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.

If M. Bishops argument be good against vs, we will re∣turne it to himselfe againe. Christ gaue vs in the Sacrament that which should be put to death for vs; but not the forme of bread: but Christs true body was giuen to death for vs, therefore Christ gaue vs to eate, not the forme of bread, but his true reall body. And doth M. Bishop beleeue so? If he doe not, then let him answer his owne argument, and wee shall thereby finde a way to answer him. It is true that Christ in the Sacrament giueth his body, but he giueth not onely his body, but also the Sacrament of his body. He gi∣ueth the Sacrament of his body externally and corporally to be receiued by the mouth: hee giueth-his true bodie in∣ternally and spiritually to be receiued by faith. He giueth vs then that bodie that was giuen to death for vs, but hee doth not giue it to the swallowing of the throat, but to the meditation of the heart. And this S. Austin notably decla∣reth, when for exposition of the words of Christ, Except yee eat the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud, &c. he saith, or rather maketh Christ to say: a 1.1 Vnderstand spiri∣tually that which I haue said; Yee shall not eat this bodie which yee see, nor drinke that bloud which they shall shead that crucifie me: I haue commended vnto you a Sacrament, which vnderstand spiritually, and it shall giue you life. Where vnderstanding eating and drinking properly with the mouth, hee denieth the very body and bloud of Christ to this eating and drinking, and leaueth onely the Sacrament to be appertaining thereto. Now in this meane while M. Bishop hath slipped M. Perkins argument, and let it goe without answer that the Sacrament is not simple the body

Page 356

of Christ, but onely as it is giuen to death for vs, and be∣cause the body of Christ neither was in the first institution, nor now is in the Sacrament really giuen to death for vs, therefore the Sacrament is not really the body of Christ.

Notes

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