thought that by workes of nature they had obtained the election of grace Againe that shift of theirs is so much the worse for that the works of which M. Bishop speaketh are not totally the effects of grace but arise in part from the free will of man For although he tell vs that grace is the principall and more potent yet he will not grant vs that it is the whole agent which not being so looke what is attributed to the free will of man falleth out to be the impeachment of the grace of God so that eternall life being ascribed to our good works shall not be ascribed wholly to grace because those good works proceed not wholly from grace but partly from our owne free will Neither is hee any whit helped by that whereon he insisteth againe in the end of this diuision that albeit the works bee partly of our free will yet the dignitie and worthinesse of the workes ariseth wholly of the grace of God for howsoeuer he wholly referre the dignitie of works to grace going before yet he thereby taketh away the nature of grace from that that foloweth after because the latter grace cannot be said to be freely giuen if it be due to the merit of any worke that is gone before Albeit the vaine man should see that heereby he quite ouerthroweth all merit of man because if the value and woorth of the worke grow wholly and onely on Gods part then can it not be that man may be saied to merit or deserue any thing thereby for what should I deserue of God by that that is wholly Gods and none of mine or if man doe truely merit then doth not merit arise wholly from the grace of God As touching the second point whereas he saith the infinite iustice of God is no other way appeased but by the infinite satisfaction of Christ and yet that there are temporall punishments due besides for which we are afterwards to satisfie by our selues he ignorantly crosseth himselfe and by one part of his speech giueth checke to the other For by what other iustice of God doe these temporall punishments fall vpon vs but by his infinite iustice what are they else in their owne proper nature but the first fruits of his eternall wrath and indignation against sinne And if there can no other be imagined but p See heere of the question of satisfaction sect 3. only his infinite iustice from which they proceed then it is not in vs to pay satisfaction to God for them because by M. Bishops owne confession the infinite iustice of God is no other way to be appeased but by the infinite satisfaction of the blood of Christ Now if he will say that finite and temporall effects cannot proceed from an infinite cause he is controlled by the whole course of this world because all the proprieties of God which are infinite as they are immanent in himselfe yet in their transitiue and foren effects are stinted and limited to the modell and state of the creature wherein the same effects are wrought In the third point it appeareth that hee vnderstood not what M. Perkins said Gods infinite mercy shewed it selfe in prouiding for vs an infinite satisfaction in the person of Iesus Christ whereby to exhaust and empt the most bottomlesse depth of all our iniquity and sinne This the Scripture euery where nameth as the effect of q Ioh. 3.16 Rom. 5.8 Eph. 2.4 the loue and mercy of God and therefore M. Perkins did not amisse to refer it accordingly Now M. Bishop tooke it that M. Perkins had named Gods mercy as requiring satisfaction not as prouiding and yeelding the same to vs in Christ and therfore for an answer sendeth vs a dreame that if Christs infinite satisfaction may stand with the mercy of God much more easily may ours But let him consider better of the matter and tell vs at more leasure how the mercy of God can bee said to be infinite in the satisfaction of Christ if it bee so limited and restrained as that in respect of temporall punishments the same is wholly frustrate and leaueth vs still to make satisfaction for our selues If the satisfaction of Christ be infinite it must necessarily bee extended to all that is to be satisfied for If it extend not to all that is to bee satisfied for it cannot be called an infinite satisfaction But of this enough in the question of satisfaction He goeth on and telleth vs that their doctrine of merits and satisfactions is so farre from Atheisme or derogating from Gods glory as that it doth much magnifie and aduance the same Of Atheisme I will say nothing but it is vntruth which he saith that their doctrine doth not derogate from the glory of God and a greater vntruth that it doth magnifie and aduance the same The glory of God appeareth not in the pride of our merits but in the forgiuenesse of our sinnes For howsoeuer he colour the matter in saying that the value and estimation the dignity and worthinesse of our merits and satisfactions ariseth wholly from the grace of God yet manifest it is that there is still somewhat left for vs to reioice in for that we by our freewill as they teach are the doers of the work Therefore the Apostle saith that r Rom. 3.27 reioicing or glorying is excluded not by the Law of workes wherein wee haue our part but by the Law of faith whereby we beleeue that God doth all according to his free promise for his owne mercies sake So in another place hauing said that f Eph. 2.5.6 wee are saued by grace through faith not of our selues it is the gift of God he addeth not of workes lest any man should boast still importing that boasting cannot be excluded so long as the title of saluation is assigned to our workes Therefore God though hee could haue made vs fully perfect and wholly free from sinne yet chose rather as S. Austin well noteth t August con Iulian. Pelag. l. 4. c 3 Ideò factum est in loco infirmitatis huius ne superbè viueremus vt sub quotidiana peccatorum remissione viuamus that wee should liue vnder daily remission of sinnes that wee may not be proud u Idem de spir lit c. 36. vt etiam iustorum emus os obstruatur in laude sua non aperiatur nisi in laudem dei that euery mouth of man may be stopped in their owne praise and may not bee opened but to the praise of God x Bernard in Cant. ser 50. sciemus in diâ— illa quia non eâ— operibus iustitiae quae fecimus nâ—s sed secundum miserecordiam suam saluos nos fecit that we may know at that day as Bernard saith that not for the workes of righteousnesse which wee haue done but of his owne mercy he hath saued vs. Why will M. Bishop goe about to rob God of this honour by such fantasticall speculations of the value and estimation
one that walketh before him and therefore that of him and his fellowes that deride them the words following haue their iust construction But you witches children come hither the seede of the adulterer and of the whoore On whom haue yee iested vpon whom haue yee gaped and thrust out your tongues are yee not all rebellious children and a false seed But from these he goeth to some of the learnedst amongst vs citing Caluin and Beza Christ truely and properly merited for vs by Caluins doctrine I truely confesse saith Caluin that if a man will set Christ singly by himselfe against the iudgement of God there will be roome for merit Where that thou maiest see gentle Reader that it was not without cause that I suspected him for the former citation I pray thee first to obserue that the very argument of the chapter whence he alleageth these words is thus set dowee h Caluin Instit. l. 2. c. 2. Rectè et proprtè dici Christum nobis promeritum esse gratiam dei salutem That it is rightly and properly said that Christ hath deserued for vs the grace of God and saluation which he purposely disputeth against some i Sect. 1. sunt quidam perperam arguti qui etsi fatentur salutem nos per Christum consequi nomen tamen meriti audire non sustinent quo putant obscurari deâ— gratiam who although they confesse that we attaine saluation by Christ yet cannot endure to heare the name of merit because they thinke the grace of God to be obscured thereby Secondly albeit he set downe Caluins tearmes of qualification k Ibid. EquideÌ„ fateor siquis Christum simpliciter per se opponere vellet iudicio dei non fore merito locum quia non reperietur in homine dignitas quae possit deum promereri simply and by himselfe yet very treacherously he leaueth out the end of the sentence whereby those tearmes are to be vnderstood which is this because there can bee found no worthinesse in man that can deserue at Gods handes For heereby it is manifest that Caluin in those wordes respecteth Christ as man and onely in that respect denieth merit if Christ meerely as man be opposed against the iudgement of God And this further appeareth by that which he addeth to his purpose out of Austin which M. Bishop dissembleth because hee thought he could not so honestly cauill against Austin as he might against Caluin l August de praedest sanct cap. 15. Est etraÌ„ praeclarissimum lumen praedestinationis gratiae ipse saluator ipse mediator dei hominâ—â— homo Christus Iesus qui vt hoc esset quibus tandem suis vel operum vel fidei praecedentibus meritis natura humana quae in illo est comparauit Respendeatur quaeso ille honâ—oâ—t à verbe patri coaeterno in vnitatem personae assumptus filius dei vnigenitus esset vnde hee meruerit There is saith Austin a most notable and cleere light of Predestination and grace euen the man Christ Iesus the Sauiour the Mediatour betwixt God and men who to bee so by what former merits of his either of workes or of faith did the nature of man in him atteine vnto Tell mee I pray saith he that that man taken into vnitie of person with the word coeternall to the Father should be the onely begotten Sonne of God whereby did he merit or deserue it By which words S. Austin giueth vs plainly to vnderstand that the man Christ Iesus did not by merits atteine to become our Sauiour to become the Mediatour betwixt God and man but it was by Gods predestination and grace by his decree and ordinance that it so came to passe Heereupon then Caluin inferreth that m Calu. vt supr Cùm ergò de Christi merito agitur non statuitur in eo principium sed conscendimus ad dei ordinationeÌ„ quae prima causa est quia mero beneplacito modiatorem statuit qui nobis salutem acquireret when we speake of the merit of Christ we are not to place it as the first beginning but we ascend to the ordinance of God which is the first cause because he meerely of his owne good pleasure appointed him the Mediatour to purchase saluation for vs. In which words he acknowledgeth that Christ did verily and indeed purchase saluation for vs but yet that it came of the good pleasure of God and his meere grace and mercy to giue him vnto vs for a Mediatour to merit and purchase our saluation His drift is not in any sort to impeach the merit of Christ but onely to shew that the merit of Christ is no impeachment of the free mercy of God because of that free mercy it is that we haue him to merit for vs. And to that purpose it is that he saith n Ibid. Nam Christus nonnisi ex dei beneplacito quicquam mereri potuit sed quia ad hoc destinatus erat vt iram dei sacrificio suo placaret suaque obedientia deleret transgressiones nostras that Christ could not merit any thing but by the good pleasure of God because but by the good pleasure of God he could not be Christ he could not be man he could not bee the Mediatour betwixt God and man In a word hence it came that he merited for vs as it is added in the next words because hee was destinated and appointed that by his sacrifie he should appease the wrath of God and blot out our transgressions by his obedience To the same effect it is also added which M. Bishop thirdly mentioneth o Ibid. Ex sola dei gratia quae hunc nobis constituit salutis modum dependet meritum Christi that the merit of Christ dependeth vpon the onely grace of God which saith he hath appointed for vs this means of saluation Not so then but that Christ did indeed merit saluation for vs but it was the grace of God that gaue him to merit for vs and so to bee the meanes of our saluation which is the thing that Beza also defendeth against Heshushius And what is there in all this for M. Bishop to dislike He will not say that Christ as a meere man could haue merited at Gods hands because he hath before confessed that the value and dignitie of Christs works arose from the dignitie of his person in that hee was the Sonne of God Hee will not denie that it was the good pleasure and grace of God that gaue Christ to merit in our behalfe for that the texts of Scripture cited by Caluin for proofe thereof doe manifestly shew p Ioh 3.16 God so loued the world that hee gaue his onely begotten Sonne to the end that euery one that beleeueth in him should not perish but haue euerlasting life q 1. Ioh. 4.10 Not that we loued God but that hee loued vs first and sent his Sonne to be the attonement for our sinnes by which it
from the very grace of God but let that be granted what kinde of Atheisme or denying of God were this or how followeth it thereof that the grace of God which is the principall agent and farre more potent than the other must thereby needs be cast to the ground and foyled this is so silly simple that I know not what to tearme it for he doth vntruely slander our doctrine and that to no end and purpose To this second cauill I answer in a word that we teach as he knoweth right well the infinite iustice of God to be appeased no other way than by the infinite satisfaction of Christs passion And that our satisfactions are onely to pay for the temporall pains remaining yet due after the infinite are paid for by Christ Now whether any such temporall paâ—ne remaine or no after the sinne is remitted is a question betweene vs but to say as M. PER. doth that we be Atheists and do denie God to be God for that we hold some temporall punishment of man to be due after pardon granted of his greater paine is most apparantly a very sencelesse assertion As wide from all reason is his third instance That Gods mercy cannot be infinite when by our owne satisfactions wee adde a supply to the satisfaction of Christ For if Christs most perfect and full satisfaction can well stand with Gods infinite mercy farre more easely may mans satisfactions agree with it which are infinitely lesse than Christs But the infinite riches of Gods mercy appeareth especially in that it pleased him freely to giue vnto vs so meane creatures and wretched sinners his owne onely deare Son to be our Redeemer and Sauiour and both Christs satisfaction and ours are rather to bee referred vnto Gods iustice than to his mercy wherefore very vnskilfully doth M. PERK compare them with Gods mercy Neither is it possible to distill any quintessence of Atheisme out of it more than out of the former nay they both vprightly weighed are so farre off from Atheisme or derogating any thing from Gods glory that they doe much magnifie and aduance the same For albeit we hold our good works to be both meritorious and satisfactory yet doe we teach the vertue value and estimation of them to proceed wholly from the grace of God in vs whereby we be enabled and holpen to doe them and not any part of the dignitie and worthinesse of the workes to issue from the naturall facultie or industrie of the man that doth them So that when we maintaine the merit or satisfaction of good works we extoll not the nature of man but doe onely defend and vphold the dignitie and vertue of Gods grace which Protestants doe greatly debase extenuate and vilifie not allowing it to bee sufficient to helpe the best minded man in the world to doe any worke that doth not offend God mortally Thus much concerning our supposed Atheisme against God now of those that be as he imagineth against Christ the Sonne of God R. ABBOT MAster Bishop here promiseth vs a serious discourse but it prooueth in fine to a leud and slanderous libell which though he court it not as he trimly and finely telleth vs with the ordinary complements of a curious preamble yet he foully corrupteth with the ordinarie Popish complements of foolish malice and wilfull fraud A man may here see in him the true Image and picture of a Popish Doctor who seeing himselfe vnable to contend further by sound argument to make his part good betaketh himselfe to this impudencie and importunity of lying and slandering Albeit in the first part thereof as touching his maine drift I will not at all repugne him the same seruing to cleere them of an imputation of Atheisme charged vpon them by M. Perkins but indeed amisse as I cannot but ingeniously and freely confesse because it is conceiued and drawen from forced and impertinent grounds and therefore breedeth rather cauillation against him than accusation against them The crime of Atheisme belongeth properly to them with whom God is either not at all acknowledged Atheisme in what sort to be imputed to Popery or not regarded and either wholly denied to be or accordingly esteemed as if he were not But where there is a Rom. 10.2 the zeale of God though not according to knowledge howsoeuer by want of knowledge there may be misconceits of God and godlinesse yet Atheisme is not to be vpbraided there It is true indeed as M. Perkins saith that Atheisme is either open or coloured but coloured Atheisme must be the same in the heart that professed Atheisme is in the mouth so to be affected as if there were no God And this couert and coloured Atheisme is it which the Scripture for the most part speaketh of whereby b Psal 14.1 the foole saith not with his tongue but in his heart There is no God it being a thing very rare that any man so professeth with the mouth but very common with men c Tit. 1.16 to professe that they know God but by their deeds to deny him d Cyprian de dupl martyr Quemadmodum bona opera profitentur deum ita mala quâ—dammodo loquuntur Non est deus nee est Scientia in excelso for naughtie doings as Cyprian teacheth doe after a sort say There is no God nor any knowledge in the most high Now in Poperie we cannot doubt but that many there are who in simplicity professing the errors and superstitions alleged by M. Perkins haue notwithstanding in that ignorance a zeale of God and an intendment of deuotion to Iesus Christ and are so far from denying God as that in dread of the Maiesty of God and in expectation of the iudgement to come they are carefull according to their maner religiously to serue him To these men then to impute Atheisme by a consequence so far fetched as bringeth all misdeeming of religion within the compasse thereof I confesse stood not with that aduisednesse and due consideration which had been requisite in a matter of so great moment and effect Much rather should M. Perkins haue sought for Atheisme in the practise and policy of them who haue been and are the maintainers of that Romane Hierarchy who making gaine and aduantage of the superstitions wherewith they haue intangled the soules of men and resoluing by all meanes to vphold their trade haue in this emploiment quenched in themselues all inward light and sense of religion somtimes openly professing and somtimes couertly dissembling their deniall and contempt of God and impious conceipt of the nullity of all the seruice and deuotion that is done vnto him Whereof we haue notable example in their e See the Bee-hiue of the Romish Church the sixt book the third Chapter Popes of which diuers haue openly shewed themselues to be meer Atheists as Boniface the eight and Iohn the three and twentith who both denied the immortality of the soule as Clement the seuenth who lying at the point of
the dignity and worthinesse of our workes And if he say that this is all of God doth he any more than the Pharisie did who said y Luk. 18.11 I thanke thee O God that I am not as other men are c. z Hieron adu Pelag. lib. 3. Ille agit gratias deo quia illius misericordia non sit sicut caeteri homines Hee thanketh God saith Hierome that by his mercy hee is not like other men hee acknowledgeth his righteousnesse to bee the gift of God but yet hee is reiected whilest with M. Bishop hee flattereth himselfe in opinion of the value and estimation the dignitie and worthinesse of his workes Now the Protestants indeed are not of that Pharisaicall humor thus to plead the reputation of their owne workes and doe take M. Bishop therein to be a foolish vaine man and yet they doe not therfore debase and vilifie the vertue of the grace of God as hee obiecteth as not allowing it to be sufficient to help the best minded man in the world to doe any worke that doth not mortally offend God but doe confesse and teach that the faithfull by the grace of God do many good workes very highly pleasing vnto God whilest a Psal 103.13 as a father pitieth his children so the Lord is mercifull to them that feare him remembring whereof we be made and considering that we are but dust and being ready when he seeth our willing indeuours to pardon the obliquities the defects and deformities of our doings the same being perfumed by faith with the sweet incense of the obedience of Iesus Christ So then according to rigour of iudgement the Protestants say b Esay 64.6 All our righteousnesse is as a defiled cloth c Dan. 9.7 To thee O Lord belongeth righteousnesse but to vs shame and confusion of face They subscribe that which Gregory saith d Greg. Moral l. 8. c. 9. Iustise peritaeros absque ambiguitate praesciunt firemota pietate iudicentur quia hoc ipsum quò iustè videmur viuere culpa est fi vitam nostram cù iudicat hanc apud se diuina misericordia non excusat The iust know that without all doubt they shall perish if they bee iudged without mercy because euen our iust life as it seemeth is but sinne if Gods mercy doe not excuse it when he shall giue iudgement of it But yet the Protestants know also that by the mediation of Iesus Christ e Rom. 12.1 the giuing vp of our bodies to be a liuing and 〈◊〉 sacrifice is accepble vnto God and that f 1. Pet. 2.5 we are made aspirituall house and holy Priesthood to offer vp spirituall sacrifices which are acceptable to God by Iesus Christ In a word the Protestants know that the Saints of God g Apoc. 4.10 cast their crownes down before the throne of God as arrogating no part thereof to themselues but ascribing all to God and therefore cannot but condemne M. Bishop and the Papists though not of Atheisme yet of Pelagianisme and heresie for that they teach men to keepe their crownes in part vpon their owne heads and to take some part of glory to themselues to the derogation of the glory of God 2. W. BISHOP First he argueth thus He that hath not the Sonne hath not the Father and he that hath neither Father nor Sonne denies God now the present Roman religion hath not the Sonne that is Iesus Christ God and man For they in effect abolish his man-hood by teaching of him to haue two kindes of existing one naturall in heauen whereby he is visible touchable and circumscribed the other against nature whereby he is substantially according to his flesh in the hands of euery Priest inuisible and vncircumscribed Answer M. PER. and all Protestants know right well that we beleeue Iesus Christ to be perfect God and perfect man and therefore wee haue both the Sonne and the Father and his reason against it is not woorth arush for we do not destroy the nature of man by teaching it to haue two diuers maners of existing or being in a place When Christ was transfigured before his Apostles hee had another maner of outward forme and appearance than hee had before yet was not the nature of man in him thereby destroyed and after his resurrection hee was when it pleased him visible to his Apostles and at other times inuisible and yet was not his manhood thereby abolished as M. PER. would make vs beleeue no more is it when his body is in many places at once or in one place circumscribed and in the other vncir cumscribed For these externall relations of bodies vnto their places doe no whit at all destroy their inward and naturall substances as all Philosophie testifieth wherefore hence to gather that we denie both the Father and the Sonne to be God doth sauour I will not say of a silly wit but of a froward will peeuishly bent to cauill and calumniate R. ABBOT As touching the existing of the body of Christ we beleeue what the holy Scripture hath taught vs The body of Christ locally circumscribed and therein we rest as the ancient godly fathers did neither will we listen to the franticke dreames of new deuising heads who for the maintenance of one absurdity not sparing to vndergoe another haue broached a maner of the being of the body of Christ according to the fancies of Marcion Manicheus Apollinaris Eutyches and such other like Heretikes who howsoeuer they admitted the name of a body yet denied the truth thereof What other is it but a fantasticall body which they affirme to be in their consecrated host where there is the sauour and tast of bread the colour and appearance of bread to sense and feeling no other but bread and yet there is no bread but a body of flesh and blood as they tell vs or rather a body which hath neither flesh nor blood M. Bishop coloureth the matter by telling vs of a diuers maner of existing or being in a place but why doe neither Scriptures nor Fathers tell vs of this diuers maner of existing or being I know that to make some shew of antiquity they alleage a few sentences of the Fathers farre enough from the purpose but this matter could not haue so passed with a by-sentence or two when there were so many and so great occasions fully to declare it and to insist vpon it if it had beene beleeued then as it is taught now They cleerely and plainely taught that a Aug. in Ioan. tract 50. secundum carnem quam verbum assumpsit ascendit in coe um non est hic Christ according to his body is ascended into heauen and is not heere and against the Manichees that b Idem cont faust Mauich l. 20. c. 11. sacundum praesentiam corporalem simul in sole in luna in cruce esse non posset Christ according to bodily presence could not at once be in the
THE THIRD PART OF THE DEFENCE of the Reformed Catholike Against DOCT. BISHOPS Second part of the Reformation of a Catholike as the same was first guilefully published vnder that name conteining only a large and most malicious Preface to the Reader and an Answer to M. PERKINS his Aduertisement to Romane Catholicks c. Whereunto is added An Aduertisement for the time concerning the said DOCT. BISHOPS Reproofe lately published against a little piece of the Answer to his Epistle to the King with an Answer to some few exceptions taken against the same by M. T. Higgons lately become a Proselyte of the Church of Rome By R. ABBOT Doctor of Diuinitie Cypr. l. 1. epist 3. Haec est verè domentia non cogitare nec scire quòd mendacia non diu fallant noctem tamdiu esse quamdiu illucescat dies c. LONDINI Impensis GEORGII BISHOP 1609. THE PREFACE to the Reader GOOD Christian Reader thou shalt vnderstand that vntill the greater part of this Booke was printed I thought I had giuen thee therein an answer to all that Doct. Bishop had published vnder the name of his Second part But being at Southwell not long since to doe my dutie to the most Reuerend Father the L. Archbishop of Yorke his Gr. being pleased to vse speech to me concerning a point in the said Second part and shewing me thereof the booke it selfe I perceiued a defect in that that I had answered finding there handled the other questions of the Reformed Catholike which he had left vntouched in his former booke and whereof in the booke which I had receiued there was conteined nothing In turning the booke I found a fault of the Print in the answer to the Aduertisement corrected in the end of the questions whereby I presently perceiued that he first printed his vngodly Preface here conteined and the said answer for some cunning deuice what it might be I leaue to thee to ghesse did thus publish the beginning and end of the booke and left the middle part to be added at his pleasure afterward As it first came foorth so I receiued it enquiring after no more because I thought I had receiued all and knowing of no more I haue written to no more and had I knowen of the rest before I had printed so much of this I would haue suppressed this till I had confuted that as I haue done this And heereby thou vnderstandest the cause why I haue in diuers places of this booke taxed M. Preface sect 22 pag. 190. Aduert sect 1. pag. 193. c. Bishop for the omitting of those questions because hee himselfe had then diuulged his book without them neither had I heard that he had written any thing of them which taxations though now I cannot alter yet by this Preface I reuoke and doe wish thee to passe them ouer as if they were not there at all Albeit where I might alter them I haue so done and therefore recalled from the Presse the copie of my Preface and aduertisement heere adioyued wherein I had further noted that omission by meanes whereof and for the adding of an answer to some few exceptions taken against mee by M. Higgons lately reuolted from vs so soone as I could get the sight thereof this booke hath been somwhat longer in comming foorth than otherwise it should haue beene To which being though not by my default thus maimed and vnperfect I haue done some disgrace by withdrawing from it the Dedication which I had intended being notwithstanding good Reader to intreat thy gentle patience to take this in good part till God shall giue me opportunitie heereafter to adde the rest Heereafter I say because it shall first be necessarie for mee to returne a Counterproofe to Doct. Bishops Reproofe lately published against a little peece of my answer to his Epistle Concerning which worke of his being such as I presume will in the end make him odious and hatefull to all men that will take knowledge of it I haue heere added some aduertisement for the time and giuen an answer to his Preface wherein he hath taken vpon him to haue said so much as may suffice to discredit me with all indifferent men that whereas it will require some longer time to examine his Reproofe in that sort as I intend it I may notwithstanding in the meane time somewhat abate the edge and remooue the scandall of it whilest by discouery of some of his iuglings if at least being so grosse and palpable they deserue to be called iuglings the Reader shall be able to conceiue what he is in all the rest I will heere amplifie nothing further but refer thee to those obseruations that I haue giuen thee thereof God giue his blessing both to my writing and to thy reading that we may both grow in hatred of Antichristian error and in the knowledge and loue of the trueth of God Thine in the Lord R. ABBOT THE ANSWER TO Doctor BISHOPS Preface to his second part of the Reformation of a Catholike c. 1. W. BISHOP CHristian Reader I suppose it shall please thee better if I doe entertaine thy studious minde with some serious discourse than if I went about to court it with the ordinary complements of a curious preamble Wherefore I purpose by thy gentle patience to handle here a matter of maruellous great importance which M. PERK towards the latter end of his booke laieth out against vs in maner of a most grieuous complaint it is that we Catholikes among many other capitall crimes by vs as he fableth defended doe bolster and vphold the most haynous sinne of Atheisme The man is not a little troubled to deuise wherein we doe maintaine any such point of impietie For compelled by the cleere euidence of trueth he confessed that we doe rightly acknowledge the vnitie of the God-head in the Trinitie of persons yet that hee may seeme to say something therein against vs he flieth vnto the threed-bare ragges of their common slanders of mans merits and satisfactions and such old stuffe and stretching them on the tenter-hooks yet one nayle further then his fellows striueth to draw out of them a certaine strange kinde of Atheisme in this maner The Roman religion makes the merit of the works of men Rom. 11.6 to concurre with the grace of God therefore it ouerthrowes the grace of God Item they acknowledge the infinite iustice and mercy of God but by consequence both are denied for how can that be infinite iustice which may any way bee appeased by humane satisfaction And how shall Gods mercy be infinite when we by our owne satisfactions must adde a supply to the satisfaction of Christ There needs apretie wit I weene to vnderstand how these points appertaine to Atheisme For suppose that we defended that the merit of the works of man concurred with Gods grace as two distinct agents which wee doe not for we hold that no works of man haue any merit vnlesse they spring and proceed
going about to discouer impiety in vs bewraieth exceeding great ignorance in himselfe not hauing yet learned to put a difference betwixt reprobation damnation We say and we therein say the truth that there is no cause of damnation but only sinne and yet we say as truly that there is no cause of reprobation The will of God the true cause of reprobation but only the wil and pleasure of almighty God Damnation is Gods sentence of iudgement whereby he assigneth the reprobate to eternall punishment for sinne Reprobation is the counsell and decree of God whereby he leaueth men in the state of sinne wherein he found them that they may iustly be condemned a Bernard de aduent dom ser 1. Omnes in Adam peccauimus in eo sententiam damnationis accepimus omnes We haue all sinned in Adam saith Bernard and in him we haue all receiued the sentence of damnation From this state of damnation God freeth some the rest he leaueth and forsaketh What is the cause hereof M. Bishop we would gladly heare it of you If you looke to sinne both sorts are sinners alike there is no more cause to condemne the one than to condemne the other no more cause to saue the one than to saue the other Tell vs M. Bishop what it is whereby God is mooued to make so great difference betwixt them betwixt whom according to themselues there is no difference at all Surely we in our learning can find no other reason hereof but that which the Apostle setteth downe b Rom. 9.18 so then he hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardeneth And what did M. Bishop neuer read these words of the Apostle If not how came he I maruell to be a doctor of Diuinity If he euer read them why then doth he here blame M. Perkins for speaking so directly according to those words that it proceeedeth from the very will of God that he sheweth mercy to some and forsaketh others But let him yet further heare the Apostle more fully cleering this matter by example as namely of Iacob and Esau two brethren borne of the same parents begotten at the same time brought foorth at one birth c vers 11. Before the children were borne when they had yet done neither good nor euill that the purpose of God according to election might stand not of works but of him that calleth it was said The elder shall serue the yonger I haue loued Iacob and hated Esau Looke to them in nature they are both men looke to them in condition they are both sinners Whence ariseth the difference If M. Bishop will say that God dealt herein according to foresight of the workes that they should doe the one good the other bad S. Austen derideth him saying d Aug. ep 105. Quisistum acutissimum sensum defuisse Apostolo non miretur Who would not wonder that this sharpe conceit should bee wanting to the Apostle Nay e Idem Enchir. c. 98. Qua in re si futura opera vel bona huius vel mala illius quae vtique deus praesciebat vellet intelligi nequaquam diceret Non ex operibus sed diceret Ex futuris operibus eoque modoistam solueret quaestionem immò nullam quam solui opus esset faceret quaestionem if the Apostle would haue had vs to vnderstand future workes either the good of the one or the euill of the other he would not haue said Not of workes but would haue said because of their workes to come and thus would he haue cleered the question or rather haue made no question that should need cleering It remaineth then that there is no other reason to be giuen as f Bell. de Amiss grat stat percati l. 2. c. 12. Huius discretionis nulla causa assignari potest nisi dei voluntas Bellarmine also confesseth but only the pleasure of him who sheweth mercy to whom he will and whom he will he hardneth that is g Aug. de praed grat c. 6. quasi diceretur cui vult donat à quo vuit a debitum poâ—â—it remitteth the debt to whom he list and where he list requireth it And surely if this matter of election and reprobation were to be decided out of the difference of workes there were no cause for the Apostle to sticke vpon the difficultie thereof whereas now to humane iudgement he stutteth and stammereth and knoweth not what to say to giue reason of that he saith He is content to rest vpon this that h Rom. 9.14 there is no iniquity with God To them that will not be satisfied herewith but go forward contentiously to wrangle he answereth i vers 20. O man who art thou which pleadest against God shall the thing formed say to him that formed it why hast thou made me thus In the end of all that discourse as it were a man amased he crieth out k Rom. 11.33 O the deepnesse of the riches of the knowledge and wisedome of God how vnsearchable are his iudgements and his waies past finding out What needeth all this a-doe if all might so easily be dispatched as M. Bishop pretendeth by allegation of the free will and workes of men But the Apostle well vnderstood that this would not serue the turne he saw a depth which he could not diue into a secret which he could not search and therefore by checking and admiring he represseth the curiosity and presumption of them whom by answering he cannot satisfie Yet in a word this is enough to stop the mouthes of all men that all being in Adam lost and cast away it was free for God to saue out of this condemned multitude whom it pleased him and to leaue the rest at his will to be disposed to other vse Albeit if M. Beza and some other doe rest this point of reprobation vpon a prime and absolute decree of God to which the fall of Adam is not in order precedent but subsequent will M. Bishop dare to say that the iustice of God is hereby impeached or attainted will he say that God dealeth vniustly therein if that be supposed to be true Surely S. Austin was of another mind and acknowledgeth in this behalfe Gods absolute soueraignty ouer his Creature to doe therewith whatsoeuer it pleaseth him l Aug. de praedsi grat c. 16. humanum genus quod creatum primitus constat ex nihilo non cum debita mortis et peccati origine nasceretur tamen ex eis creator omnipotens in aeternum noâ—nullos damnare vellet interitum quis omnipotenti creatori diceret Quare fecisti sic Qui enim cum non essent esse donauerat quo fine essent habuit potestatem nec dicerent caeteri cur paribus omnium meritis diuinum discreparet arbitrium quia potestatem habet figulus luti ex eadem massa facere aliud quidem vas in honorem aliud veròin contumeliam If mankind saith
Salomon saith x Pro. 16.4 The Lord hath created all things for himselfe euen the wicked against the day of euill If he like not these things let him enter his action against God let him not repine at vs who doe no more but report them from the mouth of God 10. W. BISHOP Another opinion some of them hold which is yet much more blasphemous then the other to wit that God who hath beene alwaies by good men esteemed the author of all good and so meerely good in his owne nature and will that he cannot possibly doe or thinke any euill that this Ocean I say of goodnesse is become the author plotter promoter and worker of all the wickednesse and mischiefe that is or hath beene committed in the world De prouid dei pag. 365. This is the doctrine of Zwinglius a great Rabin among the new gospellers who auoucheth that whē we commit either adultery murder or any such like crime that it is the worke of God he being the authour mouing and pushing vs on to doe it Againe that the theefe by Gods motion and perswasion murthereth and is oftentimes compelled to sinne In cap. 1. ad Rom. With him agreeth Bucer sometimes a professer of diuinity in the Vniuersity of Cambridge censuring him to deny God flatly who doth not firmely beleeue that God doth worke in man as well all euill as all good Of the same accursed crue was Melancthon who vpon the 8. chapter to the Romanes saith Euen as we confesse Paules vocation to haue beene Gods proper worke so doe we acknowledge these to bee the proper workes of God which are either indifferent as is to eate and drinke or that are euill as the adultery of Dauid and such like For it is euident out of the first to the Romanes that God doth all things mightily as Augustine speaketh and not permissiuely so that the treason of Iudas is as properly the worke of God as the calling of Paul Lib. 1. Inst c. 18. ss 1. But the principall proctor and promoter of this blasphemy is Caluin who of set purpose bestowes a whole chapter of his Institutions to hell to prooue and perswade it There he auoucheth boldly that the blinding and madnesse of Achab was the will and decree of God that Absolon indeed defiling his fathers bed with incestuous adultery committed detestable wickednesse yet this was Gods owne worke briefly that nothing is more plaine then that God blindeth the eies of men striketh them with giddinesse maketh them drunke casteth them into madnes and hardneth their hearts And whereas the poore Papists were wont to interpret such textes of Scripture as seeme to attribute these things to God by saying that God doth indeed iustly permit and suffer such things to be done but is not the author of them this Caluin will not in any wise admit of but in the same place confutes it saying These things many referre to sufferance as if in forsaking the reprobate he suffered them to be blinded by Satan but that solution saith he is too fond and so goeth on proouing that God doth not onely suffer but actually effect and worke all the euill that any man commiteth yea he addeth that which is more horrible that God doth worke this euill in man Ibid. sess 17.1 by Satans seruice as a meane yet so as God is the principall worker of it and the Diuell but his instrument Is not this blasphemy in the highest degree to make God a more principall author and worker of all wickednesse done in the world then the Diuell himselfe this is much wrose then flat Atheisme for it is the lesser impiety of two to hold that there is no God at all then to beleeue that God worketh more effectually all mischeefe then the infernall spirits doe But some of our Protestants will perhaps say that they hold not this opinion be it so for I thinke better of many of them yet be not these men that so teach as it were the founders of the new Gospell and men of chiefest marke among them Now what force such principal authors as they take Melancthon Zwinglius Bucer and Caluin to be may haue to carry the rest away into the same errours I know not Sure I am that Caluins Institutions wherein this matter is so vehemently vrged is translated into English and in the Preface commended to all students of Christian diuinity as one of the most profitable the holy Scriptures excepted for the sound declarations of truth in articles of religion R. ABBOT This matter of horrible blasphemie and impiety God not made by vs the author of sinne M. Bishop hath formerly charged vs with in his epistle Dedicatorie to the King and in the a Answer to the epistle sect 14. answer to the same epistle it is fully cleered Now hee being enraged and madde in his minde that he cannot tell how to gainsay that that is there answered and yet being loth to loose the aduantage of such a slander renueth it heere againe and to giue it some better colour bringeth the names of diuers principall writers of our part Zuinglius Bucer Melancthon and Caluin whom he affirmeth to haue beene authors and mainteiners of this accursed and damnable heresie And herein his master Bellarmine as well as he egregiously plaieth the Sycophant taking vpon him by a more then Alchimisticall extraction to draw out of some sentences of the forenamed authours that God b Bell. de Amiss grat statu peccats li. 2. cap. 4.5.6.7 is the author of sinne that God truely and properly sinneth yea that it is God onely which sinneth and not man and that sinne is but a matter of false opinion from which wicked assertions those woorthy men were as farre as the Iesuite was farre from honesty as hee was farre indeed in the obiecting of them They say nothing but what S. Austin of old resolued against the Pelagian heretikes their words their phrases their sentences are in effect the same and with the answers wherewith he shifteth off the sayings of Austin he may also put off the words of Caluin and the rest and say that indeed they make nothing against him Yea it is woorthy to be noted that what these men now obiect against vs the very same did the Pelagians obiect against S. Austin c Aug. ad artic sibi falsò impositos art 5. Quod peccatorum nostrorum author sit deus quòd malam hominum faciat voluntatem that by his doctrine God was made the authour of our sinnes and did make the will of men euill As he was free from any cause of such calumniation so are we also and so much the more resolute are we in our defence for that wee see that Bellarmine labouring to bee contrarie vnto vs yet by the very euidence of trueth whilest hee answereth our arguments is forced in a maner to acknowledge as much as we say Wee all teach with one consent that mans sinne
Prophecie He presently answereth b Ibid. solutio non difficilâ— est modò expendant lectores noÌ„ tantùm exponi quid Christus contulerit aegrotis sed in quem finem sanaueris ocrum morbos The solution is easie so that the Readers doe weigh that it is not heere declared onely what Christ did to the sicke but to what end hee cured their sicknesses What M. Bishop no more truth no more honestie but to cite Caluins obiection as if it were his resolution when hee himselfe answereth it in the same place Well yet againe Caluin saith that c Idem in Mat. 12.25 Memoria tenendum est vulgò receptis prouerlijs ita vsum Christum vt tantùm essent probabiles coniecturae non autem vt solidè probareut Christ vseth triuiall and vulgar prouerbes as probable coniectures not as sound arguments And what if hee say so What doth M. Bishop thinke the contrarie Will hee imagine that sound arguments may be drawen from triuiall prouerbes We take it for a memorable obseruation which Caluin giueth anone after vpon the same chapter that d Ibid. ver 34. Prouerbiales sententias non exigi debere ad perpetuam normam quia tantum docent quid accidere vt plurimum soleat Prouerbiall sentences must not be drawen to a perpetuall rule but do only teach what for the most part falleth out A prouerbiall speech it is as he there alleageth vttered by our Sauiour Christ e Matt. 12.34 Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh and yet we know that some there are f Psal 62.4 Who giue good words with their mouth and curse with their heart It hath beene a Prouerbe amongst vs a Friar a liar but will M. Bishop hereby prooue as by an infallible argument that euery Friar is a liar It hath beene commonly said concerning the church of Rome The neerer the church the farther from God and doth he hold it a good argument that therefore the Pope is in the high way to the diuell because he is so neere the church Shall euery slanderous rumour be holden for a conuiction because it is commonly vsed for a Prouerbe that there is no smoke but there is some fire If not then let him acknowledge according to Caluins rule that Prouerbiall sentences are good inducements to that which a man will perswade by them but necessary probations they are not And in that nature were they vsed by our Sauiour Christ who would draw on the Iewes by such dictates commonly receaued and approoued amongst them to consider the better of those things which otherwise by firme arguments of truth he made good vnto them Another matter is that where Christ saith to Corazin and Bethsaida and to Capernaum that g Matt. 11 21.23 if the myracles that were done in them had beene done in Tyre and Sidon yea in Sodome they had repented in sackcloth and ashes and Sodome had still remained Caluin saith that he speaketh after the maner of men not out of his heauenly cabinet which saith M. Bishop is no lesse in plaine English then that he spake vntruely as men doe Iust for so the Apostle S. Paul when he saied to the Romanes h Rom. 6.19 I speake after the maner of men because of the infirmitie of your flesh did thereby meane to tell them that hee did lie that he spake vntruely as men doe Caluins words vpon the former verse concerning Corazin and Bethsaida are these i Cal. in Math. 11.21 Ne quis spinosas de arcanis dei iudiâ—ijs quaestiones moneat tenendum est ad communem humanae mentis captum accommodari hunc domini sermonem Comparans ciues Bethsaid a eorum vicinos cum Tyrijs Sidonijs non disputat quid Deus praeuiderit futurum de ijs vel ilâ—is sed quid facturi fuerint alteri quatenus ex re ipsa perâ—â—pi poterat That no man may here mooue any curious questions touching the secret iudgements of God we are heere to resolue that the speech of Christ is applied to the coÌ„mon conceit of mens minds for comparing the Citizens of Bethsaida and their neighbours with the Tyrians and Sidonians he doth not dispute what God did foresee should be either in the one or the other but what the other would haue done so farre as by the very thing it selfe might be esteemed Afterwards comming to the other verse concerning Capernaum he saith again k Ibid. ver 23. supra admonuimus Christum humano more loqui non autem ex caelesti adyto proferre quid deus praeuiderit futurum si Sodomitis prophetam aliquem mississet We haue before admonished that Christ heere speaketh after the maner of men and doth not out of the heauenly sanctuarie declare what God did foresee would haue come to passe if he had sent a prophet to the Sodomites Caluins minde is plaine that when he saith that Christ spake after the maner of men he meaneth that he spake as men might morally esteeme the signes and wonders that he had done in these cities being so admirable and strange as that no man might probably imagine the Tyrians and Sidonians yea the very Sodomites to be so barbarous and gracelesse but that at the sight therof they would haue repented no lesse then the Niniuites did at the preaching of Ionas And that M. Bishops owne Latin interpreter tooke this to bee the true meaning of the words appeareth plainly by that hee translateth as touching the Sodomites l Fortè mansissent vsque in hanc diem Perhaps they had continued till this day He would not haue said perhaps if he had spoken out of the counsell of God but because he spake out of the conceit of men therefore he saith perhaps Why then doth he picke a quarrell against Caluin in that wherein by their owne authenticall text he is forced to subscribe that which Caluin saith But if he will needs vnderstand these words as spoken out of the secret of the counsell of God foreseeing what would haue followed if such meanes had beene vsed then let him heerein acknowledge the secret of Gods decree of reprobation of farre other nature then he hath before deliuered it that m August QuibusaaÌ„ quos nonit acturos poenitentiam non exhibet patientiam to some who he knoweth if meanes be vsed that they will repent yet he doth not yeeld patience that they may repent as S. Austin gathereth according to that construction and because hee will not grant them to beleeue therefore denieth them that whereby they should beleeue Let him leaue the Rhetoricall expostulations of humane wisedome why God being iust and good should abiect men to hell without foresight of their euill works because hee seeth that God abiecteth men notwithstanding the foresight of the good works which they would haue done if hee would haue vouchsafed them the meanes thereof I speake not this as approouing that construction but onely to whip M. Bishop
before shewed how the Fathers sticke not sometimes to tearme Christ q See heereof the question of Iustification sect 5.11 a sinner yea as Oecumenius speaketh r Oetumen in Heb. 9. vehementèr peccator erat c. vt supra a very great sinner for that as he expoundeth it he tooke vpon him the sinnes of the whole world and made them proper to himselfe Thus doth Luther say that ſ Luther in Gal c. 3. Et quidem omnes prophetae vide runt hoc in spiritu quod Christus futurus esset omntum maximus latro homicida adulter fur sacrilegus c. quo nullus maior vnquam in mūdo fuerit quia existens hostia pro peccatis totius mundi iam non est persona innocens sine peccatis non est natus de virgine dei filius sed peccator qui habet portat peccatum Pauli c. Petri c. omnia emnium peccata in corpore suo non quod ipse cōmiserit ea sed quòd ea à nobis commissa susceperit in corpus soū Chrst was the greatest sinner because he bare all our sinnes the greatest liar because he bare the person of all men of whom it is said All men are liars that the Prophets did in the spirit foresee him to be the greatest thiefe robber murtherer c. that euer liued because he did take vpon him the thefts robberies murthers adulteries and all other sinnes of all men liuing He speaketh thus to set foorth the more effectually the imputation of our sinnes to Christ and that which the scripture saith that t 2. Cor. 5.21 he was made sinne for vs u Esa 53.6 that the Lord laid vpon him the iniquities of vs all and though we forbeare thus to speake for auoiding offense as I haue formerly said yet in this sense what can Momus himselfe picke out to speake against it As for that which he saith of Christ deepely despairing and most miserably damned M. Bishops wit might haue serued him to conceiue that it was not absolutely meant because he maketh Christ withall most highly gloriing and happy in the highest degree His meaning then was as hath been before expressed that to sense of flesh and present feeling he was in state of despaire and damnation albeit by faith and hope he still gloried in God as his God and remained the heire and Lord of blissefull peace It appeareth then that in all those allegations of his there are no horrible extrauagant conceits nor any other but what the ancient fathers of whom he speaketh haue gathered out of the holy scriptures as well as we As for that which hee gathereth out of sundry particulars by him set downe that Christ in the middest of his passions retained a calme setled iudgement and most valiant constancy and resolution Christs affections in his passion kept within compasse and measure I answer him that he saith nothing therein but what he hath learned of vs who acknowledge as hath been before declared that notwithstanding all these extremities yet all his affections were kept within compasse and measure and are not to be esteemed by those exorbitancies and outrages which we in our passions are woont disorderly to runne into Yea by setled iudgement did he rightly weigh the heauy burden that lav vpon him accordingly complained therof and with valiant constancy and resolution hee waded through the middest of that horrible tempest vntill he was retired into safe harbour Of vs also hath M. Bishop learned that a great aggrauation of the griefes and sorrows of Christ was by the fathers withholding from him all inward comfort and consolation but yet together with vs he should learne out of the word of God that it was not only a priuation of spiritual comfort without which we see what tortures men euen of obstinacy vain-glory do oftentimes with inuincible courage vndergo but it was a position of spiritual anguish and distresse that drew from Christ those effects which hitherto we haue spoken of as by the discourse therof sufficiently doth appeare 15. W. BISHOP They hold first that whatsoeuer our Sauiour did Molineus in harmonia part 51. or suffered before his passion was of smal value for our redemption For as a noble Protestant said the Monkes Priests and Papisticall Doctors did erre when they vrged Christs incarnation and natiuity for all these things profited vs nothing could do nothing but onely the death of Christ which alone was accepted of God for our sinnes Secondly Caluin goeth further and doubteth not to say Lib. 2. Instit ca. 16. c. 16 ses 10. that Christes passion and corporall death would not serue the turne and had profited vs nothing at all had hee not in his soule suffered the very paines of the damned in hell This doctrine of theirs is not only contrary to an hundred places of expresse Scripture that doe assigne our redemption vnto the blood-shedding and passion of Christ but it also derogateth very much from the dignity of our Mediator For not that which he suffered made the merite of our redemption but it was his exceeding charity with which he suffered it and principally the very dignity of his diuine person which gaue that value price and estimation to his sufferinges that the very least thing that euer he suffered in his life was of infinite value and therfore sufficient to pay the ransome of all mankinde yea to haue redeemed a thousand worlds But let vs proceede on with the Protestants opinion did Christs sufferings of the torments of hell deserue of God in iustice theredemption of man not so if we may beleeue one of Foxes Martirs Acts and Monuments pa 487. who held as he recordeth that Christ with all his workes could not merit heauen for vs. But for that little credit is to be giuen to such a Martyr and such a Martyr-monger let vs heare what some of the learnedst amongst them say I truely confesse saith Caluin that if a man will set Christ singly and by himselfe against the iudgements of God there will be no roome for merit And after Christ could not deserue any thing Lib. 2. Insti cap. 17. ss 1. In abster calumni Heshu but by the good pleasure of God which is defended by his disciple Beza against Heshusius so that briefly all Christs sufferinges in hell and out of hell in true Protestant reckoning amount to no higher a value then that by the good pleasure and acceptance of God they deserued our redemption therefore in rigour of iustice they were not of sufficient worth to redeeme vs but were only of grace by God accepted for such Is not heere a faire reckning so might any other man indued with grace haue redeemed all mankinde as well as Christ if it had pleased God to haue so accepted it seeing no equall recompence was to be expected But to helpe him heere by the way that could not vnderstand how we were saued by the
mercy of God if Christs merites did in iustice deserue our saluation it is to be noted that both be true if they be duely considered For we are saued by Christs merits in rigor of iustice he satisfying of God as far-forth fully as we offended him and yet we be saued freely by the mercy of God too both because he hath of his meere mercy without any desert of ours giuen vs Christ his Sonne to be our Sauiour and also for that he hath out of the same his mercy freely applied vnto euery one in particular that is saued the merits of Christ through which he is saued R. ABBOT The value of our redemption is not to be rated by the wilfull conceits of men Christs other sufferings not sufficiēt vvithout his finall suffering and death but by the estimation and ordinance of God himselfe who doth nothing superfluously nothing idlely and without cause and therefore would not haue decreed the death of Christ but that a Luk. 24.46 it behooued Christ to suffer death and to rise againe from the dead the third day that repentance and remission of sins might be preached in his name As the Apostle saith b Gal. 2.21 If righteousnesse be by the law then Christ died in vaine so may we also conclude If the least thing that Christ suffered in his life were sufficient to redeeme vs as M. Bishop dreameth surely then Christ died in vaine It is not for man to take vpon him to be wiser then God nor for vs to say that this or that had beene sufficient to redeeme vs when we see what God hath decreed and done in that behalfe It is true in deed that the dignity of Christs person gaue worth to his sufferings but we are to learne of the wisedome of God what it was conuenient those sufferings should be to which the dignity of his person should giue that woorth so that not the dignity of his person howsoeuer but the dignity of his person in such and such sufferings certainely before determined of God was to be the merit and purchase of our redemption and saluation So then necessary it was that Christ should die for our redemption though his death had beene no sufficient price therefore but by the infinitenesse of his person Molineus therefore might very iustly and truely say not that the incarnation and birth of Christ profited vs nothing or could doe nothing but that without the death of Christ they had profited vs nothing or could haue done nothing for vs because it was by his death that God had appointed to redeem vs euen as M. Bishop against himslfe confesseth though his eies were not open to see it that an hundred places of expresse scripture doe assigne our redemption to the bloudshedding and passion of Christ The Papisticall Doctoures then their Monkes and Priests are to be condemned who vrge Christs incarnation and birth onely as a sufficient price for vs or doe stint the same as did Campian that c Campian Rot. 8. Cutus cruoris vna quaeuis guttula propter dignitatem bostiae mille mundos redimere potuisset Christ suffered for vs in soule also one drop of his bloud had sufficed to redeeme a thousand worlds not but that his incarnation and birth were profitable to vs but because whatsoeuer Christ did or suffered otherwise all concurred in his death as being preparations thereunto and in his death the fruit and effect thereof doth redound vnto vs not that we deny the value of any drop of the blood of Christ but because we hold no lesse needfull to redeeme vs then God deemed needfull that he should shead for vs. The words of Caluin which he translateth at randon are these d Caluin Instit l. 2. c. 16. se 10. Nihil actum erat si corporea tantúm morte defunctus fuisset Christus sed operae simul pretium erat vt diuinae vltionis seueritatem sentiret quo irae ipsius intercederet satisfaceret iusto iudicio It had beene to no effect if Christ had died onely a corporall or bodily death but it was withall needfull that he should feele the scuerity of Gods reuenge that so he might appease his wrath and satisfie his iust iudgement For disproofe of which assertion he vseth the words a little before mentioned that an hundred places of expresse Scripture doe assigne our redemption to the passion of Christ Full wisely I warrant you as if the scripture when it assigneth our redemption to the passion of Christ did not assigne it to those spirituall sufferings which Caluin there intendeth when as it describeth those sufferings to be a part of the same passion and the same are by Caluin so vnderstood to be If he will say that his meaning is that the scripture assigneth our redemption to the death of Christ let him vnderstand death in his true nature as he ought to doe with the complements and furniture thereof that is the wrath and curse of God and sorrowes of death as hath beene before said and then we answer as the truth is that the Scripture in assigning our redemption to the death of Christ doth consequently assigne the same to those spirituall anguishes and sufferings because those spirituall agonies are also a part of the same death Now seeing the Father sent his Sonne e Esay 53.10 to giue his soule an offering for sinne as the Prophet teacheth vs and is before declared surely Caluin rightly concludeth that if he had died onely a bodilie death he had done nothing for vs because he had not done that that the father had required nay he had not done that which the worke of redemption did require for f Athanas de incarnat Christi Neque potuit aliud pro alio in redemptionem praestari sed corpus pro corpore anima pro anima integriū aliquid pro integro homine c. one thing saith Aathanasius might not for redemption bee paied for another but the body was to be giuen for the bodie and the soule for the soule and the whole for the whole man From hence he proceedeth and telleth vs of one of Foxes martyrs as he tearmeth them Who held that Christ with all his workes could not merit heauen for vs. Thus like a madde dogge he runneth vp and downe snapping at one and biting at another and seeking in this man and that man to fasten his venemous tooth of slander and reproach Who this was he nameth no tand whereas he citeth Acts and monuments pag. 487. I finde not in the edition that I haue which is the last any matter tending to that purpose Wheresoeuer it is that he meaneth I doubt not but hee hath plaied his part in it with like fidelity as he is wont to doe As for the Martyrs and the Martyr-monger of whom he speaketh let him not doubt but the Prophets words are verified in them g Esay 57.2 peace shall come they shall rest in their beds euery
their daies to lay hold vpon a vaine shadow of an imputatiue and phantasticall iustice R. ABBOT None of our writers denie but that Christ in his death intended a price sufficient for all the power whereof in the ministery of the Gospel should extend to all but as touching the effect of his death we say truly that which M. Bishop heere obiecteth that Christ intended to die for the elect onely For a Aug. ad Artic sibi falso impositos art 1. Christi mers non impensa est humano generiâ— vt ad mortem eius etiam qui regenerandi non erant pertinerent Christ did not bestow his death vpon mankinde saith S. Austen that they who were not to be partakers of regeneration should appertaine to his redemption b Idem in Psal 87. solis praedestinatis ad aeternam salutem non autem omnibus hominibus cius bona opera profuerunt the things which he wrought were not beneficiall to all men but to them onely that were predestinate to eternall saluation The words of S. Iohn which he alleageth as contrarie to our assertion make nothing against vs. Iohn did not say c 1. Ioh. 2.2 He is the propitiation for our sinnes as speaking in the person of all the elect that then were but of himselfe and the elect to whom hee writeth and by the other words he ioyned to them all the rest of the elect that then were or after should be throughout the whole world Not for our sinnes only but for the sinnes of the whole world In the same sort hath he left the same words by occasion to be vsed of vs the former part of them to whom or amongst whom they shall be spoken the other of the rest of the members of the body that are or shall be wheresoeuer throughout the world Thus doth Saint Austin vnderstand them d Aug. epist 48. Christus propitiator est peccatorum nostrorum non solum nostrorum sed totius mundi propter triticuÌ„ quod est per totuÌ„ mundum that Christ is the propitiatioÌ„ of the sins of the whol world because of the wheat that is through the whole world so writing vpoÌ„ that epist of S. Iohn he expoundeth it to be e Idem in 1. Ioan tract 1. Ecce habes Ecclesiam per totuÌ„ mundum c. totius mundi quem suo sanguine comparauit the church throughout the whole world the whole world which he hath gotten by his blood And thus where Christ saith f Ioh. 3.17 God sent not his sonne into the world to condemne the world but that the world thorow him might be saued and the Apostle g 2. Cor. 5.9 God was in Christ reconciling the world to himselfe he restraineth the name of h Aug. Collat. 3. cum Dâ—natist Mundi no â—en in â—ono vt salnetur mundus c. Non saluabitur nisi Ecclesia in mundo c. vide mundum in bono omnes fideles et spem vitae aeternae gerentes per vniuersas gentes Deus erat in Christo inquit mundum reconcilians sibi fi reconciliari potest deo detestatus ille mun â—us iudicent qui loquuntur the world to the Church of God in the world to all the faithfull and such as beare the hope of eternall life throughout all nations because the Church only shall be saued in the world and the detested or detestable world cannot be reconciled vnto God Thus he distinguisheth i Idem in Ioan. tract 110. MuÌ„dus non permanens inâ—micus qualis est mundus damnationi prae â—estinatus sed ex inimico amicus effectus propter quem deus erat in Christo c. the world that abideth an enemy to God which is predestinated to damnation from the world that doth not abide an enemy but of an enemy is made a friend for which saith he god was in Christ reconciling the world to himselfe In like sort therefore Saint Iohn saith that Christ is the propitiation for the finnes of the world that is k Ibid. tr 111. Mundus reconciliatus ex inimico liberabitur mundo of the reconciled world of all the faithfull ouer the whole world that haue beene from the beginning and shall be to the worldes end But of this point I referre the Reader to see more before in the question of iustification the fifteenth section M. Bishop heere will go one step further and we must follow him in his step What effect saith he doth the bloud of Christ worke in the small number of these elected brethren But what doth he iest at the smalnesse of the number of these elected brethren What did he neuer reade in the Gospell l Matth. 22.14 Many are called but few elected Hath he not heard Christ comforting this m Luk. 12.32 small number feare not little flocke for it is your fathers will to giue you a kingdome Doth he glory in the multitude of his consorts without remembring that fearefull sentence of Christ n Matth. 7.13 The effect of Christs bloud to clense vs from sinne Wide is the gate and broade is the way that leadeth to destruction and many there be that goe in thereat but strait is the gate and narrow is the way that leadeth vnto life and few there be that finde it Well let vs leaue him to his greater number but as touching the effect of the bloud of Christ I answer him that it doth clense our soules from the filth of sinne and shall fully clense them from all filth of sinne It giueth vnto vs now o Rom. 8.23 the first fruits of the spirit whereby we fight against sin and serue God in holinesse of life and it shall giue vs the full measure off the spirit whereby we shall vtterly ouercome and put of the body of sinne and shall serue God in most full and perfect holinesse for euer In the meane time there remaineth in the regenerate a blot of originall sinne by reason whereof euery faithfull man complaineth as the Apostle doth p Rom. 7.14.23 I am carnall sould vnder sinne holden captiue to the law of sinne which is in my members This blot of sinne defileth and infecteth all our doings so that q Greg Moral li. 35. c. 16. Mala nostra pura mala sunt bona quae nos habere credimus pura bona esse nequaquam possunt our good workes cannot be meerely or purely good and therfore being stained and blemished they should be vtterly reiected if God in rigour of iudgement should esteeme of them But our beleefe and comfort is this that God r Rom. 3.25 hauing set foorth Christ to be our attonement through faith in his bloud doth therein vouchsafe to wash away all our blots and staines and for his sake through the imputation of his merits doth accept for iust both vs to life and our workes to reward and notwithstanding those imperfections giueth the crowne of righteousnesse to all them that
regnum obtinere caelorum caeterúm dupliet iure illud obtinens dominus meus haereditate scilicet patris merito passionis aeltero ipse contentus alterum mihi donat ex cuius dono iure illud mihi vendicans non confundor I confesse I am not woorthy neither can I by mine owne merits obteine the kingdome of heauen but my Lord Iesus hauing obteined it by double right both by inheritance from the father by the merit of his passion being himselfe contented with the one he giueth me the other by whose gift I am not ashamed to chalenge it for my right In the same maner did the godly martyr speake of right not to distinguish a right in himselfe from the right of Christ but to signify that Christ hath made ouer his right to vs and thereby wee hold as fast as Christ himselfe can hold From hence the other words are deriued by imitatioÌ„ of that which the Apostle saith f 1. Cor. 15.16 If the dead rise not againe then is Christ not risen againe by which he signifieth that there is that strait and inseparable bond betwixt Christ and his members as that to deny to them any thing which Christ hath wrought and purchased for them is to deny the same to Christ himselfe to affirme the failing of any thing to them is to affirme the failing of it to him also And as by allusion to that place of the Apostle Tertullian saith g Tertull. de Resurrect carnis securae estote caro sanguis vsurpastis caelum dei regnum in Christo aut si negent vos in Christo negent in caelo Christum qui vobis caelum negauerunt Care not flesh and blood yee haue in Christ taken possession of heauen and of the kingdome of God or if they deny you to be in heauen in Christ let them also deny Christ himselfe to be in heauen who haue denied heauen to you What will M. Bishop here tearme Tertullian and Bernard together with the Apostle himselfe audacious and sawcie Gospellers Because the Apostle denieth Christ himselfe to be risen vnlesse the faithfull also rise againe will hee returne him a scornfull iest as heere hee doth Christ belike could not liue in blisse without their holy company But their reason saith he seemeth good in the way of their owne religion Well if it be so it is sufficient for the way of their religion hath beene so farre approoued as that neither M. Bishop nor any other aduersaries haue beene able to disprooue it And because he cannot disprooue it therefore let him confesse as the truth is that the firme and stedfast apprehension of the merits of Christ and of being by faith made one with him doth minister vnto the faithfull this sacred resolution that so long as Christ perisheth not they cannot perish and therefore shall bee preserued for euer That that followeth is but an idle repetition of the same matters onely set out with a bold face and bigge looks and some inkehorne termes and therefore I passe it ouer not maruelling that any thing on our part seeme phantasticall to so vaine a man whose intellectuall parts serue him not to prooue any thing substantially for his owne 17. W. BISHOP But to returne to Christs mediatorship and merits Is it not moreouer a great disparagement vnto them to maintaine as the Protestants doe that his best beloued spouse the Church should continue but a small time at least in any sight and should bee penned vp in corners yea and during that time too it should not bee free from many foule grosse errours in the very foundation of faith Furthermore that hee left his holy word the onely rule and square as they hold of Christian religion to bee vnderstood of euery man as his owne knowledge and spirit should direct him and if any doubtfull question did arise thereabout as he fore-sawe thousands should doe yet he tooke no other order for the deciding and ending of them but that euery one should repaire vnto the same his word and doing his diligence to vnderstand it might afterward be his owne iudge As this later opinion would argue our blessed Sauiour who was the wisedome of God to bee the weakest and most improuident law-maker that euer was so the former doth mightily blemish the inestimable price of his most pretious bloud making it not of sufficient value to purchase vnto him an euerlasting inheritance free from all errours in matter of faith and abounding in all good works R. ABBOT The Protestants doe not maintaine that the Church the beloued spouse of Christ should continue but a small time but doe all absolutely affirme the continuance thereof from the beginning to the end The Church how it is visible or inuisible As for the visibilitie and sight of the Church we speake diuersly thereof as we speake diuersly of the Church it selfe Where the Church is a matter of faith there it is not subiect to sight for a Greg. Dialog l. 4. c. 4. Hoc reracitèr dicitur credi quod non potest viders nam quod iam videri potest credi non potest that is truely said to be beleeued saith Gregorie which cannot be seene and that which may now be seene cannot be said to be belecued The Church then which wee professe to beleeue in the articles of our faith is inuisible because as b Aug in Psal 56. Caput separatum est à visione the head is inuisible c 1. Pet 1.8 we beleeue in him but we see him not so is the body also d Greg. in Psal poenitential 5. Tota Ecclesia siue quae adhuc versatur in terris siue quae cum eo iam regnat in coelis c. one part thereof raigning in heauen with the head another part yet vnborne e Aug. vt supra pertinentibus ad eam etiam his qui fuerunt ante nos his qui futnri sunt â—ost nos vsque ad finem seculi because to it belong they also that shall be after vs to the worlds end the third part though visible as they are men yet inuisible according to that they are members of this Church because f Luk. 17.21 the kingdome of God is within and g Aug de Bapt. cont Donat. l. 5. c. 28. Mamfe stuÌ„ est id quod in ecclesia dicitur intus foris in corde non in corpore cogi tandum to be in the Church is not to be conceiued in the bodie but in the heart h 1. King 8.39 2 Tim. 2.19 which God only knoweth and therefore only knoweth who are within according to that seale as the Apostle calleth it of the foundation of God i The Lord knoweth who are his To speake of the Church accordingly as men take notice and knowledge of it it is said to be visible two maner of waies either as touching the persons professing the seruice and worship of God or as touching the congregating
that the Church according to the true members thereof shall be inuisible in the time of Antichrist it is without question Now that the Bishop of Rome hath beene and is that very Antichrist of whom the Scripture hath foretold and the Church of Rome the whoore of Babylon hath beene otherwhere plentifully shewed and in some part hath beene also handled formerly in the second part of this worke The time then hath been already for the Church to bee inuisible by the meanes of the furie of Antichrist maliciously and cruelly persecuting all that came to light that refused to drinke of his poisoned cup. Now hauing thus at large instructed M. Bishop what our doctrine is of the visibility of the Church I will answer him briefly as touching the other point of this cauill The Church subiect to errour that by the ancient monuments of the Church it plainly appeareth that many foule errors entred into the Church soone after the Apostles times that whilest m Matt. 13.25 the watchmen and husbandmen were sometimes sleepie the enemie came and sowed tares amongst the wheat that the builders built much n 1. Cor. 3.12 hay wood and stubble but yet so as that for the most part they reteined the only true foundatiō which is Iesus Christ so as that by the foundation they thēselues are saued but the fire of the Lord shall consume that trash which they haue builded thereon I haue o Answer to the Epistle sect 13. ex Euseb hist. eccles l. 3. c. 29. before shewed out of Eusebius how Egesippus limited the Virginitie of the Church to the age of the Apostles and that generation which with their owne eares heard the preaching of truth from them I haue there shewed how the shifts and subtilties of Satan for corrupting of the truth which he began to practise euen in their daies though they were then checked by their authoritie yet preuailed mightily when they were gone The errours which then were how farre they extended and whether they were in other places the same that we finde them to haue beene in some it is not apparant to vs but manifest it is that so cunningly and effectually Satan conueied that poison into the Church as that it hath neuer since perfectly recouered those wounds that it receiued then Yea Antichrist the man of sinne the master of abominations finding many of those corruptions in the Church hath bound them together as it were in a bundle and by his edicts and lawes hath obtruded and forced them to be receiued as articles of true faith But this saith M. Bishop doth mightily blemish the inestimable price of the most precious bloud of Christ. And why so Forsooth it maketh it not to be of sufficient value to purchase vnto him an euerlasting inheritance free from all errours in matters of faith and abounding in all good works But the effect of Christs purchase is to be determined by the wil of Christ himselfe and not by M. Bishops wilfull and witlesse dreames by which it may as wel be prooued that man is wholly without sinne as that the Church is without errour But I answer him briefly out of his owne words that as the Church which Christ hath purchased doth not so abound in all good works but that it is subiect to many sinnes so neither doth the same Church so abound in knowledge and truth but that it is subiect to many errors Christ intended not by his mediation to bring his Church in this life to full perfection So long as she continueth a pilgrim from her bridegrome and Lord she shall still carie the marks of mortalitie and corruption The Church in this world is like vnto the Moone which is neuer so cleere but that some fret or spot of darknesse is to bee seene in it and howsoeuer it seeme bright in one part yet is obscured in another But it is worth the while to see to what issue M. Bishop wil bring this conceit of his if he be vrged to reueale the secret of it For let vs question with him If the Church cannot erre how is it that the Church of Ephesus hath erred and quite fallen away p Act. 20.28 which God purchased with his owne blood and of which it was immediately that the Apostle said that q 1. Tim. 3.15 it was the pillar and ground of truth Did not the Church of r Gal. 1.6 Galatia erre The Churches of Corinth of Philippi of Thessalonica of Colossa of Pergamus Thyatira and the rest haue they not all gone astray Yes will hee say these particular Churches may erre but the whole Church vniuersall cannot erre But if euery part of the Church may erre then surely the whole Church may erre because all the parts make the whole which can be no other than the parts are We haue heereof example in the r Exod. 32.1 Israelites when the whole Church erred in setting vp the golden calfe and in the Christian Church which was in a maner ſ Vincent Lirinens Arianorū venenum non iam portiunculam quandam sed penè orbem totum contaminauerat wholly corrupted with the heresie of Arius t Hieron adu Lucifer Ingemuit totus orbis se esse Arianum miratus est the whole world groning as Hierome saith and woondering that it was become Arian Well he will say that the Church seuered and sundred in the parts thereof may erre but being assembled together by her Pastors and Bishops in a generall Councell it cannot erre But this the former instances disprooue for the whole Church of the Israelites was gathered together to Aaron the Christian Church was assembled together by her Pastors and Bishops in the Councell of Ariminum to the number of foure hundred who were moe than before had beene in the Councell of Nice and yet decreed for the Arian heresie So was there a second general Councel holden at Ephesus which affirmed approoued the heresie of Eutyches as there were also sundry other of which M. Bishop will not say but that they did erre True saieth he generall Councels may erre if they be not congregated by the authority of the Pope but being the Popes Councels they cannot erre But the Councels of Constance and Basil were both assembled by the Popes call and both these Councels decreed that the Councelis of greater authority than the Pope and the Pope subiect thereto which M. Bishop for the Popes sake will say is an errour and by the Popes procurement the contrary hath beene since determined in other Councels He will answer vs that the Councell though it be assembled by the Pope yet may goe awry if it become diuided from the Pope but being assisted and directed by him it cannot conclude amisse because the Pope cannot erre But we bring examples of diuers Popes that haue erred as Liberius by the herisie of the Arians Honorius by the heresie of the Monothelites and such like Well the Pope then saith he
bloud of our redeemer IESVS Christ Secondly of seauen Sacraments instituted by our Sauiour both to exhibite honour to God and to sanctifie our soules they doe flatly reiect fiue of them And do further as much as in them lieth extinguish the vertue and efficacy of the other two For they hold Baptisme not to be the true instrument all cause of remission of our sinnes and of the infusion of grace in our soules but only to bee the signe and seale thereof And in steade of Christs sacred body really giuen to all Catholikes in the Sacrament of the Altar to their exceeding comfort and dignity the Protestants must be content to take vp with a bitte of bread and with a sup of wine a most pittifull exchange for so heauenly a banquet They doe daily feele and I would to God they had grace to vnderstand what a want they haue of the Sacrament of Confession which is the most soueraigne salue of the world to cure all the deadly and dangerous woundes of the soule Ah how carelesly doe they daily heape sinne vpon sin and suffer them to lie festring in their breasts euen till death for lacke of launcing them inseason by true and due confession Besides at the point of death when the Diuell is most busie to assault vs labouring then to make vs his owne for euer there is amongst them no anointing of the sicke with holy oile in the name of our Lord as S. Cap. 5. vers 14. Iames prescribeth joyned with the Priests praier which should saue the sicke and by meanes whereof his sinnes should be forgiuen and he lifted vp by our Lord and inwardly both greatly comforted and strengthned these heauenly helpes I say many others which our Catholike religion affords vnto all persons and by which rightly administred God is highly magnified are quite banished out of the Protestant territories and consequently their religion for want of them is mightily maymed They haue yet remaining some poore short praiers to be said twise a weeke for fearing belike to make their Ministers surfet of ouer much praying they will not tie them to any daily praiers Mattins Euensong and other set houres they leaue to the Priests sauing that on the Sabboath they solemnely meet together at the Church to say their seruice which is a certain mingle-mangle translated out of the old portaise and Masse booke patched vp together with some few of their owne inuention And though it be but short yet it is the Lord he knowes performed by most of them so slightly that an indifferent beholder would rather iudge them to come thither to gaze one vpon another or to common of worldly businesse than reuerently there to serue God Now as concerning the place where their diuine seruice is said if goodly stately Churches had not beene by men of our religion built to their handes in what simple cotes trow you would their key-cold deuotion haue beene content to serue their Lord if one Church or great steeple by any mishap fall into vtter ruine a collection throughout all England for many yeeres together will not serue to build it vp againe which maketh men of iudgement to perceiue that their religion is exceeding cold in the setting forward of good workes and that it rather tendeth to destruction than to edification Againe whereas our Churches are furnished with many goodly Altars trimmed vp decently and garnished with sundry faire and religious pictures to strike into the beholders a reuerent respect of that place and to draw them to heauenly meditations theirs haue ordinarily bare wals hanged with cob-webs except some of the better sort which are daubed like Ale-houses which some broken sentences of Scripture Besides the ancient custom of Christās being to pray with their faces toward the Sunne-rising to shew the hope they haue of a good resurrection and that by tradition receiued euen from the Apostles as witnesseth Saint Basil their Ministers in their highest mysteries De Spiritu sancto 27. looke ouer their Communiontable into the South to signifie perhaps that their spirituall estate is now at the highest and that in their religion there is no hope of rising towards heauen but assurance of declining R. ABBOT Our Diuine seruice and worship of God is not such as the Church of Rome and the followers thereof would haue it but it is sufficient for vs that it is such as God himselfe hath commanded Of true reall and externall sacrifice I haue answered him before both in the confutation of his a Sect. 27. Epistle more at large and briefly heere in the b Sect. 3. answer of this Preface Here I answer him againe in a word with the words of Iustin Martyr that c Iustin Mart. Dialog cum Tryph. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 prayers and thanksgiuings are the onely perfect and acceptable sacrifices to God and that Christians haue learned to doe these onely euen in the memoriall of their dry and moist foode the bread of the Eucharist and the cup of the Eucharist as hee hath before called it in which is the remembrance of the passion which God by God himselfe suffered for vs. So then we doe not denie all sacrifice but we say as we haue beene taught by the Apostle S. Peter according to the ancient doctrine of the Church of Rome d 1. Pet. 2 5. We are made a spirituall house a holy priesthood to offer vp spirituall sacrifices the sacrifice e Psal 4.5 of righteousnesse the sacrifice f Ps 50.14.23 Heb. 13.15 of praise and thankesgiuing the sacrifice g Psal 51.17 of a broken and contrite heart the sacrifice h Phil. 4.18 of almes the sacrifice i Rom. 12.1 of our own bodies acceptable to God by Iesus Christ By these sacrifices we doe all loialtie and seruice to God and we doe not doubt but that we please God therein If we please not that wiser sort of which M. Bishop speaketh the reason is because they take vpon them to bee wiser than God For that propitiatory sacrifice which he driueth at is beyond Gods deuice God neuer taught it Christ neuer ordeined it the Primitiue Church neuer intended it there is no reason at al for it because the bloud of Christ once shed for vs is a sufficient propitiation and attonement for all our sinnes And because by k Heb. 1.3 10.14 once offering of himselfe hee hath purged our sinnes and made vs perfect for euer therefore it is no despight to Gods true worship but a iust assertion thereof to hold that the pretence of any further sacrifice for sinne is an impious and blasphemous derogation to the crosse of Christ As for his seuen Sacraments Seuen Sacraments a late deuice if he can prooue them to bee as he saith instituted by our Sauiour we are very readie to acknowledge the same But it is worthy to be noted that l Bellarm. de effect sacram cap. 25. Bellarmine standing vpon the proofe thereof
et graues viros reformidat hic noster clerus Now is piety and religion waxen very cold I will not say barefooted but hauing on their hose and buskins they scant vouchsafe to kneele downe to pray They weepe not as they goe or whilest the Sacrifie is in hand but they laugh and that impudently euen of them I speak whom their purple robes make more eminent than others They sing not the hymnes for that seemeth too base a matter but they tell iests and tales to make one another laugh What should I say any more the more pratling and wanton a man is so much the more commendation hath he in this corruption of maners This Clergie of ours is afraid of staid and graue men Now if the Clergy of Rome be such M. Bishop I trow of his courtesie will beare with vs if some such vngracious and retchlesse people be found amongst vs. The best is he is not present to see any such matter and therfore vpon his owne surmise may be likly to tel a lie If he were present in our cōgregations specially in townes cities I doubt not but he should see examples enow of them who say of the Church as Iacob did of Bethel h Gen. 28.16.17 How fearefull is this place this is no other but the house of God and this is the gate of heauen surely the Lord is in this place and therefore addresse themselues as Cornelius did when he was to heare the preaching of Peter i Act. 10.33 We are all heerepresent before God to heare all things that are commanded thee of God Concerning the place where our diuine seruice is said he asketh If goodly stately Churches had not beene built to their hands by men of our religion in what simple cotes trow you would their key-cold denotion haue beene content to serue their Lord And why their Lord What M. Bishop is he not your Lord as well as ours But it is true indeede that you haue another Lord whom you haue stiled k Extrauag Ioan. 22. Cum inter in glossa Dominus deus noster papa Our Lord God the Pope and must we thinke that your seruice is done to him But if we had had no other but simple cotes wherein to serue God we suppose our deuotion should haue beene as well accepted as in goodly and stately Churches The time was when the Apostles and first Christians did serue God in simple cotes and in the times of l Arnob. cont gent. lib. 6. Origen contra Cel. l. 3. 7. Arnobius and Origen the Pagans vpbraided them with the want of stately Churches and yet M. Bishop I thinke will not say but that they serued God as religiously as now they doe in the church of Rome Stately Temples as they are sometimes the fruits of true deuotion so they are sometimes matters of ambitious ostentation and sometimes the dotages of abominable superstition Herod the King euen hee that would haue murthered our Sauiour when hee was but new borne to shew his roialty and magnificence and to gaine fauour of the Iewes builded m Ioseph Antiquit Iuda◠li. 15. c. 14. the Temple of Ierusalem most gloriously and farre more neerely to the paterne of Salomons Temple than when after the captiuity they restored it the second time so as that we see the Disciples in the Gospell admiring n Mar. 13.1 Luk. 21 5. the goodly stones and buildings of it Origen mentioneth o Origen cont Cels li. 3. Splendida sana cum lucis templa cum vestibulis porticibus eximia magnitudine atque pulchritudine mirandis introgressus autem videbit adorari felem aut simiam c. the goodly Chapels and Temples of the Aegyptians with thier entries and porches admirable for thier maruellous greatnesse and fairenesse into which when yee were come yee should see them worship a cat or an ape or a crocodile or a goat or a dogge The Temple p Act. 19.27 of Diana was a most goodly thing and renowmed thorow the whole world And surely what M. Bishop now saith to vs the same might the Pagans haue said to our forefathers when they were first Christians They might haue asked them in what simple cotes they would haue serued Christ if men of their religion had not builded to their hands goodly Temples which by q Greg li. 9. ep 71. Fana idolorum in eadem gente aestrui minin è debent c. si fana eadem benè constructa sunt necesse est vt à cultu dae monum in obsequium veri dei debeant commutari Gregories aduice were turned to Christian Churches as in other places also r Lib. 2. indict 11. ep 19. Loca quondam execrandu erroribus deputata in Catholicae religionis reuerentiam dedicare he signifieth they did the like Now if Pagans in this respect were not inferiour to Papists then it is not to be a question by whom Churches were built but by whom they are rightly vsed By whomsoeuer they were built we now vse them for the exercise of true religion to the glory of God neither is our religion so cold in the setting forward of good workes but that whether by collections or otherwise wee maintaine and vphold both Church and steeple thankes be to God to that vse and we hope shall so doe to their griefe and sorrow vntill the worlds end Neither is it any disgrace to our times that collections are now generally made to such ends and purposes but rather a commendation that so many are now found so ready to contribute to such acts of piety which M. Bishop will haue vs thinke were done in former times only by some few The widowes ſ Mar 12.42 two mites were more with God than the great offerings of the rich men and we hope that the small helpes which we seuerally giue according to our ability for the maintenance of Gods seruice are as well accepted with God as the magnificence of them who out of their abundance and superfluity haue performed so great acts thēselues alone These mites being put together doe that thankes be to God that is necessary to be done and I thinke it is more than M. Bishop can iustifie that they did not in those times wherof he speaketh vse such general collections for the doing of the like things Whether they did or not it skilleth not we know that t Exo. 35.5.21 the Tabernacle of God was built in effect by such collections and God promised to dwell in it and we doubt not but he is also present with vs in our Tabernacles which by such meanes are mainteined to serue him To be short that they by whom churches were built since the faith of Christ heere receiued were all of their religion is but a vaine presumption of M. Bishop and a meere vntruth as in part hath beene declared u Answer to the Epistle sect 31.36 before and heereafter if God will vpon another occasion shall
a time because the end of his sitting is for the subduing of his enemies which thencefoorth shall be none and for the bringing of vs to God who then shal perfectly and immediately be ioyned vnto God f 1. Cor. 13.12 to see face to face and to know euen as we are knowen g August de Trin. lib. 1. ca. 10. Vt iam non interpellet pro nobis Mediator Sacerdos noster filius Dei filius hominis sed ipse in quantum Sacerin est assumpta propter nos serui forma subiectus sit ei qui illi subiecit omnia vt in quant is Deus â—â—t cum illo nos subiectos habeat in quantum Sacerdos nobiscum illi subiectus sit so as that our Mediatour and Priest the sonne of God and the sonne of man shall no further make intercession for vs saith S. Austin but he also as our Priest hauing taken for vs the forme of a seruant shall be subiect to him who hath subdued to him all things that as he is God he may haue vs subiect together with himselfe as man and as our Priest may with vs be subiect to himselfe as God the kingdome thencefoorth to abide not in the manhood of Christ as now it doth but in the Godhead that God as the Apostle saith may be all in all For conclusion of this section M. Bishop addeth That God shall then render vnto euery man according to his workes all the packe of them doth vtterly deny But M. Bishop you should for example haue named one you should haue quoted some place where either in common or priuate iudgement this deniall is set downe Gods rendring according to works prooueth no merit If you can bring none what a shame is it for a man of your degree and profession thus wilfully to lie and to wrong them that haue done no wrong to you The Scripture indeed hath taught it as he alleageth and we beleeue and so preach to all men that h Rom. 2.6 God shall render vnto euery man according to his workes We giue warning with the Apostle i Gal. 6.7 that no man deceiue himselfe for whatsoeuer a man soweth the same shall he reape He that soweth to the flesh shall of the flesh reape corruption but he that soweth to the spirit shall of the spirit reâ—pe euerlasting life We teach by the word of Christ that k Iohn 5.28 the houre shall come when all that are in their graues shall heare his voice and shall come foorth they that haue done good to the resurrection of life and they that haue done euill to the resurrection of condemnation And yet we teach withall that we are l Rom. 3.24.25 iustified freely by the grace of God throuh faith in the blood of Christ and that God doth saue vs not for any merits of ours but onely for his mercies sake Can he not tel how these two may stand to gether Let him learne then of Gregory Bishop of Rome who propoundeth the question and answereth it m Gregor in Psal paenitent 7. Si illa sanctorum foelicitas misericordia est non meritis acquiritur vbi erit quod scriptum est Et tu reddes vnicuique secundum opera sua si secundum opera redditur quomodo misericordia aestimabitur sed aliud est secundum opera reddere aliud propter ipsa opera reddere In eo enim quod secundum opera dicitur ipsa operum qualitas intelligitur vt cuius apparuerint hona opâ—râ— eius sit retributio gloriâ—saiâ—â— namque heatae vitae in qua cum deo de deo vâ—â—i ur nullus potest aequari labor nulla opera comparaâ—i praesertim cum Apostolus dicat Non sunt condignae passiones c. If the blisse of the Saints be mercy and be not purchased or gotten by merits how shall that stand which is written Thou shalt render vnto euery one according to his workes If it be rendred according to workes how shall it be esteemed mercy But it is one thing saith he to render according to workes another thing to render for the workes sake For when it is said according to workes the quality it selfe of the works is considered that whose workes appeare good his reward may be glorious For to that blessed life where we are to liue with God and of God himselfe no labour or paines can be equalled no workes may be compared for that the Apostle saith that the sufferings of this time are not worthy of the glory that shall be reuealed vpon vs. Notwithstanding then that God doe render to euery many cccording to his workes yet the doctrine of merits which M. Bishop would build thereupon is excluded because our good workes though they be sufficient as markes to distinguish vs from others yet they are not sufficient to obtaine saluation for vs yea as n Of Iustification sect 49. elsewhere hath beene declared out of Gregory if God should in strict iudgement examine the defects and blemishes of them they should therein be sufficient to condemne vs. Whatsoeuer they are they are not our owne but Gods workes in vs and o August de grat lib arbit cap 7. Si dei dona sunt bona merita tua non deus cororat merita tua tanquam merita tua sed tanquaÌ„ dona sua when he shall crowne them he shall crowne them not as our merits but as his owne gifts as S. Austin saith 11. W. BISHOP 8. I beleeue in the holy Ghost First Caluin and his followers who hold the holy Ghost to haue the God-head of himselfe and not to haue receiued it from the Father and the Sonne must consequently deny the holy Ghost to proceede from the Father and the Sonne In the Preface In cap. 6. 17. Isa in 16. Marc. as hath beene elsewhere prooued Secondly they make him much inferiour vnto the other persons for they teach in their French Catechismes that the Father alone is to be adored in the name of the Sonne And Caluin against Gentil saith that the title of creatour belongeth onely to the Father and elsewhere that the Father is the first degree and cause of life and the Sonne the second And that the * In 26. Math. v. 64. Father holdeth the first rancke of honour and gouernement and the Sonne the second where the holy Ghost is either quite excluded from part with the Father and the Sonne or at most must be content with the third degree of honour R. ABBOT As touching the Frst point he referreth his Reader to the Preface and there it is already answered That which Caluin saith is namely concerning the second person in Trinity the Sonne of God M. Bishop by consequence draweth it to the third person the holy Ghost The obiection then or rather the slander being cleered as touching the Sonne is consequently cleered concerning the holy Ghost His second cauill is The holy Ghost not made inferior
therefore we may not doubt but that the fellowship of the grace of God as God himselfe hath ordeined is to be imparted vnto them We know that many things by the law were called holy which yet were not capable of inward and spirituall holinesse and therefore albeit wee say by the Apostles phrase that the children of the faithful are holy vnto God euen from their mothers wombe yet is there no necessitie to vnderstand this holinesse of any grace of inward regeneration as they wilfully vnderstand it it being sufficient both to the Apostles words and to our meaning that they be reckoned as belonging to Gods houshold partakers of his vocation and calling designed to his vse and in case to be made partakers of his holinesse That the remainder of originall sin is properly sinne in the regenerate and that it infecteth and staineth all our good works so as that it should preuaile against vs to condemnation saue onely that God imputeth not the same vnto vs it hath beene at large before declared and M. Bishop for shame should no more gainesay it till he haue made good that that there he hath said against it As for his Sacrament of penance we know it not Repentance Christ hath taught vs but Sacrament of penance he hath taught none and therefore iustly may wee leaue it to them that haue beene the deuisers of it For remission of sinnes which wee commit after baptisme wee looke backe alwaies in our repentance to baptisme it selfe where it was sealed vnto vs not for the present onely but for euer that h 1. Ioh. 2.2 if any man sinne we haue an aduocate with the Father Iesus Christ the iust and he is the propitiation for our sinnes 14. W. BISHOP 11 The resurrection of the bodies Whether Farel the first Apostle of the Geneuian Gospel doubted thereof or no let his successor Caluin tell you who answereth Farels letter thus Epist ad Farellum That the resurrection of this our flesh doth seeme to thee incredible no maruell c. Againe many of them teach that Christ tooke not his bloud againe which he shed vpon the crosse yea some of them are so gracelesse as to say that his pretious bloud wherewith wee were redeemed Vide Conradum lib. 1. art 20. rotted away on the earth 1600. yeeres agoe If then it bee not necessarie to a true resurrection to rise againe with the same bloud why is it necessarie to rise againe with the same bones and flesh the one being as perfect a part of a mans body as the other R. ABBOT The epistle wherein are the words mentioned by M. Bishop importing a doubt of the resurrection of the bodie was not written to Farel as he falsely quoteth but to one a Caluin epist. 103. Quòd res tibi incredibilis videtur huius carnis resurrectio nihil mirū Lelius Zozimus an Italian who seemeth to haue beene but meanely perswaded of some other points of Christian doctrine After two epistles to this Zozinus in the former whereof these words are there follow two epistles to Farell But what drowsie fit was M. Bishop in to take Farels name from an epistle that followed after and by forgery to adde it to the epistle that went before But this is one of the Romish holy fraudes whether true or false it skilleth not so that it be fit to serue the turne What wee thinke of Christs resuming his bloud againe I haue b Sect. 10. before shewed As for Conrades reports of the opinions of some of our men concerning the same they little mooue vs without better testimonie because wee know what the guise of Romish Sycophants in that case is wont to be 15. W. BISHOP 12 Life euerlasting First Captaine Caluin holdeth it for very certaine that no soule doth enter into the ioyes of heauen wherin consisteth life euerlasting vntill the day of doome These be his words 3. Institu 25. sess 6. The soules of the godly hauing ended the labour of this war-fare doe goe into a blessed rest where they expect the enioying of the promised glorie And that all things are holden in suspence vntill Christ the redeemer appeare Whose opinion is yet better than was his predecessor Luthers For he teacheth in many places Enarra in Gen. cap. 26. In Ecclesi c. 9. v. 10. that the soules of the godly departing from their bodies haue no sense at all but doe lie fast asleepe vntill the latter day Take this one for a taste Another place to prooue that the dead feele or vnderstand nothing wherefore Salomon thought the dead to be wholy asleepe and to perceiue nothing at all And again The sleepe of the soule in the life to come is more profound than in this life And Luther with this one position of his as that famous historiographer Iohn Sleidan recordeth ouerthrew two points of Popery to wit Lib. 9. hist. praying to Saints for they are so fast asleepe that they cannot heare vs and praying for the dead For they in Purgatorie slept also so soundly that they felt no paines A meet foundation surely to build such false doctrine vpon In 20. Luc. hom 35. But Brentius is most plaine in this matter who ingeniously confesseth that albeit there were not many among them that did professe publikely the soules to die with the bodie yet the most vncleane life which the greatest part of their followers did lead doth clearely shew that in their hearts they thinke no life to be after this yea that many such speeches doe sometimes proceed from them Finally it is a grosse errour of theirs to thinke that euery meane godly man shall be then made equall in glory with the Apostles which Luther teacheth whereas cleane contrary S. Paul declareth In 1. c. Petri 1. 1. Cor. 15.42 that as one starre differeth from another in glory so also shall be the resurrection of the dead I omit heere many other particularities that I be not ouer tedious For these their bickerings against the very principles of our Christian faith not leauing any one article of our Creed vnskirmished with all will serue any indifferent man for a warning to beware of their prophane doctrine that leadeth the high way to Infidelitie They vse to crie out much against the Antichrist of Rome for corrupting the puritie of the Gospell as the wicked Elders did against the adulterie of Susanna but the iudicious Christian may easily espie them themselues to be the true fore-runners of Antichrist indeed by their so generall hacking and hewing at euery point of the ancient Christian faith Thus much concerning the Creede now let vs passe to the Commandements R. ABBOT Note well The soules of the faithfull affirmed by Caluin and Luther to be in heauen gentle Reader the wilfull impudencie and malice of this man He saith that Caluin denieth to soules departed the ioyes of heauen vntill the day of doome and yet in the words by him cited hee seeth that hee
c. 10. Quâ— sâ—ribit motum internum non esse 〈◊〉 â—â—si 〈◊〉 se prodat that the inward motion is no sinne vnlesse it do outwardly shew or bewray it selfe Wherein he dealeth very vnhonestly to make his Reader beleeue that he fetteth down the authors words when he setteth downe onely what hee himselfe list to collect and gather of them The words of Iosephus considering the occasion are very vnfitting and absurd and so contrarie to common sense as that we may woonder they should come from so wife a man Antiochus brought his army against the citie of Elymais as Iosephus there declareth where the temple of Diana was hee assaulted it with all his might hee left nothing vndone that he could doe for the atchieuing of his purpose though by the valour of the Citizens he was resisted and frustrate of his desire Now was it for Iosephus heere to say that to intend a mischiefe and not to act it seemeth not worthy of punishment when notwithstanding hee himselfe confesseth that thâ—â—e wanted no endeuour or attempt for the effect 〈◊〉 it It seemed strange to Tully that i Tuâ— Orat pro 〈…〉 forti 〈…〉 non 〈…〉 perind◠〈◊〉 〈…〉 non hâ—m aum conâ—â—â—ia legibus vindicâ—ntur a thing should 〈◊〉 be punished vnlessâ— it were effected as though saith he the issues of things onely were punished by lawes and not mens counsels and purposes of them And doe not humane lawes euery where take hold of attempts and practises of murther of treason and other villanies albeit they atteine not their intended end And if by the lawes of men such intents and purposes are thought woorthy of punishment would not or might not Iosephus thinke that much more they are so adiudged by the law of God But taking the words as they are yet that followeth not which Bellarmine reporteth that the inward motion is no sinne because Iosephus might thinke the same a sinne and yet not such a sinne as that a man therefore should be punished And so it seemeth the Rabbine conceiued therof whom M. Bishop further citeth out of Bellarmine who where Dauid saith k Psal 66.18 If I haue locked vnto or regarded iniquitie in my heart the Lord will not heare maketh this exposition and meaning of it l Bell vt supra ex R. Dauid Kimhi Non imputabit ad pâ—ccatum desiderium minstum si tantùm sit in corde The Lord will not impute an vniust desire for sinne if it be onely in the heart Where he doth not say that it is no sin if it be onely in the heart but onely that the Lord will not impute it or punish it for sinne For that it is sinne hee acknowledgeth in that hee calleth it vniust but hee acquitteth it from punishment so long as it is restrained and kept in But S. Pauls owne confession saith M. Bishop rightly vnderstood witnesseth the same And what is that for m Rom. 7.7 saith hee I had not knowen concupiscence to haue been sinne vnlesse the law had taught it to be sinne But what hindreth this but that as he knew by the law concupiscence to be sinne where it hath consent so by the law he knew it to be sin also though it haue no consent It is true that n Rom. 4.14 where no law is there is no transgression and without the law either written in our hearts or written in our bookes wee know nothing to bee sinne But what hindereth this confession I say but that as by the law he know the one so he knew the other also Doth not M. Bishop himselfe see how idlely he hath brought this in And in truth the Apostle spake those words of concupiscence it selfe by it selfe where it hath no consent For of the same concupiscence he saith soone after o vers 15. I allow not that which I doe for what I would that doe I not but what I hate that do I. All which coÌ„plaint being made in the person of p Aug. cont 2. epist Pelag. l. 1. c. 10. â—ont Iulian. l. 6. c. 11. the regenerate man who hateth the euill concupiscences of his owne heart and therefore giueth no consent vnto them doth plainly euict that of concupiscence without consent the Apostle saith that by the law hee knew it to bee sinne as hath beene q Of originall sinne sect 2. otherwhere declared more at large But howsoeuer M. Bishop will cauill concerning some learned Iewes the Romane Catechisme it selfe will iustifie that which M. Perkins saith that r Catech. Rom. part 3. de 9. 10 praecept Quodam naturaetumine intellectum est alienae vxoris potiundae cupiditatem prohiberi vetito adulterio nam si concupiscere liceret faâ— item esset potiri by light of nature it was vnderstood that in the forbidding of adulterie was forbidden the lust of hauing or enioying another mans wife because it should be lawfull to haue her if it should be lawfull to desire her Now if by light of nature it be discerned that in the forbidding of adulterie the will and desire of another mans wife bee also forbidden and therefore that the forbidding heereof belongeth to the seuenth Commandement then M. Perkins concludeth very rightly that the tenth Commandement goeth further to condemne euen the first motions of concupiscence and lust though they proceed not so farre as to gaine the will We may hold nothing heere superfluous God would not adde a latter commandement to forbid that which was already forbidden by a former 22. W. BISHOP Lastly saith M. PER. the words of the second Commandement and shew mercy vnto thousands on them that loue me and keepe my commandements ouer throweth all humane merits For if the reward be giuen of mercy to them that keepe the law it is not giuen for the merit of the worke done Answ Either simple was this mans iudgement sometimes or else most peruersly bent to deceiue the simple For God speaketh there neither of the reward that is rendred in heauen for good works neither of any reward at all that is rendred vnto the person himselfe that keepeth Gods commandements but of a superaboundant fauour that God of his bountie will shew vnto thousands of others for one mans sake that loueth him and keepeth his commandements therefore very peeuishly doth he draw hence any thing against merits R. ABBOT I haue before declared Gods mercy excludeth the merit of man that this promise of mercy maketh plainly against merit that it concerneth not the children onely but the fathers themselues and that if it bee mercy by which God bestoweth the things of this life which are the lesser then that it cannot be merit for which he bestoweth eternall life which is the greater See the seuenth section of the question of Merits before handled 23. W. BISHOP And to begin heere where M. PER. leaueth to shew how their new doctrine and inuentions doth crosse and make void the commandements of God First in that that he promiseth
needs confesse themselues to be farre from it which hold that to be impossible and with the principall part of true religion which consisteth in offering a true reall and externall sacrifice vnto God as in that question hath beene prooued they are at vtter defiance R. ABBOT You haue shewed your owne folly M. Bishop and dishonestly The Protestants teach faith hope and charitie aright but for the peruerting of any articles of faith on our side you haue shewed nothing We teach faith hope and charitie as God hath taught them not as your schoole hath newly framed them We teach faith wherby a 1. Io. 5.10.11 to beleeue the record that God witnesseth of his Sonne that God hath giuen vnto vs eternall life and this life is in his Sonne We teach hope whereby b Rom. 8.25 to wait with patience for the reueilling of that which God hath giuen vs. Wee teach charitie whereby to performe c Eph. 2.10 those good works which God hath prepared for vs as the way wherein to walke to the receiuing of it True reall and externall sacrifice for propitiation of sin we teach none but the sacrifice of the passion of Christ because by d Heb. 9.28 10.14 being once offered he hath taken away our sinnes and made perfect for euer them that are sanctified Therefore the sacrifice which he intendeth is no other but sacriledge and idolatrie and because God hath condemned it therefore are we iustly at defiance with it I may not omit how he heere bobbeth his Reader with as in that question hath beene prooued whereas of that question hee hath said iust neuer a word 25. W. BISHOP 2 Touching the second Commandement after our account as God is honoured by swearing in iustice iudgement and truth so he is also by vowes made vnto him of godly and religious duties which the Prophet Dauid signifieth when he saith vow yee Psal 75.13 and render your vowes vnto the Lord your God Heereupon many Catholikes haue and doe continually vow perpetuall pouertie chastirie and obedience the more fully and freely to serue God which holy vowes the Protestants disallow wholly neither doe they allow of any other vowes for ought I haue heard they doe therefore diminish the seruice of God and pare away a part of that which is reduced to the second Commandement R. ABBOT We diminish not the seruice of God because we teach al that the word of God hath taught and with mens deuises God will not be serued Spirituall vowes admitted Popish vowes reiected The true spirituall vowes whereby we consecrate our selues to God we duly approoue but Popish vowes we reiect and detest not onely as superstitious but also as they teach them with opinion of merit and purchase of remission of sinnes for themselues and others most wicked and damnable There needeth heereof nothing more to be said then hath beene before deliuered in the handling of that question 26. W. BISHOP 3. And whereas in the third wee are commanded to keepe holy the Sabaoth day which is principally performed by hearing attentiuely and deuoutly that diuine seruice which was instituted by Christ and deliuered by his Apostles which is the holy Masse they may not abide it but serue God after the inuention of their owne braines with a mingle-mangle of some old some new odly patched together R. ABBOT What Christ instituted appeareth in the Gospell what the Apostles practised and deliuered appeareth by S. Paul holding himselfe entirely to that a 1. Cor. 11.23 which he had receiued of the Lord. What doe wee finde there that doth in any sort resemble the ougly monster of the Popish Masse Gregory Bishop of Rome saith that b Greg. ep l. 7 Indict 2. ep 63. Mos Apostolorum fuit vt ad ipsam solummodo orationem dominicam oblationis hostiam consecrarent the Apostles were woont with the Lords praier only to consecrate the sacred host and shall we then thinke the Apostles to haue been the authours of those gew-gawes and fooleries those turnings and windings and crossings blessings and murmurations and eleuations that are vsed in the Masse Iulius Bishop of Rome the first condemned the dipping of the Sacrament of Christs body in the cup of the bloud of Christ c De cons dist 2. Cum omne Quòd pro complemento communionis intinctam tradunt Eucharistiam populis nec hoc prolatum ex Euangelio testimonium receperunt c. because no witnesse heereof is brought out of the Gospell If nothing be to be done in the celebration of the Sacrament but whereof there is witnesse in the Gospel and d Cyp. l. 2. ep 3. In sacrificio quod Christus est nonnisi Christu sequendus est none as Cyprian saith be to be followed therein but only Christ we haue iust cause to reiect the Masse which hath so little of that that Christ did and so much that he did not The Masse therefore is no sanctifying but a prophaning of the Lords Sabaoth but the true sanctifying of the Sabaoth is in our diuine seruice wherein Gods word is read and taught praier is made to God in the name of Iesus Christ and the Sacraments are administred accordingly as Christ himselfe hath left the same vnto vs. Wherein we haue reteined whatsoeuer the abomination of desolation had left remaining of the ancient seruice of the Church and whatsoeuer was wanting we haue supplied agreeably thereto and to the word of God and no man will account it odly patched together but such odde fellowes as M. Bishop is who are so farre in loue with the Romish harlot as that they like to eat no bread but what is moulded with her vncleane and filthie hands 27. W. BISHOP In the fourth we are commanded to obey our Princes as well as our parents and all other our Gouernours in all lawfull matters yet the Protestants hold that our Princes lawes doe not binde vs in conscience R. ABBOT What Is Saul also amongst the Prophets Princes lawes how they binde in conscience Is M. Bishop now come to speake of obedience to Princes by the problemes of whose religion no Prince shall be obeied if the Pope list by any pretense of religion to picke a quarrell against him nor any matters shall be lawfull for him to command but what must stand with the Popes law Doth he speake of obedience to Princes who because his Prince liketh not to follow his course hath before threatned him a Epist to the king sect 34. God knoweth what that forcible weapon of necessitie will driue men vnto at length When the Fox preacheth beware the Geese To the point I answer him briefely we teach that Princes lawes in things subiect to their command do binde the conscience to externall obedience though not to any spirituall opinion of the things wherein we doe obey And that we doe not denie this he himselfe b Preface to the Reader sect 3. before hath testified for
is sinne it being the vse and worke of our warfare a Heb. 12.4 to fight against sinne and the grace and power of God assisting vs whereby we ouercome sin He alleageth that S. Iames calleth it only temptation and then first sinne when it conceiueth and I answer him that S. Paul calleth it sinne before it be temptation b Rom. 7.8 sinne wrought all maner of concupiscence in me and therefore in temptation it is sinne See heereof the question of originall sinne handled at large before and of this place of S. Iames the sixt section 33. W. BISHOP Now to conclude this passage if you please to heare to what height of perfect obseruance of the Commandements the Euangelicall Preachers haue brought their followers in Germany vnto by teaching the Commandements to bee impossible and that onely faith iustifieth and that good works haue no reward in heauen and such like Iacobus Andreas a famous Lutheran shall enforme you De planetis who writeth thus That the whole world may see these men alienated from the Papacie and to put no confidence in works De Planetis therefore they doe no good worke at al. In stead of fasting they feast and are drunken day and night in lieu of Almes they oppresse and pill the poore they haue changed praying into cursing and blaspheming the name of God so prophanely that no Turkes nor Saracens commit the like impietie against Christ for humilitie there raigneth pride disdaine crueltie and riot in apparell c. and much more to the same purpose And that this truth may be confirmed by the testimony of two sound witnesses Musculus a man of no smal account among them thus reporteth of his brethren in the Lord. De prophetia Christi Such now adaies is the condition of the Lutherans that if any man list to behold a great number of Knaues robbers malitious persons coseners vsurers and such like deceiuers let him but enter into a Citie where the Gospel is taught and there he shall finde good store of them and a little after Surely it is true that among Heathens Iewes Turkes and other Infidels none can bee found more vnruly and that lesse esteeme of honesty and vertue than the Euangelicall brethren with whom all things passe currant and nothing almost is blamed except vertue For the diuell hath shaken off all their bands and turned them loose R. ABBOT And what M. Bishop are there not thinke you The vertuous conuersation of Papists as many knaues in Rome as in any city of the Lutherans What are there no Minions Courtisans there that serue for the vse of the Pope his Cardinals Did you not remember what was said of Rome by one of your owne Poets Viuere qui sanctè cupitis discedite Roma Depart from Rome all yee whose care is to liue holily Did you not consider that it was easie for vs to retort your words to your selues and to say If you please to heare what good effects the Popish doctrine of iustification by works doth bring foorth looke to the Iesuits Catechisme to Watsons Quodlibets and to the rest of those bookes of the same argument written by Popish Priests concerning the Iesuits who are the Puritane-Papists and the verie quintessence of their religion and yet are there described to be no other but Epicures Atheists fornicatours Sodomites coseners traitours proud malitious contentious couetous and what not Now wee know that the Iesuites will say that you are as leaud and naught as you haue described them to be Like will to like and get you both together there is no such goodnesse in either of you as that you should take vpon you to question our goodnesse And if I should rippe vp this matter of your vertues to the full I should but cause a lothsome and filthie stinke troublesome both to my selfe and to the Reader Therefore I rest my selfe with that answer that I haue a Sect. 15. and of satisfaction sect 19. before giuen vpon the like occasion Onely I must note it for one of M. Bishops Sycophants tricks that hee reckoneth it amongst our doctrines that good works haue no reward in heauen 34. W. BISHOP Hauing done with the Creed and ten Commandements we must now come to our Lords praier Master PER. beginneth with it thus The Lords Praier is a most absolute forme of praier now in this wee are taught to direct our praiers to God alone Our father c. and that onely in the name and mediation of Christ for God is our father onely by Christ therefore to vse any mediation of Saints is needlesse Ans We allow our Lords praier to be a most perfect forme of praier yet hold that many other sort of praiers may be made vnto God very acceptably as sundry other praiers vsed by Christ and set downe in the Gospell doe teach vs and therefore to argue that because one praier of Christs making is directed to God that no other may bee made to any Saint is very childish Wee gather praier to Saints out of S. Pauls requesting the Romans and Corinthians and others to pray for him and out of the mediation of the woman of Cananea to Christ for her daughter and the Disciples speaking to Christ for her with such like both out of the old and new Testament For if it had been either needlesse or bootlesse to haue praied vnto God any otherwise than in the name and by the mediation of Christ then S. Paul would not haue requested the helpe of mortall mens praiers to God for him and if poore sinners praiers may helpe vs much more may the intercession of the glorious Saints do who are in far greater fauor with God See the question of intercession of Saints Againe if that only forme of praier were to be vsed neither were it lawfull to pray to Christ himselfe neither could it bee prooued thereby that we should praie in Christs name For there is no expresse mention of Christs name neither any petition for Christs sake For God may bee truely called our Father in that he immediately createth and giueth vs our soules which is more than our bodies that we receiue from our carnall fathers R. ABBOT If the Lords praier be a most perfect forme of praier The Lords praier excludeth praier to Saints as M. Bishop alloweth it to bee then are we perfectly thereby directed both to whom and for what we are to praie It cannot bee called a most perfect forme of praier wherein there is any want of either of these things To adde any thing to that that is perfect is to denie the perfection of it and to take away any thing from it is to make it maimed and vnperfect Seeing then by the most perfect forme of praier we are instructed to pray no otherwise but to God onely it followeth necessarily that praier to Saints is vnlawfull because it is exorbitant from that most perfect forme M. Bishops exception heereto is
b Bernard in Cant. ser 23. Omne quod mihi ipse non imputaredecreuerit sic est quasi non fuerit it is as if it neuer had been as Bernard saith there can no satisfaction be required for it What a franticke dreame it is whereby they haue made praier for forgiuenesse of sinnes to be a satisfaction for sinne and that S. Austins words make nothing for their purpose it hath beene c Of satisfaction sect 6. 15. before sufficiently declared and is needlesse here to be repeated 37. W. BISHOP Now to the second downfall Merits are heere also ouerthrown For we acknowledge our selues debters and wee dailie increase our debts now it is madnesse to think that they who daily increase their debts can deserue or purchase any good of the creditors in a word this must bee thought vpon c. And good reason too First then I answer that veniall sins and small debts that iust mendaily incur doe not hinder the daily merit of their other good workes As aseruant hired by the day by committing some small fault doth not thereby lose his daies wages againe though he should commit such a fault that might make him vnworthy of his daies hire yet if his Master did forgiue him that fault his wages were notwithstanding due to him and so the asking pardon for our sinnes doth not ouerthrow but rather establish and fortifie our merits R. ABBOT Veniall sinnes Confession of sinnes is the demall of merit small debts small faults saith M Bishop A vaine man that knoweth neither God nor himselfe and therefore hath so small conceit of the sinnes that he daily committeth agâ—inst God No doubt but hee could plead the matter in Adams behalfe that God did hâ—m wrong to censure him so seuerely for so small a fault What it was but the eating of an apple or a figge and he might by his merits soone haue made amends for it and would God for so light a trespasse adiudge him to death yea and all his posteritie for his sake Well God make him wise to know with whom he hath to doe and then hee will see that his sinallest faults are great enough to blow vp all his merits yea and that in his best merits there is enough to condemne him if God should enter into iudgement with him And let me aske him out of his own wise sawes that he hath here set downe if a hired seruant of his by breach of conenants from day to day haue voided the condition of his wages and yet he be in the end content to remit all and to yeeld him his conditioned hire will he thinke it well that his seruant shall say that he oweth him no thanks because he hath nothing but what he hath merited and deserued Surely M. Bishop would expect that his good will and bountie should bee acknowledged in this case and would thinke it a wrong to be vpbraided with his seruants merit But though his head serue him not to conceiue this yet do thou remember gentle Reader that one forfeiture of a mans estate putteth him wholly vnder the mercie of his Lord and whatsoeuer he can plead for himselfe otherwise it serueth not the turne but he standeth at the courtesie of him whom he hath offended And what shall we say then for our selues whose life is a continuall forfaiture of our estate with God by our trespassing daily and hourely against him Shall we thinke we haue merits to plead shall we not acknowledge and confesse that wee stand meerely and wholly at the deuotion of his mercy And if remitting aliour trespasse hee vouchsafe to remember our seruice otherwise and to reward it shall we say that hee giueth vs but our own desert Do we not see our good deeds whatsoeuer they be to be so drowned and ouerwhelmed with our sinnes as that it is Gods meere mercy that any mention is made of them But when furthermore our good deeds haue in themselues such spots and staines of sinne as doe giue God iust cause to reiect them as hath beene a Of iustification sect 44. c before declared shall wee be so drunke with our owne fancies as that wee will still dreame of merit towards God These things need not to bee strongly vrged because they pretaile mightily in the consciences of all that are not of benummed and dead hearts and more hath beene answered heereof before than that M. Bishop should thinke fit to trouble vs any more with these blinde reasons Hee neuer ceaseth to oppose though when he is answered hee neuer knoweth what to reply 38. W. BISHOP The third opinion imagined to be confuted by this petition is that temporall punishment may bee retained after the crime it selfe and the eternall is remitted but this cannot stand saith he For wee owe to God obedience and for the defect of this paiment wee owe to God the forfeiture of punishment Sinne then is called our debt in respect of the punishment And therefore when we pray for pardon of our sinnes we require not onely the fault to be pardoned but the whole punishment and when debt is pardoned it is absurd to thinke that the least paiment should remaine Answ Heere is a most absurd collection For when we in our Lords praier craue pardon of our debts wee confesse that we are in his debt and that there is paiment of punishment yet due vnto vs the remission whereof we then require now this praier is made by the best men after their conuersion as he confesseth who standing in Gods fauour and therefore free from eternall punishment doe notwithstanding craue pardon and release of some punishment by M. PER. owne interpretation Whereupon it followeth most euidently out of this petition that after eternall punishment is forgiuen vnto the iust there is some other punishment remaining of which they craue pardon and consequently this opinion of ours is by this very petition and M. PER. owne exposition of it much strengthned and confirmed and nothing at all weakened R. ABBOT If M. Temporall punishmeÌ„t remitted in forgiuenesse of sinnes Bishop may be the expounder of M. Perkins exposition we doubt not but he will make some good matter of it M. Perkins meaning is plaine enough and so are his words that after our first conuerting turning vnto God we haue stil cause from day to day to humble our selues before God and to begge of him remission both of temporall and eternall punishments which by our sinnes from day to day wee runne into It followeth not of any thing that Master Perkins saith that the eternall punishment being alreadie forgiuen wee aske heere the forgiuenesse of some temporall punishment but that as our sinnes are daily so wee aske forgiuenesse daily both of the one and of the other a Aug. de vera falsa paenit cap. 5. Quia quotidiana est effensio oportâ—t vt sit quotidiana etiam remissio Because the offence is euery day saith S. Austin therefore wee
expected or hoped for nor they cannot according to their owne rules from their heart make the said petitions being out of all hope to obtaine them R. ABBOT There is a notable picture of the regenerate man in the holy woman Rebecca when a Gen. 25 22.23 the children stroue within her and the Lord said vnto her Two nations are in thy wombe and two maner of people shall be diuided out of thy bowels and the one people shall be mightier than the other and the elder shall serue the yonger For so are there in the faithfull the old and the new man the flesh and the spirit somewhat whereby they are the children of God and somewhat wherby they are still the children of this world The originall leprosie still cleaueth vnto vs but it is begun to be clensed and the strength of it is abated already Sinne still possesseth and dwelleth in our members but we do not say as M. Bishop falsly pretendeth that it hath the commanding of them b Aug. de peecat mer. remiss l. 2. c. 7. Nunc ei similes esse tam coepimus per primitias spiritus adhuc dissimiles sumus per reliquias vetustatis proinde in quantū similes in tantum regenerante spiritu filij dei in quātum autem dissimiles in tantum si ij carnis seculi Illinc ergò peccare non possumus hinc verò si dixerimus quia peccatum non habemus nosi so◠decipimus c. We are now like vnto God saith S. Austin by hauing the first fruits of the spirit and we are still vnlike vnto him by the remnants of our old state So far therefore as we are like him so far are we by the spirit of regeneration the sonnes of God and so far as we are vnlike him so far are we the children of the flesh and of the world On the one side therefore we cannot sinne but on the other side if we say that we haue no sinne we deceiue our selues and there is no truth in vs. Now then semblably wee answer M. Bishop that according to that we are renued and by the spirit of God are become the sonnes of God the name of God is sanctified in vs his kingdome is begun in vs and we doe his will in earth with ready will as it is done in heauen But by the remainder of the corruption of flesh and of the old man there is a let that Gods name is not perfectly sanctified in vs his kingdome taketh not full place in vs neither doe we his will in such measure as we ought to doe Yet we pray that the old man the body of sinne may more and more be destroied that the worke of Gods kingdome may more and more be fulfilled in vs that we may more and more keep his commandements and do his will not only with ready will but without all let and hinderance fully and perfectly as they in heauen doe Herein we pray that we may increase from day to day and we beleeue that God heareth vs and granteth our request and will goe forward with his good worke till he bring vs in heauen to the perfection of it so far are the Protestants from being out of hope of the obtaining of these three first petitions as M. Bishop fondly dreameth 44. W. BISHOP In the fourth we aske aswell to be made partakers of Christs blessed body in the Sacrament which is the food of our souls as for our daily corporall sustenance For so do the ancient fathers expound that petition as namely S. Cyprian in oratione Dominica S. Hiero. in 6. Matt. S. Amb. li. 5. de Sacra c. 4. where he hath these memorable words of the blessed Sacrament that before the words of Christ it was bread but after it is the body of Christ Why then saith hee is it called heere bread he answereth that it is called bread not simply but supersubstantiall bread For so doth the Greeke word Epióusion signifie as well as daily it is saith he not such bread as passeth into our body but it is the bread of eternall life that vpholdeth the substance of our soules Now you may be well assured that Protestants who will not beleeue any such bodily presence doe not pray to God to giue it them R. ABBOT Wee wot well that sundry of the ancient Fathers haue expounded this petition Reall presence fondly collected out of the Lords praier not onely literally of corporall foode but also mystically of the participation of the blessed Sacrament wherin Christ is spiritually offered and giuen vnto vs to be vnto vs the bread of euerlasting life Of this we will not contend with the fathers onely we would know of M. Bishop if this daily bread bee vnderstood of the Sacrament how is it that the people with them are not called and vrged to the daily participation of the Sacrament that daily they may be partakers of this bread accordingly as they are taught to pray Or if without the receiuing of the Sacrament a man may be partaker of the spirituall food of the body and bloud of Christ as by their construction of this petition compared with their practise it may seem they do confesse then they must acknowledge that there is no necessitie of their reall presence to make vs partakers of the body and bloud of Christ Which although I do not see how M. Bishop should well and hansomly auoid yet he thought good here to put in one place for the same reall presence of Christs bodie his choise notwithstanding being so smal as that he hath brought vs one that saieth nothing for him yea in very truth saith altogether against him The words of Ambrose are these a Ambr. de Sacram l. 5. cap. 4. Ante verba Christi quod offertur panis est vbi Christi verba deprompta suerint iam non panis dicitur sed corpus appellatur Before the words of Christ that which is offered is bread but when the words of Christ are vttered it is not now termed bread but it is called the body M. Bishop falsifieth the words but taking them as they are what doth hee finde in them for assertion of the reall presence Is it anie proofe of reall presence to say that the Sacrament is called the body of Christ Now as it is called the body of Christ so is it also called supersubstantiall bread not for that that it is really to the mouth belly but for that that it signifieth and presenteth to our faith And this doth Ambrose himselfe immediately declare when hee addeth b Ibid. Non iste panis est qui vadit in corpus sed ille panis vitae eternae qui anima nostrae substantiam fulcit for it is not this bread which passeth into the body but that bread of eternall life that vpholdeth the substance of our soule Where when he deuideth the bread of eternall life from that which goeth into the bodie hee plainly sheweth that
in it euen as the badde may not abide it R. ABBOT The Protestants doe so well indure to heare the words of Gods spirit as that they haue made speciall choise therof as the principall weapon wherewith to fight against the superstitions and abominations of the Papists Whose absurd dotage as many other waies so in their Aue-Marie most notably appeareth in that of a salutation to the virgin Marie being present they haue made an inuocation of her being absent and thinke it a matter of great merit and deuotion to vse it like a charme by saying it ouer thus or thus many times at once which the Angell spake but once M. Bishop allegeth for it the old Catechismes but he neither telleth vs what Catechismes he meaneth nor how old they are which if he had we should easily haue descried the vanity of his speech For if by old Catechismes he meane as he should the Catechismes of the ancient fathers and primitiue Church he is therein found a liar because in those Catechismes there is nothing of it But if by old Catechisms he meane any that haue beene of latter times vnder the darknesse of Popery he abuseth his Reader who in case of Religion looketh for satisfaction euen from the first age because what was not then a part of religion can be no part of religion now the truth of Christ being one and the same from the beginning and for euer The words he saith are the words of the holy ghost and so say we but we say that the words of the holy ghost may be abused as here they are against the purpose and meaning of the holy Ghost They are the words of the holy Ghost which Christ vsed to the Apostles a Luk. 24.25 Fooles and slow of heart to beleeue all that the Prophets haue spoken and will M. Bishop therfore say that we may vse those words for inuocation of the Apostles He allegeth againe that it is prophecied that all generations should call the virgin Mary blessed and we deny it not but we may call her blessed in the meditations of our own hearts and in speaking of her to them that heare vs though we speake not idlely as to her that heareth vs not Be it that the words were composed by the Archangell penned by the Euangelists commended to the reading of all good Christians as other words of scriptures are be it that the sense of them is most comfortable vnto vs yet what is all this to prooue that these words are to bee vsed for a deuotion and seruice to the virgin Mary specially in such sort as Popery hath vsed them in a strange and vnknowen tongue which could yeeld no comfort of the sense nor remembrance thereby of the incarnation of Christ nor perfourmance of thanksgiuing or congratulation towards God That purest antiquity which he allegeth is but corrupt nouelty and leud forgery The Liturgies of Basill and Chrysostome are very falsly so termed and yet in Basils Liturgie there is no mention of the Aue-Mary Of Chrysostomes Liturgie there are so many different copies published one by Leo Tuscus another by Erasmus another by Pelargus who also testifieth that hee hath seen a fourth as that if Chrysostome did leaue any yet no man is able to say of any of them that this is it The sermon of Athanasius in Euangel de Deipara is by b Nann epist nuncupatoria praefixa oper Athanasij In tertiam classem relegaui omnes supposititios libros quos Athanasij non puto Nannius their own translatour put amongst the ranke of bastards and counterfets The name of Deipara was not so famous in the time of Athanasius as to be prefixed in the title of a sermon neither could it haue wanted memorable testimony in the councell of Ephesus if it had been then knowen for his Ephrems works as c Hieron in Catalog script ecclesiast Multa syro sermone composuit Hierome saith were written in the Syrian tongue If M. Bishop can shew them in the same tongue yea or ancientlie translated into the Greeketongue we can giue the better credit that they are his indeed Otherwise we know that they haue been in hucksters handling neither can we but be suspicious of that iugling and foisting which we finde to haue been so vsuall and common with them And if M. Bishop will haue vs to take it for Ephrems worke let him tell vs who is the translatour of it Gerardus Vossius who translated and published the works of Ephrem by the warrant of Pope Sixtus the fift whereas he putteth his name to so many as hee translated putteth no name to the Sermon which M. Bishop citeth shewing thereby that it is not in Greeke and therefore importing it to be a counterfeit He saith that these can with no more reason be denied to be theirs then the rest of their works But I answer him that though there were no other reason yet it is sufficient reason for vs to bee suspicious of these because in them some things are set downe whereof in the rest of their vndoubted workes and in the infinite volumnes of antiquitie which are approoued and acknowledged there is no token to be found As for Bernand he liued in latter times of great apostasie and corruption In that truth which he reteined he is a good witnesse for vs against them but hee can be no witnesse for them to make good those corruptions which hee drew from the time wherein he liued And yet neither is his testimonie cited out of any of his owne works but from another I know not whom and therefore is the lesse to be regarded to say nothing that the speech is ridiculous and fond for why should wee imagine that the Angels triumph and the heauens congratulate that the earth leapeth for ioy and hell trembleth at the deuout saying of the Aue-Mary more then when wee say deuoutly Our Father which art in heauen c Surely good Christians will reiect such absurd dotages and idle dreames though with bad Christians al is fish that commeth to net and what custome offereth they are readie to entertaine neuer regarding to consult with the word of Christ for warrant of that they doe 47. W. BISHOP Now let vs come to the last part of the Catechisme which is of the Sacraments where M. PER. doth briefly repeat his arguments vsed before against the reall presence I might therefore send the Reader vnto the first Chapter of this booke for the answer but because the matter is of great importance I will heere againe giue them a short answer First saith hee the reall presence is ouerthrowne out of these words hee tooke bread and brake it ergo that which Christ tooke was not his bodie c. A simple ouerthrow Christ indeed tooke and brake bread but presently after blessing it made it his body by these words this is my bodie R. ABBOT I might send the Reader saith M. Bishop vnto the first chapter of this booke for the
Tertullian confesseth there that Catholikes held themselues bound to fast the Lent and on Wednesdaies and Fridaies whereas in Tertullian there is no such matter and hee contrariwise plainely saith of them b Tertul. de ieiun Certè in Euangelio illos dies ieiunijs determinatos putant in quibus ablatus est sponsus hos esse iam solos legitimos ieiuniorum Christianorum that in the Gospell they thought those daies determined for fasting wherein the Bridegroome was taken away which were good Friday and Easter euen and that these onely were the daies by law appointed for Christian fasts Such iugling tricks are not daintie with him and thou shalt see store enough of them when heereafter we shall come to examine him more at large 32. Now heere to obserue the same course that he hath done it shall not be amisse before I end with him to shew by one or two places with what conscience he carieth himselfe in the vsage of holy Scripture And first I note his prodigious impudencie in the defense of that damnable praier which heeretofore they haue vsed as touching Thomas Becket who though by vndue course yet died no other but a rebell and traitour to his Prince e Breuiar in translat S. Thom. Cantuariens Tu per Thomae sanguinem quem pro te impendit Fac nos Christe scandere quò Thomas ascendit By the bloud of Thomas which for thee he did spend Make vs O Christ to climbe whither Thomas did ascend This praier the masters of the Church of Rome were ashamed of and in the reforming of their Portesses they haue put it out it being one of the great infamies of their church that euer it came in But this iolly gamester resoluing to play at all will haue vs thinke that they were fooles and did more than they need to doe because this praier may be warranted d Reproofe pag. 109. 110. by example of the like recorded in the old Testament Lord remember Dauid and all his mildnesse for why may we not saith he as well beseech God to remember the constant fortitude of S. Thomas as they did the mildnesse of Dauid he should say the affliction or trouble of Dauid But did he not know that sundry great authours both old and new and namely e Leo in Natiuit dom ser 4. Hinc Dauid promissionem Dei prophetico spiritu canit dicens Iurauit dominus Dauid non frustrabitur c. Leo Bishop of Rome haue taken that Psalme to haue beene written by Dauid himselfe and doe thereby exclude that blasphemous construction of his And if it were not so will he make it all one for the people to beseech God to remember Dauids trouble and for vs to pray by the bloud of Thomas to be brought to heauen The people intreat God to remember the affliction of minde and care that Dauid had for the building of the Temple vpon which God tooke occasion to make promise to him of his sonne to sit vpon his throne by whom that should be done To this care of Dauid and to the promise thereupon made they desire God in the beginning of Solomons reigne to giue effect Chrysostome maketh it the praier of Solomon himselfe and giueth the effect therof thus f Chrysost in Psal 131. Quoniam genus ab co duxi quâ—mam cum tibi acceptum fuisset cius studium diligentia dixisti te eius genu regnuÌ„ erecâ—urum propterea haec pacta conuenta nunc a te exigimus Because I am borne of him and for that when his studie and diligence was acceptable to thee thou saiedst that thou wouldest raise vp his stocke and kingdome therefore we now desire of thee the things that thou hast couenanted and promised Now this being so plaine and cleere a meaning of that place what may we thinke of him that would thus impiously wrest it to the maintenance of a horrible blasphemie which farre hath it beene from any ancient Christian writer to imagine to be meant either there or any otherwhere 33. Againe g Answer to the epistle sect 25. the Apostle say I in expresse termes affirmeth the imputation of righteousnesse without works The words are plaine h Rom. 4.6 Dauid declareth the blessednesse of that man to whom the Lord imputeth righteousnesse without works Now what doth he say heereto Forsooth i Reproofe pag. 135. touching imputation of righteousnesse the Apostle speaketh not like a Protestant of the outward imputation of Christs iustice vnto vs but of inherent iustice to wit of faith which worketh by charitie which are qualities powred into our hearts by the holy Ghost so that saith he there is onely a bare sound of words for the Protestants the true substance of the text making wholly for the Catholikes Thus he confesseth that the words sound for vs and may we be sure that the Apostle hath any other meaning than hee soundeth by the words Forsooth M. Bishop telleth vs so and we must so beleeue it though his exposition be a meere contradiction to the words of the Apostle Inherent righteousnesse is the righteousnesse of works The Apostle speaketh of imputation of righteousnesse without works And yet we must thinke that hee speaketh of imputing inherent righteousnesse Surely the very phrase of imputing inherent iustice is in the Apostles drift a thing very absurd for k Origen in Rom. cap. 4. Quid videbitur gratiae iusto reputari iustitiam ad iustitiam what grace or fauour should it seeme to be saith Origen that to a iust man his iustice should be reputed for iustice but to say that by the imputing of righteousnesse without works is meant the imputing of inherent iustice that is the imputing of the righteousnesse of works it is a construction so frantike so senslesse so shamelesse as that we haue good cause to feare that the authour of it hath desperately resolued himselfe rather to say any thing than to confesse the truth The thing is plaine by the words in which the Apostle saith that Dauid declareth the blessednesse of that man to whom the Lord imputeth righteousnesse without works namely l Psal 32.1 Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen and whose sinnes are couered blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne Whereby it is manifest that not the imputing of inherent iustice but the forgiuenesse of sinnes by faith in Christ is the imputing of righteousnesse without works Man hauing no works whereby to appeare iust in the sight of God yet by forgiuenesse of sinnes is reputed iust because m August Retract li. 1. c. 19. Omnia mandata facta reputantur quando quicquid non fit ignoscitur all the commandements of God are reputed as done when that is pardoned which is not done Now what impudency is this man grown to that dareth thus apparently delude abuse the world Surely these shifts of his are such so wilfull so wretched as that they giue all