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.

As touching the Frst point, he referreth his Reader to the Preface, and there it is already answered. That which Cal∣uin saith, is namely concerning the second person in Trini∣ty, the Sonne of God. M. Bishop by consequence draweth it to the third person, the holy Ghost. The obiection then, or rather the slander, being cleered, as touching the Sonne,

is consequently cleered concerning the holy Ghost. His second cauill is, * 1.1 that we make the holy Ghost much inferiour to the other persons. And how may that appeare? Marry in their French Catechismes they teach, saith he, that the Fa∣ther alone is to bee adored in the name of his sonne. But what? because they say, the Father alone, must they needes be ta∣ken to exclude the holy Ghost? Hath he not so much diui∣nity as to know that the name of the Father, is sometimes vsed for distinction of persons, sometimes indefinitely of God, without any such distinction? When our Sauiour saith, a 1.2 One is your Father, who is in heauen, doth not the name of Father there, extend to God the Father, the Sonne and the holy Ghost? Doth it not so also, where the Apo∣stel saith, b 1.3 There is one God and Father of all, who is aboue all, and through all, and in you all. Doth M. Bishop other∣wise vnderstand it, when he saith, Our Father which art in heauen? Surely the French Catechisme may say as he re∣reporteth, (who yet seldome reporteth truth) & yet import nothing therby, but what Origen saith Christiās of old did, namely c 1.4 to offer praiers to God only by Iesus, or in the name of Iesus. The next cauil against Calum is of the same kind, that the title of Creatour belongeth only to the Father. Which M. Bishop might well haue vnderstood, in the distinctiō of the persōs by their seueral attributes, as d 1.5 Caluin setteth it down to be very true; and the rather, for that in the very articles of the Creed he findeth it so applied; I beleeue in God, the Father almighty, maker of heauen and earth. For although it be true, which S. Austin oftentimes deliuereth, that e 1.6 the workes of the Trinity are inseparable, and in the act of any of the persons is the concurrence of all; yet they so concurre, as that they retaine therein their seuerall proprieties, so as that of seuerall actions arise seuerall denominations; which in common phrase of speech are vsed as in some specialty belonging to one person rather than another. As therefore we attribute it to the sonne alone to haue redeemed vs, and to the holy Ghost alone to sanctifie vs, albeit both the Fa∣ther

and the holy Ghost, had their worke in our redempti∣on; and the Father and the Sonne haue their worke also in sanctifying vs; euen so to the Father alone, the title of Cre∣atour is applied, not but that the Sonne and the holy Ghost haue their worke in the creation, but because, f 1.7 the Father is the primary or principall worker, as Origen saith, at whose commandement the world was created by the Sonne, and g 1.8 wherein, as the Syrmian Councel saith, and Hilary ap∣prooueth, the Sonne did obedience to the Father. As for the rest that he heere quarelleth at, that the Father is called the first degree and cause of life, and the Sonne the second; and a∣gaine, that the father holdeth the first ranke of honour and go∣uernment, and the sonne the second; not to question the truth of his allegations, I would in a word aske his wisdome, doth he that saith, that the Father is the first person in Trinity, and the Sonne the second, deny thereby the holy Ghost to be the third? or doth hee hereby exclude the holy Ghost from hauing part with the Father and the Sonne? Doth the Apostle when in his epistles he saith, h 1.9 Grace and peace from God our Father, and from our Lord Iesus Christ; doth he, I say, exclude heereby the holy Ghost from being the authour of grace and peace, or from hauing part with the Father and the Sonne? Or when he saith; i 1.10 Blessed be God, euen the Father of our Lord Iesus Christ, doth he deny the Sonne and the holy Ghost to be blessed and praised toge∣ther with the Father? If he doe not, why then doth this idle headed Sophister thus take exception, where there is nothing for him iustly to except against? Forsooth at most, saith he, the holy Ghost must be content with the third degree of honour. But what, M. Bishop; doe not you also place the holy Ghost in the third degree, when you name him the third person? Doth not your head serue you to vnderstand degree of order only, without imparity or minority, as all Diuines in this case are woont to do? But why doe I thus contend with a blinde buzzard, a wilfull and ignorant wrangler, and not rather reiect him as a man worthy to be

altogether contemned and derided? He hath k 1.11 before cited the latter of these words, to shew that Caluin made the Sonne of God inferiour to the Father, but how leaudly he dealeth in the alleaging of it, and to how small purpose, it is there declared, & there is no cause here to speake thereof.

Notes

• * 1.1

  The holy Ghost not made inferior to the Father and the Son.
• a 1.2

  Matt. 23.9.
• b 1.3

  Eph. 4 6.
• c 1.4

  Origen. cont. Cels. ••.8. Chri∣stiani soli Deo per Iesum pre∣ces offerentes.
• d 1.5

  Calu. Opus in Explicat. per∣fidiae Valent. G••ntil. Certè vn•• consensu fatemur Chri∣stum impropriè vocari creato∣rem coeli & ter∣rae quoad per∣sonae distinctio∣nem. Ne{que} enim dubium est quin seriptura patri nomen Creatoris ven∣dicans personas distinguat.
• e 1.6

  August de praedest. san∣ctor. cap. 8. Inseparabilia dicimus ••sse ope∣ra Trinitatis.
• f 1.7

  Origen. cont. Cels. lib. 8. Di∣cimus immedi∣atum opifice•• esse fi••um dei verbum. &c. Ver•• aut••m pa∣trem, curus mandato mun∣du•• sit per ipsum filium conditus, esse primarium opincem.
• g 1.8

  Hilar. de Sy∣nod adu. Aria. Si suis vnum di∣cens deum, Chri∣stum autem de∣um ante secula filium dei obse∣cutum patri in creatione omni∣um non confite∣tur, anathema sit.
• h 1.9

  Rom. 1 7. 1. Cor. 1.3. et in reliq.
• i 1.10

  2. Cor. 1.3. Ephe 1.3.
• k 1.11

  Preface to the Reader. sect. 7.