the soule going from the body he shall hold it with him for euer without any change that neither being exalted it can come downe to punishment nor being drowned in eternall punishments can thence forth rise to any remedy of saluation If after death there be no deliuerance if there be no change but as the Angell either good or badde receiueth the soule out of the body so it continueth for euer either exalted to ioy or drowned in punishment then there can be no Purgatory then there can be nothing but either heauen or hell where they that come shall abide for euer Hee citeth for this the same wordes of Salomon that we doe and of which Olympiodorus a writer of the same time saith k Olympiodor in Ecclesi asâ— cap. 11. In quocunque loco seu illustri seu tene 〈◊〉 depreâ—edatur â—omo cum moritur mâ—ode gradu atque ordine poriâ—â—net in aeternum nam vel requieseâ—â— in lumine foelicitatis aeterae cum iustis Christo Domino vel in tenebris cruciatur cum iniquis huius mundi principâ— Diabolo In whatsoeuer place either lightsome or darke a man is taken when he dyeth in the same degree and order he abideth for euer for either he resteth in the light of eternall felicity with the iust and with Christ our Lord or else he is tormented in darkenesse with the wicked and with the Prince of this world the Diuell But Gregory againe writeth an Epistle to his friend Aregius a Bishop to comfort him concerning the death of some belonging to him wherin it is worthy to be obserued how consonantly he carrieth himselfe to the doctrine of the Scriptures Amongst other wordes wee reade these l Gregor lib. 7. indict 2. Epist 111. Indecens est de illis taedio afflictionis addâ—ci quos credendum est ad veram vitam moriendo perue nisse HabeÌ„t for sitan illi iustam longi doloris excusationem qui vitam alteram nesciunt qui de hoc seculo ad mâ—lius transitiâ— esse non confidunt nos autem qui nouimus qui hoc credimus docemus coÌ„tristarinimium de obâ—â—ntibus no debemus ne quod apud alios tenet pietatis speciem hoc magis nobis in culpa sit Nam dissidetâ—c quodamodâ— genus est cotra hoc quod quisque pradicat torqueri moestitia dicente Apostolo Nolumus autem vos ignorare fratres c. Hac itaque ratione perspecta studendum nobis est vt sicut dixâ—mus de mortâ—â—â— non esslâ—gamur sed affectuÌ„ viuentibus impendamus quibus pictas ad 〈◊〉 sit ad sâ—uct◠〈◊〉 It is vndecent for vs to giue our selues to long affliction of sorrow for them whom wee are to beleeue to haue come by death vnto the true life They haue haply iust excuse of long sorrow who know not any other life who doe not beleeue the passage from this world to be to a better world but wee who know who beleeue and teach this are not to be too heauy for the dead least that which with others carryeth a shew of piety be to vs rather a matter of blame For it is in a manner a kinde of distrâ—st to be tormented with heauinesse contrary to that which he himselfe doth teach Hereof he citeth the wordes of Saint Paul to the Thestalonians which I haue before set downe and then addeth This therefore seeing we know wee are to haue care as I haue said not to be afflicted for the dead but to bestow our affection vpon the liuing to whom our piety or denotion may be profitable and our loue may yeeld fruit Surely he leaueth no place for Purgatory that teacheth to beleeue that the faithfull in death doe attaine vnto true life and that their passage from this world is to a better neither doth he acknowledge any vse of Prayers of Masses and Trentals and other Offices and Obsequies for the dead who saith that our deuotion and loue yeeldeth no fruit or profit to them He would not haue bidden Aregius not to be afflicted for the dead but to bestow his affection vpon the liuing if hee had thought the dead to be in a Purgatory where they should and might be releeued by the deuotions of the liuing Thus he beleeued and taught where he taught aduisedly according to the Scriptures and thus wee beleeue accordingly and what hee casually taught otherwise wee reckon it for wood and straw and stubble which hee built vpon the true foundation which now the day-light of the Gospell hath reueiled and the fire of Gods word consumeth though hee himselfe by the faith of the said foundation hath attained peace And this wee hold to be the only true application of the Apostles wordes and most fitting to the processe of the text the Apostle making himselfe a builder by his preaching laying Christ for the foundation of his doctrine and therefore consequently vnderstanding gold siluer pearles wood hay stubble to be the rest of the doctrine that is preached concerning Christ either true signified by gold and siluer and pearles or false signified by wood and hay and stubble So did Tertullian of old vnderstand it m Tertul. coÌ„t Marc. l. 5. Super quod prout quisque superstruxerit dignam scilicet vel indignam doctrinam opus â—ius per ignem probabitur merces â—iâ—s per ignem rependetur As euery man saith he buildeth vpon the foundation doctrine worthy or vnworthy his worke shall be tryed by fire his reward shall be repaied him by fire In the like sort doth Ambrose expound it n Ambros in 1. Cor. 3. Tria genera posuit praeclara in mundo in quibus bonam doctrinam significauit c. Tria alia genera posuit sedfriuola In his corrupta vana doctrina designata di nâ—scitur He setteth downe three kinds of things that are excellent in the world gold siluer pearles by which he signifieth good doctrine three other things he setteth downe which are but base wood hay stubble and by these corrupt and vaine doctrine is designed Now if by these things doctrine bee designed then the fire whereby triall must be made of these things must be vnderstood accordingly That cannot be of the Popish Purgatory fire for it cannot in this sense bee fitted to Purgatory fire which the Apostle saith Euery mans worke shall be made manifest for the day shall declareâ— because it shall bee reueiled by fire for it is not declared or manifested by Purgatory fire whether doctrine bee true or false sith it selfe is so obscure and darke as that no man knoweth where it is Is it made manifest to vs by Purgatory fire whether ours or the Popish doctrine bee the more true Nay but by the word of God this triall is made and thereby it appeareth what is truth and what is falshood what is right and what is wrong and the truth as the gold and siluer is approued and iustified thereby but errour and false doctrine as wood and
for no other but a madde and frantike dreame and yet perforce must vse it because hee knew no better shift therefore he thought good to colour it the best he could by curtolling the wordes alleaged naming only imputation of righteousnesse whereas the Apostle nameth imputation of righteousnesse without workes But let him take the wordes as the Apostle setteth them downe and then giue vs his answere and we shall apparantly see him to be a most impudent man making no conscience of that he saith but studying only to blinde the Reader from seeing that truth which he himselfe knoweth not how with any probable shew to contradict Yet he telleth vs for conclusion that there is only a bare sound of wordes for the Protestants the true substance of the text making wholly for the Papists So then the sound of the wordes by his confession is for vs but inasmuch as the wordes are very plaine and cleare how may we be informed that the true substance and meaning of them is wholly for the Papists when as they containe in shew a flat contradiction to the doctrine of the Papists Wee see here the vse of that caueat which the Rhemists haue giuen to their Reader aduertising him o Rhem. Testam ArgumeÌ„t of the Epistles in generall to assure himselfe that if any thing in Pauls Epistles sound to him contrary to the doctrine of their Catholike Church he faileth of the right sense By this meanes if Saint Paul say it is white yet we must not thinke that he meaneth it to be white if it please their Church to call it blacke And therefore though here he speake of imputation of righteousnesse without works and bring testimony of ancient Scripture for confirmation thereof yet he must not be taken to meane that there is any such or any other but the imputation of the righteousnesse of workes because there is no other approued by the Roman Church Well may we thinke the iudgement of God to be fearefull vpon them who are so blinde as to be led with such fopperies and grosse deceipts CHAP. X. That eternall life is meerely and wholly the gift of God and cannot be purchased by merit or desert ANSWERE TO THE EPISTLE PAul teacheth that eternall life is the gift of God through Iesus Christ c. to Hee telleth vs againe and againe c. W. BISHOP IN the same place you had a large solution of this obiection but he that hath made a couenant with hell will not looke vpon that which might helpe him to heauen We teach with the Apostle and with his faithfull interpreter Saint Augustine That eternall life is the gift of God both originally because we must receiue grace by the free gift of God before we can doe any thing that doth deserue the ioyes of heauen and also principally the whole vertue and value of our merits doe proceede of the dignity of Gods grace in vs which doth eleuate and giue such worth to our workes that they thereby deserue life euerlasting Notwithstanding if we take not hold on Gods grace when it is freely offered vs and doe not concurre with it to the effecting of good workes we shall neuer be saued and this our working with the grace of God deserues heauen both which are prouedly this sentence of the same Apostle God will render to euery man according to Rom. 2. vers 6. 7. 8. his workes to them truly that according to patience in good workes seeke glory and honour and incorruption life eternall to them that are of contention and that obey not the truth but giue credit to iniquity wrath and indignation where you may see in expresse termes eternall life to be rendered and repaid for good workes to such men as diligently seeke to doe them and to others who refuse to obey the truth and rather choose to beleeue lies and to liue wickedly eternall death and damnation R. ABBOT WHether M. Bishop or I may bee thought more likely to flatter himselfe in an opinion of hauing made a couenant with hell I leaue it to be esteemed by the whole processe of this worke and the God of heauen shall make it one day more fully to appeare Against his solution of the obiection here propounded he knoweth well that I a Of Merits sect 8. haue returned a replication which sheweth the same to be infirme and vaine and seeing he can fortifie it no further the bare repeating of it is no other but womanish and idle talking The Apostle telleth vs that b Rom. 6. 23. eternall life is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the free grace or gift of God through Iâ—su Christ our Lord. We teach saith M. Bishop that eternall life is the gift of God originally and principally Thus by his shifting termes of originally and principally he limiteth the Apostles wordes and deludeth a maine Theoreme and Canon of Christian faith leauing it to be vnderstood that though eternall life be originally and principally the gift of God yet totally and absolutely it is not so Which iâ— it be true it must necessarily follow that as the Apostle saith truly that eternall life is the gift of God because in part it iâ— so so a man may truly say against the Apostle that eternall life is not the free gift of God because in part and in some sort it is not so And if no man may dare in this wise to gainsay the Apostle then wee must acknowledge that which Origen saith that c Origen in Rom. 4. Stipendia inquit peccati mors Et non addidâ—â— similitèr vt dicâ— et stâ—pendia aâ—â—â— iustitiae vita aterna sed ait Gratia autem Deâ— vâ—â—a aetâ—rna vt stâ—pend â—m quod vtique debiâ—o mercedi similé est retributionem poenâ— esse docâ—â—â—t mortis vâ—tam verâ— aternam soli gratiae consignareâ— the Apostle hauing said that the stipend of sinne is death did not adde in the like sort that the stipend of righteousnesse is eternall life but eternall life is the grace of God that he might teach that the retribution of punishment and death is a stipend which is like to a debt or wages but might assigne life eternall to grace only And thus the Apostle himselfe teacheth vs to conceiue when he saith d Rom. 11. 6. If it be of grace then it is not of workes otherwise grace is no grace For e August coÌ„t Pelag. Celest lib. 2. c 24. Gratia Dei non eriâ— gratâ—â— vllâ— modo nisigratâ—ita fuerâ—t omni modo grace saith Austin shall not be grace in any respect except it be free in euery respect f Idem Epist 120. c. 19. Haec est gratia quae gratis datur non meritâ—s operantis sed miseratione donantis That is grace saith he which is freely giuen not for the merits of the worker but by the mercy of the giuer Thus Hierome saith g Hieron Epist ad Demâ—trâ—ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non opâ—ruâ— retributio sed donamis est
proprietas Ecclesia ea est vt Catholica nempe vniuersalis vocetur The third property of the Church is that it is called Catholike that is vniuersall or might the Catechisme say without absurdity that Catholike is Vniuersall and must I be absurd because I say The Catholike Church is the Vniuersall Church Surely when words of one language are borrowed to speciall vse in another the reddition of them in the tongue to which they are borrowed is taken with the learned as supplying the place of a definition and it is thereby made to appeare whether they be properly and rightly vsed or vnproperly abused M. Bishop and his fellowes abuse the name of Catholikes and of the Catholike Church which English men doe not so readily vnderstand Let them giue the signification of the word and call themselues vniuersals their Church the vniuersall Church and then all that haue will to vnderstand can easily see their foolery and are ready to deride them But this they hide vnder the veile and couer of a Greeke word and wee that the truth may be the better seene are necessarily to discouer and therefore iust cause had I to say The Catholike Church is the vniuersall Church and he is an absurd man to taxe it as a thing absurd Yet notwithstanding I wish the Reader duly to obserue how that taxation stand 〈…〉 with the other that the same proposition of mine is captious For why is it captious Marry because the Catholike Church doth signifiâ— both the whole body of the Church compacted of all the particular members in which sense no one pâ—rticular Church can be called the Catholike Church because it is not the whole body and secondly the Catholike Church doth also designe and note very properly euery particular Church that embraceth the true Christian faith Where we may wonder that within the compasse of so few lines the mans wits should so extremely faile him For if the Catholike Church and the vniuersall Church be one and the same thing as he hath already told vs and vniuersall be no distinct thing but the very signification of the word Catholike then how can it be which here he telleth vs that the Catholike Church signifieth both the whole body of the Church which is the vniuersall Church and doth also very properly designe and note euery particular true Christian Church If the Catholike Church be no distinct thing from the vniuersall Church then it cannot properly note or designe euery particular Church or if it doe properly designe euery particular Church then it is distinct from the vniuersall Church Tell vs M. Bishop how these things hang togither for if the vniuersall Church be the very signification of the Catholike Church then we cannot see how a particular Church can bee properly called the Catholike Church because no particular Church can properly be called the vniuersall Church As for the exception that here lyeth against vs that the Fathers in pointing to a particular assembly doubt not sometimes to vse the name of the Catholike Church I shewed it before to be no whit preiudiciall to that that wee say because they minded not in so doing to limit themselues to that particular assembly but in a particular assembly to demonstrate the vniuersall Church For to say in any Citty for distinction sake this is the Catholike Church what was it else but to say this is that Church which is vniuersally dispersed through the whole world euen as when a man to demonstrate the elements saith This is the aire this is the earth pointing to the aire or earth whereat he is present but therein intending to demonstrate the whole body of the aire or earth hauing continuation with that whereto he pointeth For as the Apostle directing his speech to the Church of Ephesus nameth l Act. 20. 28. The Church of God which he hath purchased with his owne bloud and againe m 1. Tim. 3. 15. the house of God which is the Church of the liuing God the pillar and ground of truth so speaking of a part as to conioyne it with the whole euen so no otherwise was it that in noting any particular Church it was said This is the Catholike Church the whole Church being totum similare as I said before and the whole being subiect to be designed in any part But M. Bishop here saith that this was not only because the Church is totum similare but because each of the said particular Churches hath the same faith the same Sacraments and order of gouernment Which is as wisely and discreetly spoken as if he had said that this was not only because the Church in all parts thereof hath the same faith and sacraments but because the said particular Churches haue all the same faith and Sacraments For why is the Church said to be totum homogeneum or similare a body whose parts are all of the same nature kinde and being but because in all parts thereof there are the same faith and Sacraments or to vse the wordes of the Apostle n Ephes 4. 4. One body one spirit one hope of calling one Lord one faith one baptisme one God and Father of all who is aboue all and through all and in vs all Surely either M. Bishop was sleepy or else his wits were a wooll-gathering when he put in this exception Now then it was not said that the word Catholike is not or may not bee directed to any particular M. Bishop doth therein but meerely calumniate but I said and shewed that it is neuer rightly applied any way or to any particular but with implication of the vniuersall Church The faith is called Catholike because it is the faith of the vniuersall Church propagated and spred by the Apostles ouer the whole world Particular Churches are called Catholike and particular persons are called Catholikes as a man would say Vniuersalists for maintayning communion and fellowship of this faith with the Church of the whole world And as the name of the aire or the earth being absolutely vsed importeth that whole element whereof we speake but yet according to distinction of places we say The aire of London the aire of Oxford the aire of Winchester c. without restraining the name of the aire to any one place more then other and only meaning that part of the aire that is in such or such a place euen so whereas the name of the Catholike Church simply and absolutely vsed importeth the whole vniuersall Church the same notwithstanding is found to be distinguished by diuersity of places the Catholike Church of such a place or the Catholike Church of such a place not limiting the name of the Catholike Church to any one place more then other and in true propriety of speech meaning nothing else but that part of the Catholike Church that is in this or that place And therefore I formerly noted and thinke not vnfit here to be repeated that as Leo wrote himselfe o Leo. epist 12. Leo
child that hee cannot wrastle which notwithstanding beeing growen hee can Secondly it signifieth that such a thing commonly or for the most part cannot bee as when it is said A Citty that is set vpon a hill cannot bee hidde which notwithstanding by interposing somewhat may bee hidden and not seene Thirdly that wee say cannot bee which is not conuenient or agreeable to reason as when it is said The children of the Bride-chamber so long as the Bridegroome is with them cannot fast meaning that so long it is not reasonable or fitting so to doe Fourthly it is said cannot bee which the will admitteth not or liketh not to doe as when the Euangelist saith of our Sauiour He could doe no great miracles there because of their vnbeliefe wherein is a relation to the former meaning the will not admitting that which is not fitting or conuenient to be done Fiftly we say that can not be which by naturall course cannot be though by the power of God it may be done And lastly we say so of that which in no sort can be and is wholly and altogether vnpossible It was farre from Cyprians meaning that it was a thing wholly vnpossible for the Romans to admit the hearing of such persons for if he had so thought what needed he so much to labour Cornelius the Bishop in that behalfe but he would note it as a thing vnfitting to that testimony which the Apostle had giuen of them and which being so vniust he assured himselfe they would by no meanes yeeld vnto Euen in the same manner as Gregory saith that o Greg. Mor. l. 33. c. 22. Iniqui si apâ—rtè malâ— essent à bonis omninò recipi non possent men openly euill cannot be receiued or entertained of them that be good and as Marcellinus saith of a Bishop that p Collat. cum Donat. 1. c. 62. Falsi crimen nec obijcere condecet sacerdotem nec committere potuisse credendum est it beseemeth him not to obiect falshood to another nor is it to be beleeued that he could commit the same himselfe and as Leo saith q Leo. Epist 52. Priuilegia EcclesiaruÌ„ Sanctorum patrum Canonibus instituta Nicena Synodi fixa decretis nulla possunt improbitate conuellâ— nulla noâ—itate mutari The priuiledges of Churches established by the Canons of the Fathers and by the decrees of the Nicene Councell cannot by any sinister practise be impeached on by any nouelty changed and as we commonly say out of the law Id tantùm possumus quod iure possumus r Aug. cont Gaudent lib. 2. c. 22. Quod non potest iustè non potest iustus We can doe that only which we can lawfully doe or as St. Austin saith to the same effect The iust man cannot doe what he cannot iustly doe agreeable to the wordes of the Apostle Å¿ 2. Cor. 13. 8. Wee can doe nothing against the truth but for the truth Where as in infinite places more wee may not vnderstand a meere deniall of possibility but a signification of improbability of vndecency or breach of duty if the thing bee done that is spoken of euen as St. Austin expoundeth the wordes of the Angel to Lot t Genes 19. 22. I can doe nothing till thou be come thither u Aug. cont Gaudent lib. 2. c. 22. Non posse se dixit quod sine dubiâ— poterat per potentiam sed non poterat per iustitiam He saith he could not which doubtlesse by power he could but by iustice he could not doe Now if M. Bishop be pecuishly wilfull against common sense to vnderstand perfidiousnesse of falshood or errour in matters of faith yet that Cyprian can be vnderstood no otherwise but according to the same meaning it is infallibly proued for that in a matter of faith he with his Councell of African Bishops as I said before determineth contrary to the Church of Rome and of Stephanus the Bishop of Rome saith expresly that hee x Cyprian ad Pompei Haereticorum causam contra Christianos coÌ„tra Ecclesiam Dei assâ—rere conatur c. Imperitè atque improuidè scripsit c. Quae ista obstinatio quaeuâ— prâ—sumptio humanam traditionem diuina dispositioni anteponere c. vnitatem veritati de diuina lege venientem noÌ„ tenens hâ—resâ—m contra Ecclesiam vindicat endeauoured to mainteine the cause of Heretikes against Christians and against the Church of God that he wrote ignorantly and vnwarily that obstinately and presumptuously he preferred the Tradition of man before the ordinance of God that not holding the vnity and truth that proceeded from the law of God he defended heresie against the Church Wherein although it be true that Cyprian did erre yet we cannot doubt but that vpon aduertisement giuen him by the Bishop of Rome he would haue reformed his errour and submitted himselfe to the iudgement of that Church if he had knowen that priuiledge of immunity from errour which M. Bishop now by his testimony challengeth thereunto In a word to shew the weaknesse of the foundation whereupon M. Bishop buildeth all this fable Cyprian where he saith as the other Fathers sometimes doe y Cypr. Epist ad Iubaian alt ad Quirin Petrus super queÌ„ Dominus aedisâ—cauit Ecclesiam suam that Christ builded his Church vpon Peter in the very same place disputeth against the sentence of the Bishop of Rome thereby plainly declaring that from Peter to the Bishop of Rome there is by his iudgement no such priuiledge deriued as these men so infinitely babble of Now though his proofes hitherto be vaine yet those that follow are more vaine beside that hee is faine to report them falsly to giue them that little colour that they seeme to haue Ambrose saith he taketh it to be all one to say the Catholike and the Roman Church Forsooth Ambrose reporteth that his brother Satyrus hauing escaped the danger of shipwracke and being come to land was destrous in token of thanks-giuing to receiue the Sacrament So it was that the heresie or schisme of the Luciferians at that time preuailed in those parts and hee was carefull by no meanes to communicate with them Therefore z Ambros de obitu Fratris Percontatus ex â—o est vtruâ—â—am cum Episcopâ—s Catholicis hoc est cum Romana Ecclesia conâ—eniret he questioned with the Bishop whom hee had sent for vnto him whether hee accorded with the Catholike Bishops that is with the Roman Church Hee held it not enough to name Catholike Bishops because Heretikes and Schismatikes doe take vpon them to be called Catholikes but because he knew the Church of Rome then retayned the Catholike faith he would take knowledge of them to be Catholike Bishops by this that they ioyned themselues in fellowship of faith with the Roman Church And is not here thinke you a goodly reason They were then Catholike Bishops that did communicate with the Church of Rome therefore
it is all one now to say the Catholike and to say the Roman Church The Church of Rome as the most famous and chiefe Church was most fit to bee named in this case but otherwise it may euen as well be said They were Catholike Bishops that coÌ„municated with the Church of Millan where Ambrose was Bishop therefore to say the Church of Millan is all one as to say the Catholike Church As little discretion is there in his next allegation out of Hierome who mentioning the words of Ruffinus concerning some workes of Origen by him translated The Latin Reader shall finde nothing in them different from our faith demandeth thus a Hieron Apolog aduers Ruffin lib. 1. Fide suam quam vocat Eamnè qua Romana pollet Ecclesia an illam quâ— Origenis voluminibus continâ—tur si Romanam respondeâ—it ergo Catholâ—ci sumus qui nihil de Origenis errore transtulimus c. Which calleth hee his faith that which the Church of Rome professeth or that which is contained in the bookes of Origen If he answere the Roman faith then are we Catholikes who haue translated nothing of the errour of Origen For what is there here said of the Roman Church but what might likewise bee saâ—d of any other Church professing the true faith The argument followeth because the Roman Church did then maintayne the true Catholike faith so should it follow of the rest If he professe the faith of the Church of Constantinople of Antioch of Alexandria yea of the poore Church of Eugubium then is he a Catholike because al these did then professe the Catholike faith But what is this to M. Bishops purpose to proue in the Church of Rome a priuiledge of continuance and stability in the same true Catholike faith to proue that the Roman faith should bee alwaies the certayne and vndoubted patterne of the true Catholike faith In which conclusion his other Authours also doe all faile him who though it be graunted him that they did as he saith proue themselues then to be Catholikes and their Churches Catholike by declaring themselues to communicate with the Church of Rome and their aduersaries to bee Heretikes because they did not so for that the Church of Rome was then famously knowen to haue continued the same from the beginning in the points of faith then impugned by the Heretikes yet very idlely and childishly are they alleaged to proue that which M. Bishop intendeth that it should alwayes thenceforth continue so But indeede hee racketh his Authours and wrongeth them neither doe they say that which hee would haue them taken to say Tertullian appealeth to other Churches as well as to the Church of Rome and referreth his Reader to the most famous of them accordingly as they are nearest at hand b Tertul. de praescript Percurre Ecclesiaâ— Apostolicas apud quas ipse adhuc Cathedrae Apostolorum suis locis praesidentur c. Proxima est tibi Achaiai habes Corinthum Si non longè es a Macedonia habes Philippos habes Thessalonicenses Si potes in Asiam tenderâ— habes Ephesum Si autem Italâ—ae adiaces habes Romanam Runne through the Apostolike Churches in which there are Bishops still sitting in the seates of the Apostles in their places Is Achaia next vnto thee thou hast Corinthus If thou be not farre from Macedonia thou hast Philippos and the Thessalonians If thou canst goe into Asia thou hast Ephesus If thou border vpon Italie thou hast the Church of Rome What is there here for M. Bishops turne c Epiph. haeres 27. Epiphanius setteth downe a Catalogue of the Bishops of Rome but saith not a word to that effect as M. Bishop citeth him Optatus approueth his part to be Catholike not simply by communicating with the Church of Rome but for that togâ—ther with the Church of Rome d Optat. lib. 2. Siâ—icius hodie noster est socius cum quo nobis totus orbis coÌ„mercio formatarum in vna communionis societate concordant they communicated with thâ—â—hurch of the whole world Yea in the same booke hee attributeth as much in this behalfe to the seuen Churches of Asia as to the Church of Rome therby as strongly reproueth the Donatists e Ibid. Cum quibus Ecclesijs nullum communionis probamini habere consâ—rtiâ— c. Extra septem Ecclesias quicquid soris est alienum est You are proued to haue no fellowship of coÌ„munion with the seuen Churches Whatsoeuer is without the seuen Churches is stranger to the Church Austin setteth downe the succession of the Bishops of Rome and vpbraideth the Donatists that f Aug. Epist 165. In hoc ordine successionis nullus Donatista Episcopiâ— inuenitur no Donatist was found amongst them but as well doth he obiect to them that whereas g Ibid. Quile gunt in codicibus sanctis Ecclesias quibus Apostoli scripseruÌ„t nullum in eis habeÌ„t Episcopum Quid autem peruersius insaniê° quà m lectoribê° easdem Epistolas legentibus dicere pax tecum ab earum EcclesiaruÌ„ pace separare quibus ipsa Epistolae scriplae suÌ„t they read the Epistles of the Apostles they diuided themselues from the peace and fellowship of those Churches to which the Apostles wrote the same Epistles So then in all these Authors which he alleageth he doth but meerely abuse his reader which is the cause why he thus set downe their names without their wordes for that he presumed that only alleaging their names men would imagine that vndoubtedly they said somewhat for him whereas if he had set downe their wordes euery man might see that they said nothing Yea but it is greatly to be noted saith M. Bishop that there is no generall Councell of sound authority wherein the Christian truth hath beene expounded and determined but is confirmed by the Bishop of Rome Well and it is as greatly to be noted that the sentence of no Bishop of Rome was anciently holden sufficient for the deciding of a question of faith except the same were confirmed by a generall Councell Therefore doth Leo Bishop of Rome mention h Leo epist 61. Apostolicae sedis Epistola vniuersali sancta Synodi assensâ— firmata Et Epist 70. Scripta mea adiecta vniuersalis Synodi coÌ„firmatione c. his Epistle against the heresie of Eutyches confirmed by the vniuersall assent of the sacred Synode and his writings hauing the confirmation of the generall Councell added thereto And what his authority was in the Councell it may be conceiued by that he wrote to the Councell of Ephesus i Idem Epist 14. Misi qui vice mea sancto conueÌ„tui vestrae fraternitatis intersint communi vobiscum sententia qua Domino sint placitura constituant I haue sent my deputies to be present with you in your assembly and by sentence in common to decree those things which may be pleasing to the Lord where wee see that he challengeth no more but a voice in common with the
the Catholike or Vniuersall Church discountenancing all partiall and schismaticall combinations and meere impudency is it by those or any other wordes of Austin to challenge to the Church of Rome an authority or superiority of gouernement ouer other Churches when as wee see that both Austin and the rest of the Bishops of Africa did with one consent vtterly disclaime the same Hitherto therefore wee see no cause to attribute to the Church of Rome any such priuiledges as M. Bishop pretendeth and the lesse opinion haue wee that any such there are for that hee bringeth no shew of proofe but onely by wresting and falsifying the Authours whom hee alleageth in that behalfe W. BISHOP §. 3. HEre comes in Master Abbots second proposition but the CHVRCH of Rome is a particular CHVRCH in which is as great doubling and deceit as in the former for albeit the Church of Rome doe in rigour of speech only comprehend the Christians dwelling in Rome yet is it vsually taken by men of both parties to signifie all Churches of whatsoeuer other Country that doe agree with the Church of Rome in faith and confesse the Pastor thereof to be the chiefe Pastor vnder Christ of the whole Church Like as in times past the Roman Empire did signifie not the territory of Rome alone or Dominion of Italie but also any nation that was subiect to the Roman Emperor Euen so the whole Catholike Church or any true member thereof may be called the Roman Church à parte principaliore because the Bishop of Rome is the supreme head of their Church Wherevpon if you demand of a French Catholike of what Church he is his answere will be that he is of the Catholike Roman Church where he addeth Roman to distinguish himselfe from all Sectaries who doe call themselues sometimes Catholikes though most absurdly and to specifie that hee is such a Catholike as doth wholly ioyne with the Roman Church in faith and religion Euen as the word Catholike was linked at first with Christian to distinguish a true Christian beleeuer from an Heretike according to that of Pacianus an ancient Authour Christian is my name Epistola ad Simphorian Catholike is my surname so now adaies the Epitheton Roman is added vnto Catholike to separate those Catholikes that ioyne with the Church of Rome in faith from other sectaries who doe sometimes call themselues also Catholikes though very ridiculously because they be diuided in faith from the greatest part of the vniuersall world Out of the premises may bee gathered that the Roman Church may well signifie any Church that holdeth and maintayneth the same faith which the Roman doth whence it followeth that M. Abbot either dealt doubly when he said the Roman Church to be a particular Church or else he must confesse himselfe to be one of those Doctors whom the Apostle noteth For not vnderstanding what 1. Tim. 1. vers 7. they speake nor of what they affirme R. ABBOT HEre is a new-found distinction and I confesse my selfe to be one of those Doctors that know it not and wee see that M. Bishop as great a Doctor as he is yet can bring neither Scripture nor Father nor Councell nor Story nor any ancient writer whatsoeuer for the warrant of it but such as it is wee must take it barely vpon his owne word The Church of Rome hath abused the world vnder pretence of the name of the Catholike Church alleaging falsly of it selfe that which is truly said of the Catholike Church that without the Church there is no saluation To discouer this fraude we instruct men as truth is that the Church of Rome is but a particular Church and therefore cannot be called the Catholike that is the vniuersall Church and therefore againe that it is but a meere mockery of Popish impostours whereby they say that out of the Church meaning the Church of Rome there is no saluation To this M. Bishop answereth that in that proposition The Church of Rome is a particular Church there is doubling and deceipt And how I pray Forsooth albeit the Church of Rome in rigour of speech doe comprehend only the Christians dwelling in Rome yet it is vsually taken to signifie all Churches of other Countries agreeing in faith with the Church of Rome and confessing the Pope to be chiefe Pastor of the whole Church Where it is to be obserued how hee setteth himselfe meerely to circumuent and cosen his Reader For it being admitted that the Church of Rome is taken to signifie all Churches of other Countries agreeing in faith with the Church of Rome and confessing the Popes chiefty ouer them yet this nothing hindereth but that the Church of Rome is still a particular Church or a part only of the Church because the whole Church doth not agree nor euer hath agreed to giue to the Pope and Church of Rome that chiefty which they require For how many Churches are there not in Europe only but also in Asia and Africa that deride that claime of theirs and neither yeeld nor acknowledge any such superiority to belong vnto them Yea and his owne instance of the Roman Empire confoundeth him in this behalfe because as the Roman Empire was not the Empire of the whole world but imported only the Countries subiect to the Romans there being many other Dominions and Kingdomes that were neuer subiect vnto them euen so the Roman Church is not the Church of the whole world which is the Catholike Church but signifieth only those Churches which professe subiection to the Bishop of Rome there being many other Churches which professe no such subiection Now therefore be it so that the Church of Rome is so vsually taken to signifie other Churches submitting themselues to the Church of Rome M. Bishop for all this to his purpose is neuer a whit the nearer vnlesse he can shew that the Church of Rome is taken to signifie the whole Catholike Church of Christ For if it be not the whole Catholike Church then it is but a member and part thereof and therefore only a particular Church Tell vs then M. Bishop is it any where to be found that the Roman Church is taken to signifie the whole Catholike Church Marke I pray thee gentle Reader how it sticketh betwixt his teeth Faine hee would speake it and yet because hee knoweth it to bee an absurd lye his heart faileth him and only faintly hee telleth vs The whole Catholike Church may be called the Roman Church But M. Bishop doe not tell vs what in your foolish conceipt may bee tell vs what hath beene done The Fathers were interested in this cause as well as wee they haue told vs of the East Church and the West Church the Greeke Church and the Latin Church they haue infinite times made mention of the Roman Church but shew vs that euer they meant by the Roman Church to signifie the whole Church Here hee is blancke and can say nothing and if he would say any thing the
likewise hold that there is no saluation but in communicating with the Church of Rome Forsooth we must vnderstand that the Rogatists and Donatists spake falsly concerning their Church but most sure it is saith he that there is no saluation out of the true Church of Christ. It is sure indeede and will not both Rogatists and Donatists and all manner Heretiks say the some as well as he They all confesse that out of the true Church of Christ there is no saluation and therefore doe euery sort of them take vpon them to be the true Church of Christ that so they may perswade men that there is no saluation but with them But M. Bishop inferreth Wherefore whosoeuer doth not communicate with the Church of Rome which is the chiefe member thereof is out of the state of grace and saluation And would not a Donatist as well inferre Wherefore whosoeuer doth not communicate with the Church of Africa which is the chiefe member thereof is out of the state of grace and saluation Indeed he should haue said somewhat to the purpose if he had made it good that out of the communion of the Church of Rome there is no communion of the Church of Christ but if he cannot make this good then full simply doth he conclude There is no saluation out of the true Church of Christ therefore there is no saluation out of the Church of Rome But he telleth vs that the Church of Rome is the chiefe member of Christs Church Be it so and so was the Church of Ierusalem the chiefe member of the Church of the Iewes and yet the Church of Ierusalem put to death the Prophets and Christ himselfe and in that communion there could be no saluation Is not a chiefe member of the same substance as is the rest of the body and what hindereth then but as the other members so the chiefe member may be wounded and corrupted and cause annoyance to other members that adioyne vnto it Albeit we desire him to proue to vs that the Church of Rome is the chiefe member of the Church of Christ I regard not what humane estimation hath attributed vnto it for the renowme and eminency of the place but I require some diuine institution whereby it hath beene founded the chiefe member of the Church We say that with God there is no more respect of the Church of Rome then of any other Church if they will haue vs to beleeue more we put them to that for their Roman Church which St. Austin required of the Donatists for proofe of that which they said for their African Church a August de vnit Eccles c. 6 Legite nobis hoc de Lege de Prophetis de Psalmis de Euangelio de Apostolicis literis legite credimus Reade vs this out of the law out of the Prophets out of the Psalmes out of the Gospell or Writings of the Apostles reade it to vs and we beleeue it namely that Christ abideth no where heire vpon the earth but where he can haue the Pope to be b Ibid. Quare superordinatis dicendo in nullis terris haeredem permanere Christum vbi non pâ—tuerit cohâ—redem habere Donatli his fellow heire as the Donatists said of their Pope Donatus or that the Roman Church is such a chiefe member of the Church as that no man can liue but by the breath that he draweth from thence or obtayne forgiuenesse of sinnes but in the society and fellowship thereof I know I trouble M. Bishop now he loueth not to be called vpon for Scripture for the proofe of this matter for hee knoweth well that the Scripture hath nothing at all to giue testimony thereof Well though hee bring nothing out of Scripture yet he hath that out of Hierome that will serue his turne c Hieron ad Damas Ego nullum primum nisi Christum sequens beatitudini tuae id est Cathedrâ— Petri communione consocior super illam petram aedificatam Ecclesiam scio quicunque extra hanc domum agnum comedcrit prophanus est siquis in Arca Noe non fuerit peribit regnante diluâ—iâ— I following no chiefe but Christ saith he to Damasus Bishop of Rome ioyne my selfe to your blessednesse that is to the communion of Peters chaire vpon that Rocke I know the Church to be built whosoeuer eateth the Paschall Lambe out of this house he is prophane whosoeuer is not in the Arke of Noe shall perish by the floode By these wordes M. Bishop would beare vs in hand that Hierome beleeued a perpetuall necessity of hauing communion of faith with the Bishop and Church of Rome But tell vs M. Bishop in good sooth doe you thinke that Hierome not long before would haue said the same to Liberius that here he saith to Damasus He saith of Liberius that d Idem in Catalog Liberium Romanae vrbis Episcopum pro fide ad exilium pergentem primus solicitauit fregit ad subscriptionem haereseos compulit by the perswasion of Fortunatianus he was ouercome and brought to subscribe the heresie of Arius and would he then haue ioyned in communion with him If he would in this case haue disclaimed Liberius then certainly he could not meane to Damasus that it standeth for a perpetuall rule in the Church that who so will be saued must ioyne in communion with the Bishop of Rome But Hierome dealt aduisedly by expounding himselfe in his first wordes though M. Bishop list not to take knowledge of it He professeth to giue primacy to none but to Christ himselfe to make none the Authour or Lord of his faith but only Christ Notwithstanding in communion and fellowship of faith he professeth to ioyne with Damasus But how farre or in what sort I ioyne in communion with your blessednesse that is with Peters chaire Not simply then with Damasus Bishop of Rome but with Damasus sitting in Peters chaire Now as e Mat. 23. 2. the sitting in Moses chaire importeth the teaching of the doctrine of Moses so the sitting in Peters chaire importeth the teaching of the doctrine of Peter Damasus at that time did so and maintayned against the Arians the confession of Peter f Mat. 16. 16. Thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God This Hierome well knew and therefore what hee would not haue yeelded to Liberius though Bishop of Rome because hee sate not in Peters chaire that hee yeeldeth to Damasus because he did so and desireth by him to be instructed whether the vse of the word hypostasis might stand with the truth of the confession of Peter It is therefore communion with Peters chaire which Hierome commendeth that is with the faith and doctrine which therein Peter taught but he doth not tell vs that the Bishop of Rome doth alwaies and infallibly sit in Peters chaire For of Peters chaire at Rome we deeme the same as of Peters chaire at Antioch and Alexandria both which Gregory Bishop of Rome maketh
habent neque ille suis nomen indit aut à suis recipit sed omnes vt antea consuetâ— more Christiani nominantur Neuer any people tooke name of their Bishops but of the Lord in whom they beleeued We haue not taken names from the holy Apostles our Masters and Ministers of the Gospell of our Sauiour but of Christ we both are and are called Christians but they who deriue the originall of their faith from any other doe worthily beare the names of their authours as to whom they doe belong When as therefore we all were and were called Christians of Christ Marcion the inuentor of heresie was worthily exploded The other which remained with him by whom Marcion was exploded retayned the name of Christians but they who followed Marcion were no longer called Christians but Marcionites And thus Valentinus Basilides Manicheus and Simon Magus gaue names to their followers and thence it came that some were called Valentinians other Basilidians other Manichees other Simonians other Cataphrygians of their Countrey Phrygia other Nouatians of Nouatus Thus Meletius being eiected by Peter a Bishop and Martyr named them that followed him not any more Christians but Meletians In the same sort when Alexander eiected Arius they who cleaued to Alexander remayned Christians but they who went away with Arius leauing the name of Christians to Alexander and his were thenceforth called Arians Moreouer euen now after the death of Alexander they who are of the same communion with Athanasius the successor of Alexander and with whom Athanasius himselfe is ioyned in communion they all still keepe the same marke he neither giueth any name to them nor they to him but all as before according to the accustomed manner are called Christians This place I haue set downe at large that the Reader may see that Athanasius here could not haue omitted the name of Catholikes there being such occasion to draw it from him if it had been then in vse and that the common names of opposition were then not Catholikes and Heretikes but Christians and Heretikes euen as Cyprian also vseth it saying of Stephanus x Cyprian ad Pompeium Qui haeretâ—coruÌ„ causâ—m contra Christianos contra Ecclesiam Dei esscrere conatur He goeth about to maintaine the cause of Heretikes against Christians and against the Church of God the word Catholike being neuer found in either of them personally taken or substantiuely as before was said but only that Athanasius mentioneth one surnamed y Athanas Epist ad solitariam vitam agentes Faustinus Catholicus homo genere Bithyâ—us opinionibus haereticus Catholicus an Arian Heretike and a persecutor of the faith We may therefore well thinke that there was little discretion riueted to M. Bishops head that would tell vs that the name so taken is so fast ioyned and riueted with Christian profession and religion as that it cannot be separated from it for if it were not so riueted then how commeth it to passe that it is so now The originall thereof was as we may well coniecture by occasion of the heresie of the Donatists who challenged the name of the Church to a part in Africa or elsewhere which were followers of Donatus against whom they that defended the Church Catholike were thereof in processe of time termed by the name of Catholikes The first vse then of the name of Catholikes stood in opposition betwixt Catholikes and Donatists albeit custome soone transported it to make a generall opposition betwixt Catholikes and Heretikes Now the name thus arising accidentally and only by occasion who doubteth but that without preiudice of Christian profession it may by occasion be let fall againe And what greater occasion can there be then the Popish abuse thereof who make a Catholike to import the same in effect now that a Donatist did then For with them a Catholike is no otherwise taken but for a Roman Catholike and because the whole Church is not Roman but a part only what is this Roman Catholike but one who vnder the false name of a Catholike diuideth himselfe from the whole Church as the Donatists did to cleaue to a part thereof What is the name of a Catholike then with them but a Donatisticall name schismaticall and factious and therefore wicked and hatefull and in their sense wholly to be abandoned out of the Church of God Hereby it may appeare how idlely M. Bishop saith that the Apostles did ascribe and appropriate the name Catholike to true Christianity for although they taught vs to beleeue the Church to be Catholike that is vniuersally extended through the world yet did they neuer teach neither was it for a long time after them accustomed that true Christians were called by the name of Catholikes and therefore without wrong to any thing which the Apostles taught we may rightly say that the name according to the Popish abuse thereof is become the proper badge and marke of Apostataes and Heretikes And therefore although if we had beene in the time of Austin we would with him z August in Ioan. tract 32. Catholico nomine fide gaudemus haue reioyced in the Catholike name and faith yet now we cannot with the Papists reioyce in the name of Catholikes and without any blasphemy we reiect it because vnder that name they haue diuided themselues from the Catholike Church and haue destroyed the true Catholike faith Who though they be no other but proud and false fellowes as M. Bishop speaketh and meere vsurping companions and their insolent and audacious folly haue beene both rebuked and conuicted yet doe still impudently and infinitely persist in their absurd claime and doe leaue vs no way but only to desist from the communion of the name which we cannot free from that abuse Now whereas I say further that a Rom. 2. 28. the Apostle denyeth the name of Iewes to them who yet according to the letter were so called because of the circumcision of the flesh and applyeth the truth of the name to them who were so according to the spirit albeit according to the letter they were not so named M. Bishop very discreetly answereth that the name Iew being taken in the Apostles sense for one of what nation soeuer that fulfilleth the iustice of the law neuer was nor shall be a name of reproch But what is this I pray to that that I say Doe my words import that the name of a Iew in that sense is or hath beene a name of reproch When I say that the Apostle applyeth the truth of the name to the faithfull would he conceiue me that the Apostle applyeth to them a name of reproch My words plainly signifie that the name in vulgar and literall construction applyed to them who by propagation of nature are the seede of Abraham is become a name of reproch and shame but that as it hath implication of spirituall circumcision and conformity with Abraham it is a name of honour though they to whom it
appertayneth be not according to the letter and in common speech called by that name Let him then vnderstand proportionably that the truth of the name of Catholikes belongeth not to the Romish faction who challenge to themselues as the Iewes did to haue gotten by succession the possession of the name and will be commonly so called but it belongeth to vs who though we vse not the word being growen to ill meaning by their abuse yet do maintayne one and the same truth with them who first were called by that name In a word as there is a double sense in the one so is there also in the other and I doe not so hoppe from one sense to another in the one but that I shew a iust â—orrespondence betwixt them both W. BISHOP §. 3. BVt and it please you the Protestants haue the kernell of the name Catholike and we but the shell Why doe they then so bitterly inueigh against it why are they not more willing to extoll and magnifie that renowmed title being of such ancient Nobility Twenty pound to a peny that what face soeuer he set on it yet in his heart he meruailously feareth the contrary himselfe If that faith and religion only be Catholike and Vniuersall as he acknowledgeth that hath euer beene and is also spread ouer all the world and shall continue to the worlds end then surely their religion cannot be Catholike euen by the vniforme confession of themselues who generally acknowledge that for nine hundred yeares togither the Papacy did so domineer all the world ouer that not a man of their religion was to be found in any corner of the world that durst peepe out his head to contradict it Could there be any Church of theirs then when there was not one Pastor and flocke of their religion though neuer so small in any one Countrey And euen now when their Gospell is at the hottest hath it spread it selfe all the world ouer is it receiued in Italie Spaine Greece Afrike or Asia or carried into the Indians nothing lesse They cannot then call themselues Catholikes after the sincere and ancient acceptation of that name which is as himselfe hath often repeated out of S. Augustine Quia communicant Ecclesiae to to or be diffusae Because they communicate in fellowship of faith with the Church spread ouer all the world They must therefore notwithstanding M. Abbots vaine bragges be content with the shell and leaue the kernell to vs who doe embrace the same faith that is dilated all Countries ouer yea they must be contented to walke in the foote-steps of their fore-fathers the Donatists euen according to M. Abbots explication and flie from the vniuersality of faith and communion of the Church spread all the world ouer vnto the perfection of their doctrine which is neuerthelesse more absurd and further from the true signification of the word Catholike then the Donatists shift was of fulnesse of Sacraments and obseruation of all Gods Commandements as hath beene already declared But let vs heare how clearely and substantially he will at length proue their Church to be Catholike R. ABBOT IT pleaseth vs very well M. Bishop that we haue the kernell of the name of Catholikes and in the meane time because your importunity so requireth we are content to leaue the shell to you The kernell serueth vs to feede vpon and it is very tastfull to vs but you haue berayed the shell and therefore we haue no care to meddle with it Our inueighing against it is no otherwise but in respect of your abuse let it be restored to his true vse and we shall be ready to extoll it and where it is so we doe so As for your wager M. Bishop of twenty pound to a peny you haue lost it and you know that you haue lost it because you see that I haue set no other face vpon the matter then by sufficient proofs I haue made good But here he taketh in hand to bereaue vs of the kernell because our faith and religion was neuer Catholike that is was neuer spred ouer the whole world Whereas I on the other side doe tell him that it is only our religion which appeareth to haue beene absolutely spred ouer all the word and none but ours For our religion is no more nor other then is contained in the Gospels and Epistles of the Apostles and because we know that the religion there set downe was spred ouer all the world therefore we cannot doubt but that our religion is that that was spred ouer all the world and though Apostasie hath ouershadowed it yet hath euer since continued in the world As for that which he alleageth to the contrary it is no vniforme confession of ours but a deformed lye of his owne We doe not acknowledge that for nine hundred yeares togither there was not a man of our religion to be found in the world The Papacy indeede did mightily domineer accordingly as it was foretold but yet it could neuer so preuaile to the extirpation of our religion but that euen in the middest of the Papacy it hath continued still yea thousands and hundred thousands as by their owne stories appeareth haue beene murthered and slaine for the profession thereof Yea in the very religion of Popery our religion hath continued for what is Popery but a doctrine compounded of our religion and their owne deuice Our religion hath serued them for a foundation whereupon to build not only their wood and hay and stubble but also the wild-fire and poison of their idolatries and damnable heresies which without the pretence and colour of our religion Christian eares would haue detested and abhorred but therefore dreaded them not because they saw them cloaked with shew of still retaining that which we professe They durst not deny those Canonicall bookes of the old and new Testament which our religion receiueth but to serue their turne they added other bookes not inspired of God to be notwithstanding of like authority with those They acknowledged the Lords praier the articles of the Creede the ten Commandements which we receiue as principles of our religion but they frustrated them by a superstitious custome brought in of reciting them like a charme in an vnknowen tongue They haue neuer denyed the two Sacraments which we teach which were fast rooted in Christian profession but they haue added to them other fiue and made them vp seuen They vsed no other substantiall forme of Baptisme then we doe only they prophaned it with sundry polluted and corrupt ceremonies of humane deuice In their Masse and Sacrament of the Altar the ground of all is that that we doe according to the institution of Christ and example of the primitiue Church They bring bread and wine to the Lords table they sanctifie or consecrate the same with the words of Christ when and where they list they administer the same to the people and all this they take vpon them to doe in remembrance of the Passion Death and
Resurrection of our Lord Iesus This is our religion and herein their example iustifieth vs but their doctrines of transubstantiation and reall presence and concomitancy and sacrifice propitiatory for quicke and dead with the rest of that kinde are additions of theirs whereof the institution of Christ which togither with vs they recite maketh no shew at all If they should haue disclaimed redemption and remission of sinnes by the bloud-shed and death of Christ Christian people would haue defied them therefore they left the name thereof in the Church which is our religion but they defeated the power of it by briâ—ging in a thousand other deuices wherby men should redeeme themselues and purchase the remission of their owne sinnes It is our religion to acknowledge Christ to be the Mediator betwixt God and Man and this they would neuer disauow but to Christ they haue ioyned the Saints also to be our Mediators It is our religion to teach that God is to be worshipped and all spirituall deuotion is to be done vnto him and this they cannot deny but they haue added hereto the worshipping of Saints and Saints Images and thereby haue defiled the worship of the immortall God They deny not grace which our religion teacheth but they put to it the power of nature and free will They dare not but confesse Christ to be the head of the Church which our religion teacheth but they haue added the Pope to be another head and so haue made the Church a Monster with two heads Thus in euery point of doctrine take away those patcheries and additions of theirs which are things not taught vs by the word of God and euen in their religion that which remaineth is our religion the very truth of the Gospell of Iesus Christ For these and such other propositions of true faith the Diuell could neuer abolish out of the Church only by Antichrist he suppressed the knowledge and vse of them and to this wholsome wine put such abundance of his corrupt and poisoned waters as might frustrate the power and effect thereof Wherein notwithstanding he could not so farre preuaile but that the light here and there brake forth by such chinks and lattises as were remaining which many of our forefathers in the time of that Aegyptian darkenesse did discerne and see to their euerlasting comfort and soules health Yea M. Bishop knoweth well that there were in those times both Pastors and Flocks not in one only Countrey but in many who detested those blendings and mixtures of theirs and kept themselues either wholly or for the most part to the entire truth of our religion the light whereof euen then shined vnto them out of the very darkenesse of the Church Which notwithstanding we wonder not that he pretendeth not to know who will seeme not to know that our religion hath spred it selfe into Italie and Spaine when as all the world knoweth that the Inquisition hath shed the bloud of many thousands there only for the profession of our religion Yea the principles of our religion are so residing will they nill they in the very bowels of Popery as that they are forced to vse many sinister courses to drowne and stifle them and to keepe the people from taking knowledge thereof because they see that if there be but winde to blow away the ashes our fire will straightwaies burne amongst them and the flame presently ascend to the consuming of their roofe they see that if men be but stirred a 〈…〉 awaked out of their sleepe they will be forthwith ready out of the very common instinct of Christianity to beeleeue as we doe In Greece in Africa in Asia wheresoeuer the Gospell is there is no other but our Gospell because there is no Gospell but that which the Euangelists and Apostles haue recorded in the writings of the Gospell neither is Christ any where knowen but where he is knowen by that Gospell Therein hath our Gospell beene spred ouer the whole world therein we communicate with the Church of the whole world wheresoeuer this Gospell is free there our religion is not bound but thereby euen amidst errour and apostasie b wisedome is iustified of her children and God Mat. 11. 19. according to the purpose of his grace giueth light vnto euerlasting life As for the Indians lamentable experience haue they had of the Popish Gospell Neuer any Apostle or Euangelist carryed their religion abroade as the Papists haue done thither and they haue cause to wish that the Roman Church had neuer beene so Catholike as to extend to them Vpon some few of the remainder of them they haue forced baptisme some of their ceremonies but they haue taught them nothing of religion nothing of the Gospell of Iesus Christ How otherwise their religion hath beene spred ouer the whole world enough hath beene said already in briefe I say here that they can alleage no age nor time wherein they can make good that it hath so beene We know they can talke at will but farre are they from proofe that their doctrines of the Popes Supremacy his Pardons and Iubilees of Purgatory of Transubstantiation of their priuate Masse and halfe Communion with a number of such other were euer or at any time receiued throughout the whole world CHAP. IIII. That the Church before Christ euen from the beginning was a part of the Catholike Church and that the faith and religion of the new Testament differeth not in substance from the old A BRIEFE DEFENCE OF THE KINGS SVPREMACY ECCLESIASTICALL ANSWERE TO THE EPISTLE NOw as of this Catholike Church from the beginning to the end there is c. to Now whereas he alleageth c. W. BISHOP §. 1. WE agree in this that there is but one faith one baptisme one spirituall foode and one religion in the Catholike Church but M. Abbot is fouly ouer-seen about the time when the true Church beganne first to be called Catholike which was not before Christs time but afterwards according to that alleaged out of Pacianus an ancient Author who writeth of the name Catholike saying Pacian Epist ad Simphor de nomine Catholico Christian is my name 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 and did cleaue fast vnto the whole body of the Church were intituled Catholikes to distinguish them from Heretikes that did not ioyne with the vniuersall corps of Christians in faith and religion which M. Abbot before did in plaine words confesse see his text afore where 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 were right and according to the will of God for that time because Catholike signifieth that which is spred all the world ouer and receiued of all nations so was not the law of Moyses and the manner of seruing God therein prescribed but was peculiar
a Genes 14. 18. hee brought forth bread and wine and that as Ambrose and Hierome say out of the Hebrew writers b Ambros ad Hebr. cap. 7. Hieron ad Euagr Nec mirum si Melchâ—zedec victori Abraham obuiam processerit in reseâ—â—ion em tam ipsius quam pugnatorum eius panesâ—â—mumque protulerit For the refreshing of him and his souldiers in which meaning c Ioseph Anâ—iq Iudaic. l. 1. â— 11. Milites Iosephus namely Abrahami hospitalitèr habuit nihil â—is ad victum decsse passus doth vnderstand it And if M. Bishop will needes haue it translated by the word of offering as his fellowes are wont greatly to wrangle to that intent yet Ambrose so also applyeth it that d Ambros de Sacram. l. 4. c. 3. Occurrit illi Melâ—lnsedec Sacâ—rdos â—btulit ei paâ—â—e vinii he offered to Abraham bread and wine thereby excluding all necessity of construction of sacrifice to God But if yet we shall perforce take it of offering to God we conceiue of it according to that which Cyprian saith thatâ— e Cyprian l. 2. Ep. 3. Domiâ—uâ— noster Iesus Christus Sacrificium Dâ—o Patri obtulit obtulit hoc idâ—m quod Melchisedec obtulâ—rat id est panem vinii suâ—â— scilicet corpus sanguineÌ„ our Lord Iesus Christ offering a sacrifice to God the Father offered the very same that Melchisedec had offered that is bread and wine euen his owne body and bloud If the sacrifice of Christ and Melchisedecke be the very same and Melchisedecke also offered the body and bloud of Christ as these words import then cannot our sacrifice be a true and real sacrifice of Christs body and bloud because Melchisedecks was not so Christ as yet not hauing taken his body and bloud and therefore must both that and this be vnderstood to be only the mysterie and signification thereof And this interpretation of the sacrifice on both sides Hierome confirmeth when of our Sauiour Christs institution of the Sacrament he saith f Hieron in Mat. 26. Assumit panem ad verum Paschae traÌ„sgreditur Sacramentum vâ— quomodo in praefiguratione eius Melchisedec suÌ„mi Dei Sacerdos panem vinii offerens fecerat ipse quoque veritatem sui corpâ—ris sanguiniâ— repraesentaret Christ taketh bread and goeth to the true Sacrament of the Passeouer that as Melchisedec the Priest of the high God in prefiguring of him offering bread and wine had done so he himselfe also might represent the truth of his body and bloud There is therefore both in the one and in the other not the very truth of the body and bloud of Christ but only a representation of the truth thereof euen as Chrysostome on the one side expresseth when he saith that g Chrys Op. imperfec hom 11 Haec vasa sactificata inquibus non â—st verii coâ—pus Christi sed mysterium corporis eius continetur in the holy vessels is contained not the true body of Christ but the mysterie of his body And vnlesse it be thus it cannot stand which Ambrose concerning this offering of Melchisedec saith that h Ambros de Sacram. l. 4. c. 3. Intellige Sacramenta quâ— accipis anteriâ—ra esse quà m sint Moysi Sacramenta c. the Sacraments which we receiue are more ancient then the Sacraments of Moses for how can that be if our Sacraments be truly and really the body and bloud of Christ which Melchisedecks were not Againe where God by Malachy saith i Mat. 1. 11. In euery place incense shall be offered vnto me and a pure offering whose eyes are so sharpe as that in those words he can discerne the Popish sacrifice of the Masse We reade here of incense and a pure offering but this roome is too little for the building of so large a house their Masse cannot stand within the compasse of this ground And when we consider how the Fathers expound the same Tertullian one where generally of k Tertul. adu ludaeos Desacrisicijs spiritualibus addit dicens In omni loco sacrificia munda offerâ—tur spirituall sacrifices another where of l Idem cont Marc. l. 4. Sacrificium mundum scilicet simplex oratio de conscientia pura sincere prayer out of a pure censcience Hierome of m Hieron in Zacha. c 8. Sacrificium mundum nequaquam in victimis veteris Testamenti sed in sanctuate Euangelica puritatis the sanctity and holinesse of Euangelicall purity Eusebius of n Euseb de demonstrat Euang lib. 1. c 6. Sacrificium quod appellaturpurum facimus per puras actiones pure and godly doings Austin of o Aug. cont lit Petil. l. 2. c. 86. Viuum Sacrificium de quo dictum est Immola Deo sacrificium laudis the liuely sacrifices of praise and thanks-giuing Theodoret of p Theodoret. in Mal. c. 1. Debitum honorem praestabuÌ„t accomodatum cultum adhibebunt the due honour and conuenient worship of God exemplifying the same by the words of Christ q John 4. 23. The true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and truth and by the words of the Apostle r 1. Tim. 2. 8. Let men pray euery where lifting vp pure hands without wrath or doubting and Hierome by the words of the Psalme Å¿ Psal 141. 2. Let my prayer be set forth in thy sight as the incense and the lifting vp of my hands as an euening sacrifice these things I say considered may we not be thought to be out of our wits if we shall beleeue them that the place must needes be vnderstood of their monstrous sacrifice That Manna was a type of the body of Christ no Christian man doubteth but that it was a type of Christs body as really in the Sacrament no wise man beleeueth and the reason wherby t Answere to M. Perkins Aduertisement sect 56. See the Confutation elsewhere he goeth about to proue it is there declared to be vaine So haue I also u Of Traditions sect 21. formerly shewed that the example of the high Priest amongst the Iewes giueth no manner warrant to the supreme authority of one head ouer the whole Christian Church that the high Priest amongst the Iewes had no such supremacy as they claime to the Pope that reason teacheth such a supremacy to be the manifest and certaine danger of the Church and experience hath found it to be the very ruine and desolation thereof As for their according with the Iewish ceremonies in consecrating of Priests and hallowing of Churches and Altars and Vestments c. it is a slender proofe for the finding of their religion amongst the Iewes because they haue borrowed many ceremonies from the Pagans also and yet they will not say that their religion was amongst the Pagans Their emuâ—aâ—â—on of those ceremonies we iustly cry out against as preposterous and absurd because they being as M. Bishop saith types and figures of the law of
of St. Thomas as they did the mildnesse of Dauid But against that if of his I oppose the exposition that Thomas Aquinas maketh of the Apostles wordes concerning the Iewes that they were beloued for their Fathers sakes vnderstanding the same of the elect of that nation l Tho. Aquin. in Rom. c. 11. Lect. 4. Quod non est sic intelligendum quasi merita praestita patribus fuerint causa aternae electionis 〈◊〉 sed quâ—a Deus ab aterno elegit gratis patres filios hoc tamen ordine vt filij propter patres consequerentur salutem noÌ„ quasi merita patrum suffiâ— creat ad siliorum salutem sed per quandam abundantiam diuine gratiae 〈◊〉 hoc dicit quae in tintum patribus est exâ—â—bita vt prop ter promissiones eis factas etiam fily saluarentur Which saith he is not to be so taken as if the merits bestowed vpon the Fathers were the cause of the eternall election of the children but for that God from euerlasting chose freely both the Fathers and the children in such order notwithstanding as that the children for the Fathers sakes should obtaine saluation not as if the merits of the Fathers should suffice for the saluation of the children but he speaketh it according to an abundance of Gods grace and mercy which was so farre yeelded to the Fathers as that the children should be saued by vertue of the promises or for the promises sake made vnto their Fathers Here is then the true reason why they alleaged vnto God for themselues the names of the Fathers not for the merits of the Fathers but because of the promises that God had made vnto them Whereof we haue this for a certaine demonstration that wee no where finde any of the Fathers mentioned in that sort but only such to whom the promises of God haue in speciall manner beene made neither Abel nor Enoch nor Noe nor Iob nor Moses nor Esay nor any of the rest but only Abraham Isaac Iacob Dauid to whom God vouchsafed to doe that honour by speciall couenants and promises to tie himselfe both to them and to their seede Yea and it is further to be obserued that this was no ordinary manner of praying amongst them as wherby to begge of God remission of sinnes and eternall life as we see that Popish prayer doth but when God in anger and displeasure seemed ready m Deut. 9. 25. 26. to destroy their nation and so to forget the promise made vnto their Fathers or when they would seeke any fauour at Gods hands for the iustification of that promise then would they alleage to God the names of their Fathers as it were to put him in minde of those things which he had promised Thus doth Moses himselfe declare the meaning of that prayer in another place when he saith n Exod. 32. 13. Remember Abraham Isaac and Iacob thy seruants to whom thou swarest by thine owne selfe and saidst vnto them I will multiply your seede c. In which sort the three children in the fiery furnace are brought in praying vnto God in the Apocryphall additions to Daniel o Song of the three children Vers 35. 36. Take not away thy mercy from vs for thy beloued Abrahams sake and for thy seruant Isaacs sake and for thine holy Israels sake to whom thou hast spoken and promised that thou wouldest multiply their seede c. And thus it is said that p 1. Chro. 13. 23 the Lord had mercy on them and pittyed them and had respect vnto them because of his couenant with Abraham Isaac and Iacob So concerning Dauid also we reade that q 2. Chro. 21. 7. the Lord though he were much prouoked yet would not destroy the house of Dauid because of the couenant that he had made with Dauid and because he had promised to giue a light to him and to his sonnes for euer This couenant and promise Salomon pleadeth in his prayer vnto God r 2. Chro. 6. 16. Lord God of Israel keepe with thy seruant Dauid my father that which thou hast promised him and againe Å¿ Vers 17. Let thy word be verified which thou spakest vnto thy seruant Dauid And thus the Church of the Iewes in time of affliction remembreth God concerning Dauid t Psal 89. 49. Lord where are thy old louing kindnesses which thou swarest vnto Dauid in thy truth By all which we see that it was not vpon the persons or vertues of Abraham Isaac Iacob Dauid that those ancient faithfull rested themselues in their prayers but vpon the word the couenant the promise of God which he in mercy had vouchsafed to make vnto them And hereby we learne what to conceiue of those latter wordes which M. Bishop alleageth out of the Psalme u Psal 132. 11. Lord remember Dauid and all his mildnesse Where to make the wordes seeme somewhat the more effectuall to his purpose wee see how hee groundeth himselfe vpon an errour of translation For the wordes of the Psalme truly translated are not Remember Dauid and all his mildnesse but remember Dauid and all his affliction or trouble as not only x Hieron translat Psal iuxta Hebr. Memento Dauid omnis afflictionis cius Hierome in his translation opposed to the Septuagint in Greeke but also their owne interpreters y Pagn Ar. Mont. Vniuersa afflictionis eius Pagnine and Arias Montanus haue translated it Where vnder the name of affliction we vnderstand that feruent burning zeale and carefull trauell of minde wherewith Dauid was possessed and euen perplexed and anguished through desire that he had for the building of the Temple of God and for the setling of the Kingdome and state accordingly as God had promised vnto him With which desire he was so vehemently affected as here it is expressed as that hee sware and vowed to the Lord not to enter into his house nor to climbe vp to his bed not to suffer his eyes to sleepe nor his eye lids to slumber till he found the place for building the Temple of God the house of God wherin he would rest and dwell amongst them Salomon the sonne of Dauid whom I doubt not to haue beene the authour of this Psalme for that z Psal 132. â— c. a part hereof was vsed by him in a 2. Chro. 6. 41. the dedication of the Temple recommendeth herein to God the remembrance of this care and craueth successe thereto and that God would verifie in him all that he had thereupon said and promised to Dauid in that behalfe I haue before shewed how Chrysostome giueth the effect of this prayer in Salomons name b Chrysost in Psal 131. Quoniam genus ab co duxi quoniam cum tibi acceptum suissâ—t cius studâ—um diligentia dixisti te cius genus regnam erecturum propterea nunc haec paâ—la conuenta à te exig mus Idem habet Basil in Psal cund Because I am
heauen The other points were touched before and shall be shortly againe But I would in the meane season be glad to heare where the written word teacheth vs that Kings and temporall Magistrates are ordained by Christ to be vnder him supreme Gouernours of Ecclesiasticall affaires because M. Abbot made choise of this head-article of theirs for an instance that the written word was plaine on their side 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 temporall Magistrates any Ecclesiasticall persons at all or can one that is no member of the Ecclesiasticall body be head of all the rest of the Ecclesiasticall members or is the state Secular higher and more worthy then the Ecclesiasticall 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 where the Christian world is turned topsie-turuy that may be thought meete and expedient but in other places that will not be admitted for currant which 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 R. ABBOT THe truth of mine assertions hath hitherto appeared by my defence of them but let them no further be taken for true then he is here found to be false that is the oppugner of them He saith that my conclusion conuinceth me euen by the verdict of my selfe to fall into the foule fault and errour of the Donatists To proue this he maketh me to speake in my answere in this sort Our faith because it is that which the Apostles committed to writing is the Apostolike faith and our Church by consanguinity and agreement of doctrine is proued to be an Apostolicall Church c. and is the only true Catholike Church c. Hauing set downe all these as my words he inferreth thus see you not how he is come at length to proue their Church to be Catholike by perfection of their doctrine which was as he himselfe in this very assertion noted a plaine Donatisticall tricks reproued by St. Austin c. But I pray thee gentle Reader to looke where thou canst finde those wordes by me set downe And is the only true Catholike Church Aske M. Bishop if thou meete with him where he found them and if he cannot tell thee aske him in sadnesse what spirit he thinketh it was wherewith he was led when he set them downe for my wordes Fie M. Bishop fie for shame doe you talke so against lying and will you in the meane time lye so wittingly and willingly so as that there is no meanes to salue it no colour to excuse it I did not say that ours is the only true Catholike Church I made no shew of prouing it by perfection of doctrine to be the Catholike Church I neuer wrote it I neuer thought it and therefore once againe I wish you to bethinke your selfe of your words whereof I remembred you before a Reproofe pag. 283. The diuels cause it is that needeth to be bolstered out and vnderpropped with lyes Surely it is beyond doating folly it is desperate fury that draweth men on to such courses To let that goe foule and shamefull as it is he telleth vs next that he liketh well of Tertullians obseruation that our faith ought to haue consanguinity and perfect agreement with the Apostles doctrine But he curtolleth Tertullians obseruation by this recitall of his because Tertullian doth not only say what our faith ought to haue but telleth vs that b Tertul. de Praescript Quae licet nullum ex Apostolis vel Apostolicis authoreÌ„ suum proferaÌ„t vt mâ—â—tò posteriores quae denique quotidiè instituiâ—tur tamen in eadem fide conspirantes non mâ—â—us Apostolicae depâ—tantur pro consanguinitate doctrinae those Churches which cannot bring any of the Apostles or Apostolike men for their authour as being much later euen the Churches which daylie are begunne yet according in the same faith are for this consanguinity or agreement of doctrine reputed Apostolike Churches no lesse then the rest Hence I concluded that our Church because it agreeth in faith and doctrine with the Apostles is therefore to be reckoned an Apostolike Church But that saith M. Bishop is not the question at this time And what then is the question Marry saith he whether our doctrine or the Protestants be truly called Catholike that is whether of them hath beene receiued and beleeued in all nations ouer the world But did not he see that the one of these directly followeth of the other for the faith of the Apostles is it that was spred ouer the whole world Our faith is the same with the faith of the Apostles because it is that which is recorded in the Scriptures of the Apostles Therefore our faith it is that was spred and beleeued through the world Abrahams faith was it that was spred ouer the whole world for Abraham is c Rom. 4. 12. 16 the father and patterne of all that beleeue both circumcised and vncircumcised Our faith is the same with Abrahams faith Therefore againe it is our faith that was generally receiued throughout the world At this M. Bishop biteth the lip it troubleth him that he knoweth not what to say to it He seeth this proofe to be most certaine and impregnable aboue all other and therefore he seeketh by all meanes to diuert and turne away his Reader from listening to it He telleth him that I doe not deale plainly and soundly that I goe about the bush that I fetch wide and wild windlesses from old father Abrahams daies But I answere him that I haue so gone about the bush as that I haue scratched him with it and my wide and wild windlesses haue so inclosed him as that he cannot finde which way to get out againe Well if my course like him not what would he haue me doe I should he saith haue demonstrated by good testimony of the Ecclesiasticall histories or ancient Fathers that the Protestants religion had flourished since the Apostles daies ouer all Europe Afrike and Asia I haue done already sufficient to demonstrate that I haue astonished him and choaked him with the euidence of Scriptures Stories Councels Fathers so as that hitherto he hath left all that he hath written to the question of religion without defence I shall make further demonstration thereof in this booke euen in the Roman Church What am I the nearer with him by that that I haue done What shall I be the nearer when I haue all done for he hath resolued himselfe to a wicked course and therefore though the light shine into his eyes yet he will sweare that he seeth it not He blameth me for concluding without
nihilo inquit saluos faciet illos haud dubiuÌ„ qum iustos qui noÌ„ proprio merito sed Dei saluantur clementia He will saue them for nothing as who are saued not by their owne merit saith he but by the mercy of God For y Gregor Moral l. 8. c 9. Iusti perituros se absque ambiguitate praesciunt si remota pietate iudiceÌ„tur quia hoc ipsum quoque quòd iustè videmur viuâ—re culpa est si vitaÌ„ nostram cum iudicat hanc apud se diuina miserecordia non excusat iust men saith Gregory know before-hand that they shall perish without doubt if God set mercy aside in the iudging of them because euen that which seemeth our iust life is but sinne if Gods mercy when he iudgeth it doe not excuse the same Hitherto then it appeareth that I want no armour or weapons to fight against him yea who seeth not him rather to be a beggarly companion who taketh vpon him to contradict me vpon no other but only his owne word As for pouerty of spirit he sheweth his prophanenesse in iesting at it because Christ hath pronounced a blessing to it z Mat. 5. â— Blessed are the poore in spirit for theirs is the Kingdome of heauen But now before he giue ouer that text he will finde a weapon there to fight against me In the next verse saith he it is plainly shewed that God did grieuously punish all them who liued wickedly notwithstanding they held the right faith The wordes of that verse are these a Vers 18 The wrath of God is reueiled from heauen against all vngodlinesse and vnrighteousnesse of men which with-hold the truth in vnrighteousnesse Where it being manifest that the Apostles wordes haue reference to Gentiles and Heathens who had no knowledge of God but only by natures light the Apostle accusing them for suppressing and drowning euen that which they vnderstood or might vnderstand by the creation of the world I might question with what discretion it is that M. Bishop attributeth vnto them the holding of the right faith But not to trouble my selfe or the Reader further then is needfull I let that passe and looke to his inferences that he maketh out of those wordes Whence it followeth first saith he that men may haue a true faith without good workes Which though it haue no manner of sequele from the Apostles wordes there being nothing as I haue said which importeth the hauing or holding of true faith yet with great opportunity he mentioneth because he giueth me occasion to shew that though the righteousnesse of God be only from faith to faith yet that faith wherein this righteousnesse consisteth neuer is nor can be without due correspondence of good workes and godly life And to this belongeth that which the Apostle saith that b Rom. 3. 31. by faith we establish the law because we doe not by faith establish the law if we preach such a faith as may stand with the contempt of the law and wilfull neglect of the commandements of God Surely if faith may be without charity and it be by an after-supply of charity that wee haue the will to keepe Gods commandements then should not the Apostle say that by faith but rather by charity we establish the law But because without saith there is no charity and charity is the necessary sequele of the regeneration of faith therefore the Apostle rightly saith that by faith we establish the law as whereby we c Gal. 3. â—4 Ezech. 36. 26. 27 receiue the promise of the spirit of God the effect and d Gal. 5. 22. fruit whereof is charity whereby e Rom. 7. 22. we delight in the law of God as touching the inward man and are grieued at the remainder of carnall concupiscence whereby we are hindered that f Gal. 5. 17. we cannot doe the things that we would The faith which the Gospell teacheth is that and no other wherof we reade that g Acts 15. 9. by faith God purifieth our hearts which is called h Gal. 5. 6. faith working by loue of which St. Iohn saith i 1. John 3. 3. Euery one that hath this hope purgeth himselfe euen as he is pure k Ephes 3. 17. by which Saint Paul againe saith that Christ dwelleth in our hearts and l Rom. 8. 10. if Christ be in you saith he the body is dead as touching sinne but the spirit is life for righteousnesse sake As for that faith which is without workes it is by equiuocation only called faith as the picture of a man is called a man this being yeelded to custome of speech and to the conceipt of men who giue names oftentimes for semblance and shew where there wanteth the substance and truth of them To which purpose the wordes of Leo Bishop of Rome are very remarkeable m Leode Quadrages serm 7. Charitas robur fidei fides fortitudo est charitatis tunc verum nomen verus est fructus ambarum cum insolubilis manâ—t vtriusque coÌ„nexio Vbi enim non simul fuerint simu desunt quia inâ—icem sibi inuamâ—n lumen sunt donec desiderium credulitatis impleat remuneratio visionis incommutabilitèr videatur ametur quod nunc sine side non diligâ—tur sine dilectione non creditur Charity is the strength of faith and faith is the strength of charity and then is there the true name and the true fruit of both when there abideth an insâ—parable coniunction of them for where they are not both together they are both wanting because they are the helpe and light each of other vntill reward of seeing fulfill the desire of beleeuing and that be vnchangeably beholden and loued which now is neither loued without faith nor beleeued without loue Where we see a difference signified by Leo betwixt the true name of faith and that which is vulgarly termed faith so that though sometimes we speake of faith without workes applying the name of faith to the outward profession of faith as he himselfe also doth yet n Idem de Collect. eleemos serm 4. Multis quibus auserre non potuit fidem sustulit charitatem agro cordis ipsorum auaritiae râ—dicibus occupato spoliauit fructu operum quos non priuauit consâ—ssione labiorum the true name of faith is not appliable where there is not charity ioyned with it neither can there be true beleefe where there is no loue Hereto accordeth Gregor in Ezech. hom 22. Fidem Spem Charitatem â—tque operationeÌ„ quamdiu in hac vita viuimus aequales sibi esse apud nosmetipsos inuenimus c. Nam nunc quantum credimus tantum amamus quaÌ„tum amamus tantum de spe praesumimus De fide quoque operatione Ioannes Apostolus faâ—etur dicens Qui se dicit nosse Deum c. Notitia quippe Dei ad fide pertinet mandatorum custodia ad operationem Cùm ergò
they see others fall by resting on their owne strength Now therefore be it that some who not are but see me to be in grace and to stand doe afterwards fall and be cut off this maketh nothing against the assurance of them who are indeede in grace and doe truly beleeue in the name of the sonne of God who i 1. Iohn 5. 11. beleeuing the record that God hath witnessed of his sonne that God hath giuen vnto vs eternall life and this life is in his sonne are hereby taught k Vers 13. 15. to know that they haue eternall life and that they haue the petitions that they desire of him And thus Gregory saith as touching the heauenly City Ierusâ—lem which is aboue that l Gregor Exposit in 1. Reg. l. 1. c. 1. Moral Quam familiariter dilâ—git suam esse indubitantèr credit Suam naÌ„que hanc ciuitatemesse cognouerat qui dicebat scimê° quia si terrestris nostra domus c. he that entirely loueth it doth vndoubtedly beleeue it to be his owne For saith he he knew this City to be his that said m 2. Cor. 5. 1. We know that if our earthly house of this habitation be dissolued we haue a building which is of God a house not made with hands eternall in heauen And thus saith Leo that n Leo de Resurrect Domini ser 2. Quam idcò vsque ad celerrimâ—m resurrectionem voluit esse mortalem vt credentibus in cum nec persecutio insuperabilis nec mors posset esse terribilis cùm ita dubitandum non esset de consortio gloriae sicut dubitandum non crat de communione naturae Si ergò incunctantèr corde credimus quod â—re profitemur nos in Christo crucifiâ—i nos sumus mortui nos sepulti nos etiam die tertia suscitati Christ would haue his flesh to continue in case of mortality vntill his resâ—rrection that to them that beleeued in him neither persecution might be vnconquerable nor death might be terrible for that they were no more to doubt of being partakers of glory with him then they were to doubt of his being partaker of the same nature with them If saith he we stedfastly beleeue with the heart that which we professe with the mouth we are crucified in Christ we are dead we are buried we are also the third day raised againe from the dead o Ibid. serm 1. Non haesitamus diffidentia nec incerta expectatione suspendimur sed acceptâ— promissionis exâ—rdiâ— fidei oculis quâ— sunt futura iam cernimus natura pronectiâ—ne gaudentes quod credimus iam tenemus We stagger not by distrust saith he againe neither doe we hang in vncertaine expectation but hauing receiued the beginning of the promise we now see with the eyes of faith the things that are to come and reioycing for the aduancement of our nature we euen now hold that which we beleeue This is the assurance of the faithfull euen an vndoubted beleefe and knowledge that the heauenly City is theirs a certaine and vndoubted expectation of the glory of Christ whereby they reioyce as being in him already raised againe from the dead and as already holding and possessing that which they doe beleeue Howsoeuer therefore men are to be shaken out of all carnall security and presumption of their saluation yet the godly security and presumption of faith is not to be denyed and the more we grow in faith the more doth the soule grow secure and vndoubted of God to be our God presuming not of our selues where indeede we see nothing but cause of feare but of God only to say of him p Psal 71. 14. I will goe forth in the strength of the Lord God and will make mention of thy righteousnesse only And againe q Psal 124. 7. Our helpe standeth in the name of the Lord which hath made heauen and earth In a word one truth agreeth with another and therefore M. Bishop in opposing some formall speeches of the holy Ghost against other the like formall speeches which in their true meaning stand very well and agree together doth no other but deforme the truth and wickedly taketh vpon him the patronage and maintenance of falshood and vntruth CHAP. XIII That the good workes and sufferings of this life are not meritorious or worthy of the blisse of the life to come ANSWERE TO THE EPISTLE PAul saith The sufferings of this time are not worthy of the glory that shall be reueiled c. to Paul saith nothing for those points c. W. BISHOP I Say that M. Abbot hath gotten such a custome of abusing Gods word that hee scarce alleageth one sentence of it without one paltry shift or other The wordes of S. Paul truly translated are Our sufferings are not worthy to the glory or as our English phrase is are not to be compared to the glory of c. that is our labours or paines are not either so great and waighty or of so long endurance as be the ioyes of heauen yet through the dignity which we receiue by being made members of Christ and by the vertue of Gods grace wherewith those workes be wrought and by the promise of God both we are accounted worthy of heauen according to S Pauls owne phrase Which persecutions 2. Thessal 1. v. 5. you sustaine that you may be counted worthy the Kingdome of God and our sufferings meritorious of life euerlasting which S. Paul doth very precisely teach where he saith that our tribulation which for the 2. Cor. 4. vers 17. present is momentary and light yet worketh aboue measure exceedingly an eternall waight of glory in vs we not considering the things that are seene but that are not seene and elsewhere is bold to say That 2. Tim 4. vers 8. God had laid vp for him a crowne of iustice which our Lord will render to me in that day a iust Iudge and not only to me but to them also that loue his comming If God as a iust Iudge render the ioyes of heauen as a crowne of iustice then were they before iustly deserued and the sufferings of them that deserued them were in iust proportion worthy of them Thus briefly any indifferent Reader may perceiue how farre S. Paul being rightly taken is from affording any reliefe vnto the Protestant cause They doe now as many vnlearned and vnstable men did euen in his owne time witnesse Saint Peter depraue and misuse certaine sentences of his 2. Pet. 3. vers 16. hard to be vnderstood to their owne perdition and to the deceiuing and vndoing of their followers for in all his Epistles being vnderstood as he meant them there is not one word or sillable that maketh for the Protestants or any other Sectaries and plenty there are of plaine texts for the most points of the Catholike faith A tast whereof I will giue you as soone as I shall haue made an end of answering vnto this his idle discourse
mouth full of blasphemic a Syluest Prier cot Luther conclus 56. Indulgentiae non innotuêre nobiâ— authorâ—tate Scripturae sed authoritate Ecclesiae Romanae Romanorumque Pontificum quae maior est Indulgences or Pardons haue not beene knowen to vs by the authority of the Scriptures but by the authority of the Church of Rome and Bishops of Rome which is greater then the Scriptures b Alphons de Cast adu haer lib. 8. tit Indulgentiae Inter omnes res de quibus in hoc opere disputamus nulla est quam minùs apertè sacrae literae prodiderint de qua minùs vetusti scriptores dixerint Et post pro indulgentiarum approbatione sacrae Scripturae testimoniâ— apertum deest There is nothing saith Alphonsus de Castro which the Scriptures haue declared lesse plainly or whereof the old writers haue said lesse There is no plaine testimony of Scripture for the approuing of them And yet M. Bishop no skimmer ouer the Scriptures I warrant you but a man of great obseruation and insight into them will take vpon him to haue found where S. Paul teacheth of Pardons not obscurely or darkely but in very formall termes He citeth to this purpose the wordes of S. Paul concerning the incestuous excommunicated Corinthian now much humbled by repentance and hauing giuen thereof great satisfaction and testimony to the Church c 2. Cor. 2. 10. Whom you haue pardoned any thing I so doe also for my selfe also what I haue pardoned for your sakes I haue done it in the sight of Christ that we be not circumuented of Satan Here he saith that the Corinthians and S. Paul himselfe did giue a pardon he did release some part of the penance of that incestuous Corinthian which is properly to giue pardon or indulgence Iust as well fitted as if he had put a Goose quill to a Wood-cocks taile Hee might euen as well haue alleaged our Bishops as giuers of Popish Pardons because they doe release to men vpon occasion some parts of penance inioyned them for criminall demeanours and had he not made a great speake if he had so done What are we come to vnderstand by the Popes Pardons the releasing of Penitents from the bond of excommunication for the restoring of them againe to the communion of the Church It is true which he saith of this that if S. Paul could so doe S. Peter could doe as much and other principall Pastours of Christs Church haue the same power and authority who doubteth hereof But we speake of a power which the Pope challengeth as proper to himselfe to giue Pardons and Libels of Indulgence or to giue authority to others to giue the same out of the Church treasury of the supererogations of Saints not for absoluing Penitents in foro Ecclesiae but in foro Coeli for releasing of soules from Purgatory and for giuing of them remission for so many dayes or yeares or hundreds or thousands of yeares not only to men for themselues liuing but also for their friends dead and that for doing such and such deuotions or paying so much money for such or such vse or aiding him in his wars against Christian Princes or doing any other worke and seruice that he requireth A lewd and wicked deuise and practise of the Popes of some latter ages and as lewdly coloured by M. Bishop by pretense of that that doth in no sort appertaine vnto it For all that the Apostle intendeth in the words alleaged is that which St. Ambrose briefly expresseth thus d Ambros in 2. Cor. 2. Orat ne adhuc exulcerato aduersum illum animo durum esset illis habere cum illo coÌ„munionem Ecclesiae Hee prayeth them that they would not any longer by a minde exasperated against him bee hard to haue with him the communion of the Church This is the forgiuenesse this is the pardon that he desireth in his behalfe that inasmuch as he hath sufficiently shewed himselfe penitent for his fault they will no longer forbeare to haue Christian society and fellowship with him M. Bishop therefore would neuer haue brought vs this place for Popes Pardons but that by a resolute course of impudency he maketh choise to say any thing rather then to say the truth W. BISHOP §. 8. THe last of M. Abbots instances is That S. Paul saith nothing of traditions wherein hee sheweth himselfe not the least impudent for the Apostle speaketh of them very often Hee desireth the Romans to marke them that make dissentions and scandals Rom. 16. ver 17. contrary to the doctrine which you haue learned and to auoide them but the doctrine that they had then learned before S. Paul sent them this Epistle was by word of mouth and tradition for little or none of the new Testament was then written wherefore the Apostle teacheth all men to be auoided that dissent from doctrine deliuered by Tradition And in the Acts of the Apostles it is of record how S. Paul walking through Syria and Silicia confirming the Churches Commanded Act. 15. vers 41. them to keepe the precepts of the Apostles and of the Ancients Item when they passed through the Citties they deliuered vnto them to keepe the decrees Act. 16. vers 4. that were decreed by the Apostles and Ancients which were at Hierusalem and the Churches were confirmed in faith c. Where it also appeareth that those decrees were made matter of faith and necessary to be beleeued to saluation before they were written Hee doth also charge his best beloued Disciple Timothy To 1. Tim. 6. ver 20 keepe the Depositum that is the whole Christian doctrine deliuered vnto him by word of mouth as the best Authours take it auoiding the prophane nouelty of voices and oppositions of falsly called knowledge Againe he commandeth him to commend to faithfull 2. Tim. 2. vers 2. men the things which thou hast heard of me by many witnesses Was not this to preach such doctrine as he had receiued by Apostolike tradition without writing And further which suppresseth all the vaine cauils of the sectaries he saith Therefore Brethren stand and 2. Thess 2. v. 15. hold the Traditions which you haue learned whether it be by word or by our Epistle where you see that some Traditions went by word of mouth from hand to hand as well as some others were written and were as well to be holden and stood too as the written proceeding from the same fountaine of truth Gods spirit Thus much in answere vnto the instances proposed by M. Abbot which he very ignorantly and insolently auoucheth to haue no proofe or sound of proofe out of S. Paul R. ABBOT HEre M. Bishop playeth the Iugler againe and casteth a mist before his Readers eyes by altering the state of the question betwixt vs and them For the question is not whether the doctrine of truth haue beene at any time deliuered by Tradition that is by word of mouth without writing but whether
amputatis quae superflua leuia falsa blasphema ridicula phantastica videbantur false blasphemous ridiculous n Pius 5. Offic. Beat. Mar. in Princip Huiusmodi ferè omnia officia vanis superstitionum erroribus reserta erroneous superstitious were brought into the seruice of the Church and o Liâ—dan apud Espenc vt supra Preces secretae mendis turpissimis conspurcatae the prayers thereof were filthily corrupted or when p Cor. Agripp de vanit scient cap. 17. Hodie tanta in Ecclesijs Musicae licentia est vt â—â—â—am vnà cum Missae ipsius Canone obscoenae quaeque cantiunculae interim in organis parâ—s vices habeant filthy songs had equall place or course with the Canon of the Masse And what will not M. Bishop say as all his fellowes doe that the Pastors and Doctors of all the Easterne parts haue gone astray will hee not acknowledge that all those Churches haue failed in faith What is become of the Church of Ephesus to which the Apostle wrote these words now in question What of the Church of Corinth of Colosse of Thessalonica and the rest If this the truth of the Apostles wordes reserued might befall to them what saith he for other Churches more then he doth for them If M. Bishop will say that the wordes haue some speciall reference to the Pastors and Doctors of the Church of Rome we hold him a most ridiculous man that taketh vpon him to see that which amongst so many ancient interpreters of the place neuer any man saw before him Once againe I say that Christ hath giuen Pastors and Doctors to his Church as of old q Ezech. 3. 17. 33. 7. he gaue watchmen to the house of Israel Hee hath prescribed them their office and duty and appointed the worke that they shall doe When they performe their duty faithfully and carefully they are the saluation of the people and bring many vnto glory But if they neglect their duty and leaue the worke of God vndone the people perish vnder them and they become guilty of their destruction And thus it befalleth often in the publike state of the Church euen to the ruine thereof that theeues and robbers thrust themselues or creepe by stealth into the places of Pastors who sometimes cannot sometimes will not teach and sometimes teach errour and lies in steede of truth whilest they measure their teaching by r Tit. 1. 11. filthy lucre and by Å¿ Rom. 16. 18. Thil. 3. 19. seruing their bellies in steede of seruing Iesus Christ The Apostle doth not say they cannot erre hee doth not say that the Church vnder them cannot faile in faith Only God amidst all ruines and desolations prouideth for his Elect and in the want and default of ordinary Pastors raiseth vp other spirits and vseth other meanes for the effecting of his good purpose concerning them so guiding them not as that they neuer erre in faith they erre often greeuously and are misled with the customes and superstitions of their times but so as that they neuer erre finally as touching any truth the knowledge and faith whereof hee hath made necessary to eternall life Now whereas M. Bishop concludeth out of the same place that the Church shall neuer be inuisible as which hath alwaies visible Pastors and Teachers hee therein sheweth his absurd loosenesse and carelesnesse of arguing because though the Apostle affirme Pastors and Teachers in the Church yet he doth not so much as intimate any way that they are alwaies visible What is there in the Apostles wordes whence hee should in any sort gather that there is a perpetuall visible state and succession of Pastors and Teachers Be it that there is a perpetuity of succession to be gathered from hence yet it doth not follow that there is a perpetuall visibility thereof It is enough here thus to reiect him as an idle Sophister and indeede not worthy of so much as the name of a Sophister that will bring a conclusion there where he hath no slâ—ew of footing for it otherwise of the visibility or inuisibility of the Church I haue spoken sufficiently t Part. 3. Answere to Doct. Bishops Preface sect 17. and CoÌ„futat of his Answere to M. Perkins Aduertisement sect 6. otherwhere and it were too long to dispute here His next matter is a bare recitall of a text without any collection made therefrom imagining in his blinde vnderstanding that it is a plaine assertion of that that hee would proue by it Hee maketh St. Paul to say that Priests are chosen from among men and appointed for men in those things that appertaine to God that they may offer gifts and sacrifices for sinne Where it is first to bee noted how to serue his owne turne he falsifieth the Apostles text and readeth Priests are chosen from amongst men for that the Apostle saith Euery high Priest is chosen from amongst men By saying Priests hoe would extend the wordes as to be vnderstood of their Popish Priest-hood in the Gospell whereas the Apostle by naming a high Priest appropriateth his wordes to Aarons Priest-hood in the law For euen in the Popish Priest-hood there is no high Priest the power of sacrificing being indifferently common to them all and no more belonging to Popes and Bishops then to the meanest hedge-Priest or Curate in the world Seeing then the Apostle speaketh of a Priest-hood which admitteth a high Priest which the Popish Priest-hood doth not certaine it is that the wordes can haue no reference to Popish Priest-hood Therefore the Fathers vniuersally apply this text as the drift of the holy Ghost most plainly leadeth them to the Leuiticall Priest-hood only neither did they euer dreame of any Euangelicall Priest-hood intended herein Ambrose declareth the purpose of the Apostle to be this u Ambros in Heb. 5. Vt consueto SacerdotuÌ„ more qui in lege fuit ad altius id est Christi sacerdotium eos perdâ—ceret qui adhuc infirmi fueruÌ„t propterea modum carnalis Pontificis introducit that by the accustomed manner of the Priests in the law he might bring them being weake to the higher or more excellent Priest-hood of Christ therefore saith hee doth hee bring in or set downe the manner or condition of the carnall high Priest Theodoret saith x Theodoret. ibid. DoceÌ„s quòd etiam in lege non Angelus vt pro hominibus sacerdotio fungatur electus est sed homo pro hominibus c. Haec dixit Apostolus non nobis Pontifiâ—atus regulas volens ostendere sed ad dicendum de Pontificatu Domini viam muniens He teacheth that euen in the law there was not an Angell chosen to execute the office of Priest-hood for men but a man was chosen for men and The Apostle saith he speaketh these things not to set downe rules of the high Priest-hood but to make way to the Priest-hood of Christ Wee see they both take the wordes as spoken of the Priests in the law
after the old and new Testament written and the Canon of the Scriptures established and confirmed there bee any thing further to bee receiued for doctrine of faith and truth appertaining to saluation that is not contained in the Scriptures Tradition as he here speaketh thereof is confounded with Scripture because it is one and the same doctrine first preached by word of mouth and afterwards committed to writing in the Scripture but Tradition as we question it is diuided against Scripture and importeth doctrine ouer and beside that which is now taught vs by the Scriptures We know well that the doctrine of saluation vntill the time of Moses was only taught by word of mouth but is that an argument to proue that now that wee haue the Scriptures we must also receiue vnwritten Traditions besides the Scriptures Nay when it seemed good to the wisedome God to commit his word to writing hee would not doe it in part only but fully and perfectly so that a Exod. 34. 4. Moses wrote all the wordes of the Lord and said of that which he wrote b Deut. 12. 32. What I command thee that only shalt thou doe vnto the Lord thou shalt put nothing thereto nor take ought therefrom Therefore although the word of God were afterwards also deliuered by word of mouth in the Preachings and Sermons of the Prophets yet were they in their Sermons to preach no other doctrine neither did they but what had authority and warrant by Moses law Now their Sermons being also written for exposition and application of the law of Moses and a further supply added of the Scriptures of the Apostles and Euangelists how much more ought we to content our selues with the Scriptures without adding to them or taking from them receiuing and beleeuing only those things that we are taught thereby as being assured of that which the Scriptures themselues teach that c 2. Tim. 3. 15. the Scriptures are able to make a man wise vnto saluation through the faith which is in Christ Iesus Hereby then appeareth M. Bishops fallacy in the citing of those texts which he hath here alleaged St. Paul willed the Romans d Rom. 16. 17. to marke and auoide them that made dissensions and scandals contrary to the doctrine which they had learned True it is and what then But the doctrine saith he which they had then learned before St. Paul sent them this Epistle was by word of mouth and Tradition for little or none of the new Testament was then written Marke what he saith before St. Paul sent them this Epistle for hereby hee in a manner acknowledgeth that St. Paul comprised in this Epistle the doctrine which they had before learned by Tradition The Apostles intendment then appeareth plainly to be this that they should shunne those which dissented from the doctrine which they had hitherto learned by Tradition that is by preaching and word of mouth the summe whereof he had now sent them written in this Epistle that they might henceforth learne to shunne them that dissented from the same doctrine deliuered to them in the Scriptures How ill-fauouredly then doth M. Bishop argue out of these wordes that we are now to receiue other doctrines then are contained in the Scriptures There can no argument be rightly framed out of that text whereof it can be any harme to vs to grant the conclusion If he will set it in due order it must be this The doctrine which the Romans had learned they had learned hitherto by Tradition but the Apostle teacheth them to auoide such as dissented from the doctrine which they had learned therefore he teacheth them to auoide such as dissented from the doctrine which they had hitherto learned by Tradition This we grant and what will he conclude thereof Surely if he will inferre any thing against vs hee must goe on and say But they learned somewhat then by Tradition which is not since deliuered in the Scriptures Which if hee will say wee require proofe of it and the text which he here alleageth will yeeld none We say that the whole doctrine which the Apostles first deliuered by Tradition and word of mouth they committed afterwards to writing ech his part as God inspired and directed for comprehending of the whole Seeing therefore they were tyed to shunne all that dissented from the doctrine receiued by the Tradition and Preaching of the Apostles wee hauing the same doctrine contained in the Scriptures are likewise tyed to shunne all doctrine that hath not testimony of the Scriptures Albeit it is here further to be noted how rashly M. Bishop saith that the doctrine which the Romans had learned they learned only by Tradition and word of mouth inasmuch as the Apostle telleth vs that the Gospell as it e Rom 1. 2. was promised in the Scriptures of the Prophets so was also f Rom. 16. 26. preached by the Scriptures of the Prophets so that St. Luke telleth vs that the noble Iewes of Berhea hearing the Apostles preaching g Acts 17. 11. searched the Scriptures daylie whether those things were so and that our Sauiour Christ when he sent them forth to preach h Luke 24. 45. opened their vnderstanding that they might vnderstand the Scriptures that so they might be enabled for their preaching I haue i Chap. 4. §. 5. before shewed out of Gregory and others that the whole faith which the Apostles preached they receiued from the Scriptures of the Prophets and therefore they deliuered not the Gospell only by Tradition but what they taught they confirmed by the Scriptures So then the Apostles admonition to the Romans will fall out to be this that they should auoide them that dissented from the doctrine which they had learned by the Scriptures though not yet by the Scriptures of the new Testament yet by the Scriptures of the old k Luke 24 27. 44. the law of Moses the Prophets and the Psalmes l Aug. cont 2. Gaudent lipist l. 2. cap. 23. Quibus Dominus testimonium perhibet tanquam testibus suis which Christ named for his witnesses and whereof he said m John 5 39. Search the Scriptures for in them yee thinke to haue eternall life and they are they that testifie of me The two next proofes which hee bringeth are such as that he iustly deserueth to be dubbed for them It is of record saith he how St. Paul n Acts 15. 41. walking through Syria and Cilicia confirming the Churches commanded them to keepe the precepts of the Apostles and of the Ancients and o Acts 16. 4. when they passed through the Cities they deliuered vnto them to keepe the decrees that were decreed by the Apostles and Ancients which were at Hierusalem and the Churches were confirmed in the faith And what hereof It appeareth saith he that those decrees were made matter of faith and necessary to be beleeued to saluation before they were written Yea were But did not you know M. Bishop that