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 latley become a proselyte of the Church of Rome. By R. Abbot Doctor of Diuinitie.

R. ABBOT.

Christ by his office is our Prophet, our Priest and our King. * 1.1 As a Prophet he hath declared fully and finally the whole counsell and way of God for the attainment of eter∣nall life. As a Priest, he hath offered a sacrifice for our re∣demption, and by vertue of that sacrifice is our Mediatour to intreat mercy for vs. As a King, he prescribeth lawes whereby to gouerne vs, and hauing a 1.2 All power giuen to him both in heauen and earth exerciseth the same to safegard and defend vs. In all these offices, (of which M. Bishop speaketh as if he vnderstood not what they meane) the Church of Rome offereth most high indignity to the Son of God. To take the points spoken of in order as they are; first they are iniurious to the kingdome of Christ, in that they giue the Pope authority to make lawes to bind in con∣science, which Christ only hath authority to doe. b 1.3 To bind in conscience, is to tie the conscience and inward man to an opinion of holinesse and spirituall deuotion in the thing which is done, so as to account the same a worship of reli∣gion whereby God is truly serued and honoured, yea and further, according to Romish fancies, the means of remissi∣on of sinnes, and the merit of eternall life. This whosoeuer doth, sheweth himselfe a deceiuer and an Antichrist, and the Pope in so doing is found to be he, of whom the Apo∣stle prophecied, c 1.4 that he should sit as God in the temple of God,

domineering in the hearts and consciences of them of whom it is said, d 1.5 Ye are the temple of the liuing God. If Princes attempt to make lawes in this sort, they are therein vniust and presumptuous against God. Otherwise to speake of Princes lawes, God himselfe bindeth the consci∣ence to yeeld the outward man in subiection to the Prince, when notwithstanding the conscience it selfe remaineth free as touching the thing which the Prince commandeth. I know that in outward things it is true which the Apostle saith, e 1.6 All things are lawfull for mee, I may doe all things; God hath giuen mee no restraint. To eat or not to eat, to weare such a garment or not to weare it; to doe thus or thus it is all one with God: I am no whit the better the one way, nor the worse the other way. Neuerthelesse if my Prince command mee either way, God requireth mee to abbridge my selfe of the outward vse of that liberty which he otherwise hath giuen mee and to performe obedience to my Prince, yet still retaining inwardly the same opinion and persuasion of the thing in it selfe that I had before; and therefore content to tie my selfe outwardly to do thus, because I know inwardly that it is indifferent to God ei∣ther to doe thus or thus.

The second presumption of the Pope against Christ is in taking vpon him infallibly to determine the sense of holy Scripture. By which pretense he most impudently carieth himselfe, bringing all abhominations into the Church, and corrupting all religion and seruice of God, and yet affir∣ming that he doth nothing contrary to the Scripture, be∣cause whatsoeuer the words of Scripture are, yet the sense must be no other but what he list. But well might we be thought to be without sense, if so senseles a tale should pre∣uaile with vs; a thing which in the ancient Church for so many hundreds of yeeres amidst so many questions and controuersies was neuer dreamed of. What needed the fa∣thers so much to busie themselues, and out of their owne exercise and experience prescribe rules to others for find∣ing

out the true sense of Scripture, when as a Pope with a wet finger could haue helped them to the certaine and in∣fallible truth thereof? Yea why haue we so many Com∣mentatours of the Church of Rome, so various and diuers in their expositions and interpretations of Scripture; and why doth not the Pope rather by one commentary of his illuminated vnderstanding reconcile all differences, dis∣patch all doubts, and resolue at once infallibly what is the certaine meaning of euery place? Are those holy fathers loth of their labour, or are they so busied in other or greater affaires as that they haue no leasure to attend to such tri∣fles? Satisfie vs, M. Bishop, as touching these matters; otherwise we must take this deuise to be as indeed it is the couer of your shame, the cloake of your apostasie, which can no otherwise be shadowed but by this pretense: That the Popes sense is the very trueth of Scripture, being not∣withstanding wholly repugnant & contrary to the words. In a word, the Pope thrusteth out the lawes of Christ which are expressed in the words of Christ, and by his sense setteth vp his owne lawes vnder the name of Christ.

To giue power to the Pope properly to forgiue sinnes, as M. Bishop doth, is a wicked blasphemie and an Antichristi∣an exalting of him into the place of Christ. When the Scribes said within themselues, f 1.7 Who can forgiue sinnes but God only? our Sauiour Christ did not contrary them therein, but partly by discouering the thoughts of their hearts, and partly by the miracle that he wrought, taught them to vn∣derstand him to be God the Sonne of God, and therefore that he had power to forgiue sinnes. He hath left it there∣fore so to be conceiued of vs, that power to for giue sinnes be∣longeth to God only. g 1.8. The seruant, sai he Cyprian, cannot for giue that which by hainous traspasse is committed against the Lord. h 1.9 Surely it belongeth only to the true God, saith Cy∣rill, to be able to release men from their sinnes; for who but the maker of the law, can free them from offense that are trespas∣sers of the law? As for that which M. Bishop obiecteth that

Christ said to his Apostles; i 1.10 Whose sinnes ye remitte, they are remitted vnto them, and whose sinnes ye retaine, they are retained, it no more importeth a power of forgiuing sinnes, then the ministers k 1.11 Sauing them that heare him, importeth a power of sauing. For as the minister saueth not properly by any power of sauing, but only by teaching the way of saluation; so he also forgiueth sinnes, not properly by any power thereof, but by preaching the Gospell of remission of sinnes, and designing them to whom belongeth this re∣mission. God hath made vs not Lords but l 1.12 Ministers of the new Testament, and of the spirit, neither hath he giuen vs the power but m 1.13 The ministry of reconciliation; for God was in Christ reconciling the world vnto himselfe, not imputing vn∣to them their sinnes: to vs he hath committed (only) the word of this reconciliation, namely whereby we preach and testifie in the name of Iesus Christ remission of sinnes and reconci∣liation to God to all that repent and beleeue the Gospell. But this whole cōmission of forgiuing sins shall be the bet∣ter vnderstood by those instances by which Cyrill exem∣plifieth the same, n 1.14 First in baptisme, and afterward in re∣pentance. Them that beleeue and approoue themselues by holi∣nesse of life, the minister addmitteth to baptisme; (this is to forgiue their sinnes) but carefully he repelleth and putteth backe them that are vnworthy (this is to retaine them.) But of this forgiuenesse of sinnes in baptisme we must remem∣ber that which S. Austine saith, if at least that booke be his; o 1.15 The Lord Iesus gaue the office of baptizing to many, but the power and authority to forgiue sinnes in baptisme, he reserued to himselfe only. For the noting of which difference he rightly alleageth the words of Iohn Baptist: p 1.16 I bap∣tize with water, but he it is which baptizeth with the holy Ghost. Now if to baptize with water to the remission of sinnes be to remitte sinnes in that sense which our Sauiour intendeth in that speech; and to baptize with water to re∣mission of sinnes importeth no power for forgiuing sinnes, but only a ministery for publication and for the apply∣ing

of Gods seale for exhibiting and confirming thereof, it followeth so far foorth that those words of Christ doe not giue to the minister any power properly to forgiue sinnes. Therefore Chrysostome though he terme this ministery in some sort a power, yet to shew in what sort it is to be con∣ceiued, most notably saith; q 1.17 Not the Priest only but nei∣ther Angell nor Archangell worketh any thing in those things that are giuen of God, but the Father, the Sonne and the holy Ghost doth all; the Priest putteth too but his tongue and his hand. The other instance which Cyrill giueth is, r 1.18 When the minister giueth checke to offendours, and to the penitent release. Whereof he giueth example in the incestuous Corinthian, whom for fornication the Apostle deliuered to Sa∣tan for destroying the flesh that the spirit might be saued, and afterwards receiued againe that he might not be ouerwhelmed with ouermuch sorow. here the Corinthians did forgiue, and the Apostle himselfe did s 1.19 forgiue, and thus the terme of for∣giuing hath alwaies his place and vse, but this forgiuenesse is disciplinary for reconcilement to the Church: it is not forgiuenesse of sinnes spiritually and properly so called, though by the ordinance of Christ it must be to the peri∣tent a necessary introduction to the assurance and comfort thereof, as t 1.20 before hath beene declared. I conclude this point with that which Hierome writeth vpon the words of Christ to Peter u 1.21 whatsoeuer thou bindest in earth shall be bound in heauen, and whatsoeuer thou loosest on earth shall be loosed in heauen, for declaration whereof he saith, that z 1.22 as the Priest in Moses law did make the Leper cleane or vncleane not for that he did so (properly and indeed) but only tooke notice who was a leper, and who was not, and did discerne be∣twixt the cleane and the vncleane, so heere the Bishop or Priest doth bind or loose, not bind them which be innocent, or loose the guilty, but when according to his office he heareth the variety of

sinnes, he knoweth who is to be bound and who to be loosed. Not so then as that in propriety of speech he either remitteth or retaineth sinnes, but only discerneth and notifieth who is to be taken for bound with God, and who for loosed; whose sinnes must be holden either to be remitted or retain∣ed y 1.23. Which sentence of man they who are thus condemned, as Hierome againe saith, must know to be strengthened and made good by the sentence of God himself; namely when it proceed∣eth according to those rules and directions which God hath prescribed in this behalfe; for otherwise, z 1.24 it is not the sentence of the Priest but the life of the parties that is inquired of with God. Here then the Pope is a manifest vsurper, first against God in that he taketh vpon him a power properly to forgiue sinnes, and thereby seateth himselfe in the throne of Iesus Christ; secondly against the Church of God in chal∣lenging to himselfe a propriety of that which was spoken a 1.25 to the vniuersall Church, and wherein euery one that is a successour of the Apostles hath as great power and autho∣rity as he.

Christ, saith he, gaue his Apostles authority ouer the whole earth; Goe into the vniuersall world. But by this, Christ gaue no more authority to one of them, then he did to another, and whatsoeuer he gaue them what is it to the Pope, that he should thereby challenge b 1.26 the whole world to be his di∣ocesse, and should define that c 1.27 it concerneth euery humane creature vpon perill of damnation to be subiect vnto him? And what authority did Christ giue them hereby other then S. Mathew expresseth; d 1.28 Goe, teach all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father, of the Sonne, and of the holy Ghost, teaching them to obserue al things whatsoeuer I haue comman∣ded you. This was their authority; they had no power to command but what Christ had commanded them. Let the Pope conforme himselfe to the tenour of this commission, and he will then renounce his Popedome, and we shall ac∣knowledge him the disciple and seruant of Iesus Christ.

Ouer a part of hell he saith no Pope hath authority, signi∣fying

thereby, according to their partition, the hell of the damned. But how then did Clement the sixt not doubt to say in one of his Buls, e 1.29 we will that the punishment of hell in no sort be laied or inflicted vpon him; and how was it that Gregorie deliuered the soule of Traian out hell, as f 1.30 Da∣mascen hath reported, and sundry authours of the Church of Rome as Bellarmine acknowledgeth haue stedfastly be∣leeued? If M. Bishop tell vs that Gregorie did that only by way of intreaty and request, he himselfe granteth the Pope to haue no other ouer Purgatory, and therefore ouer hell and Purgatory he hath authority both alike. When he doth good to any soule in Purgatory it is per modum suffragij, as a suppliant and intreater, not as a commander, saith he. But how then did the same Clement the sixt say, concerning them who should die by the way as they were comming to his Iubilee at Rome; g 1.31 We command the Angels of Paradise that they bring the soule of such a one into Paradise being fully freed from Purgatorie paines. And what; is all this power no more now but to supplicate and intreat? Haue they mocked the world all this while, & made men beleeue that the Pope not only hath power to deliuer soules out of Pur∣gatory himselfe, but can also impart the same to others, and is all come now to supplication and intreaty? Why, M. Bishop can supplicate and intreat as well as the Pope, and what reason haue we but to thinke that God is as readie to heare his praier as the Popes, and so by that meanes he shall haue as great power ouer Purgatory as the Pope. Such are the mockeries of Poperie; such are their doctrines of reli∣gion; they themselues can not well tell what to make of them.

Further he saieth, Whether the Pope hath any authoritie ouer Princes and their subiects in temporall affaires, it is que∣stioned by some. The more shame is it, M. Bishop, for them by whom it is questioned. Tertullian reporteth the minde of the ancient Church in this behalfe, h 1.32 We honour the Em∣perour as the man next to God, and as hauing receiued of God

whatsoeuer he is, being inferiour to God onely. And is it now come to be questioned whether the Pope euen in temporall affaires haue authority ouer Princes, who in their king∣domes respectiuely are the same that the Emperour then was? But is it questioned onely M. Bishop and not deter∣mined? Wee may indeed admire their impudency therein, that they, who so much pretend antiquitie, should resolue a matter so contrarie to the doctrine and example of all an∣tiquitie; but yet they haue so resolued, that either directly or indirectly the Pope hath superioritie ouer Princes euen intemporall affaires. i 1.33 The Canonists do commonly defend the first part, saith the Mitigatour, that is, directly: but Ca∣tholike Diuines for the most part the second (that is indirectly and by consequence) but both parts fully agree that there is such an authority left by Christ in his Church. They agree in deed, but it is like Herod and Pilate against Christ. Accor∣dingly as they carrie themselues in this point, so they de∣serue to be credited in all the rest. But M. Bishop telleth vs that Christ might haue giuen him that authoritie without de∣grading himselfe. And I answer him that the question is not what Christ might haue done, but what he hath done. Therefore his instance of a King substituting a Viceroy will not serue his turne; for hee that without any commission from the King taketh vpon him to be a Viceroy, and vnder pretence thereof impugneth his Princes lawes, and maketh construction of them at his owne pleasure, and to serue his owne turne, howsoeuer he seeme to doe all in his Princes name, yet is indeed a traitour and a rebell to his Prince. This is the Popes case, and therefore vnder the name of the Vicar of Christ, he is no other but a traitour and a re∣bell against Iesus Christ. As for those faculties of greater authoritie and vertue, because wee reade nothing thereof in the Gospell, no not in S. Peter himselfe thove faculties which they attribute to the Pope, therefore we hold them and that iustly, to bee the Popes owne presumptions, the flatteries of Parasites, the deuises of ill disposed men,

k 1.34 who speake things which they ought not for filthy lucers sake.

The Popish Priesthood is not true and reall, but meerely fantasticall: for a true and reall Priesthood, such as they boast of, requireth a true and reall sacrifice for sinne, which they haue not. For after the sacrifice which pur∣chaseth forgiuenesse of sinnes, l 1.35 there is no more offering for sinne. But in the death of Christ is a full purchase of the forgiuenesse of sinnes. Therefore after Christs death there is no more offering for sinne. We say then of Priesthood as Cyrill hath taught vs to say; m 1.36 We ascribe not the name of Priesthood or the thing it selfe to any other but to Christ on∣ly. See that question, saith M. Bishop. But where? for hee himselfe hath said nothing of it, and whatsoeuer he would say, it is already preuented in n 1.37 answer of his Epistle to the King.

To the last obiection that for one Iesus the all-sufficient Mediatour of intercession, they haue made as many as be in the Popes Kalendar; he answereth, yea and many more to. What M. Bishop, so many Mediatours, when the Apostle saith plainly, o 1.38 There is one God, and one Mediatour betwixt God and man, euen the man Iesus Christ? We hold, saith hee, that any of the faithfull yet liuing, may bee also requested to pray for vs. True M. Bishop, yet not as Mediatours, as if we may plead any thing that they haue done or can do for vs for our owne accesse to God, but onely as fellow-mem¦bers of one body affected in compassion one towards an other, pleading for our selues, and ech for other that which Christ hath done for all. Wherefore as the greater praieth for the lesse so doth the lesse also for the greater; not onely S. Paul for the Romans, the Ephesians, the Collossians, but also the p 1.39 Romans, the q 1.40 Ephesians, the r 1.41 Colossians for S. Paul. And although we thus request the praiers one of another, yet doe we not pray to God that he will heare vs for their sakes whom we request to pray for vs, but all expect mercy onely for Christs sake. But Popish praiers

are of a farre other nature: s 1.42 By the holy name of Marie haue mercy vpon vs: by the intercession and merits of S. Peter, S. Paul, S. Iohn the Euangelist and other of thine Apostles haue mercy vpon vs; by the vertues and merits of the holy fathers, S. Augustine, S. Hierome, S. Chrysostome, S. Am∣brose and all other haue mercy vpon vs. This is one of the abhominations of Popery, that they do not onely idlely in∣treat the Saints to pray for them, but do also alleage to God their merits and intercessions by vertue thereof to obteine mercy at Gods hands. But hee saith it shall be hard for vs to prooue that Christ onely maketh intercession for vs. Yea M. Bishop: but why then doth S. Austen say, that t 1.43 in heauen of all that haue beene partakers of flesh Christ onely maketh intercession for vs? Did hee speake more then hee could prooue? Deceiue not your selfe M. Bishop; hee could prooue this matter well enough, but you cannot prooue that which so iniuriously to Christ the onely Mediatour you affirme and teach that Mediation of intercession be∣longeth to the Saints; it being a thing vnreasonable and absurd to thinke that Mediatours for vs stand in need of a Mediatour for themselues.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Christ degra∣ded by the Pope.
• a 1.2

  Matt. 28.18.
• b 1.3

  See hereof part. 2. pag. 17.18.
• c 1.4

  2. Thess. 2.4.
• d 1.5

  2. Cor. 6.16.
• e 1.6

  1. Cor. 6.12. & 10.23.
• f 1.7

  Mar. 2.7.
• g 1.8

  Cyprian de Lapsis. Nec re∣mittere aut do∣nare indulgen∣tia sua seruus potest quod in dominum deli∣cto grauiore commissum est.
• h 1.9

  Cyril. in Ioan. lib. 2. cap. 56. Certè solius re∣ri dei est vt possit à ptceatis homines solue∣re: cui enim alij praeuaricatores legis liberare â peccato licet nisi legis ipsius au∣thori?
• i 1.10

  Iohn 20.23.
• k 1.11

  1. Tim. 4.16.
• l 1.12

  2. Cor. 3.9.
• m 1.13

  cap. 5.18.
• n 1.14

  Cyril. vt su∣pra. Erit autem id duobus vt arbitror modis, primò baptis∣mo. acinde pe∣nitentia. Nam aut credentes & vitae sancti∣monia probates homines ad baptismum in∣ducunt; & in∣dignos diligenter expellunt, &c.
• o 1.15

  August. scal. Paradis. cap. 3. Officium bapti∣zandi dominus concessit multis, potestatem verò & authorita∣tem in baptismo remittendi pec∣cata sibi soli re∣tinuit.
• p 1.16

  Ioh. 1.26.33.
• q 1.17

  Chrysost in Ioan. hom. 85. Quid sacerdo∣tes dico? Ne{que} Angelus, ne{que} Archangelus quicquam in his quae a deo data sunt effice∣re potest, sed pa∣ter & filius & sp. sanctus om∣ma facit: sa∣cerdos & lin∣guam & ma∣nus praebet.
• r 1.18

  Cyril. vt su∣prà. Aut eccle∣sia filijs peccan∣tibus quidem increpant, pae∣nitentibus au∣tem indulgent. 1. Cor. 5.5.
• s 1.19

  2. Cor. 2.7.10.
• t 1.20

  See the An∣swer to the epistle dedi∣catory sect. 28
• u 1.21

  Matt. 16.19.
• z 1.22

  Hieron. in Matt. 16. Que∣modo ibs sacer∣dos leprosum facit mundum velimmundum (non quò sacer∣dotes leprosos faciant & im∣mundos sed quò habeant notitiam leprosi vel non leprosi, & possint discernere qui mundus quiuè immundus fit) sic & hic alligat vel soluit episcopus Et Presbyter, non eos qui insontes sunt vel noxij; sed pro officio suo cum peccatorum audierit varietates scit qui ligandus sit, qui soluendus.
• y 1.23

  Idem in Mat. 18. vt sciant qui à talibus condemnantur sententiam hu∣manam diuina sententia robo∣rari.
• z 1.24

  Idem in Mat. 16. Cùm apud deum non sen∣tentia sacer∣dotis, sed reorum vita quaeratur.
• a 1.25

  Gregor. in 1. Reg. l 6. cap. 3. vniuersali ec∣clesiae dicitur, Quodcun{que} li∣gaueris, &c.
• b 1.26

  Deecret. Greg. de foro compe∣tenti, cap. Licet. & de Appellat. ca. vt debitus. in glossa Papa vnusomnium hominum ordi∣narius.
• c 1.27

  Extrau. de maior. & obed. c. vnam san∣tam subesse Romano Ponti∣fici omni huma∣nae creaturae pronunciamus omninò esse de necessitate sa∣lutis.
• d 1.28

  Mat. 28.19.
• e 1.29

  Bale in Clem. 6. Nolumus quòd paena in∣ferni sibi a∣liquatenus in∣fligatur.
• f 1.30

  See Bellarm. de purgatorio. lib. 2. cap. 8.
• g 1.31

  Bale. vt supra Nihilominus prorsus manda∣mus angelis Paradisi qua∣tenus animam à Purgatorie pentius absolu tam in Paradi∣si gloriam in∣troducant.
• h 1.32

  Tertul. ad scapul. Colimus im••eratorem vt hominem à deo secundum & quicquid est à deo conse∣cutum solo deo minorem.
• i 1.33

  Treatise tending to Mitigation, &c. in the Preface to the Reader. sect. 22.
• k 1.34

  Tit. 1.11.
• l 1.35

  Heb. 10.18.
• m 1.36

  Cyril. epist. 10 ad Nestor. Nec praeter ip∣sum alteri cui∣piam homini siue sacerdotij nomen siue rem ipsam ascribi∣mus.
• n 1.37

  Sect. 27.
• o 1.38

  1. Tim. 2.5.
• p 1.39

  Rom. 15.30.
• q 1.40

  Eph. 6.19.
• r 1.41

  Col. 4.3.
• s 1.42

  The golden Letany.
• t 1.43

  Aug. in Psal, 64. solus ibi ex his qui carnem gustauerunt in∣terpellat pro nobis.