsoeuer the abomination of desolation had left remaining of the ancient seruice of the Church and whatsoeuer was wanting we haue supplied agreeably thereto and to the word of God and no man will account it odly patched together but such odde fellowes as M. Bishop is who are so farre in loue with the Romish harlot as that they like to eat no bread but what is moulded with her vncleane and filthie hands 27. W. BISHOP In the fourth we are commanded to obey our Princes as well as our parents and all other our Gouernours in all lawfull matters yet the Protestants hold that our Princes lawes doe not binde vs in conscience R. ABBOT What Is Saul also amongst the Prophets Princes lawes how they binde in conscience Is M. Bishop now come to speake of obedience to Princes by the problemes of whose religion no Prince shall be obeied if the Pope list by any pretense of religion to picke a quarrell against him nor any matters shall be lawfull for him to command but what must stand with the Popes law Doth he speake of obedience to Princes who because his Prince liketh not to follow his course hath before threatned him a Epist to the king sect 34. God knoweth what that forcible weapon of necessitie will driue men vnto at length When the Fox preacheth beware the Geese To the point I answer him briefely we teach that Princes lawes in things subiect to their command do binde the conscience to externall obedience though not to any spirituall opinion of the things wherein we doe obey And that we doe not denie this he himselfe b Preface to the Reader sect 3. before hath testified for
is sinne it being the vse and worke of our warfare a Heb. 12.4 to fight against sinne and the grace and power of God assisting vs whereby we ouercome sin He alleageth that S. Iames calleth it only temptation and then first sinne when it conceiueth and I answer him that S. Paul calleth it sinne before it be temptation b Rom. 7.8 sinne wrought all maner of concupiscence in me and therefore in temptation it is sinne See heereof the question of originall sinne handled at large before and of this place of S. Iames the sixt section 33. W. BISHOP Now to conclude this passage if you please to heare to what height of perfect obseruance of the Commandements the Euangelicall Preachers haue brought their followers in Germany vnto by teaching the Commandements to bee impossible and that onely faith iustifieth and that good works haue no reward in heauen and such like Iacobus Andreas a famous Lutheran shall enforme you De planetis who writeth thus That the whole world may see these men alienated from the Papacie and to put no confidence in works De Planetis therefore they doe no good worke at al. In stead of fasting they feast and are drunken day and night in lieu of Almes they oppresse and pill the poore they haue changed praying into cursing and blaspheming the name of God so prophanely that no Turkes nor Saracens commit the like impietie against Christ for humilitie there raigneth pride disdaine crueltie and riot in apparell c. and much more to the same purpose And that this truth may be confirmed by the testimony of two sound witnesses Musculus a man of no smal account among them thus reporteth of his brethren in the Lord. De prophetia Christi Such now adaies is the condition of the Lutherans that if any man list to behold a great number of Knaues robbers malitious persons coseners vsurers and such like deceiuers let him but enter into a Citie where the Gospel is taught and there he shall finde good store of them and a little after Surely it is true that among Heathens Iewes Turkes and other Infidels none can bee found more vnruly and that lesse esteeme of honesty and vertue than the Euangelicall brethren with whom all things passe currant and nothing almost is blamed except vertue For the diuell hath shaken off all their bands and turned them loose R. ABBOT And what M. Bishop are there not thinke you The vertuous conuersation of Papists as many knaues in Rome as in any city of the Lutherans What are there no Minions Courtisans there that serue for the vse of the Pope his Cardinals Did you not remember what was said of Rome by one of your owne Poets Viuere qui sanctè cupitis discedite Roma Depart from Rome all yee whose care is to liue holily Did you not consider that it was easie for vs to retort your words to your selues and to say If you please to heare what good effects the Popish doctrine of iustification by works doth bring foorth looke to the Iesuits Catechisme to Watsons Quodlibets and to the rest of those bookes of the same argument written by Popish Priests concerning the Iesuits who are the Puritane-Papists and the verie quintessence of their religion and yet are there described to be no other but Epicures Atheists fornicatours Sodomites coseners traitours proud malitious contentious couetous and what not Now wee know that the Iesuites will say that you are as leaud and naught as you haue described them to be Like will to like and get you both together there is no such goodnesse in either of you as that you should take vpon you to question our goodnesse And if I should rippe vp this matter of your vertues to the full I should but cause a lothsome and filthie stinke troublesome both to my selfe and to the Reader Therefore I rest my selfe with that answer that I haue a Sect. 15. and of satisfaction sect 19. before giuen vpon the like occasion Onely I must note it for one of M. Bishops Sycophants tricks that hee reckoneth it amongst our doctrines that good works haue no reward in heauen 34. W. BISHOP Hauing done with the Creed and ten Commandements we must now come to our Lords praier Master PER. beginneth with it thus The Lords Praier is a most absolute forme of praier now in this wee are taught to direct our praiers to God alone Our father c. and that onely in the name and mediation of Christ for God is our father onely by Christ therefore to vse any mediation of Saints is needlesse Ans We allow our Lords praier to be a most perfect forme of praier yet hold that many other sort of praiers may be made vnto God very acceptably as sundry other praiers vsed by Christ and set downe in the Gospell doe teach vs and therefore to argue that because one praier of Christs making is directed to God that no other may bee made to any Saint is very childish Wee gather praier to Saints out of S. Pauls requesting the Romans and Corinthians and others to pray for him and out of the mediation of the woman of Cananea to Christ for her daughter and the Disciples speaking to Christ for her with such like both out of the old and new Testament For if it had been either needlesse or bootlesse to haue praied vnto God any otherwise than in the name and by the mediation of Christ then S. Paul would not haue requested the helpe of mortall mens praiers to God for him and if poore sinners praiers may helpe vs much more may the intercession of the glorious Saints do who are in far greater fauor with God See the question of intercession of Saints Againe if that only forme of praier were to be vsed neither were it lawfull to pray to Christ himselfe neither could it bee prooued thereby that we should praie in Christs name For there is no expresse mention of Christs name neither any petition for Christs sake For God may bee truely called our Father in that he immediately createth and giueth vs our soules which is more than our bodies that we receiue from our carnall fathers R. ABBOT If the Lords praier be a most perfect forme of praier The Lords praier excludeth praier to Saints as M. Bishop alloweth it to bee then are we perfectly thereby directed both to whom and for what we are to praie It cannot bee called a most perfect forme of praier wherein there is any want of either of these things To adde any thing to that that is perfect is to denie the perfection of it and to take away any thing from it is to make it maimed and vnperfect Seeing then by the most perfect forme of praier we are instructed to pray no otherwise but to God onely it followeth necessarily that praier to Saints is vnlawfull because it is exorbitant from that most perfect forme M. Bishops exception heereto is