Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
scripture_n church_n word_n write_a 3,648 5 10.7659 5 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A16174 A reproofe of M. Doct. Abbots defence, of the Catholike deformed by M. W. Perkins Wherein his sundry abuses of Gods sacred word, and most manifold mangling, misaplying, and falsifying, the auncient Fathers sentences,be so plainely discouered, euen to the eye of euery indifferent reader, that whosoeuer hath any due care of his owne saluation, can neuer hereafter giue him more credit, in matter of faith and religion. The first part. Made by W.P.B. and Doct. in diuinty. Bishop, William, 1554?-1624. 1608 (1608) STC 3098; ESTC S114055 254,241 290

There are 11 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

we are justified not by faith alone but also by good workes That in extremity of sicknesse we must cal for the Priest to anoile vs with holy Oile That we must confesse our sinnes not to God alone but also vnto men these and diuers such like heades of our Catholike faith formally set downe in holy Scripture the Protestants wil not beleeue though they be written in Gods vvord neuer so expresly but doe ransacke al the corners of their wits to deuise some odde shift or other how to flie from the euidence of them Whereupon I conclude that they doe not receiue al the written word though they professe neuer so much to allow of al the bookes of Canonical Scripture Lib. 2. de Trinitate ad Const For the written word of God consisteth not in the reading but in the vnderstāding as S. Hierome testifieth that is it doth not consist in the bare letter of it but in the letter and true sence and meaning joined togither the letter being as the body of Scripture and the right vnderstanding of it the soule spirit and life thereof he therefore that taketh not the written word in the true sence but swarneth from the sincere interpretation of it cannot be truly said to receiue the written word as a good Christian ought to doe Seing then that the Protestants and al other sectaries doe not receiue the holy Scriptures according vnto the most ancient and best learned Doctors exposition they may most justly be denied to receiue the sacred vvritten word of God at al though they seeme neuer so much to approue al the Bookes Verses and Letters of it vvhich is plainly proued by S. Hierome vpon the first Chapter to the Galathians Now to draw towardes the end of this clause not only neuer a one of M. Abbots assertions whereby he went about to proue them selues and their Church to be Catholike is true as hath beene shewed before but ouer and besides his very conclusion conuinceth himselfe euen by the verdict of himselfe to fal into the foule fault and errour of the Donatists Our faith saith he because it is that which the Apostles committed to writing is the Apostolike faith and our Church by consanguinity and agreement of doctrine is proue to be an Apostolical Church c. and is the only true Catholike Church c. see you not how he is come at length to proue their Church to be Catholike Page 16. Line 5. Ex perfectione doctrinae By perfectnesse of their doctrine vvhich was as he himselfe in this very assertion noted a plaine Donatistical tricke reproued by S. Augustine whom in that point he then approued What doating folly is this in the same short discourse so to forget himselfe as to take that for a sound proofe which he himselfe had before confuted as heretical we like wel of Tertullians obseruation That our faith ought to haue consanguinity and perfect agreement with the Apostles doctrine but that is not the question at this time but vvhether our doctrine or the Protestant be truly called Catholike that is whether of them hath beene receiued and beleeued in al nations ouer the world that is to be proued in this place M. Abbot if he had meant to deale plainly and soundly should not haue gone so about the bush and haue fetched such vvide and vvilde windlesses from old father Abrahams daies but should haue demonstrated by good testimony of the Ecclesiastical Histories or of ancient Fathers vvho were in the pure times of the Church the most Godly and approued Pastours thereof that the Protestāts religion had flourished since the Apostles daies ouer al Europe Afrike and Asia or at least had beene visibly extant in some one country or other naming some certaine Churches in particular which had held in al points their faith and religion vvhich he seing impossible for any man to doe fel into that extrauagant and rouing discourse which you haue heard concluding without any premises sauing his owne bare word that in the written word There is no mention made of the Pope or his Supremacy nor of his Pardons c. Belike there is no mention made of S. Peter nor aught said of his singular prerogatiues It hath not peraduenture That whatsoeuer be should loose on earth should be loosed in heauen The other points were touched before and shal be shortly againe But I would in the meane season be glad to heare where the written word teacheth vs that Kinges and temporal Magistrates are ordained by Christ to be vnder him supreme Gouernours of Ecclesiastical affaires because M. Abbot made choice of this head-article of theirs for an instance that the written word was plaine on their ●ide he should therefore at least haue pointed at some one text or other in the new Testament where it is registred that Princes are supreme gouernours of the Church Nay are temporal Magistrates any Ecclesiastical persons at al or can one that is no member of the Ecclesiastical body be head of al the rest of the Ecclesiastical members or is the state Secular higher and more worthy then the Ecclesiastical and therefore meete to rule ouer it though they be not of it to say so is to preferre the body before the soule nature before grace earth before heauen or is it meete and decent that the lesse worthy-member should haue the supreme command ouer the more honourable vvhere the Christian vvorld is turned topsy-turuy that may be thought meete and expedient but in other places that wil not be admitted for currant vvhich in it selfe is so disorderly and inconuenient without it had better warrant in the word of God then that new position of theirs hath ROBERT ABBOT NOw vvhereas he alleageth that al his Majesties most roial Progenitours haue liued and died in that vvhich he calleth the Catholike and Apostolike faith Ambros lib. 5. epist. he plaieth the part of Symmachus the Pagan sophister who by like argument vvould haue perswaded Valentinian the Emperour to restore their Heathenish Idolatry and abhominations We are to follow our Fathers saith he who with happinesse and felicity followed their Fathers Aug. psal 54. Thus men haue hardned themselues in their heresies saying What my parents were before me the same wil I be But his Majesty wel knoweth that in matter of religion the example of parents is no band to the children L. 2. epist 3. but the trial thereof is to returne to the roote and original of the Lordes tradition as Ciprian speaketh not regarding what any before vs hath thought fit to be done but what Christ hath done who is before al. It is not vnknowne to his Majesty that there should be a time when Apocal. 17. vers 13. the Kinges of the earth shal giue their power and kingdome to the beast vntil the word of God be fulfilled and with the whoore sitting vpon many waters Vers 14. should bende themselues to fight against the Lambe Wherein if any of his Progenitours
censured a base and beggarly vassal for shewing my selfe sorrowful for my Princes misfortune what stile deserues he for such outragious reproches bealched forth against the highest Bishop of Christes Church Now whereas M. Abbot boldly auerreth That thereby his Majesty hath learned to cast off the yoke of bondage by which other Princes are enthralled to a beast sauing his reuerence I answere that other Kinges nourished in countries accounted as ciuil to say the least as Scotland vvil not change that their bondage vvith his Majesties supposed liberty and freedome because they hold it farre better to enjoy the direction and assistance of the Bishop of Rome for the vniforme and peacible gouernement of their Clergy according vnto the ancient Canons of the Church then either to take it into their owne handes or to cōmit it to the discretion of Consistory Ministers or to any other sort of late deuised Ecclesiastical plat-formes Godly wise and vnderstanding Kings vvil no doubt consider that some who perswade them to cast off such yokes are very false Parasites no sound and true harted subjects because it is said of Kinges out of il counsel in the second Psalme Let vs breake their bandes and let vs cast from vs their yoke vvhereas contrariwise in the same place the spirit of God speakes thus to Princes Apprehendite disciplinam Receiue discipline that is obserue al good orders and take correction least that our Lord waxe angry with you and then you perish from the right way And if they themselues should so much forget their duty to God and respect to his holy Church as to seeke the vtter ruine and subuersion of it yet very reason teacheth them that it is farre more safe orderly and expedient that there should be one only supreme Pastour assisted with the graue counsel of some of the wiser sort of euery Christian country as the Popes holinesse is with the counsel of his most graue wise and learned Cardinals to controule and correct them then to be left to the mercy of the Ministers of euery country and to the tumultuous reformation of the rash and giddy multitude who by the cōmon consent of the best learned Protestants must take their Prince in hand and belabour him if he goe about to oppresse the Gospel as hath beene before proued To proceede is it not a rare pranke of a parasite to auouch that an ancient student in diuinity must needes stand dumbe like an Asse before his Majesty and not be able to answere him one word in his owne profession but the Church the Church the Fathers the Fathers I vvish hartily that his excellent Majesty would match me with no meaner a man then Doctor Abbot he that professeth himselfe able to stoppe al mens mouthes to alleage not only the Church and the Fathers but the Scripture the Scripture and by his Highnesse authentike judgement approue him to haue the better cause that can pertinently cite most plaine texts of Scripture for their religion I make no doubt but the Protestant part notwithstāding their common craking of the vvord of God should goe to the ground Marry vvhen vve auouch holy Scripture for vs in as expresse tearmes as can be deuised they wil not yeeld but deuise most extrauagant glosses to fly from the euident testimony of Gods most holy word whereupon we are compelled to make recourse vnto the definition of the Church of God Iob. 16. v. 13. Which is guided by the spirit of God vnto al truth and vnto the learned commentaries of the most ancient holy and juditious Fathers vvho vvere for their times appointed by the holy Ghost to rule and instruct the same his Church that seing how they vnderstood the holy Scriptures vve may by their euen and vnpartial line and square direct our judgement in the true sence of holy Scripture vvhich is the principal cause why we rely so much vpon the Church and Fathers and for vvhich he so scornefully vpbraideth vs vvith the Church the Church the Fathers the Fathers And here to returne one of M. Abbots sharpe wordes vpon himselfe vvhat a dissembling hipocrite was he to say that when al was done we could not make any thing good by either Church or Fathers Sect. 9. 10. when as he himself doth plainly confesse that S. Augustine S. Hierome Epiphanius and diuers other Fathers be flat for vs and is driuen roundly to deny their authority and to preferre the opinions of condemned Heretikes Iouinian Vigilantius and Aërius before these most renowmed Doctors and Pastors As grosse and palpable an vntruth is that vvhich followeth That the Catholikes be not heauily persecuted by the state whereas al their goodes and chattels be vvholy confiscate and two partes of their landes their bodies at pleasure subject to prison there to lie without baile or mainprise their persons daily in danger of death for receiuing or any vvay maintaining their Pastours to omit al other their oppressions which be almost innumerable but belike because al Catholikes be not by most cruel death suddainly made away this Minister of bloud accounteth their persecution light and easie And vvhereas he so enlargeth the short and smal persecution of their bretheren I doe offer to joine with him in this issue that more Catholike Priests Religious men and others haue beene tormented murthered and most despitefully slaine by men of their religion within the compasse of two Realmes France and England during the only time of Queene Elizabeth her raigne then were of Protestants and men of al other Sects for a thousand yeares before in those countries yea take to them also al Spaine and Italy The Donatists and al other sectaries doe suffer persecution as S. Augustine truly saith for their obstinate folly vvhat of that ergo whosoeuer suffereth persecution for his religion is a foole what a foolish reason in this then were the Apostles and al the best Christians fooles But M. Abbot saith We be children and can yeeld no reason for that we suffer but what ignorance affordeth vs to wit we must cleaue to the Church and follow our fore-fathers Surely that were a foule fault that we as children should obey our Mother the holy Church and follow the faith and religion of our fore-fathers But first it is most palpably false that we can yeeld no other reason for our religion as our bookes euidently doe conuince Then if we had no other reason but that one it alone were sufficient for it is an article of our Creede to beleeue the Church and S. Paul assureth vs 1. Tim. 3. vers 15. That the Church is the pillar and ground of truth vvhereupon this is receiued as a principle of faith among the ancient Fathers allowed euen by Protestants themselues That he that hath not the Church to his Mother shal neuer haue God to his Father he therefore that cleaueth fast vnto the firme pillar of the Church and followeth her precepts as of a most faithful Mother can neuer goe astray
not a word out of him that wil greatly helpe their cause For what saith he that we say not we hold with him that the want of knowledge of the Scriptures is the cause of heresie for he that knoweth and vnderstandeth wel the holy Scriptures can neuer fal into errour or heresie Besides vve denie not but that it is expedient for al men either to reade the Scriptures or to heare them to reade them themselues if they be men of judgement and indued with a lowly spirit carrying with them this rule of S. Peter 2. Pet. 1. vers 19. That the Scriptures as they were not written by a priuate spirit so they must not be vnderstood by a priuate interpretation vvherefore in al darke and doubtful places they must not trust to their owne wit but make their recourse vnto the Catholike Church Ioh 14. v. 26. Ioh. 16. v. 13. 1. Tim. 3. vers 15. Which is directed by the spirit of God into al truth and therefore called the pillar and ground of truth for the true sence and meaning of them Al the rest both Men Women and Children we would haue to heare the holy Scriptures read vnto them and expounded by their lawful Pastours and approued Preachers who are chosen and sent to feede their soules with that heauenly foode of the word of God So that Gregory the ninth differeth nothing from Paul the fift the present Pope of Rome who is fully of the same opinion And M. Abbots audatious assertions to the contrary are but meere slanders For we hold it not pernitious for al sortes of people to reade the Scriptures vnlesse it be in such false translations as the Protestants haue made but haue our selues translated them into the vulgar tongue that al Godly wel minded people of any reasonable capacity may diligently and deuoutly reade them at their good oportunity M. Abbot vvas wont heretofore to alleage some authour or other to giue the better countenance to his lies but now he is faine to face them out himselfe without the helpe of any other and hauing put his special confidence in lying as they did of vvhom the Prophet speaketh Esai 28. Posuimus mendacium spem nostram We haue put our hope in lying he thrusteth them out lightly by huddles False then it is first that we teach the people to be secluded from the reading of Scripture as dogges are from holy thinges for vve would haue none other debarred from reading of them but wauering wilful and peruerse fellowes 2. Pet. 3. vers 16. Who as S. Peter teacheth abuse the holy Scriptures to their owne destruction and to the seducing of others Secondly it is a lie in graine to auouch that we teach the knowledge of the Scriptures to breede errour and heresie vnlesse he meane the corrupt and peruerse knowledge of them which is rather to be tearmed the ignorance of them for the true knowledge of them deliuereth vs from al errour and heresie and settleth vs in the sound doctrine of the Catholike Roman Church True it is that many now a-daies vvho haue some smattering in the vvordes and verses of the text hauing itching eares and wauering minds are the sooner lead away through their little skil in the Scriptures and ouer-great presumption of their owne wits for hearing Heretikes cite for proofe of their heresie some texts of Scripture which they know to be Gods vvord and hauing neither sufficient learning to answere them nor grace to aske counsel therein of the true Pastors of Christs Church vvho would rightly informe them become a pray to the rauening vvolues Againe the very experience of this age doth sufficiently informe an vnderstanding man that the ouer common reading of Gods word by the more rude and vnruly sort hath rather ingendred a corruption of manners then bredde any amendment thereof for euery peeuish scripturist puffed vp with the opinion of his owne learning wil rather take vpon him to be a teacher of others then a practiser of them himselfe And often very preposterously Women wil teach Men Children their Fathers Sheepe their Pastours in a word many wil be jangling about matter of religion and very few studious to liue religiously These disorders I graunt doe not spring directly out of Gods word but out of our corrupt nature too too prone to presumption on our owne skil And there fore let any reasonable man judge vvhether they did not more vvisely who vsed to bridle this itching appetite of reading in the curious and thought it better to binde them to follow the aduise of their spiritual guides which haue charge of their soules then our new bretheren who allow euery Man Woman and Child to read vvhat bookes of Scripture they list and to wrangle about them so commonly S. Paul insinuateth that al places of Scripture are not fit for al sortes of men but in some parts 1. Cor. cap. 3. vers 2. There is milke for sucklings and in others Strong meate for the more perfect And our Sauiour Christ IESVS spake much in parables vvhich are not for euery ones capacity A sword is a good weapon but put it into the hand of a madde man it wil doe more harme then good so if some men get a smattering in holy Scriptures they wil vse it ful madly Wherefore the Catholike Church though shee wish euery child of hers to know so much of the Scriptures as vvil doe them any way good yet shee knowes it to be holesome and very necessary that a moderation be vsed therein according to the discreet aduise and judgement of Godly and prudent Ghostly Fathers ROBERT ABBOT HIEROME and RVFFINVS by the doctrine of the Church of Rome Hier. in Prolog Galiat in Praefat. lib. Salomonis Ruffin in expositione Simboli excluded from Canonical Scripture the same bookes that we doe the bookes of Iudith Tobias Wisdome Ecclesiasticus Baruch and the rest they say plainly Non sunt in Canone non sunt Canonici They are not Canonical nor in the Canon The Church readeth them for instruction of manners not to giue any authority to any Ecclesiastical doctrine But now the Church of Rome wil haue them to be receiued and beleeued for Canonical Scriptures and of equal and like authority withal the other bookes WILLIAM BISHOP I Obserue first that M. Abbot forgetting himselfe vvhich is a foule fault in a liar and leauing his owne prescript order is now fallen cleane from S. Peter and S. Pauls successours the Bishops of Rome Secondly that he neuerthelesse holds his old custome in lying I winke at that petty lie that he thrusteth in Baruch among the rest vvhich his Authors doe not but may not dissemble this greater for whereas he saith Hierome and Ruffinus by the doctrine of the Church of Rome exclude from Canonical Scripture the same bookes that we doe therein he fableth for though they so did yet did they it not by the doctrine of the Church of Rome For Innocentius the first Pope of Rome
vvhom S. Augustine alleageth stiling him a Saint and ranking him with S. Ireneus S. Cyprian and S. Ambrose in these wordes August lib. 1. cont Iulianū cap. 4. Cùm hijs etiam ipse considet etsi posterior tempore prior loco In time somewhat after some of them but in dignity of place before them This holy and learned Bishop of Rome I say vvho flourished in S. Hieromes daies or else S. Augustine vvho was in manner his equal Epist. 3. ad Exuper cap. vltimo could not haue cited his testimony doth expresly declare those very bookes to be Canonical Scripture I trust his declaration that ruled that See of Rome wil rather be taken for the doctrine of the Church of Rome then any other mans besides Againe Pope Gelasius the first who liued not long after him which also is one of M. Abbots chosen patrons did in publike assembly In Decret de Libris sacris in 2. tomo Cōciliorum assisted also vvith 80. other Bishops define the same bookes to be Canonical Scripture who can then doubt but that the Church of Rome in S. Hieromes and Ruffinus daies tooke those bookes to be Canonical Scripture wherefore it was but M. Abbots addition to the text to affirme that Hierome and Ruffinus according to the doctrine of the Church of Rome did so say Besides the third Councel of Carthage holden at the felfe-same time Cōcil 3. Carthag cap. 47. doth declare the said bookes of Tobias Ecclesiasticus c. to be Canonical Scripture affirming also that therein they followed the sound judgement of their Ancestours Lib. 2. de Doctrina Christ cap. 8. Lib. 18. de Ciuitat cap. 36. S. Augustine in sundry places of his workes doth by name declare the bookes of Wisdome Ecclesiasticus Tobias Iudith and the two bookes of the Machabees to be Canonical Scripture and seemeth to expound S. Hieromes sentence in these wordes The bookes of the Machabees the Iewes indeede doe not receiue but the Church of God taketh them for Canonical Scriptures Whence we after the auncient Lib. 7. Etimolog cap. ● learned and holy Bishop Isidorus doe collect this distinction The Canon of the Scriptures is twofold the one of the Hebrewes the other of the Christians that of the Hebrewes vvas compounded long before Christes daies in which these bookes of Wisdome Ecclesiasticus c. are not comprehended because they vvere written in later times and not in the Hebrew tongue Prolog Galiator Of this Hebrew Canon speaketh S. Hierome in that Prologue as it wil be manifest to al that shal but reade it for he saith first That the Hebrewes haue but 22. letters and according to the same number but 22. bookes in their Canon then reckoning them vp by name inferreth therefore the booke of Wisdome c. be not in the Canon to wit that Canon of the Hebrewes whereof he there spake vvhich also appeareth more euidently by his answere to Ruffinus vvho objected against him as a shameful reproach that he rejected certaine Chapters of Daniël because they were not in the Hebrew though they were in the Septuaginta S. Hierome excuseth himselfe saying Lib. 2. cont Ruffinū versus finem That therein be shewed the opinion of the Hebrewes but did not deliuer his owne sentence And as he there saith That he who would calumniate that his doing should shew himselfe a sycophant so he doth thereby giue al others to vnderstand that he vvho would after that faire warning build any Catholike conclusion vpon his relation of the Hebrewes opinion should proue him selfe a foole in trusting to so sandy and slippery a foundation And yet further in his Preface vpon the booke of Iudith he teacheth That the Hebrewes did not take that booke of Iudith for Canonical yet the first Nicene Councel vvhich is the most authentike of al general Councels did account it in the number of holy Scripture so that in S. Hieromes opinion also though these bookes were not in the Canon of the Hebrewes yet they may be very sincere Canonical Scripture with the Christians vvho haue the spirit of discerning and judging of such Canonical bookes as wel as the ancient Hebrewes had But S. Hierome saith in the later place That the Church doth not vse them to establish Ecclesiastical doctrine I answere that the Churches of Afrike did vse them euen in his owne time and the Church of Rome which is the principal of al Europe at the least as hath beene proued before so that his vvordes must needes be restrained vnto some Churches in Asia where he liued for the most part or it may be said that the Church had not then when S. Hierome so wrote generally declared them to be Canonical though very shortly after euen before his dying day they were in the most principal places of the Church both declared and receiued for Canonical That the Church had sufficient author●ty by declaration to make bookes of Scripture Canonical that before were not generally taken for such the Protestants themselues must needes confesse because they take for Canonical the Epistle to the Hebrewes and diuers others with the Reuelation of S. Iohn which vvere doubted off by many of the learned Christians in the primitiue Church Lib. 3. Hist. Eccles c. 10. 19. as witnesseth Eusebius ROBERT ABBOT VIGILIVS borne at Rome and Bishop of Trent according to the doctrine of the Church of Rome that then was affirmeth That the body of Christ when it was vpon the earth Vigil cōt Eutich lib. 4. was not in heauen and that now because it is in heauen it is not vpon the earth But now the Councel of Trent and Church of Rome perswade vs that the very body of Christ though it be in heauen yet is really and substantially here vpon earth also vpon the Altar and in the Pix and in the Priests belly and in the bellies of as many as are partakers of the Sacrament WILLIAM BISHOP In vita S. Sisinnij THIS large amplification is shortly answered Vigilius though a holy Catholike Bishop as his praying to Saints doth demonstrate yet was none of S. Peters successours neither doth he speake any thing against Christs real substantial presence in the Bles Sacramēt if his wordes be taken in his owne meaning to wit that Christ since his ascention is not here in that māner and fashion as he did conuerse vpon the earth with his Disciples that is in the forme of man Which I gather out of Vigilius his owne wordes for he saith that Christ is departed from vs in the forme of a seruant and so according vnto that forme of a seruant in the habit and likenesse of a man he is not present with vs but the very same body vnder the forme of bread is in as many places as the blessed Sacrament is consecrated See for this more in the question of the Real presence ROBERT ABBOT Hier. in Catalogo TERTVLLIAN being for enuy of
heauen shal preach vnto vs any thing concerning Christ or concerning his Church or concerning any thing pertaining to our faith and life but what we haue receiued in the Scriptures of the law and Gospel accursed be he Our faith therefore because it is that which the Apostles committed to writing is the Apostolike faith and our Church ex consanguinitate doctrinae by consanguinity and agreement of doctrine is proued to be an Apostolical Church c. of this Apostolical Church his Majesty is the supreme gouernour vnder Christ As for M. Bishops religion it cannot be the Catholike religion because it is not that vvhich the Catholike Church that is the faithful of al ages haue practised His faith is not the Apostolike faith because it is not that vvhich the Apostles left in writing They make no mention of the Pope of his Supremacy of his Pardons of worshipping of Images inuocation of Saints Pilgrimages and a thousand such trumperies WILLIAM BISHOP WE agree in this that there is but one faith one baptisme one spiritual foode and one religion in the Catholike Church but M. Abbot is fouly ouer-seene about the time when the true Church beganne first to be called Catholike which was not before Christs time but afterwardes according to that alleaged out of Pacianus an ancient authour who writeth of the name Catholike saying Christian is my name Pacian epist ad Simphor de nomine Catholico Catholike is my surname For when among Christians some beganne to teach false doctrine and to draw others after them into sects they that remained sound did cleaue fast vnto the whole body of the Church were intituled Catholikes to distinguish them from Heretikes that did not joine vvith the vniuersal corps of Christians in faith and religion which M. Abbot before did in plaine wordes confesse see his text afore vvhere he beginneth to argue of the word Catholike And the reason is most perspicuous why the Iewes and their religion could not be called Catholike though it vvere right and according to the wil of God for that time because Catholike signifieth that which is spread al the world ouer and receiued of al nations so was not the law of Moises and the manner of seruing God therein prescribed but vvas peculiar vnto the children of Israel and as it were confined within the limits of one land and country vvherefore it could not be called Catholike and vniuersal And M. Abbot was greatly deceiued or else goeth about to deceiue others when for proofe of communicating with the Catholike Church he recoileth back vnto the beginning of the vvorld Why did he not rather shew that their new Gospel flourished in al countries assoone as the Christian faith vvas planted and that it hath continued in al ages since the Apostles daies vntil our time that had beene to haue spoken directly to the purpose which he seldome vseth But he saw that to be a worke to hard for Hercules and therefore to delude his reader and to lead him from the matter he flieth vp to the old farne-daies of Abel Noē Abraham c. as though they had reuealed vnto them al those particular points of faith which Christ taught his Apostles and the same religion and manner of vvorshipping God that we Christians haue which is flatly opposite to the doctrine of S. Paul who testifieth Ephes 3. v. 4. That the mistery of Christ vnto other generations was not knowne vnto the Sonnes of men as now it is reuealed vnto his holy Apostles and Prophets in the spirit Those ancient Patriarkes as men Hebr. 11. vers 13. looking a farre off at the daies of Christ the light of the vvorld did not discouer so distinctly the misteries of the Christian faith as the Apostles vvho vvere Iob. 6. v. 45. taught by his owne mouth and made to know Ioh. 15. v. 15. al his Fathers secretes and had ¶ * Rom. 8. vers 23. the first fruits of the spirit in best sort to vnderstand them and carry them away To be short our Sauiour hath decided this question and saith in expresse wordes Math. 13. vers 17. Many Prophets and just men haue desired to see the thinges that you see and haue not seene them and to beare the thinges that you heare and haue not heard them Obserue then how absurdly M. Abbot behaueth himselfe in this matter First he vseth tergiuersation in leaping so farre backe from the point of the question seeking communion with the Catholike Church some thousandes of yeares before there vvas any Church Catholike Secondly in auouching the ancient founders of the first world to haue beleeued clearely and particularly al the articles of faith that vve beleeue or else why doth he conclude that the Roman faith is not Catholike because in that old and hoare-headed world some branches of their faith were not sprong vp and of ful growth They did not saith he worship Idols and Images they did not pray to Saints c. But good Sir did they beleeue that al their children vvere to be baptised and that al persons of riper yeares among them were to receiue the holy Sacrament of Christes body yea can M. Abbot demonstrate that they had perfect faith of the most holy and blessed Trinity beleeuing distinctly in three persons and one God or that the redeemer of the world Christ Iesus was to be perfect God and perfect man the nature of man in him subsisting vvithout the proper person of man in the second person of the Trinity which are the most high misteries of our Christian faith I am not ignorant that albeit those ancient Patriarkes and Prophets had not cleare and distinct knowledge of many articles vvhich vve are bound to beleeue yet they beleeued some few of them in particular and had a certaine confuse and darke conceit by figures and tipes of most of the rest Touching these very points vvhereof M. Abbot would haue them vvholy ignorant if his bare vvord without any manner of proof were so powerful I affirme that they held the most of them vvhich I wil not stand here to proue at large for that were Protestant-like to runne from one question to another without order but I wil only giue a touch to euery one of his instances referring the reader for more ful satisfaction to the proper place of those head controuersies First no Catholike euer taught any man to worship Idols let that then passe as a Protestant slander but that Images are to be placed in Churches the examples recorded in the old Testament of hauing them both in their a Exod. 25. vers 18. Tabernacle and in the b 3. Reg. 6. vers 23. Temple of Salomon this sentence of the Psalmist c Psalm 98. vers 5. Adore his foote-stoole and many such like places and resemblances doe argue very strongly that Images are to be worshipped Secondly inuocation of Angels is most plainly practised by the holy Patriarke Iacob the Father of al
sute of diuers Bishops of the East he did solemnely summon S. Athanasius that most learned and valiant Patriarke of Alexandria to appeare at Rome before him there to answere vnto such crimes as were indeede most vvrongfully objected against him Lib. 4. hist Tripart c. 6. Nicephor lib. 9. cap. 6. thus saith the holy History The Pope following the law of the Church commanded them also to come vnto Rome and according to the rule of the Canons cited the venerable Athanasius to judgement Athanasius obediently appeared but his aduersaries knowing that their lies in that place vvould soone be discouered durst not appeare vvhereupon Athanasius was purged of those imputations Ibid. cap. 12. and restored to his Bishoprick Vnto the same Iulius not long after Athanasius being pittifully abused by the Arrians repaired the second time for aide vvhere he found diuers other Bishops of the East namely Paulus Bishop of Constantinople Marcellus Bishop of Ancony Asclopas Bishop of Gaya and Lucianus Bishop of Adrianople al Easterne Bishops and yet appealing to Iulius Pope of Rome for remedy of the wrongs done them by the Arrian Heretikes which doth most manifestly testifie that in the primitiue Church al other Bishops acknowledged the Bishop of Rome for the supreme Pastour of Christes Church vvhich also Zozomenus doth confirme shewing how Iulius restored them al Tanquam omnium curam gerens Zozom l. 3. hist. cap. 8. propter propriae sedis dignitatem As one that had care ouer them al for the dignity of his owne See And Iulius his owne wordes recorded by no meaner a man then S. Athanasius doe declare the same for blaming the Bishops of the East he saith Athanas in Apolog. 2. Why did you not write vnto vs especially you of Alexandria are you ignorant that the custome is that we should first be written vnto that from hence it might be defined what was right therefore if you haue any quarrel against any Bishop you ought to haue referred it hither to our Church c. And shortly after I signifie to you such thinges as were receiued from the blessed Apostle S. Peter c. vvhere M. Abbot may see that one of S. Peters successours of great worth and authority doth tel the Bishops of the East Church that by order set downe by S. Peter himselfe Bishops causes of al countries ought to be referred vnto the definition of the Bishop of Rome he therefore is their superiour I adde hereunto because it belongeth both vnto Pope Iulius and this present purpose of their supremacy in Ecclesiastical causes this sentence taken out of the Ecclesiastical history The Councel holden at Antioch was not good Hist Tripart lib. 4. cap. 9. for that Iulius Bishop of Rome was not there present nor sent any Legate in his place because the Ecclesiastical Canons doe command that Councels ought not to be celebrated without the sentence of the Bishop of Rome ROBERT ABBOT GELASIVS Bishop of Rome saith as we say Gelas cont Eutich Nestor That in the Sa●rament is celebrated the Image or resemblance of the body and bloud of Christ and that there ceasse●h not to be the substance or nature of bread and wine But now the Romish religion maketh them Heretikes that say the Sacrament is the Image or resemblance of the body bloud of Christ and not the body and bloud of Christ it selfe or wil not beleeue that the bread and wine are substantially and really turned into the same body and bloud Albeit they beleeue with the same Gelasius that the Sacrament is a diuine thing and that thereby we are made partakers of the diuine nature euen of Christ himselfe really and substantially but yet spiritually vvith al his riches becomming ours and being eaten of vs not by our teeth into our bellies but by faith into our harts vnto life euerlasting WILLIAM BISHOP FIRST I say that M. Abbot hauing his eie-sight sore troubled with a grosse defluxion of salt rhewme taketh a Rowland for an Oliuer that is one Gelasius an vnknowne Grecian for Gelasius an African borne yet Bishop of Rome That he was not Gelasius the Bishop of Rome appeareth plainly out of that very treatise cited by M. Abbot for that Gelasius professeth to alleage the testimony of al the learned Fathers who wrote before him yet he maketh no mention of the most renowmed authours in the Latin Church as of S. Hillary S. Augustine S. Hierome and of Pope Leo al vvhich wrote before Gelasius the Bishop of Rome and were had in very great estimation by him as may be seene by his declaration of the Canonical Scriptures of the most approued fathers workes Dist 15. Sācta Romana Ecclesia Ibidem Againe that Gelasius citeth often and relieth much vpon the authority of Eusebius Bishop of Caesarea vvhereas Gelasius the Pope hath noted his vvorkes for little better then Apocryphal so that nothing is more like then that the good man hath mistaken his marke and is fallen from the successours of S. Peter and S. Paul vpon I cannot tel whom yet because he is an old writer though of what credit it be vncertaine I wil not refuse him And to the former part of his sentence that in the Sacrament there is an Image or resemblance of Christes body I answere that vve Catholikes doe say as much in effect for euery Sacrament is a visible signe of an inuisible and holy thing and so Christs body vnder the forme of bread and wine is a resemblance of his body parted from his bloud on the Crosse and the body of Christ vnder the formes of bread and vvine as it is in the Sacrament is a picture also or resemblance of the vnion of his mistical body in faith and charity euen as the bread is made of many graines of corne and the vvine pressed out of many clusters of grapes The later part of his sentence may also haue a good meaning and stand wel with our doctrine for the nature of bread doth not wholy ceasse to be in the blessed Sacrament because the forme sauour and tast of bread which be natural qualities thereof doe stil remaine though the whole inward substance be turned into the body of Christ which that Gelasius doth in the same place signifie when he there saith The same bread to be changed into the diuine substance that is into the substance of Christ by the operation of the holy Ghost whereby the receiuers are made partakers of the diuine nature And M. Abbots glosse vpon these later wordes is very extrauagant for we cannot in property of speech be said to be partakers of Christs nature really by being made partakers of his riches for it is one thing to be partaker of a mans nature really another farre different to be partaker of his goodes and benefits And as for the receiuing of Christ spiritually by faith that may be done vvithout receiuing any Sacrament at al but Gelasius either speaketh of receiuing Christ in the
handes and by which many miracles were wrought if with filing be could get off any thing For when many that come hither doe craue that blessing that they might haue of that dust which is filed off those chaines the Priest comming with the file● doth for some presently get off something whereas for other he drawing the file on the chaines a long time nothing at al wil off it Further to a Noble man of France he sent the blessing of S. Peter and a little Crosse within the which was inclosed some such filing of S. Peters chaines Which for a time saith he bound S. Peters necke Lib 2. Epist 72. but shal loose your necke from sinne for euer Some relikes also of S. Laurence Grid-yron were inclosed in the foure corners of that same Crosse That by the helpe of that whereon his body was broiled your minde saith he may be kindled in the loue of God Touching the Images of Saints he not only approueth them to be made but teacheth them to be set in Churches Lib. 7. Epist 119. that they who cannot reade may by beholding of them learne to imitate some of their vertues Moreouer he exhorteth al men to worship them by kneeling before them yet with this caueat that they doe not yeeld them any such adoration as is proper to God What a protectour he was of Purgatory praier for the dead Lib. 7. Epist ad Secundin Lib. 4. Dialog cap. 20. may be seene in these places vvhere he saith that we must beleeue that there is a Purgatory fire to cleanse lighter offences after this life before the day of judgement And proues it both by Christes wordes ¶ Math. 12. vers 32. If any man blaspheme against the holy Ghost it shal not be forgiuen him neither in this world nor in the world to come And out of S. Paul 1. Cor. 3. vers 15. He shal be saued yet so as by fire And in the beginning of the third penitential Psalme expounding these wordes of the Prophet O Lord rebuke me not in thy fury neither chastise me in thy wrath he adjoineth This is as much as if Dauid had said I know that after this life some shal feele the fire of Purgatory others shal receiue the sentence of eternal damnation But because I esteeme that transitory fire of Purgatory to be more intollerable then any tribulation of this life I doe not only wish not to be reproued in the fury of eternal damnation for I feare also to be purged in the wrath of thy transitory correction In this exposition he agreeth vvith S. Augustine vpon the same Psalme euen as he did in the first with the same profound Doctor Lib. 21. de Cinit cap. 24. Et lib. 6. contra Iouintanum cap. 9. Further he teacheth to pray for the soules departed Lib. 4. Dialog cap. 50. And to offer sacrifice for them Ibid. cap. 55. and else where in many places To speake a word of the single and chast life of the Clergie S. Gregory saith None ought to be admitted to the ministry of the Altar Lib. 1. Epist 42. L. 12. In fine In decretis sauing such whose chastity hath beene approued before they were made Ministers Againe If any Priest or Deacon doe marry accursed be he How wel he liked of the vowes and holy profession of Monkes and Nunnes may appeare by that that he himselfe was one of them And he relateth Homil. 11. in Ezechiëlem Hom. 40. in Euangel that there were 3000. Nunnes of name in his time within the walles of Rome whose life was so holy and so much exercised in fasting praiers and teares that he did beleeue had it not beene for them none of the rest had beene able to haue subsisted so many yeares amongst the swordes of the Longobardes He then did not as the Protestants doe thinke religious persons vnprofitable members of the common weale by whose holy liues and deuout praiers he esteemed the Citty to haue beene preserued For the sprinckling of holy Water in Churches erecting of Altars placing thereof Relikes of Saints see Lib. 9. Epist 71. For Pilgrimage to holy places Lib. 4. Epist cap. 44. Homil. 37. in Euang. Lib. 2. Dialog cap. 17. Finally if I would stand to rehearse al that S. Gregory hath vvritten in the defence of the Catholike Roman faith I should make a vvhole volume And this briefe extract out of his owne authentike workes vvil suffice I hope to demonstrate what a jolly patron he was of the Protestants doctrine and vvith vvhat good conscience M. Abbot and his fellowes doe alleage him as a fauourer of their errours which he disproued confuted and condemned so fully and particularly little lesse then a thousand yeares before they vvere hatched and thrust into the world And must it not needes vvorke in al considerate English-mens harts a very vehement inclination to imbrace the now professed Roman religion to see the same point by point professed taught and practised a thousand yeare gone by so wise holy and learned a Bishop vvho was also as I noted before the chosen instrument of God principally to procure our reclaiming from Idolatry and the seruing of false gods vnto the true and sincere faith of IESVS Christ That faith which he taught was planted first amongst vs English-men See the Catholike Apologie out of Protestants as the most learned among the Protestants doe confesse the same hath also euer since vntil of late beene wholy retained of al our most holy Ancestours is it not then a great shame for vs to degenerate so farre and to fal so fondly from it I trust in the mercies and goodnesse of God that we shal once haue grace to perceiue vnderstand and amend it ROBERT ABBOT GREGORY the ninth Bishop of Rome though liuing in later time of great corruption yet by the ancient doctrine of the Catholike Church could say that * Greg. Ep. ad Germ Archi-Episc Cōstat apud Math. Paris in Henrico tertio the not knowing of the Scriptures by the testimony of the truth it selfe is the occasion of errours and therefore that it is expedient for al men to reade or beare the same But now the doctrine of Rome is that it is pernitious for the people to meddle vvith the Scriptures that reading and knowledge thereoff is the breeding of error and heresie and as dogges from holy things so the people must be secluded from the reading and vse of them WILLIAM BISHOP M. ABBOT seemes to be fallen into a dangerous consumption and to draw fast vpon a desperate estate or else he vvould neuer vse such silly salues as this to prolong the life of his forlorne cause From Gregory the first he leapeth ouer the heades of an hundred Popes his Successours and lighteth next vpon Gregory the ninth that liued aboue six hundred yeares after him whom also he citeth not out of his owne workes but from the report of another and when al is done he hath
Rome vvhereas neither that Church then nor vve now doe reject the true fasting which the Scripture teacheth but only those opinions of fasting vvhich the Montanists first deuised and the Papists haue receiued against the Scripture to forbeare continually by way of religion such and such daies from such and such meates with a minde there in and by their very forbearing to doe a worship to God to satisfie for sinne to merit and purchase the forgiuenesse thereoff and to deserue eternal life WILLIAM BISHOP BEFORE we come to joine issue let this maxime of arguing be obserued He that vvil proue one to be the proper disciple of any Sect-master must doe it by producing the proper and peculiar doctrine of the same sect and not by alleaging such points of doctrine as are common to that sect vvith many others For example if I would proue a Protestant to be an Arrian I must not thinke to performe it by prouing that they beleeued in one God as the Arrians did or that they flie to the touch-stone of the Scriptures as the Arrians did refusing Traditions and that they relied much on the power of temporal Princes setting the Bishop of Romes authority at naught c. for none of these be proper branches of the Arrian sect but common to them with others Marry if I could proue them to affirme the Sonne of God touching his diuinity to be lesser then his Father or after his Father or not of the same substance vvith his heauenly Father I must needes be taken then to speake to the purpose Euen so if M. Abbot doe insist vpon those points of the Montanists errors which were proper to themselues and not common with others prouing vs to maintaine the same I then wil graunt that he acquiteth himselfe like a braue champion But if he doe make al his instances in such general circumstances of fastinges as the Catholike Church then did maintaine as vvel as the Montanists Yea that the Protestants themselues doe in part vphold and defend as wel as the Catholikes then euery man must needes acknowledge and take him for a wrangling Sophister and a vaine bragging writer that crakes of wonders and performes nothing Let vs now descend to his particulars and try what sharpnesse of wit and soundnesse of judgement he sheweth therein The Montanists saith he appointed certaine and standing daies for fasting and forbearing of certaine meates so doe the Papists I graunt vvhat be they therefore Montanists then the Protestants be also Montanists because they appoint certaine and standing daies of fastes as Friday Saturday the Imber and Lent-fasts and many feasts eues vvhich daies they appoint for the forbearing of flesh Is not this a proper peece of Montanisme that is common to so many Nay the Apostles themselues did the like as Tertullian in the same place graunteth vvere they also therefore Montanists see how M. Abbot beginneth to shame himselfe To the next The Montanists did not take any creature or meate to be vncleane but did only by way of deuotion forbeare at certaine times and the Papists doe also the same vvhich I also graunt And doe not the Protestants agree vvith them in the former part thinking no meate to be vncleane Now in the later they doe vvorse for they forbeare flesh at certaine times not of deuotion to chastise their bodies and to please God as the Montanists pretended but for worldly pollicy of fauouring the increase of flesh for the vpholding of the trade of fisher-men and to please their Prince Here let any Godly man be judge whether of these two endes of pleasing God or the Prince be more Christianlike and whether of them doe more sauour of the spirit of God he shal no doubt finde that herein it is much better to concurre with Tertullian then consort with the Protestants And that the best learned in the primitiue Church so thought and so taught I haue proued in the Question of fasting The Montanists being vrged with that place of S. Paul that it was the doctrine of Deuils to command to abstaine from meates answered that it touched Marcion and Tatianus who condemned meates as vncleane in their owne nature the same answere doe the Papists giue which I acknowledge vvillingly What are they thereby become Montanus disciples then vvas S. Augustine as a great Papist so no smal Montanist for he doth in most expresse tearmes so expound that place these be his wordes The Apostle doth in these wordes properly point at Aug. cōt Adimant Manichaeū c. 14. 1. Tim. c. 4. not them who therefore abstaine from such meates that they may thereby bridle their owne concupiscence or spare another mans weakenesse but those who thinke the flesh it selfe vncleane Doe you see how S. Augustine interpreteth those wordes of S. Paul euen as we doe who also answereth to euery of the Protestants objections against set fasting aboue a 1000. yeares before they troubled the world In like manner doth S. Hierome in the very wordes that M. Abbot sets downe for ours thus he writeth Lib. 1. cont Iouin ca. 41. The Apostle doth condemne them that forbidde to marry and command to abstaine from meates c. true but he aimed at Marcion and Tatianus and such other Heretikes that command perpetual abstinence as though the creatures of God were abhominable but we commend euery creature of God and doe only preferre fasting before fulnesse c. So that by this exposition of S. Paules doctrine vve are not proued Montanists but doe imitate therein the principal pillars of the ancient Roman Church S. Augustine and S. Hierome and doe therein also wipe away a sluttish imputation of Iouinian reuiued and set a foote againe by the Protestants that forsooth Lib. 1. cont Iouin cap. 3. We teach the doctrine of Deuils condemned by the Apostles and doe fal into the opinion of the Manichees because we command to abstaine on fasting daies from some kinde of meates which God created to receiue c. but of this more exactly in the Question of fasting Now to the rest of M. Abbots text The Montanists tooke that their fasting to be a seruice and worship to God vvherein they were not deceiued for it is written in the word of God Luc. 2. That Elizabeth a blessed widdow departed not from the Temple by fasting and praier seruing night and day seruing in Greeke Latreuousa that is doing seruice and worship to God as by praier so by fasting Againe by fasting watching and other bodily austerities we doe according to the common exposition of the auncient Fathers Rom. 12. exhibit our bodies to God a liuing bost as the Apostle speaketh holy pleasing God and a reasonable seruice It must needes then be a very holy and most acceptable seruice and vvorship of God that is resembled by S. Paul vnto a liuing and pure sacrifice Canon 5. And in the Councel of Nice it is said That we may offer to God the pure and solemne fast of Lent
their saying doe alleage this Canon which maketh nothing at al for them because it speaketh only of a Priest that had a wife in times past Qui vxorem habuit that had a wife not that hath a wife Such men that vvere once married after their vviues death we doe admit to be Priests and to offer sacrifice condemning the Eustachians or vvhosoeuer else vnder pretence of their former mariages doth seeke to debarre them from that sacred function Marry such sensual or weake men that cannot or wil not refraine from marriage or company of their wiues vve doe wholy exclude from the celebration of the holy misteries And verily ignorantly and sawcily doth Mathew of Paris or any other late writer reprehend Gregory the seauenth for forbidding al men to be present at their Masses For it argueth great and grosse ignorance in al learned antiquity to account it a strange thing that Priests keeping company with their wiues should be repelled from the Altar vvhen not only Gregory the great Leo the great and Epiphanius vvhose sentences I haue before recited but also euen by M. Abbots owne confession Pope Stritius with the Clergy of Rome and S. Hierome did teach the very same little lesse then a thousand yeares before Mathew of Paris daies to omit sundry other ancient Fathers and decrees of approued Councels so that it was no strange example or vnaduised act to forbidde such fleshly fellowes to celebrate Masse neither could any but loose libertines be offended at it ROBERT ABBOT THE Valentinian Heretikes and Heracleonites Irenae lib. 2. cap. 18. Epiph. Haeres 36. August de Haeres 16. were condemned by the old Church of Rome for vsing expiations and redemptions by anointing men vvhen they were about to die yet thereof hath the Church of Rome now framed to themselues their Sacrament of Extreme vnction WILLIAM BISHOP HERE are but a few lines and yet not free from some lies The Church of Rome hath her Sacrament of Extreme vnction registred in the holy Scriptures as M. Abbot knoweth wel enough in these wordes Iacob 5. vers 14. Is any man sicke among you let him bring in the Priests of the Church and let them pray ouer them anoiling them with oile in the name of our Lord and the praier of faith shal saue the sicke and our Lord lift him vp and if he be in sinnes they shal be remitted him Where we see a set holy ceremony which was instituted by Christ and published by his Apostle S. Iames to be vsed ordinarily by the Priests for remission of sinnes which doth conuince it to be a true and proper Sacrament A fond fiction then was it to say that it was after the Apostles time inuented by Heretikes and that the Church of Rome hath borrowed it of them vvith which foolish deuise of theirs it hath also very smal affinity for their dreame was that by the pronouncing of certaine vnknowne Hebrew vvordes ouer the head of the sicke their soule was made inuisible and incomprehensible Epiph. Haeres 36. euen vnto the infernal spirits as M. Abbots owne authour witnesseth Briefly they differed in forme of wordes in substance of matter and in the state and intention of the Minister They vsed certaine Hebrew vvordes Messia Vphared and such like vvhich are set downe by Epiphanius We these God of his most pittiful mercy and by this holy anointing forgiue thee thy sinnes They vsed oile or some other ointment mixed with vvater We oile alone blessed by a Bishop Any lay person of their brother-hood might minister their drugs Our Sacrament is to be administred by a Priest only Their intention was to make the soule inuisible to the infernal spirits But ours is according to the doctrine of the Apostle to purge the sicke from the relikes of sinne and to giue him comfort and strength to resist the assaults of the ghostly enemy There being so great difference in al the essential points of these two anoilinges judge what a wonderful inginer M. Abbot did take himselfe to be when he conceited that he could by his fine pen shal I say or brazen fore-head make them seeme al one to the simple ROBERT ABBOT IT vvas heresie in the Pelagians with the old Church of Rome to affirme in this life a possibility perfectly to fulfil the law of God and S. Hierome as touching this point L. 1 2. 3. aduers Pelag. expresly disputeth against them but now it is heresie with the Church of Rome to affirme and teach the same that Hierome did as M. Bishop afterwardes giueth vs to vnderstand The same Pelagians were accounted Heretikes for saying that a man in this life might be anamarticos without sinne and that by baptisme he becommeth so but now the Church of Rome teacheth the same And M. Bishop in plaine tearmes telleth vs Page 32. That there is no more sinne left in the new baptized man then was in Adam in the state of innocency to vvhich state of baptisme they also equal a man vvhen he is shriuen to the Priest and of him hath receiued absolution from his sinnes I reserue the Pelagian doctrine of Free-wil and Satisfaction to their due place vvhere God-vvilling it shal appeare that therein also the now Church of Rome approueth those points as Catholike and true for which the ancient Church of Rome condemned them Yea so farre is the Pelagian heresie in request vvith the Papists as that Faustus a Bishop of France at that time a maintainer thereof Bignae Bibliot sacrae Tom. 2. Osor de Inst lib. 9. is by some of them recorded for a Saint and his booke vvhich he hath vvritten in behalfe thereof is called Opus insigne A notable worke And by some other the doctrine of S. Augustine against the Pelagians concerning Predestination is repugned which of old vvas acknowledged by the Church of Rome to be the Catholike doctrine of the Church WILLIAM BISHOP M. ABBOT comes now to make an end of his slanders and false imputations against the present Catholike Roman Church after the same sort as he hath heretofore vsed to wit with wrested and vntrue reportes of the old Heretikes opinions and the ancient Fathers refutations of them The Pelagians did teach indeed that it was possible to keepe Gods Cōmandements but therefore they were not accounted Heretikes for the same doth both S. Augustine and S. Hierome that writ against them approue and confirme in many places I wil touch some of each of them S. Augustine hauing alleaged certaine texts of holy Scripture to proue the same doth conclude thus By these and innumerable other testimonies De Peccatis Meritis Remissione lib. 2. cap. 6. I cannot doubt either that God hath commanded man any thing that is impossible for him to doe or that it is impossible for God to helpe man to fulfil whatsoeuer he hath commanded him and therefore a man holpen by God may if he wil be without sinne De Grat. l. Arbit ca. 16. And
is so conformable to the Apostles admonition that he must needes be much troubled vvith passion that cannot perceiue it Now to that which he saith that this is a threat If euery kind of signification of future danger in how faire manner soeuer it be deliuered may be called a threat then euery friend that in the kinde of disswasion mentioneth any such inconuenience like to ensue must be taken no longer for a louing friend but for an vnkinde menacer that vseth threats which in al mens judgements that vnderstand that matter must needes be condemned for most absurd My wordes then vvere very absurdly noted for a threat because they contained a certaine signification of some future incōmodity Now whereas M. Abbot demandes Whether this were the stile of the first Church and to disproue it alleageth one sentence out of Tertullian who albeit ancient yet is he to short of the first Christian Church by two hundred yeares and which is farre worse he was no sound member neither of the same Catholike Church at al. I answere that the first Church might haue vsed the like stile very authentically for the Prophets inspired by the holy Ghost vttered farre more rough speeches to their Kinges vvhich are vvarranted for loial and dutiful subjects in the holy Scriptures and therefore may be very lawfully imitated I wil omit the wordes of that Prophet who annointed 4. Reg. 9. vers 7. Iehu King of Israël And of the Prophet Ahias vnto the * 3. Reg. 14. vers 12. Queene Ieroboams wife because they are exceeding sterne and boisterous and fit not our purpose Let that milde Iudge and Prophet Samuël his speeches to King Saul be scanned vvho being one of Saules best and most louing subjects yet was bold to tel him to his face 1. Reg. 13. vers 24. That his Kingdome should rise no further * Ibid. ca. 15. vers 23. And that God had chosen another man to be gouernour of his people And that God had cast him off and that he should not be King no longer If some flattering Parasite standing by vvould therefore haue challenged the Prophet Samuēl for a false traitour that durst so boldly menace his King with no lesse a punishment then depriuation from his Kingdome had he not beene a fit patterne of M. Abbots patience that Prophets admonition as any man may see vvas exceeding vehement and plaine in comparison of mine yet I rehearse it that my reader may see how the best subjects may without touch of disloialty admonish their Prince of some euil hanging ouer their heades Nathan the Prophet his wordes come nearer to my purpose he tooke it to be no treason nor any point of disloialty to tel his Prince vvho was no meaner a personage then that most puisant and holy King Dauid plainly and roundly 2. Reg. c. 12. That the sword that is bloudy strife and contention should not depart from his house and progeny for euer That God would raise vp out of his owne house euil against him What is this holy man of God to be stiled a false traitor for his labour is he of a Prophet become a Herald at armes that durst threaten his Prince with open warre and rebellion either he must be taken for such a disloyal person or else I that doe not approch neare vnto the sharpnesse and roundnesse of his wordes am most wrongfully burdened therewith But let vaine men either of malice towardes their aduersary or of flattery to their Prince spit out their venim and barke against innocents neuer so currishly yet his most excellent and milde Majesty wil I doubt not rather imitate that holy and noble King Dauid vvho tooke it in very good part then lend his Highnesse gentle cares vnto such venimous declaimours that care not how vily and vvrongfully they gal and slander their aduersary To conclude this point if the very nature of disswasion according to the approued rules of al men that write thereof doe allow me to signifie that inconuenience in such modest sort as I deliuered it if the same be also fortified by the examples of men inspired vvith the holy Ghost and warranted by the record of Gods word was not M. Abbot in a frantike humour trow you when he burst out so furiously against it vvas he not strangely transported with blinde malice al his booke ouer when as in euery Section thereof almost he glanseth and girdeth at this as if it were some horrible bugge-beare and hainous crime Now I come to Tertullian and S. Augustines wordes vvhich we receiue with reuerence and great approbation For first We willingly yeeld our selues to be slaine for our religion and thinke it not only more tollerable as Tertullian speaketh but a thousand times more honourable to be killed in that holy quarrel then to kil or slay any man Yet vvil I be bold to say if I should haue vsed the like vvordes I doubt not but they should haue beene much more racked and tormented then those which I vttered For ●f I had said as Tertullian did If we would deale with you not by secret reuenge In Apolog. cap. 37. but by open enmity we want neither number nor strength what warre were we not fit for c. vvho sees not but such a quarreller as M. Abbot is would haue taken that straight for a terrible threat indeede and for an open denouncing of warre We moreouer like very wel of S. Augustines discourse and doe accordingly exhort al Catholikes valiantly to contemne this transitory life for the obtaining of eternal life See our Epistles of comfort to the afflicted Catholikes and other like Treatises written to that purpose you shal not finde one word in them incouraging any man to seeke remedy thereof by taking armes but to indure patiently vvhatsoeuer it shal please God to permit the state to lay vpon them vntil it be his holy vvil to redresse it And though this be our accustomed stile when we write or speake to our afflicted bretheren yet pleading vnto my Prince in their behalfe I might very dutifully remember his clemency of the ordinary mischiefe which too too commonly waiteth at the heeles vpon ouer-much seuerity Neither was S. Augustine when he counselled al men to patience ignorant of that vprore vvhich happened at Millaine in his owne time or not much before euen among the best affected subjects for the defence of S. Ambrose against the Emperour his Soueraigne The like shortly after hapned at Constantinople in the behalfe also of their most glorious Patriarke S. Iohn Chrysostome against the Emperour Archadius Now albeit none of these most holy Bishops vvould haue had their flocke taken armes in their defence but misliked that as much as any other yet no question but that they might very vvel without suspition of disloialty haue humbly requested the said Emperours to haue vsed more lenity in their proceedings for feare of such an after-clap And he that should therefore haue stiled them either false
the Clergy of Rome fallen into the heresie of Montanus and thereupon oppugning the same Church declareth what the said Church then taught concerning fasting Tertul. de Iejun aduersus Psythicos of purpose to dispute against it They say saith he that men are to fast indifferently at their discretion not by commandement euery one according to his owne time and occasion that the Apostles did so obserue imposing no yoke of standing fasts and such as should in common be kept of al c. WILLIAM BISHOP FROM the Pastours of the See of Rome M. Abbot is declined to the enemies of the same Church doth he not fairely obserue his owne order and promise But vvel M. Abbot if Tertullian for enuy of the Clergy of Rome fel into heresie let your charity towards the Roman Clergy helpe to draw your selfe out of the same sinke of heresie But where was your judgement to cite an author vvriting out of the corrupt humour of enuy as you confesse your selfe for an vpright indifferent reporter of his aduersaries cause Did euer enuy yet learne to speake vvel Why did you not rather alleage some sound Catholike Authour for the reporter of Catholikes opinions What is it because as Vultures and Rauens doe rather flie to rotten carrion and dead stinking carcases then to any sound bodies so they that seeke to deuour poore sinful soules doe make choise of tainted and corrupt authors out of their contagion to infect and destroy others Simile simili gaudet Like wil to like Nay vvhat if M. Abbot be not satisfied with the badde vvordes of Tertullian vvhich proceeded out of enuy and malice but doth yet by chopping and changing of them make them farre worse then they be in the authour is he not then to be esteemed as a most corrupt mangler of antiquity Tertullian to make his owne error seeme the lesse proposeth odde trifling arguments against it which he could answere with more ease and that after an odious manner as the aduerse party is wont to doe that he might make the Catholikes out of loue with them yet doth M. Abbot relate the same in great grauity as the most sincere substantial proofes of the contrary party sauing that now and then after his old fashion he falsifieth his authour too Now to the vvordes of Tertullian the first are craftily cropped off by him for Catholikes neuer said so absolutely That they were to fast at their owne discretion and not by commandement for Tertullian confesseth there that Catholikes held themselues bound to fast the Lent and on Wednesdaies and Fridaies therefore they could not say that they were to fast only at their owne discretion True it is that they answered him and the Montanists that they vvere not bound to keepe any of their new deuised fasting-daies nor to fast after the manner that they prescribed and that by the commandement as they said and lied of the Paraclete or holy Ghost from such fasts they proclaimed themselues free vvhereupon he malitiously reported that they said they might fast when they list and were not bound to fast by any cōmandement Secondly whereas Tertullian saith in the name of Catholikes That the Apostles imposed no yoke of standing fasts and such as should be commonly kept of al Nisi eo tempore quo oblatus est sponsus by which he meaneth specially the Lent wherein the memory of Christes death is celebrated and afterward mentioneth the Catholikes halfe-fasts as he tearmeth them of Wednesdaies and Fridaies M. Abbot to make them speake like good Protestants dasheth al that cleane out of the text leauing them to say that the Apostles appointed no fasting daies at al neither Lent nor Fridaies So what by Tertullians odious relation and M. Abbots false addition or substraction there is a pretty peece of cosenage to gul the simple and vnwary reader The wordes then of Tertullian being first such as proceeded from enuy and then also much mangled afterward and peeced togither at M. Abbots pleasure I hold it not necessary to stand vpon them but doe come vnto M. Abbots inferences and goodly buildinges vpon such a deceitful foundation ROBERT ABBOT SEE M. Bishop how like a Protestant the Church of Rome spake in those daies would you not thinke that Luther or Caluin or Beza were the Authour of these wordes How lightly doe you regard these arguments from vs which the Church of Rome 1400. yeres agoe vsed to the very same purpose that we now doe But the Church of Rome hath learned now to sing another songe shee condemned the heresie of Montanus then but now shee maintaineth it I auouch it M. Bishop that concerning fasting neither you nor al your fellowes are able to acquite the Church of Rome of the heresie of Montanus WILLIAM BISHOP I See M. Abbot how like the Protestant humour is vnto the distempered spirits of old time I thinke verily that Luther Caluin Beza and such late plagues of Christendome doe yet more deceitfully and falsly report Catholikes opinions and arguments then euer Tertullian did How lightly these arguments which you afterward enforce are to be regarded shal shortly appeare The Church of Rome hath not changed one note of her old songe concerning fasting neither shal you with the helpe of al your companions proue vs to be Montanists in this point of fasting I being the simplest of a thousand amongst the learned on our side vvil quickly cleare our party from that imputation And contrariwise I doubt not but to proue you and yours to be the disciples of louinian and Aërius old condemned Heretikes in this point of fasting Let vs lay vvordes a-side and come to arguments ROBERT ABBOT THE Montanists appointed certaine and standing daies for fasting and for the forbearing of certaine meates so doe the Papists The Montanists did not take any creature or meate to be vncleane but did only by way of deuotion as they pretended forbeare at certaine times and the Papists also doe the same The Montanists being vrged vvith that place of S. Paul to Timothy of them that cōmanded to abstaine from meates answered that that place touched Marcion and Tatianus such others vvho condemned the creatures as euil and vncleane not them vvho did not reject the creatures but only forbeare the vse of them at sometimes the same answere giue the Papists The Montanists tooke that their fasting to be a seruice worship of God so doe the Papists The Montanists thought that their fasting did merit at gods hands that it was a satisfaction for sinne that emptines of belly did much auaile vvith God and made God to dwel with man the same effects doe the Papists teach of their superstitious fasts Looke what arguments the Papists vse for their fasting the same Tertullian vsed for the Montanists Looke what cauils and calumniations the Papists vse against vs of feasting in steed of fasting of Epicurisme and pampering the belly the same Tertullian being a Montanist vsed against the doctrine of the Church of