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 SECOND SECTION of the second chapter.

W. B.

THE second branch of M. Ab∣bots comparison between the Roman church and the Dona∣tists, is as faulty as the first. Thus he proposeth it. The Do∣natists would haue the church to be called Catholike, not by reason of the communion therof throughout the whole world, but for the per∣fection of doctrine and Sacraments, which they fal∣sly chalenged to thēselues. The same perfection doth the church of Rome arrogate to her self. This hal∣teth on both sides, as the former did: for the Donatists (as S. Austin M. Abbots Authour relateth) did not call their church Catholike for perfection of doctrine or Sacraments, as M. Abbot fableth: but for the fulnes of Sacra∣ments and for observation of all gods com∣mandements: they were not so dull and bloc∣kish (as S. Austin noteth) to argue an vniuer∣sality out of perfection, which is seldome vni∣uersall, but aymed alwaies at some kind of vniuersality. On the other side there is no Ro∣mā Catholike that would haue the church be

called Catholike, rather for her perfection in doctrine and Sacraments, then for her com∣munion over all the world.

R. ABBOT. §. 2.

IT is true, that S. Austin chalenged vnicentius the Donatist for interpreting the word Catholike, not for the communion of the whole church, but for the obseruation of all Gods cōmaundements, or for the fulnes of Sacraments. yet I did not amisse to put perfection for fulnes; because they do both signifie the same thing. for is not fulnes of Sacraments, the sa∣me with perfection of Sacraments? and observation of all gods commaundements, with perfection of observing them? like as perfection of doctrine is to teach all truth. Besids Gaudentius a Dona∣tist doth tell vs, that by Catholike they vnder∣stood perfect, when he said: the word Catho∣like importeth, that which is full in Sacra∣ments, which is perfect, and which is vnspotted. To the second member I say, that Bristow a great Romanist, granteth the church to bee called Catholike, bicause she is vniuersally perfect, halteth in nothing, and is spred ouer all the world: and Austin himself in his youn∣ger daies did so expound the same word, though in his further experience and Iudgment, hee abhorred from it, and left it wholy to the Do∣natists. So did Ciril of Ierusalem and also Pa∣cianus. wherfore M. Bishop sheweth himself scarce wise in denyall of it,

W. B.

I haue M. Abbot guilty and confessing that hee changed his Authors words, yet never without one idle excuse or other; he hath (for¦sooth) given another word, but which signi∣fieth the same in effect. If the words had been of the same signification, yet it had been plainer dealing to haue kept the authors ow∣ne words; but if there be great diuersity bet∣weene them, then there was litle shew of ho∣nest dealing to shift from the one to the other. who but M. Abbot will say, that perfection of Sacraments, and fulnes of Sacraments bee all one? where fulnes is referred to the com∣pleat number of Sacraments: and perfection may bee attributed to the right vse of them, or to the vertue and efficacy of them. For they bee two distinct controversies betweene the Protestants and vs. The one, how many sa∣craments there bee; the other, of what perfe∣ction and efficacy they are. That is, whether they conferre grace or no. wherfore it was not well done to thrust in perfection for fulnes, there being such ods betwene the nature and vse of those two words. Againe, betwene the obseruation of all Gods cōmaundements, and perfection, there is a notable difference in the way of our religion; for it appertains to all the faithfull to obserue all Gods commaunde∣ments; but the counsels of perfection are left to the free choice of them, whose harts it shall

please God to dispose that way. wherfore if M. Abbot had had an honest good meaning he would not haue so changed his authors words, but hee more like a Ioly wise politike protestant, that beleeveth neither the full number of the sacraments, nor thinketh it possible to keepe all Gods cōmaundements, flieth from those tearms of fulnes of sacra∣mentes and obseruation of all the cōmaunde∣ments as frō checks and reproues of their new belief; and choppeth in perfection of doctrine bicause he can therin better wrangle. And al∣beit Gaudentius did ioyne perfect and vnspot∣ted with fulnes; yet it followeth not therof, that he tooke those words for all one; but ra∣ther ioyned together many words of diuers significations, to explicate more fully the for∣ce of the word (Catholike.)

Now to the second member albeit Doctor Bristow (a man of singuler vertue and lear∣ning) and some others haue taught the word (Catholike) to comprehend within the latitu∣de of his signification that which is vniuersal∣ly perfect, and halteth in nothing; yet no one of them doth exclude the more vsuall and bet∣ter allowed signification of the same, which is to designe the communion and society of the whole world. Nay Doctor Bristow in the ve∣ry wordes cited by M. Abbot doth expresly include it (and is spred over all the world,) and that after the example of Saint Austin euen by M. Abbots owne confession. For albei•• that great Doctor in his youth vsed the wor••

Catholike to signifie perfection of doctrine; yet growing to riper iudgment and being of better experience, he abhorred that significa∣tion of the word as Donatisticall, & left it w∣holy to the Donatists. wherfore let the indif∣ferent reader iudg, who dealeth more sound∣ly in the exposition of this word Catholike, whether I, that do follow S. Austin in his more advised and riper iudgment: Or M. Ab∣bot that would haue him followed in that he taught being yet young, and which hee him∣self afterward vpon better consideration thought good to alter. Is it not a signe of most wilfull blindnes to alledge that as imitable out of an Author, which hee himself advisedly corrected, and taught to bee abhorred?

Notes

• Aug. in bre: collat•• diei. 3. c. 2.
• Epist. 48.
• Aug. epi∣stola 48. Idem in Breuic: collat die 3. cap. 2.
• Collat 3. cū donat. cap. 102.
• Replito fulc. c. 10. dem. 6.