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.

About this Item

Title
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.
Author
Abbot, Robert, 1560-1618.
Publication
Londini :: Impensis Georgii Bishop,
1609.
Rights/Permissions

To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.

Subject terms
Bishop, William, 1554?-1624. -- Second part of The reformation of a Catholike deformed -- Early works to 1800.
Catholic Church -- Controversial literature -- Early works to 1800.
Link to this Item
http://name.umdl.umich.edu/A69095.0001.001
Cite this Item
"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." In the digital collection Early English Books Online 2. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/A69095.0001.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed June 16, 2024.

Pages

R. ABBOT.

Whether M. Bishop or M. Perkins doe mistake, * 1.1 let the Reader iudge. The Pope saith that a 1.2 the merits of the holy Ʋirgin, and of all the elect from the first to the last are knowen to yeeld supply or help to the store of his treasury: M. Bishop saith that they doe not hold any ouerplus of merits in Saints, and therefore denieth any merits to be laied vp in that storehouse. If M. Bishop say true, then the Pope lieth: If the Pope say true, then M. Bishop lieth: And if there be no ouerplus of merits in Saints, we desire to know what reason they haue then to craue mercy of God by the merits of the Saints, as we haue already seene in the former section. But M. Bishop doth not loue to be demanded a reason of all matters; he will haue vs to take his time though it be with∣out reason. Well, though there be no merits, yet what els may we thinke is laied vp in that storehouse of the Pope? forsooth some Saints and Martyrs haue suffered more paines then the temporall punishment of their sinnes deserued. Full wisely spoken; the temporall punishment of their sinnes de∣serued paines. But let that passe; and what I pray of those

Page 29

paines? forsooth the sufferings of the Saints which were need∣lesse for their owne satisfaction, are reserued in the Churches storehouse, and are to be dispensed by the Pope. And therefore Iob is brought vs for an example, who complaineth that b 1.3 his calamity was heauier then his sinnes. Indeed the holy man Iob considering the course of Gods iudgements in this world, and knowing the cleerenesse of his conscience, and the vprightnesse and innocency of his life, might well and truely answer his friends that his strange fall and so vn∣speakeable calamity was more grieuous then could be ex∣pected out of that condition of life which he had liued. God had another end in the afflicting of Iob which Iob himselfe vnderstood not, and therefore wondered at that which befell vnto him. Whatsoeuer he suffered, he is therein set before vs for an example of patience; but as touching matter of satisfaction we read nothing. Nay as Paul in that respect said of himselfe, so must it be said of Iob also, c 1.4 Was Iob crucified for you? Albeit we would gladly know of M. Bishop what became of the ouerplus of Iobs satisfactions for so long a time? for the storehouse, of which M. Bishop speaketh, was of farre later time. The matter of it was prepared by Heretikes, the Pope gaue it ground, and the Scholemen built it. Where then was the supera∣bundance of Iobs sufferings and of others all that while re∣serued to the Popes vse? yea or how may it appeare that the disposing thereof is committed to the Pope? Who is fit∣ter, saith M. Bishop, to dispose of any mans goods then he to whom the charge thereof is committed by his testament? Alas good man, and doe ye now appeale to the Testament of Christ? Bring vs foorth the Testament, M. Bishop; and shew vs where it is that Christ hath made the Pope super∣visour of any such goods. He is a lewd man that belieth and falsifieth the Testament of another man; what are you then that thus belie the Testament of Christ? Of this blasphemous fancy enough hath beene said before in the question of d 1.5 satisfaction. His parenthesis, what, was not

Page 30

the father well pleased with his Apostles? such a wise one as it is, is answered also e 1.6 before. He was well pleased with his Apostles, but it was Christ alone in whom he was well pleased towards his apostles, and is well pleased towards vs. f 1.7 In Christ only, saith Gregory, the father was well pleas∣ed, because in him only he found no sinne.

Notes

Do you have questions about this content? Need to report a problem? Please contact us.