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

63. W. BISHOP.

Moreouer, [unspec 8] the institution of a religious rite and ceremo∣nie, to be vsed in the whole Church vnto the worlds end, and to be receiued of all Christian people of age and discretion, did necessarily require that it should bee done in most certaine and cleare tearmes; otherwise, there might arise great strife and contention about it, and be the ruine of thousands. And speci∣ally great perspicuitie is required in this holy Sacrament, where the mistaking of it, must needs breeed either idolatrie, if wee worship for Christ, that which is not Christ: or impietie, if on the other side we should not giue to it (being Christ God and man) diuine honour. Wherefore, no good Christian may thinke, but that our prouident Sauiour Christ Iesus, who verie well foresaw all these inconueniences, did deliuer it in such tearmes as he would haue to be taken properly, and not be construed at mens pleasures figuratiuely. Adde, that hee spake those words to the twelue Apostles onely, whom hee was accustomed to in∣struct plainly, and not in parable darkely; and who were woont also to aske for the interpretation of obscure speeches, who here made no question about this high mysterie, because they were sufficiently forewarned, that they should eat Christs flesh, * 1.1 and that his body was truly meat: and therefore beleeued Christs words without further question.

Notes

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