A disproofe of D. Abbots counterproofe against D. Bishops reproofe of the defence of M. Perkins reformed Catholike. The first part. wherin the now Roman church is maintained to be true ancient catholike church, and is cleered from the vniust imputation of Donatisme. where is also briefly handled, whether euery Christian can be saued in his owne religion. By W. B.P. and D. in diuinity

THE FOVRTH Paragraffe.

w. B.

NOw to M. Abbots second so∣phistication. The Roman church by your rule is the head, and all other churches are members to it: but the Catholike comprehendeth all. Ergo, to say the Roman is the Catholike church, is to say, the head is the whole body.

To which I saye first, as I said to the former argument, that it is missshapen, and by the like it maie bee proued, that their English church is not the Catholike church, which M. Abbot is content to grant. Se••ondly I say, that it is a fault in arguing when a word is v∣sed Metaphorically, to take hold vpon anie other property of the Metaphore, besides that wherin the resemblance lieth. I gaue for e∣xample, that our blessed Saviour is called a Lion for his invincible fortitude. Now if anie man would out of that metaphore ar∣gue, that our Saviour had foure feete, bicau∣se a Lion hath so, he should be not only ridi∣culous, but also blasphemous. In like manner though the church of Rome be by vs called the head church, bicause of her superiority:

Yet doth it not follow, that anie other pro∣perties belonging to a head, be of necessity at∣tributed to the same church. And to our pre∣sent purpose, though a head cannot be called by the name of the whole, it being but one part of the whole, called dissimilare, that con∣sisteth of diuers parts, one vnlike to the other; yet might the church of Rome, not withstan∣ding that it is the head, be called by the name of the whole Catholike church. For that the Catholike church is, totum similare, a whole consisting of parts, that bee all a like as the ai∣re is: every part wherof is called by the name of the whole, as euery part of the aire, is called the aire, euery part of water, is called water: so every particular church, that is part of the Ca∣tholike church, may truly be called the Ca∣tholike church: though it be not the whole Catholike church. To which M. Abbot after much idle speech mingled with scornfull sco∣ffing, answereth nothing els in effect, but that hee had said before, these be his wordes.

R. AB.

TAke a head in what sence you will, it must needs bee a distinct part from the rest of the body, and then repeats his goodly argument in the∣se tearmes. The church of Rome is by their le∣arning the head of all other churches, and all other churches are as the members and body of this head. But the Catholike church com∣prehendeth all both head and body. To say

then that the Roman church is the Catholike church is all one, as if a man should say, the head is the whole bodie. After which he addeth, who can speake more cleerly then I haue do∣ne? where if you wilbe his favorable and fast frind, you must applaud him and say, that no man is able to do better, nor to set it out more cleerly then hee hath done. A high conceit of his owne writing, vt∣tered with vanity enough. Now of mee his poore Antagonist hee saith, who can answere more ab∣surdly then he hath done? I haue put him to his trumps I warrant him &c: to omit much such trumpery which followeth, without any forti∣fication of reason, or temper of modestie.

W. B.

I am so farr of from being troubled with his trumpes, which are nothing els indeed then very frumpes (besids that one old halting spurgald Iade of an argument so confusedly set downe by him, even there where hee cra∣kes most of cleernes) that I will do that for him, which hee blinded with self loue imagi∣ned impossible for any man to do, to wit; I will put downe his argument more cleerly and formerly, then he hath done himself, as every scholler that can Iudge of the forme of an argument may easily perceaue, in this man∣ner. No part can be the whole, but the church of Rome is but a part (to wit the head of the church) Ergo it cannot be the whole. This his so often re∣peated argument, without any new fortifica∣tiō,

needs no other refutatiō, than that which hath been once or twice giuen before.

Thus at length we come to the end of M. Abbots first chapter, which was diuided in∣to fower sections or parts; and haue by the helpe of Gods good grace both defended and proued that supreme commanding power of Iurisdiction, which consisteth in the chief go∣vernment of Christs church vpon earth, to haue been by our blessed Saviour first establis∣hed and placed vpon the person of S. Peter Prince of the Apostles; that there should be perfect vnity in his Ecclesiasticall kingdome: then that the same might endure not for tear∣me of S. Peters life only, but alwaies continue vnto the worlds end, He ordained that S. Pe∣ters successors the Bishops of Rome should enioy the same soveraigne authority, ouer the whole Catholike church vntill the worlds end. which I made good specially by the con∣fession and acknowledgment of the greatest Patriarks, most learned and best approued Prelats of the East churches; because the better learned Protestants do after a manner grant vnto the Bishop and pope of Rome,* 1.1 as patri∣arch of the west, supreme authoritie and Iu∣risdiction ouer all the west churches. Moreo∣uer, because the protestants do all and some obiect that fact of the African Bishops, whe∣rin they seemed to deny appeales of all vnder the degree of Bishops vnto the court of Rome, as an argument of great moment against the said supreme commanding power of the sea

of Rome, I haue produced testimonies of the most ancient, and best learned Bishops and Doctors of the African church, averring the Iurisdiction of the church of Rome ouer themselues and their countrie. So that there can remaine no scruple in the vpright and iu∣dicious Readers vnderstanding, but that the Bishop of Romes supremacy hath been ac∣knowledged, witnessed and obeyed all the world ouer, even in the pure times of most florishing Christianity. And consequently, that all they who desire to bee sound and per∣fect Catholiks, must imbrace and professe the faith and religion of the same Roman church, or els be content to bee reckened in the rew of hereticall or schismaticall Congregations. And as in this life they willingly take part with them in their schisme and errors: so they may assure themselues (vnles God giue them grace to repent) to bee against their wils, sor∣ted with them in the finall separation at the last day, and to haue their vnlucky lott with them in the lake euer burning with fire and brimstone. from which our most mercifull Lord and sweet Saviour Christ Iesus deliuer all them that professe his truth and holy na∣me. Amen.

M. Richard field Doctour of diuinity in his fift book of the church printed at london 1610. of the bishop and church of Rome hath these positions.

FIrst in the 32. chapter: that the Bishop of Rome doth succeed S. Peter in the Bis∣hoprique of the City, and in the honour of being one of the prime Bishops of the world.

Secondly in the 34. chapter: that the church of Rome was head of all churches, that is first in order and honour among them, but not in absolute supreme commaunding power.

3 That the same church was in more speciall sort head of such churches as were within the Patriarchship of Rome, as was all the west church.

To which effect his maiesty of England (our soueraigne lord) writeth to all Christian Monarches:* 2.1 If there were yet question a∣mong the Patriarches for the first place, I would with all my hart giue my consent that the Bishop of Rome should haue the first seat. I being a westerne king would go for the patriarch of the west.

4 That the Bishop of Rome had the care of all churches, not as absolute supreme com∣maunder, but as most honorable among the Bishops: who were first to be sought

vnto in matters requiring a common deli∣beration, and from whom all things gene∣rally concerning the state of the whole church were either to take beginning, or at the least to seek confirmation, before they were generally imposed and prescri∣bed.

The same Doctour in his preface to the reader teacheth, that to compose variances ri∣sing between Patriarches and their Bishops, or among themselues, he that was in order and honour before the rest might lawfully in∣terpose himself, and in his synode iudg of such differences. And in such cases as could not be so ended, or that concerned the faith, and the state of the whole vniuersall church, there remained the iudgment and resolution of a generall councell, wherin the Bis∣hop of the first sea (that is the Bishop of Rome) was to sitt as President and modera∣tour.

Obserue how easily that which we teach of popes the supremacy may be gathered out of these principles. for if it appertaine vnto the Bishop of Rome as prime Patriarch, to com∣pose the differences rising betwixt other Pa∣triarches and their Bishops; if he must be principally sought vnto for finall resolu∣tions in matter of faith; if care of all chur∣ches belong to him and from him all thin∣ges generally concerning the state of the whole church, were either to take begin∣ning

or els to seek confirmation: let any vn∣derstanding man exercised in gouernment tell me, how Patriarches and Bishops may be conuented to appeare without comma∣unding authority; and how without com∣pelling power, the popes finall determinations would be of all parties obeied.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Of this read more in the no∣te at the end of this chapter.
• * 2.1

  Pag 46.