A DISPROOF OF D. ABBOT'S COUNTERPROOFE AGAINST D. BISHOP'S REPROOF of the defence of M. Perkins reform Catholic. THE FIRST PART. wherein the now Roman church is maintained to be the true ancient Catholic church, and is cleared from the unjust imputation of Donatism. where is also briefly handled, whether every Christian can be saved in his own religion. BY W. B. P. AND D. IN DIVINITY.  Ex Augustino con. epist. Pelag. lib. 1. cap. 1. Cum non desinant fremere ad dominici gregis caulas, atque ad diripiendas tanto pretio redemptas oves, aditum undique rimari, commune nobis est, etc. pestilentibus & infidiantibus eorum scriptis, medentia & munientia scripta praetendere: quibus rabies qua furunt aut etiam ipsa sanetur, aut à laedendis alijs repellatur. 
AT PARIS, Printed by CLAUDI morel. M.DC.XIV.   

CUM huius libri Auctor nobis infra scriptis de fide & eruditione sit probe cognitus, alijque & S. Theologiae & linguae Anglicanae periti contestati sint, nihil in eo contineri, quod non sit Catholicae fidei & pietati consentaneum, ex ipsorum fidecensemus eundem utiliter excudi & publicari posse.  
MICHAEL AUBRY. NICOLAUS ISEMBERT. Doctores Sorbonici. Idem ex propria scientia Testor ANTONIUS CHAMPNEUS, Doctor item Sorbonicus.   

To fill up this spare room, I set this sentence of S. Augustine's against the Donatist Petilian that it may be added unto the resemblances between the Donatists and the Protestants touched in this book page 364. 
l. 3. c. 40 co. lit. pet.   Then he went on with a slanderous tongue in the dispraise of Monasteries and Monks, blaming me also, that I had instituted that kind of life. Of which manner of life either he is utterly ignorant, or rather he feigns himself ignorant of that which is famously known all the world over. 
Observe, that it is a donatistical trick, to inveigh against religious houses, and religious persons, by the Protestants revived and much augmented.   

ILLUSTRISSIMO ET REVERENDISSIMO S. R. E. CARDINALI, D. D. Francisco de joyeuse, Episcopo Ostiensi, & Sacri Cardinalium Collegij Decano, Guilielmus Bishop Anglus, aeternam foelicitatem.  
CUM amplissimo ac nobilissimo Clero Gallicano nos plurimum debere, & agnoscamus ingenue & perlibenter praedicemus, quod nos Anglos (patria quidem religionis Catholicae ergò pulsos, & eiusdem defendendae causa I arisus collectos) annua sua pensione sublevare atque cohonestare uóluerint; tum vestram certe illustriss. dignitatem [quae summum inter illos locum merito iure obtinet] singulari quadam benevolentia complecti, eximio etiam honore prosequi, quam aequissimum esse censent omnes.  
Hinc factum est, ut interim dum opus Latinè elaboratum paremus (quod omnibus quoquo modo possit inseruire) libellum hunc Anglicana lingua conscriptum, Celsitudini vestrae dedicarem; quo appareret nos tempus non conterere otio, sed aliquid in singulos dies meditari, quod publicum Catholicae Ecclesiae bonum promoveat. Si vero initium a charissima nobis patria ducamus, quo & parentibus simul prodesse poterimus, nemo aequus rerum aestimator [uti speramus] id aegrè feret: nec vulgarem (certescio) Galliae vestrae afferret vel voluptate, veletiam commoditatem, si Anglia nostra ad Catholicam religionem, dei praepotentis gratia reduceretur.  
Praeterea, praecipuus huius libelli scopus hic est, summi Pontificis & Sacrosanctae Romanae Ecclesiae integritatem, dignitatem, auctoritatem a malevolis adversariorum calumnijs & obtrectationibus non tueri modo & conseruare, sed eandem etiam nonnullis, è sacris literis & sanctorum patrum monumentis petitis argumentis, illustrare atque propugnare: cui igitur potius opuscalum hoc inscribendum fuit, quam eiusdem S. R. E. lumini splendissimo, firmissimoque columini? qui Illustrissimum esse Cardinalem (quae in ecclesia clarissima est dignitas) pro parvo ducere possit, cum celeberrimi, sanctissimi, & totius orbis terrarum supremi illius Senatus, primum etiam locum obtineat Decanus dignissimus. Nec Christianissimi tantum ac amplissimi Galliarum regni, in Romana curia Protector iamdiu extitit potentissimus; sed & in summi● Apostolicae sedis cum florentiss. Venetorum statu difficultatibus, mediator adfuit summus, & veluti moderator gratiosissimus. Adeo ut Catholici omnes non minus fere Illustrissimae D. vestrae debeant, quod ingruens illud bellum, Reipub. Christianae periculosissimum sapienter averterit, quam quod ad obtinendum totius Ecclesiae Primatum, Sanctissimum Dominum nostrum Paulum Papam quintum, (primo illo honoris gradu utique dignissimum) praecipuè adiwerit. Si igitur aliquid summi Pontificis principatu dignum mea quam exilis industria elaborare possit [quod sentio quam sit exiguum] digniorem cui illud dicaretur, D. vestra Illustrissima reperirem neminem.  
Huc accedit quod Diaecesi Rhotomagensi (nobis proximae,) sacrosanctus praesis Archiepiscopus, & in altissimo illo munere administrando tam multa adeo praeclarè gesseris, ut nostros & oculos & animos ad Illustrissimam D. vestram suspiciendam colendamque attraxerint. Egregian vestram in templa, aliaque pia & loca, & opera magnificentiam, tacitus praeteribo, quia ad maiora quae disciplinam Ecclesiasticam propius spectant, festino.  
Salutem populi ex sacerdotum honestate, scientia & industria dependere plurimum, nemo est qui nescit. Quam ob causam semmarium vestris fundastis sumptibus, in quo melioris notae ac indolis iwenes, ad divinarum rerum cognitionem, & morum probitatem recte instituantur, ut boni effecti pastores, commissum sibi gregem in via mandatorum dei, ad gloriosissimun caelorum regnum faeliciter perducant.  
Insuper cum venerabiles ac pios congregationis Oratorij patres spiritu imprimis feruere, & oratione pollere animaduerteritis, domicilium illis perquàm commodum in Diaecesi vestra collocastis; quo doctrinae lumine & vitae exemplo, tam eos qui in virtutum stadio decurrunt, ut vehementius currant, incitarent, quam ut illos qui haereticorum retibus irretiti, de via veritatis aberrant, ad Catholicae Ecclesiae caulas, suis humeris reportarent.  
Nec his solum qui in communi vitae genere deo deseruiunt, consuluisse, singulari vestrae charitati satis fuit, nisi monasterium etiam dotaret, in quod sanctissimae virgines (quae crucem Christi mundi delitijs anteponentes) sese è mari hoc procelloso quasi in tranquillum portum reciperent, ut liberiùs & pleniùs sponso suo caelesti vacare, & pro huius miserrimi saeculi peccatis, ardentiùs interpellare possent.  
Cum & his qui in saeculo, & illis quae in Claustro sanctè vivere student, a prudente vestra pietate adeo affluenter provisum sit, an hic tandem fuit vigilantissimae vestrae curae pastoralis finis? Minime vero. Etenim cum hinc ob consilij maturitatem, & longam maximarum rerum experientiam prope Regem ad maxima Reipub. negotia peragenda sedere compellimini, illinc vero propter senilem infirmitatem, amplissimam vestram provinciam peragrare, & quomodo se quisque suo in munere gerat, perlustrare non possetis, adiutorem vobis elegistis nobilissimum Dominum, D. Franciscum de Harlay, virum omnium virtutum laud florentem: qui ex illustri ortus familia, inter magnates sanè, si voluisset, splendide vivere potuisset: sed ab ineunte aetate saeculi pompis nuncium remittens, in altissimarum rerum contemplationem, mentem suam tanto studio, tantaque ingenij felicitate intendit, ut non in Latinis modo & Graecis literis, sed & in omni scientiarum genere, tam miros brevi tempore fecerit progressus, ut inter gravissimos Theologos Parisienses juvenis summa cum laud professus sit: qui rerum etiam occultarum cognitioni raram quandam prudentiam coniungens, ad res magnas & sacras eximiè gerendas admodum habeatur idoneus. Hic talis ac tantus juvenis vestram sustinens personam, ac graviore vestro illustratus consilio, gregem vest●um vigilantissimè inspiciet, & omnia quae ab boni Pontificis munus spectare intelligit, prudentissime administrabit.  
Quum igitur provinciam nobis proximam, ab Illustrissima D. vestra adeo omni ex part excellenter gubernari perspexerimus, mirum videri non debet si nos, qui omni proprij Episcopi auxilio penitus destituimur, ad tanti Archiepiscopi patrocinium confugiamus. Itaque humillimè ab Illustrissima vestra Amplitudine petimus, ut in suam nos clientelam benign admittere; & libellum hunc, perpetui nostri erga Illustrissimam D. vestram obsequij, quasi arrhabonem recipere dignetur. Deumque Opt. Max. quotidie rogabimus, ut Illustrissimam D. vestram ecclesiae suae quam diutissime incolumem conseruet.  
Parisiis xxi. Novembris, Anno Domini 1614   


AN ANSWER UNTO M R ABBOT'S EPISTLE Dedicatory.  
GOOD Christian reader I being prisoner by the gatehouse in westminster, when Mr. R. Abbots last book entitled, the true ancient Roman Catholic, came forth against me was you may be sure well enough looked unto for writing then any reply. Since my enlargement I was a long time occupied partly in flanders, partly in Paris about ordinary business well known to many, so that I had small respite to read over that which M. Abbots had written against me. At length coming to have better leisure, (albeit I have never since been free from the same care) and not willing to spend my spare time idly, but to set in hand with some piece of work I was by my grave and understanding friends advised, to begin with a confutation of the same book, as coming forth latest, and being indeed the only book which M. Abbot had laboured in defence of himself against me. I at my loving friends instance perusing over that book more diligently, found it fuller of words, taunts and cavils, than of weighty and sound matter: and would therefore rather have made choice of some other book of more importance; not making any great reckoning of his untrue imputations and bitter speeches against myself. because the most honourable prelate's of the primitive Church, and best deserving Doctors (whose books I am not Worthy to carry after them) writing against bitter and broadmouthed Heretics, never lightly escaped better cheap: for what these mild hornets wanted in sound reasonnig, that they were wont to supply in foul railing. My kind friends replied, that how little account soever I made of mine own interest, yet M. Abbot being now grown a man of name, and chosen for the divinity reader in the famous university of Oxford, that ought not to be contemned which he and his friends deemed worthy the print. Besides he pretendeth it to be a piece of great price, long premeditated, and esteemed by him a matter worthy a large treatise, and therefore not to be let pass as a thing of nought without an answer.  
whereupon in part, and withal to justify that in my book which he catcheth at as least justifiable belike, (for he doth not answer it orderly as it lieth, though it were but a little one, but picketh out certain parcels) I in fine resolved to examine briefly the weight and worth of that his book, which he surnameth a counterproofe, not unproperly: because he doth in it very often hunt the counter, (as they say) that is, rather run up and down, forward and backward, turn this way and that way very idly and impertinently, then fall to any serious proof, or pursue the points in question directly.  
Notwithstanding I will not deal with M. Abbot after such a hafting and abrupt manner, as he doth with me, by cutting of at the first clapp fourscore & eight pages of my small discourse without any word of answer thereunto, mangling also the middle of it, and leaving out a great part of the latter end: but will begin with him at his Epistle Dedicatory, and thenceforth prosecute it orderly as it lies, not omitting by the way any matter of moment: though I mean not to set down his whole text word by word, because that would cost me more the printing then it is worth by a great deal, And we here in banishment have not so much spare money: but the sum and substance of all he handleth, shallbe sincerely related, as the judicious and upright Reader, if he please to confer this my answer with that his book, shall easily perceive.  
Having in few words showed the reasons that moved me to undergo this work, and the method that I mean to observe therein, without any further preface I will presently come to M. Abbot's Epistle Dedicatory: in the first entry whereof he seems to play the trivant and for want either of judgement or of fit invention, to fall into a faulty Exordium, by the skilful in that art called Commune common; which his adverse party may as well (if not better) use against himself, than he doth against his adversary. Neither needs it any other answer but a plain return of the same words with a very little alteration. Let us try whether M. Abbot's poem proposed against us, will not in the judgement of an indifferent Reader serve for us against them: Thus it begmneth.  Mr. Abbot's text turned against his own party. 
MOST gracious and renowned prince, such is the malice and fury of Antichrist and his army of priests (as Gregory calleth them) in oppugning the Religion and faith of Christ, 
Greg lib. 4. Ep. 38.  as giveth cause to us that fight for Christ, to stand continually upon our guard, and to be ready still in arms, to entertain the assaults, that are made continually against us.  W. B. 
THE first staff of this wartier like sentence, because it hath in it the names of Antichrist and Priests, may at the first blush seem to some protestants to hit us: but if they please to consider that such Priests only be touched therein, whom Gregory the great (pope of Rome, and a main pillar of the Roman faith) doth condemn: they shall discover presently those to be either runagate Priests, such as were Luther, Zuinglius, Caluin, Beza, jewel, fox, and the like turne-coates; or else counterfeit and bastard priests, whom in England men call Ministers; of which false and wicked priests both sorts are in Gregory's judgement the sworn soldiers (not of the Pope of Rome a feigned Antichrist) but of that great and open Enemy of jesus Christ, that shall in the latter end of the world be revealed, as for many other their enormous and blasphemous opinions, so namely for their inveterate malice and obstinate rebellion against the Church of Rome, whereof S. Gregory was both an illustrious Doctor and chief Governor: All which being most perspicuous and clear, the whole period (laying M. Abbot's malice and fury aside) runneth roundly for us against him and his fellow Ministers.  To the second. R. AB. 
THey carry themselves now towards us more eagerly and angrily, for that they see themselves deceived of the prey which they long hoped for, imagining by this time out of the troubled, waters of this state, to have fished some what for advantage to themselves.  W. B. 
THE former part of this sentence can ill be applied unto poor and afflicted Catholics, who carry themselves neither angrily nor eagerly, but with all submission, by long patience and modest behaviour seeking to mitigate the exasperated minds of their persecutors, & to move compassion in others more pitiful over the manifold unspeakable miseries which for so many years they have endured. It toucheth indeed to the quick some malicious restless Ministers, and others over spiteful and busy Officers, who year by year, month, by month, nay day by day carry themselves so eagerly and angerly towards all sorts of Catholics, men women and Children: that even many of the milder sort of Protestant's themselves, are astonished at their barbarous in humanity & unsatiable cruelty. Albeit we cannot but feel exceeding great grief through this long toedious and bitter persecution: yet some comfort we may pike even out of the extreme eagerness thereof: because it is one good sign that it will not last long for this is by the spirit of God noted of that peerless persecutor in the revelations: having great wrath, 
Apoc 12. v. 12.  knowing that he had but a little time: which is as much to say, as the greater and more eager their anger is, the sooner shall it by gods sweet providence have an end. And surely me thinks their own experience should assure them (were they not wonderfully transported with passion) that how eager or angerly so ever they seek the extirpation of the Catholic faith out of our country (which is the prey they have so many years greedily hunted after, and with all wit of man laboured to catch) yet they shall never be able to compass it, let them trouble the waters of life, as far forth as God will give them leave. for they cannot but see to their small comfort, that not withstanding all their severe laws, and grievous executions of them against Catholics, their number by God's mighty hand doth daily increase and multiply. And many Priests are more ready to offer their lives in that holy quarrel, than their persecutors willing to put them to death therefore. That dark speech of M. Abbot, of fishing for advantage in troubled waters, doth most properly appartaine unto Protestants, who have taken the opportunity of garboils and civil wars, to plant the Ungracious graft of their fruitless Gospel in most countries of Europe, where it hath gotten any root. see concerning this point the discourses of Florimond Reymond a very noble french writer of this age. Let us return to M. Abbot's text turned against his own party.  R. AB. 

Vevel 12.15.  Which expectation being by the mercy of God wholly frustrate they imitate the Dragon in the revelation, casting out of their mouths calumniations and slanders, and all outrage and importunity of malicious contradictions, even floods of water to carry away violenly and to drown (if it were possible) the woman, even the Church of Christ amongst us, that have escaped their cruel and bloody hands.  W. B. 
Woe seethe not how plainly these words do paint to the life M. Abbot and his pew fellows, who are the only men that by fraudulent persuasion, and violent persecution do the uttermost that lieth in them, if not by drowning, yet by hanging and quartering, and casting into dark and stinking dungeons, to carry away violently those poor Priests and Catholics, that have as yet escaped their cruel and bloody hands: for when M. Abbot or any other Protestant of our Country of his age, were in the cruel and bloody hands of the Papists, neither he nor they I trow do remember; for if any such thing were, it must needs be before they were borne. And if tart venomous speeches, and most deadly calumniations do transform men into Dragons; who more sib to a serpent then M R. Abbot, who poisoneth his papers with heaps of most noisome and loathsome corruption. Take a taste of him in this very Epistle, which benig dedicated unto so high and mighty a Prince, it imported him much to have made some show at least of a modest Divines spirit: but he seems so full gorged of such cankered putrefaction, that he could not hold it in or dissemble it, before you heard, the malice and fury of Antichrist and his priests: here we are resembled to a dragon casting up calummations, malicious contradictions, floods of waters, all outrage: their cruel and bloody hands: afterward, disgorg the veno and poison of his wicked and corrupt heart: his deceitful and traitorous attempt; his impostures, drunkenness, wilful railing: he runs on me furiously▪ like an ungracious thief at the bar he impudently crieth out; desperately bend to pervert, to forge, to face; utter ruin and confusion of the great Capitolian priest, we believe that god will give strength to your arm, and give Edge to your sword to strike through the loins of all them that are the supporters of that Antichristian and wicked state. is it not time to stay here? doth not this Minister strive I will not say to imitate, but to outfly that fell Dragon whereof he speaketh? cometh there not out of his mouth rather flashes of fire, than floods of water, that feareth not to set down in print, that he thirsteth after the blood of all Catholics: and prayeth to his God Mars I ween (for unto the God of mercies no Christian heart can so pray) that he will give strength to his prince's sword to strike through the loins of all (note that a few will not serve his turn) that are supporters of the Catholic Roman faith: for all them he reputeth to be contained within the state of Antichrist. Virum sanguinum & dolosum abominabitur Dominus, a blood thirsty and deceiful man our lord doth abhor. God send you gentle sir a little more Charity. It followeth in your text which will very currently serve against yourself.  R. AB. 
IN which service of Antichrist M. ABBOT our countryman hath very industriously done his part, 
M. Bishop.  and hath laboured if not to excel, yet to equal almost any of his fellows in the subverting of the wayward, and in animating of men to obstinacy against the truth of God: who having to the kings most excellent majesty disgorged against us the venomed poison of his wicked and corrupt heart, and being by me duly chastised for his disloyal and traitorous attempt (to delude by false suggestions his liege and sovareigne lord) seeing his impostures and frauds most plainly discovered and laid open, hath added drunkenness to his thirst, and sought to fill up the measure of his former iniquity, by wilful railing at those things which he knoweth to be true. And having no other way to revenge the impeaching of his credit (greatly touched as he conceived by the answering of his book) hath in a latter book run upon me furiously, and loaden me (as much as in him lieth) with odious imputations of abusing, falsifying, misconstruing and misapplying both scriptures and fathers, like the ungracious thief at the bar, who convicted by most clear and apparent evidence, yet still impudently crieth out that all is false, etc.  W. B. 
HItherto are M. Abbot's words, with the only change of my name into his, which every man that hath seen what books passed between us, can witness how fitly they may be returned upon himself. for in his answer to my Epistle to his Majesty, he doth bitterly inveigh against me, and goeth about by very untrue suggestions to abuse his highness. which I partly discovering in my book called the reproof, he seeking to uphold his credit much impeached (as he thought) there by, hath since surcharged me with more odious imputations. True it is that neither he nor I do come near unto many other writers of this age on both sides: though I keeping the tenor of his own words, (which do attribute unto me much more than I deserve,) do signify that he laboureth to equal almost any of his fellows; always excepting the uncivil rudeness of his style, which is much more cankered than becomes the candour of a Divine. but if that be the natural and incurable malady of the fervent hot spirit in the new turmoiling Gospel, all mild and sweet peaceable natures will assuredly in short time learn to abhor it.  
whereas M. Abbot chargeth me to have endeavoured to delude my sovereign by false suggestions, all upright consciences will judge that he rather hath so done than I, if it shall please them to take to their considerations but this one inducement. M. Abbot in his first book did burden me with the same crime, to which I returned him in print this Answer. I wish very heartily that you could and would obtain of his majesty, that we both in person might appear before his highness, there to justify whether of us had sought to abuse his Majesty by lies, and by pretending antiquity for those things which by antiquity were condemned. I to show the assurance I had in the truth of my allegations, and in the uprightness of the Catholic cause, having publicly made this earnest request unto M. Abbot: it being my hap afterward to fall into his brother's hands, and by him to be laid up in prison, where M. Abbot might have spoken with me at his pleasure and leisure; should not he then at the least, if he had had any confidence in the goodness of his cause, have confronted me, and convinced me of some of the pretended falsehoods, whereof he had accused me? He cannot say that he knew not of it, or had not sufficient time to think of the matter: for I was holden there in expectation eleven months; during which space he was once at London that I heard of, and had leisure to go to à Readers feast, but small devotion (as it seemeth) to visit a poor prisoner, and less affection to come to à conference about those allegations and reasons: which though he had cunningly patched together, and gilded over goodly: yet his own conscience told him, that they would not abide the hammering of an equal conference: they might serve to deceive the simple, but would not hold weight in the balance of a learned Disputation. wherefore he had reason to think it better policy to avoid that trial, which might perhaps have turned to his further shame. yea his Majesty of his own gracious disposition being willing (as I credibly heard) to have spoken with me, was by M. Abbot's friends possessed with sundry slanderous informations against me, to divert his Majesty therefro. Seeing therefore that I both offered, requested, and expected a meeting with M. Abbot about the verification of our writings, and he having not only the opportunity of time and place, but the advantage also of other Circumstances, would not appear and show himself; what reasonable men can doubt, but that he at the least did fear and mistrust his own cause? and thereupon assure themselves (who cannot be so privy to M. Abbot's dealings as he is himself) that M. Abbot's allegations and arguments are to be vehemently suspected and feared; and consequently that very unwise are they, who in matter of salvation and damnation do rely upon him.  
Hitherto I have used M. Abbot's words against himself, now I come to the rest which speak more distinctly for him.  R. AB. 
Which plainly appearing to be so, little reason had I to trouble myself to give any further answer to it. Nevertheless because the further answer of the chiefest part of it, hath fallen within the compass of my intention of describing the true ancient Roman Catholic, & no difference there is, but that whereas I might have walked at my own liberty, I now tie myself to follow him: I have yielded so much to him, that whereas by comparison I formerly showed, that the now church of Rome in faith & religion is far estranged from the old, so it may now more fully appear that it is so: and that M. Bishop contending for the contrary, hath done it only for his belly; and for his credit's sake, having made the deceiving of souls his occupation to live by, and being ashamed at these years to confess that he himself hitherto hath been deceived.  W. B. 
M. Abbot (as he here says) would not have answered my little book howsoever it was to purpose, had it not fallen within the compass of a former pretended treatise of his own: how much less cause have I to withdraw my hand from more serious and substantial work, to give answer unto his long tedious trifling books? that man's head that should not ache, before M. Abbot had sound proved the now Roman church, to be in any one point of faith estranged from the old; were like to live many a fair day without need of a Physician. He hath showed his good will I confess by giving the essay: but hath done little more thereby, then bewrayed how unable he is to perform it. so that one may wonder at his simplicity (shall I say) or at his audacity, or rather at both? at his simplicity, for wanting wit to understand when it was so plainly told him how impertinently he dealeth in the matter. At his audacity, if seeing his rash and raw Enterprise succeed no better, he would nevertheless hold on still and proceed farther.  
Let it be by the way observed that M. Abbot's intention was and is to describe, the true Roman Catholic: for that you shall hear him hereafter, in the heat of disputation very busy to prove, that there is such an incompatible repugnance between the very terms Roman & Catholic, that they can no more be coupled together, than particular and universal: yet here more calm and better advised, he acknowledgeth that they may stand well joined together and be attributed to one particular person: and by the like reason, to one particular Church. so that howsoever he cry there against us, for couchnig together the Catholic Roman Church: yet here he must needs approve it, or else contradict himself, and give over his intended description of the true Roman Catholic. well be it pardonable for a new gospeling Minister to unsay that in one place, which he saith in another: yet that calumniation of my poor labours employed in the service of the Catholic cause for my bellies sake (as he writeth) is not tolerable: but the imputation is so gross and palpable, God be thanked, that M. Abbot cannot choose but receive shame by it: which I will declare by this brief Antithesis between himself and me, hoping that the good Reader will give me leave (being put to it) to relate that of myself, which is commonly known. It is not unknown to many that I did forsake the apparent hope of a poor gentleman's estate, to become a Roman Priest: he to escape misery, crept into the Ministry. I wittingly and willingly made myself thereby uncapable of all spiritual livings and promotions, which our noble country doth afford in great plenty unto men of the Church. he contrariwise as it seemeth, followed the study of new divinity, to fill himself with fat benefices, if the greedy apperite which his former penury bred in him, can be satisfied. for having three or four livings already, he is thought to gape still after some greater. In a word I do strive to walk in the narrow and hard path of fasting, prayer and continency from all corporal pleasures: he liveth at large following the carnal liberty of Luther's Gospel of wiving, eating, & fulfilling the desires of the flesh. All which being duly considered let the indifferent Reader judge, whether of us two be likelier to contend about matters of religion for our bellies sake? The same may be said for the point of honour and reputation; he running the full career of our country to high dignities and promotions: I treading in their foosteps, who be they never so learned or virtuous, may truly say with the Apostle. I think that God hath showed us the last, 
1. Cor. 4. v. 9  as it were deputed to death, and the dross of all even until this day. wherefore all worldly credit, and belly commodities lying in M. Abbot's way, and against my profession; were his wits at home (think you) when he upbraided me with them? And if I would make deceiving of souls my occupation, as he for his credit's sake and gain, seemeth to have made it his: I might perhaps have been little behind him in wordly wealth and reputation. But god forbidden that to gain all the good in the world, I should once go about so much as to endanger the salvation of mine own soul: so far of am I (our blessed lord be praised therefore) from being any whit disposed to follow M. Abbot's trade and occupation in deceiving of others.  R. AB. 
WHICH work I most humbly desire may go forth under the protection of your highness, who according unto that eminent wisdom and knowledge, wherewith God hath endued your tender years, I make the judge of this quarrel, and therefore the first part thereof I do now tender at your highness feet, for a testimony of my loyal and dutiful affection, and for acknowledgement of my devotions unto Almighty God for the preservation of your highness and the continuance and increase of his graces and blessings towards you: that your princely name may more and more grow great, and be a terror unto the self exalting kingdom and Monarchy of the great Capitolian Priest, at length to work the utter ruin and confusion thereof. which as we believe not to be far of, so we hope that in that glorious revenge of the cause of Almighty God, your highness shall have a chief and honourable part: and that God will strengthen your arm, and give edge to your sword, to strike through the loins of all them that are the supporters of that Antichristian and wicked state which all other additions of honour and renown both with God and men, I w●ll never cease to further by my prayers unto almighty God▪ so I rest always to your highness service most humbly and affectionately devoted. R. Abbot.  W. B. 
AS we do most freely confess almighty Gods exceeding bountifulness towards that our gracious young Prince Henry (now deceased) in pouring out upon him plentifully singular natural gifts of both valour and understanding, & do dolefully bewail the great loss of such a glittering ornament and comfort of our infortunate country; so we heartily wish and do daily pray, that it may please the immense divine bounty to bless that tender young prince Charles his dear and noble brother, with the true knowledge of the Catholic and Apostolic faith: that he may to God Almighty's glory, to the true honour and peace of our country, and to his own eternal salvation, return unto the ancient and holy Religion of his best renowned and most puissant progenitors; that growing as in age, so in understanding and true piety, he may become, though no competent judge in matter of faith, as M. Abbot too flatteringly would make his royal brother in his nonage (for the judgement of those high supernatural points of religion do belong rather to the vocation of godly and grave learned Bishops, than to youthful princes:) yet to be a devout embracer and a zealous maintainer of that heavenvly engraffed word which only can save our souls: for the defence whereof the glorious title of defender of the faith, was annexed to the crown of England. In which, and for which principally, his most royal and gracious Grandmother was put to death: which to have been the now Roman faith and Religion, no honest man can or will (I think) deny. And who is such a stranger in the estate of our neighbour countries, that doth not clearly behold the ready way to advance his princely name and renown, and to increase both the wealth and strength of our kingdom, is to receive, or admit of the Roman religion; which spain, France, and Flanders (the richest and noblest regions adjoining next to us) do follow and uphold? The ministers rare devotions unto the Almighty for the preservation of the noble Prince's life, and increase of honours, were vain and frivolous, yea God send they were not hurt full and ominous. for of such like the holy Ghost faith, 
Prover. 28.9.  Oratio eius erit execrabilis, their prayer shallbe accursed. God commonly punishing them, whom Satan's servants pray for: and many times cursing them, whom they do bless. And what marvel if we consider but the strange disposition of his Charity, shall I say, or rather of his fury: that would have his Prince bathe his sword in the blood of innocents', and to sheathe it in the Bowels not of some hundreds or thousands of such as never offended him, but of innumerable hundreds of thousands, of what sort, nation or country soever, so they be favourers and supporters of the Roman religion. was it any marvel I say, that the father of mercies, and God of all comfort was highly displeased at the pitiless petition of this bloody Minister, or rather monster?  
From his devotious and charity suitable to his profession, let us pass unto his hope expressed in this passage. his hope was that Prince Henry's highness should have a chief part in the suppressing of this Roman religion. May he not now (as once he told me) cry out with the no-vaine poet: O spes fallaces, o false and deceitful hopes; o vain confidence in earthly creatures, be they never so noble and powerful. good reason hath he to do so, seeing he would not hearken unto the divine prophet when he said: 
Psalm. 145. v. 2.  Nolite confidere in principibus, in filijs hominum, in quibus non est salus. Do not put your trust in princes, nor in any sons of mortal men, in whom there is no help, principally for the achieving of any such ungodly & merciless exploit.  
I come now to the new article of M. Abbot's belief, that the utter ruin (forsooth) of the Roman religion is not far of: of which peradventure he may be as well assured, as every protestant is of his own salvation. But because this seemeth to be rather a kind of prophecy, than any article of faith: why may not M. Abbot (who is not yet known to be either a prophet or the son of a prophet) as well fail in this his belief, as he was deceined in his hope. And it being the divination but of a blear eyed if not of a blind prophet, proceeding rather out of his own longing, then of any foresight he hath of future events, no man (I trow) is bound to believe him unless he list. Some likelihoods there be (I grant) in worldly men's opinions, that the Catholic religion may be rooted out of England. but when we lift up our hearts to heaven, and weigh well the true qualities and nature of Christian religion, we see no evident cause to fear any such imminent danger: nay we discover rather motives to persuade us to the contrary, to wit, that our redemption and the restoration of Catholic religion in our country is near at hand.  
Not to answer M. Abbot (who hath brought no one reason for his surmise) but for the consolation of many heavily distressed, and most pitifully afflicted Catholics, my most dear and best beloved countrymen, I will briefly examine the causes that may move worldlings to imagine their father's old faith to be now in great hazard of utter ruin and destruction; that I may withal show some reasonable grounds of hope for the speedy reparation thereof: The first & principal cause of the decay of the Catholic faith in our country, earthly men esteem to be the impoverishing of all them that constantly profess and maintain the same: for seeing all Catholics (whom they call Recusants) to be fleeced and spoiled of all their goods, and to have nothing left for themselves, their wives, and their children to live upon, they presently judge that they cannot long hold out. And all men of means being once impoverished, neither priests (who by doctrine, administration of Sacraments, and good example of life are great props and stays of religion) can be harboured and entertained; nor poor prisoners succoured and relieved: and consequently all Catholics in short space must needs be utterly extinguished. Behold the presumptuous discourse of dust and ashes, who being not able to raise their thoughts above the flat of the earth, or over the heads of their cattle, do seldom meditate upon those words of our blessed Saviour: pauperes Euangelizantur the Gospel is preached to the poor. poor men do more readily embrace the glad tidings of the gospel than the rich; or upon that golden sentence of the chosen vessel of his grace. videte vocationem vestram fratres, 
1. Cor. 1. v. 26.  etc. see your vocation brethren that not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble: but the foolish things of the world hath God chosen that he may confound the wise: and the weak things of the world hath God chosen, that he may confounded the strong; and the base things of the world and contemptible hath God chosen, and those things which are not, that he may destroy those things that are: that no flesh may glory in his sight. Being then assured by the truth itself that poor, base, contemptible creatures in the eye of the world, be such as Christ maketh special choice of, to receive, embrace, and preach his word: How can it be probable to any christian, that the stripping men out of their goods, is an assured way to make them to fly from their faith? If poor fishermen, and others, that voluntariely forsook all they had, were esteemed by Christ jesus, (the grand master of that heavenly work) the fittest men to make pillars and chief members of his holy faith and religion; how grossly are they deceived in the estate and managing of heavenly affairs, who do dream that to make all Catholics poor, is to extirpate the Catholic religion? when as it is in deed a ready way to make most absolute & perfect christians, discharged of all earthly clogs, more nimble, proper, and at better leisure to employ themplues wholly and heartily in that spiritual business. And thereby also endearing themselves unto Almighty God, (for whose quarrel they have lost all) do become more capable and worthy of his greater gifts and blessings. who can tell whither our forefathers did not, through abundance and superfluity of temporal wealth, forget their duty to God, and by the sins that followed thereupon, made way to that dissolution of religion which after ensued in our miserable country? for so it happened often in Israëll as Moses foretold, my beloved waxed gross and Kicked, 
Deut. 32. v. 15.  he was gross and exceeding fat: he forsook God his Creator, and turned away from his saviour. And may it not well be the just judgement of the same Almighty Lord, to punish us their Children (whom God often visiteth for their father's faults) in the same kind, according to that rule of the law: in quo quis peccat, in eo & puniatur. Let them be punished in the same kind that they did offend. why should we not then be content to redeem our religion with penury, which our Ancestors mortgaged through their overgreat superfluity? yea although that were not so, let us imitate that wise and well advised merchant commended in the Gospel, who having found out the precious pearl of the true Christian faith and religion, went and sold all that he had and bought it. I dare be bold (because I have the warrant of God's word for it) to assure all them that so do, that they thereby make the richest purchase that can be made upon the earth: unto which if the best bargains that worldlings make be compared, they are but shadows and mere dreams. If there were a stately gallant fair rich Lordship to be sold, at two or three years purchase, what press would there be of buyers? how willing would the veriest pinchpennies in a conutry be to bestow their money there upon? and what is this earthly bargain if it be paralleled to that heavenly? of which our saviour speaketh in the gospel: 
Matt. 19 v. 29.  he that forsaketh father or any other friend, he that leaveth land or living, or any other commodity for my name's sake, he shall receive, not one for one, but a hundredth for one and to boot in the world to come, life everlasting. And they that doubt least in the mean season, they shall want necessary sustenance: they must needs confess themselves censured by our Saviour to be modicae fidei, 
Matth. 6. v. 30.  men of small faith, that do not trust confidently in the providence of our heavenly father, who feedeth the fowls of the air, and clotheth the grass of the field: of which he hath not so much care as of us Christians: if they be worthy the name of Christians that dare not rely upon Christ's infallible promise: quaerite regnum Dei & justitiam eius, 
Matth. 6. v. 33.  & haec omnia adijcientur vobis. Let them that feign would, yet with much ado can overcome this temptation of poverty, ponder these few points often and advisedly, and pray to God to strengthen their weakness: then no doubt but they shall be able to prefer poverty with Christ, before the riches of this world with the loss of Christ, and of their souls. I that do but handle this matter by the way may not dwell long in it, but will make it up with these memorable and comfortable words of the Apostle: 
Heb. 13. v. 5.  Let your manners he without avarice, contented with things present: for he (that is, the sovereign Lord of heaven and earth) said; I will not leave thee, neither will I forsake thee: so that we do confidently say, Our Lord is my helper, and I will not fear what man can do to me. To our purpose then M. Abbot, how wise an Auguret soever he would seem to be, cannot by the impoverishing of Catholics, divine that the utterruin of their religion as at hand: when as by blessed poverty patiently endured for Christ's sake, it is much more like, that the same holy religion shallbe the sooner restored.  

1. Nor imprisonment.  Moreover they cannot be assured to make an end of the said religion by imprisoning the constant professors thereof. If to be locked up in prison were to be secluded from God's help, as they are debarred of their wordly friends company: or to be deprived of our heavenly father's favour, as it is of some earthly men's countenance: then there were no doubt but that poor weak mortal men, would quickly wax weary of their Imprisonment. but if to be a ptisoner for that holy cause of the Catholic religion, be rather a retreat from the conversation of worldlings, and a recalling of our minds from all terrestrial cares, to be more neat, pure, and at better leisure to receive and entertain celestial inspirations: then surely to him that knoweth to make the true use of that enclosure, imprisonment will seem, as a promotion in the favour of God, so an augmentation in the fervour of his religion. Are we not by prison waned from many vanities and follies, yea preserved from divers dangerous temptations, which others living at their liberty and pleasure abroad do often fall into? And how many thousands of devout souls, have of their own free choice most willingly forsaken all the world, and shut themselves up within religious Cloisters, to be freed from the ordinary perils of worldly conversation, and to live a more retired and religious life? why then should not Christ's prisoners make a virtue of necessity, and seeing that now by God's pleasure they are drawn from their own houses, and household affairs (where they were perhaps to much busied about horses, sheep, hawks, hounds or other like base or idle creatures,) let them hardly employ their study to make a good general confession, thereby to enter assuredly in to the fast favour of the almighty. let them study to answer well (according to that measure of understanding and learning that God hath given them) in the cause of religion, for which they suffer. Let them spend the most of their time in prayer, and other works of Christian devotion and piety: and then no doubt their imprisonment will not seem tedious unto them, but must needs be very comfortable & fruitful. because thereby they purge their souls from sin, make satisfaction for their faults past, break of many evil customs, lay a good foundation for the time to come, purchase the favour of God, and draw his manifold heavenly blessings upon themselves, their family, and friends. finally they shall serve for burning lamps to the world abroad, and for good example to their neighbours and acquaintance at home. for albeit their bodies be confined within a small compass; yet the fame of their constancy, and virtuous retired life, will fly abroad far and near: and carry with it a very sweet fragrant savour unto others, animating them to suffer more willingly and constantly, what they see their honourable friends, or honest neighbours to have well passed through before them.  
Neither ought any man to fear over much the laying up in dark loathsome holes or deep dungeons: 
3. Not dungeous.  for if it please our heavenly father to suffer that rigour to be exercised upon us, he will give us courage and strength enough to abide it The chaste patriarch joseph was cast into a dungeon, and it is recorded to our comfort, 
Sapient. 10.14.  that the wisdom of God descended down with him, and did not forsake him in his fetters. 
Daniel. 6 22  That great Prophet Daniel was cast into a den of lions, And his God was with him there, shutting up the mouths of those cruel hungry beasts, and delivered him therehence safe and sound. The farther we are shut from all company of men, the nearer we are set unto the quires of Angels. As we must herein needs confess and acknowledge our own natural weakness and frailty, and that we are not able so much as to think one good thought of ourselves, and much less to be able to endure any such great extremity, as so close an imprisonment would be to fleshand blood: so on the part of God (for whom we suffer) we must be confident, and say after that most zealous Apostle Saint Paul: 
Phil. 4. v. 13.  Omnia possum in eo qui me confortat, I can do all things with his heavenly help and gracious favour that doth comfort and strengthen me: and be bold to pray with Saint Austin. Da Domine quod jubes, & jube quod vis. give me o blessed Lord force to do that which thou commandest, and command me whatsoever thou pleasest: Fidelis enim est Deus, 
1. Cor. 10 v. 13.  qui non patitur vos tentari supra id quod potestis, etc. For God is faith full, and will not suffer you to be tempted above that which you are able to bear: but will make also with temptation a way forth, that you may be able to sustain. It cannot but greatly comfort all such prisoners, to set before their eyes the most noble example, of that worthy spectacle of all retired persons Saint Anthony. he having lived some years in the wilderness in very great austerity, and being for his singular virtues, 
Athanas. in vita S. Antoniuses.  and most godly instructions, much sought unto by many that desired to imitate his holy life; he (I say) to avoid that resort, would wander yet further into the wilderness. At length it was his hap to light upon the ruins of an old decayed castle, in which the wild beasts & venomous serpents had made their dens and nests. This was a place alone for a champion of his faith, spirit, and resolution. There he taking up his lodging, the serpents and beasts as if they had known good manners avoided suddenly, and gave place to that honourable servant of the most high god: and the Citizens of heaven came often (no doubt) to visit him. This holy soldier of Christ condemned himself to a hollow cave of the said ruined Castle, and there lived full twenty years, admitting no man to come to him, saving one only, who twice in the year brought him some poor provision of bread and water. At length being found out by the religious souls, who sought up and down after him all the wilderness over: at their instant entreaty to do service to others, he came out of that voluntary prison, as if it had been out of a paradise, so sound of body, so fresh of colour, with such a sweet mild countenance, that all who beheld him were astonished to see it. But what marvel? for if the court be commonly said to be there where the king is: who can doubt but that cave might very well be resembled to the court of heaven? assuredly the king of heaven attended on by his celestial train, came thithe often to visit his be loved servant and dear son Anthony. And what comfort could he want that conversed so familiarly with the courtiers of heaven? can he that liveth in such special favour of the Almighty, (at whose commandment be all things both in heaven and earth) be destitute of any necessaries? This every man that shall stand in need of it, may very well apply unto himself with the help of these words taken out of the like in S. Austen. Quod fecit unus homo, facere potest & alter homo, illius gratia per quem factus est omnis homo: that which one man hath done, another man may do, through his gracious aid and assistance that made all men.  
Though Protestants cannot either by spoiling Catholics of their goods, 
4. Nor death.  or casting of them into prisons and dungeons, extinguish the Catholic Roman faith in our country, yet by hanging and quartering of them as traitors, may they not bring that to pass? for making away many worthy priests in that cruel bloody manner, it may hap to fright all other out of the country, and then the laity wanting the gracious help of Sacraments, and the necessary comfort of their spiritual fathers, will quickly quail and yield. O wise folly, or rather foolish wisdom of worldlings. indeed if the course of the divine providence were squared out by the leaden rule of our vain discourses, than it were not unlike to fall out after the protestants imagination. but god himself having revealed unto us in his holy word, that the putting to death of his faithful preachers, shall nothing hinder, but much further, increase, and multiply the fruit of their divine doctrine: Are they not rather to be esteemed Atheists than Christians, that are persuaded, that the way to extinguish Christian religion, is to make great havoc and slaughter of Christ's disciples? doth not our blessed saviour himself teach most plainly, yea and bindeth it (as it were) with an oath. Amen Amen, dico vobis: verily verily I say unto you, unless the grain of wheat falling into the earth do die, it remaineth alone: 
joan. 12. v. 14.  but if it do die, it bringeth forth much fruit. by which similitude Christ giveth us to understand, that like as one grain of corn mortified in the bowels of the Earth, doth produce some thirty, some sixty, some a hundredth fold increase: Even so every holy Martyr (who is of the purest wheat of Christ's flower) pouring out his innocent blood in testimony of the Catholic Roman religion, doth through the virtue of God's powerful grace, wonderfully move all well disposed minds to embrace the same religion. for how can they be persuaded otherwise, then that the Almighty hath given to them great assurance of a most happy estate in the life to come, whom they behold in the midst of torments to departed this life so holily, mildly and comfortably. Pretiosa in conspectu Domini, 
Psal 115. v. 5.  mors sanctorum eius. the glorious death of gods Saints is so precious in his sight, he so dearly esteemeth of them who endure death for his honour, that not themselves only, who die so happily, shallbe highly advanced in his heavenly kingdom; but for their sakes and at their requests, God will over and beside convert multitudes of others. the holy doctors were of opinion that the death and prayer of S. Stephen, was the special means of S. Paul's Conversion. but what need we any testimony of man for this matter, when as God himself hath in express terms testified, that he will show mercy unto thousands, 
Exod. 20  for ones sake that loves him, and keeps his commandments: And no man can better testify his love towards God, then to lay down his life for him, and with his very heart's blood to seal (as it were) his service and love towards him. 
joh. 15. ●.  maiorem Charitatem nemo habet, quam ut animam suam ponat quis pro amico suo. wherefore in the primitive church it was the common opinion of all Christians, that sanguis Martyrum semen sit ecclesiae, the blood of Martyrs, is the seed of the church. the sense whereof is recorded in these words of ancient Tertullian directed to the Heathen persecutors. 
Tertul in fine Apolog.  Neither doth your over curious and diligent cruelty prevail any whit at all against us, but is rather an allurement to our religion, we are multiplied and made more, as often as we are mowed and cut down by you. for the blood of Martyrs is the seed of Christians: 
Matth. 13  yea it is compared by divers holy fathers to that seed which was sowed in the best ground, and brought forth an hundredth fold increase. 
justin. in Apolog.  That glorious and learned Martyr S. justin, comparing Christians to a vine (as in the scriptures they be often resembled) saith: 
Esai. 5. joh. 15.  that as a vine every year must be pruned, and have all superfluous branches cut of, to make it yield more store and better fruit: so some Christians now and then cut down, and put to death for the Christian religion, doth both multiply, and make more perfect Christians. To be short I will rehearse but one passage uttered by that golden mouth of S. Io: chrysostom, wherein all the foresaid branches of loss of goods, loss of liberty, and life are couched together, without any fear of loss of their religion. 
Chrisost. quod Christus sit Deus.  Albeit (saith he) the faithful Christians were disgraced, despised, lost their goods, and were cast into prison: yea were butchered, burned, drowned, and put to all kind of tortures, with the greatest shame and spite, that could be devised, like Traitors and public enemies of the common weal: yet did they always increase and multiply. As well Masters as scholars, Priests as Lay men, were fettered and suffered a thousand kind of evils: yet the number of both Masters and Scholars did grow daily greater and greater. Thus Saint chrysostom, and much more to the same purpose. And if it would please our own Magistrates, who are of greater years, to call to mind how few priests and recusants were in the days of Queen Elizabeth, when they began first to put priests to death, and to heap such heavy penalties upon recusants, in comparison of them that now be: they must needs (if passion do not much blind them) clearly see, that their persecution hath mightily augmented our number. I out of my small experience may be bold to avouch, that since I can well remember, for one Roman priest that then was in England, there are now little less than twenty; And for one recusant then, now more than a hundred Have we not therefore just cause (following even the light of human reason and policy) to think, that the Protestants themselves who sit at the helm of government yielding unto that sensible argument of their own manifest experience) will shortly cease the heat of the persecution, and bridle those distempered restless spirits, that seem to feed upon other men's sorrows, if it be for no other cause, but for the preservation of their own religion. I mean not here to propound to them (who are without all comparison exceedingly far wiser than myself) how many great commodities both at home and abroad, they might reap by holding a milder course in matter of religion: because I find small disposition in them to accept of that service. but for the comfort of afflicted Catholics my most dear countrymen and brothers, and for the fuller confutation of the new article of M. Abbot's false belief: I have briefly showed, that to strip Catholics of their goods, for their religion, is to put them (though perhaps against their wills) to purchase the redemption of that with their penury, which their Ancestors lost through over much superfluity. To cast and keep them in prison, is to sequester them from their worldly occupations, and thereby to make them much apt for heavenly meditations: To hang them like traitors, is to prefer them to the glorious crown of Martyrs. And all this put together, cometh so far to short from rooting out the Roman Religion, or from daunting of others from the liking of it: that it worketh marvelous effects in many good souls, and procureth multitudes to embrace it. wherefore M. Abbot's dream of the utter ruin thereof to be at hand, may be aptly compared to the divination of those pagans, which S. Austin recorded as most absurd. when the Gentiles (saith he) saw that the church of Christ could not be rooted out with so many grievous persecutions as it had endured, 
Aug. l. 18. de civit. 54.  but that it was thereby wounderously enlarged: they nevertheless were so blindly bend against it, that they would needs appoint a certain time, within the which it should be utterly rooted out. which was expired before S. Austen had written those his worthy Books of the city of God, the christian Church much more flourishing, and enlarging itself then before. The like success will be no doubt unto M. Abbot's dream; (who would needs counterfeit those malicious Pagans, in prognosticating the utter decay of the Roman religion to approach) if we remain constant, and do with patience after the example of those ancient noble Christians, bear the loss of our goods, lands, liberty, and life; in the quarrel of God's cause, and for his sacred religion.  
I am not of their mind who looking upon the help of men, do out of human probability, either appoint some time when this shall come to pass: or on the other side, not seeing any man's aid ready at hand, do utterly despair of the recovery of it. but do like marvelously well of them, who humbly acknowledging our own and our forefathers manifold grievous iniquities to be such, that we have not yet suffered the hundredth part of that which they and we have justly deserved. yet lifting their hearts towards heaven, and maturely pondering upon God almighty's incomprehensible mercy, wisdom, and power, do conceive good hope of our speedy redemption for no Christian can say his creed, but he finds in the first article thereof that God is Almighty, he can do all things when he will, and assoon as he will; with one word of his mouth, one fiat of his (by which he made heaven & earth) is more than a thousand times sufficient, to alter the whole course of the protestants proceeding; yea to work such a strange alteration, that they who now be most earnest persecutors of the Roman religion, may after the manner of Saint Paul become most zealous professors and planters of the same. for most true is that which good Mardocheus in his devout prayer confessed. 
Hester 13  O Lord God, the disposition of all things doth he in thy hands, and there is no man that can resist thy will, if thou please to save us. yea the stronger, the more eminent, subtle, and vehement, God's enemies be to oppose against his servants, the sooner are they overthrown; for he delights sometimes to give his adversaries all the advantages they can require: that they may be many against few; mighty and rich against weak and poor; wise and politic, against simple and plain men; to the end, that a few, weak, simple and poor people under his conduct, overcoming many strong wealthy witty adversaries, all the glory may redound to God alone: and others understanding thereby who be the true people of God, may wholly and heartily join with them in his service. here to prevent the cavils of the malicious, I would have it observed, that we Catholics do not put our trust in any foreign invasious or domestical garboils, but in the mere mercies and might of the sovereign Lord of heaven & Earth: who (as we hope) will for our blessed saviours sake, at the intercession of the most holy mother of God (whose dowry England hath been and is esteemed) and of all the blessed Saints, turn the hearts of our persecutors, and effectually move even them, who now are most greedy to spoil Catholics of their goods, to bestow their own, towards the restoring of the Catholic Religion: And they that are now so hasty to cast Catholics into prison, and to seek their deaths, shallbe so zealous and forward for the setting up of the same, that they will therefore most willingly lose their own liberty and lives. And albeit this may seem strange unto the dull and dark understanding of worldlings: yet the faithful must needs confess, that he whose words laid the blustering winds, and calmed in an instant the raging waves of the sea, can (no question) as easily, and as speedily turn the hearts of our persecutors, and make them in a moment our honourable friends. yea make them as freely and largely, to spend their own riches, in favour and defence of the Catholic cause, as now they do covetously hunt after the spoil of others, for profession of the same. of god's power to bring this to pass, there can be no doubt among the faithful. but all the question is, whether he will do it or Noah, or how soon it shall please him to do it. I can scarce understand how the true faithful soul, casting her eye upon the inestimable mercies of the Almighty, can stand in any doubt, whether he will have compassion of us or no? Let the dejected for their consolation, weigh well these comfortable sentences taken out of holy scriptures. Can God forget to have mercy, 
Psal. 76.  or will he bury his mercy in his wrath? Nothing less, as it is said in an other place, Our Lord is merciful and gracious, 
Psal. 102.  flow to anger and plenteous in mercy, he will not always chide, nor keep his anger for ever. and, 
Psal. 2.  when his wrath is kindled, it will last but for a little while. Again, when he hath been angry, 
Abaruc. 3. Psal. 144  he will remember to sh●w mercy: his mercies are above all his works. he will therefore sooner forget all other his wonderful works, than his most excellent mercies. which Esay the prophet doth recommend to us, by the tender compassion of a mother over her infant, in this manner: can a woman forget her sucking babe, that she should not have compassion on the son of her own womb? yea she may forget him, 
Esay 49.15.  yet I will not forget thee. for I have graven thee in the palms of my hands, and thy walls are continually before me. Behold how many causes of confidence, this one sentence of holy scripture, doth close together as it were in one Cluster. first the father of mercies, and God of all consolation doth assure us, that though the kind tender hearted mother should so much forget herself, as not to show compassion to her own Infant, crying unto her for relief; which is in any good nature impossible: yet God so tenderly affecteth his spiritual Children, his creatures made after his own image & likeness, that although she should, yet he will not shut up the Bowels of his tender mercies towards his infants, heartily repenting them of their sins, and humbly flying unto him for secure. secondly the print of the nails graven in the palms of our blessed saviours hands, always present before the face of God, are both most assured pledges of his inestimable kindness showed towards us: and be most forcible suitors to his heavenly father, to move him speedily to bend his forces to our aid. yet farther, the holy Angels patrons of our country in general and guardians of all English in particular, And all the valiant Martyrs and other saints of our nation (who in holy writ be resembled to walls of defence and safeguard) are continually before God, both graciously tendering our prayers & pains patiently endured for his holy names sake; and praying also themselves most fervently, for the restitution of Christ's religion in our country. All these motives concurring, must he not be very lumpish, or rather overwhelmed with heaviness, that cannot persuade himself hopefully to attend and expect his own release and redemption, from the omnipotent and merciful hands of his heavenly father, so inclinable of himself, and so provoked thereunto, through the merits of our Redeemer, & intercession of his saints. Specially if he do remember, that it is not any earthly good, but Gods own honour and glory that we seek after: that he may be truly known, loved & served of all men: that our whole country may be once again blessed with the happy fruition of his holy religion: that all manner of vice (which now reigneth there in a very high degree) may be rooted out, and the seeds of all holy virtues sown in a most fertile soil. This being (I say) the sum of all that we most instantly do sue unto his divine majesty to obtain, how can we but live in great hope to see it brought to pass by God Almighty, that doth infinitely more than we ourselves desire it? And can by ten thousand manner of ways more than our dull wits are able to comprehend, effect, and perform it. true it is that the grave majesty of the Almighty (with whom a thousand years are as it were yesterday) seemeth to our shuttle short capacity, to proceed very slowly in this business. Notwithstanding he is most sure in his courses, and will in due season, recompense his slowness with abundance of favours, far surpassing the expectation and hopes of all men. yea many times when he seemeth most to have forgotten his humble servants, and to be farthest of from their help; then is their deliverance nearest at hand. He suffered the Egyptians to do their uttermost endeavour to oppress and make an end of all the Israëlites: yet when they were even at the very brim of desperation, he sent them a saviour: who out of that their miserable bondage, brought them into a land flowing with milk and honey. Like wise did his divine wisdom permit the cruel and bloody Emperors, Diocletian and Maximinian, to do all the mischief that the malice of man could devise, to make havoc of all Christians, and a final extermination of all monuments of Christian religion: nevertheless when they had powered out the extremity of their outrageous malice, they died most miserably: and the great Constantine (our most glorious countryman) that succeeded them, did very shortly after triumphantly set up the Christian religion, unto the unspeakable comfort of all Christians. wherefore albeit to the eye of man, there do not appear any present redress of our miseries, yet reposing our trust in the might, mercies and promises of God, let us confidently say with S. Peter. 
1. Pet. 3.9.  Our Lord slacketh not his promise as some do esteem it: but he doth patiently for you, not willing that any perish, but that all return to penance. It may be very well that he hath stayed the longer, partly to scour our the rust of our former faults: partly that the number of those glorious Martyrs and confessors, (wherewith he will have our realm fenced & adorned) may be accomplished: or that the conversion of many that went astray, might be wrought, by beholding the constant suffering of his servants. finally, that the full measure of the impenitent may be made up. The sovereign lord of heaven and earth having upon these or the like considerations (known only to his unsearchable wisdom) made stay of our deliverance until this present, must not therefore be thought to have cast us of for ever, and to have wholly forgotten his mercies; but we must with longanimity attend his good pleasure and leisure, and in any case not lose our confidence in him. which he doth not only expect at our hands, but doth also so much respect it, that for it alone he promiseth deliverance. 
Psal. 90.  Quoniam in mesperavit, liberabo eum, protegam eum quia cognovit nomen meum. I will deliver him, because he put his trust in me: I will protect and defend him, because he knew my name; that is, my might, my mercy, my love, to all that call upon me, and put their trust in me. Again, Our Lord will help them and deliver them, 
Psal. 36.  and save them, Quia speraverunt in eo: even for that they trusted in him. The house of Israel trusted in our lord, and he was their helper and protector: the house of Aaron trusted in our lord, and he was their helper and protector, they that fear our lord, let themtrust in our lord, 
Psal. 113.  for he willbe their helper and protector. Call upon me in the day of tribulation and I will deliver thee, 
Psal. 49.  and thou shalt honour me: behold God takes it for honour done unto him, to call upon him in our distress and to be so well persuaded of his honourable care overall his people, that he will not let them perish under his hands. These being words of comfort uttered by the spirit of God, and recorded in his holy word; would it not grieve any Christian heart to hear some, other wise good souls, to say: oh I shall never see any amendment, things will never go better, while I live. Now poor spirited people, why do you to your own grief and others discomfort, take upon you to determine that which you are altogether ignorant of? who made you privy to God's counsels? what can you tell how long you shall live yourselves, or what shall happen in your days? you may very well say, that we have not deserved any such great grace at God's hands, nay rather that we are most unworthy of it: wherefore if God deal with us after our deserts, we shall never see that happy day: but do not take upon you to set bonds to Gods infinite mercies? the highest point whereof is to surpass infinitely, and to prevent all merit of man, and to go far beyond all human expectation. It troubleth me not to hear our persecutors say of us: 
Psal. 70.11.  God hath forsaken them, come, let us persecute and apprehend them, for there is no body to deliver them: or to cry out with the children of Edom against jerusalem: race it, raze it, even unto the foundation thereof. 
Psal 1, 6.7.  for they do but show blind Zeal, and over great confidence in their bad cause. But to see God's servants not to be as courageous in his quarrel, and as hopeful in his help & succour: is a great sorrow to my heart. which pusillanimity of ours springeth from no other root, then from want of deep, and often meditation of our blessed lords sovereign power, goodness, and mercy: and for want of due consideration, that it is only the true honour of God, and the restitution of his holy religion, which we so vehemently thirst after, and earnestly desire to see once again flourishing in our country. which (we doing our parts) God will no doubt, for his own glories sake in time perform. To those puling and dejected spirits, let me be bold to speak in these words of the Apostle. 
Heb. 10.35.  Do not therefore cast away your confidence, which hath a great recompense of reward. for patience is necessary for you, that doing the will of God, you may receive the promise. for yet a little, and a very little; he that is to come, will come, and will not slack or tarry. and my just liveth by faith. And if any man draw back, he shall not please my soul. But we are not children of withdrawing to perdition: but of them that believe, to the saving of the soul. which words of the Apostle are taken out of the like of the prophet Abacuc who saith. If he make delay, wait for him, for coming he will come (that is, he will not fail but surely come) and will not stay long. 
Abac. 2.3  behold he that will not believe this, his soul is not right, but the just man shall live in his faith. Out of both which the prophets, and Apostles words, I gather a necessity imposed upon all right and good souls, if not to believe assuredly, yet to live in great hope and confidence, of speedy succour from God for their delivery. otherwise they not only want that special virtue of hope, but also are in danger (according to the foraleaged testimony of the holy Ghost) of drawing back and falling away from the state of salvation to their own everlasting perdition. After these plain testimonies taken out of the word of God, I hope the good Catholic Reader will give me leave to employ one probable conjecture taken out of the prudent observation of some virtuous judgements. It cannot be denied that priests and religious persons be under God the chief planters and waterers of the Catholic Roman religion. for they by preaching, teaching, administering of Sacraments, and training up of others in virtue, and by their good example do settle, uphold, and confirm all the rest in matter of faith and religion. It is long sithence it pleased God of his great goodness to grant us in foreign nations some colleges, and seminaries to breed and bring up virtuous & learned priests. And within these few years (since the persecution at home waxed hotter) divers houses both for religious men and women, have been erected for our countrymen abroad, and many worthy persons inspired by God, have retired themselves into the same. Behold then the foundation laid by the providence and mercy of God, for the erecting and building up of Christ's Catholic church amongst us again. Now I am well assured that no man dare say, that God is to be likened to that foolish builder reprehended in the Gospel, who having laid the foundation of a tower could not bring it to perfection, and was therefore worthily mocked of the beholders, saying; 
Luc. 14.  hic homo coepit aedificare & non potuit consummare. this man began ro build but could not bring his work to an end. Our saviour then having already (as we be verily persuaded) planted the foundation of that most holy Edifice, he will not fail in short time to bring it to perfection. Many goodly great stones and fair tall timber trees, with other necessary furniture to build up the walls of jerusalem are already prepared: now to rough hue, square, and smooth them, persecution is permitted: And much blood of Martyrs hath been plentifully powered out, to temper the lime and sand, that must unite and join fast together all the parts of that spiritual building. It may be that some principal pieces or workmen do yet want, whom when it shall please the great master of the work, to convert & assemble with their est: what let will there be, even in man's judgement, for the accomplisment of this heavenly work? wherefore with comfortable confidence let us ride out the storm, and with patiented longanimity persever faith full unto the end: with earnest devout prayers, craving the aid of our most merciful father in heaven, & with humble obedient behaviour towards our prince and his Magistrates, seek to assuage their wrath kindled (as we know) without cause, so vehemently against us in earth. then shall we both fulfil towards others, and finally (by the grace of God) shall see fulfilled towards us, that which the famous ancient Doctor Origen, hath recorded of the best Christians in the primitive Church, in these memorable words, with which I will conclude this Chapter. 
Orig l 2. contracts sum responsione ad 2. Cal.  Christians taught not to fight against their persecutors, have by observing duly the mild temperate law of their sounder Christ jesus, more prevailed, then if they had received commission from him to have waged war against their enemies. God almighty defending them, and fight for them, and at seasonable times restraining the persecutors of the Christian name. Some noble champions of his, he suffered (for their greater approbation and glory) to be put to death: that the beholders of their constant valour, and sweet mildness in that bloody agony, might thereby be the sooner induced to embrace their religion: yet God so mitigated the matter, that he permitted not all that holy kind of people to be cut down. for his divine purpose was, that they should grow, and that all nations should be replenished with their godly and saving doctrine. And sometimes he gave calms, that the weaker sort and wearied, might have respite to breath, to repair their losses, and to gather new forces: until at length it pleased his divine Majesty, of his infinite mercy and compassion towards his faithful servants, so to defeat all their adversaries plots and devices against them: that neither the king nor the precedents and judges, nor any other Magistrates, no not the common people could be exasperated and stirred up, to persecute them any longer. which wonderful grace the omnipotent (that hath set bounds unto the billoes of the roaring seas, saying hitherto ye shall pass, but go no further) out of his most tender mercies grant unto his much afflicted, yet very faithful servants, in our poor country. Amen.   

AN ANSWER TO M. ABBOT'S PREface to the Reader.  
MR. Abbot to make his reader understand the manner of his proceeding in this book of his, relateth what he had done before, in this manner.  
First (saith he) I have challenged the name Catholic from the popish use, and proved that the papists could no more take that title to them, but by mere usurpation. Afterward I entered into a comparison consisting of three parts. whereof the first was to declare, that neither S. Paul's, nor S. Peter's Epistles, contain any defence of the doctrine now taught at Rome. the second, that sundry definitions of the ancient Roman faith, were wholly agreeable to that which the protestants teach, and is impugned by the church of Rome that now is. the third and last was to prove, that sundry heresies condemned of old by the Roman church, be now defended by the same church of Rome.  
which points being (as every man seethe) all and every one, of marvelous great moment; yet M. Abbot doth here confess and acknowledge, that in his answer unto my Epistle to his Majesty, he handled them only positively, that is to say, briefly and superficially, the occasion then (as here he says) requiring no more; purposing afterwards when opportunity should serve a longer treatise thereof. in the mean time (saith he) Doctor Bishop published a reproof of my defence of the reformed Catholic: setting under this title a Gorgon's head, to affright all men concerning me, as having abused God's sacredword; mangled, misapplied, and falsified the ancient father's sentences: so that whosoever hath any care of his own salvation, can never hereafter credit me in matter of faith & religion. Concerning which hideous outcry of my falsifications, I refer thee to the advertisement which I have added to the third part of that defence, where I have scourged him accordingly. this is the effect of M. Abbot's entry into this his work.  W. B. 
THIS being but a preparation to make way to that which followeth, I need not stand long upon it. that vain and untrue vaunt of his, that the hath won the name and title of Catholic from us, I pass over here as a vanity: because it is elsewhere to be handled more at large. but I may not omit to put the Reader in mind, how contrary M. Abbot is to himself in his own judgement about his own work. here he saith (as you have heard) that he did set down in his answer to my Epistle, those three branches of comparison between the ancient and modern church of Rome, only positively: yielding also the reason, because the occasion then required no more. yet whosoever pleaseth to read his preface of the same 
a defence of the reformed Catholic.  work to the reader, shall find him there to speak in an other key. I have (saith he there) had care to give the reader satisfaction in the questions here discussed (of which these comparisons were a great part) and to stop the adversaries mouth, that he may have no thing further to reply. I have according to Tertullia's rule, endeavoured to make truth to use all her strength. I have taken time convenient to levy such troops and bands, that I may not need to doubt of the victory. compare these places together, and tell me whether they be not plain contradictory? to handle questions positively and briefly: And to treat of them so fully, and in such exquisite manner, that to the very adversary nothing should be left to reply. there he wrote, that he took convenient leisure to leavy such troops and bands, that he needed not to doubt of victory. here having seen his said troops and bands harassed and defeated, he is of another mind, and upon better advice acknowledgeth, that his former furniture was slender, and that he handled the matter but superficially. whether of these should the good Reader believe? both he cannot, being so contrary the one to the other. yet being one and the same great Doctor that hath set down both in print, and recommended both to his reader; he may hap to stagger, which of them he is to take for true. M. Abbot so highly magnified there, his uttermost endeavour to discuss those matters plentifully and exactly: that he left to himself here no colour for this poor excuse which he cometh in withal, of handling these questions positively. well, if the master of the work himself surveying it better over upon my advertisement, do think his former arguments and answers, (which then he took to be complete and insoluble) to be both slender and feeble: I make no doubt but that the discreet reader will do him so much honour and credit, as to follow his judgement therein, and to esteem no better of them, than he himself doth, that favoureth them most, and should know them best. surely me thinks it must needs be a sufficient wrning to any man to beware how he believeth him, who doth not believe himself in his former writings. Now to that big brag of his, that he hath in a brief advertisement trowneed me terribly, & like a Saturnian frowning angry schoolmaster scourged me accordingly: Good be thanked, his words be but wind. for the poor scholar so piteously whipped by him, feels no pain at all. But what meant he to hide that Choleric pamphlet of his (written in more haste belike, then good speed) in such a corner, that a man must ride to the latter end of the third part of his long tedious books, ere he can find it out? well sith it hath pleased him to range it in that place so far out of the way, he cannot be offended that I do not answer it, till I come thither. in the mean season let the judicious reader, take a scantling by this my answer unto his work of longer meditation, how easily that short pamphlett, written both in haste and in passion, may be answered.  M. AB. 
BUT in that reproof of his, very little it is that he hath said, for justifying what he himself had before written: not being able in deed to defend any one point thereof. only he found some what to cavil, concerning my debating of the name Catholic, and the comparison I made betwixt the old and new Roman church: and thereof as touching the matter in substance, he hath framed his book.  W. B. 
What he should say or do, that dealeth with such a shameless writer, I assure thee good Reader I do not well know. my book is extant, and in many men's hands, as he cannot be ignorant: Let them all, or whosoever else pleaseth to read it, be judges between us, whether from the very preface unto the end of my boo●● I do any thing else then plead in justification of what I had before written? putting down, word by word, first, what exception M. Abbot had taken against the same: then answering directly to every point and parcel thereof. must he not then (if any grace be left in him) blush at these his words, that I said very little for iustifieing what I had before written? where more is said to that very purpose, I think than he willbe well able to answer these seven years. he that in the Entry of his book sticketh not to tell such gross tales, what credit doth he deserve in the residue? he confesseth that I said something of the nam● Catholic, and of his comparison between the old and new Roman church: which is true. but when he signifieth that thereof in substance my whole book was framed, he goeth about to deceive, and that very grossly. for beside sundry other matters, I treated of these very three points in particular, which M. Abbot pretends to be most pertinent to his purpose. To wit, the first, that Saint Paul both in his Epistle to the Romans, and in the rest, doth teach most branches of the Roman doctrine. which is handled from the page of my book 134. unto 149. The second that so did also some of the most holy & best learned ancient Bishops of Rome; from p. 149. unto p. 219. And as plainly against the third point, I declared that not so much as one heresy condemned of old, is by the modern church of Rome revived or countenanced: but that the protestants do in express terms revive, bolster out, and uphold many old rotten errors and heresies, recorded and condemned for such by the most sound, sincere and juditiouse witnesses of the primitive church; S. Augustin, Saint Ambrose, Saint Hierome S. Epiphanius, and others; see the page 251. and many after. all which being to be found most certain and true, with a wet finger (as they say) by turning only to the places quoted; the reader if he have any care to find out the truth, and to avoid errors, will (I hope) take notice at the length of M. Abbots most palpable and notorious leasings, who would make him believe that there were nothing of substance in my book of any of those matters.  R. ABBOT. 
TO this therefore I have addressed my description of the ancient Roman Catholic, forbearing that more orderly course, which I had intended for the performance of this work, and choosing rather to follow him step by step, as formerly I have done, only beginning where he cometh to the purpose, and leaving all his vagaries, and affected discourses to he more briefly touched in the end of all.  W. B. 
YOU may here discover why M. Abbot was bold to strain a point, and to say that I only touched the name Catholic, and that comparison: that he (forsooth) addressing an answer thereunto, might be taken to have, if not proceeded orderly, yet to have spoken to the purpose directly. But it being evident and clear, that I handled as well those other three points, and in the same order, as he propounded them: every understanding man may perceive, that his purpose was rather to shift from orderly proceeding, and to thrust out some such stuff as he had ready for the present, to entertain his favourable reader, and for the rest to take a longer day. whereas he says, that he hath followed me step by step, he should rather have said leap by leap: and that with such unexpected nimble dexterity in a man of his declining age, and heavy constitution: that at the very first feeze, he hath overlept fourscore and seven pages of mine; smoothing the matter over, as though all that had been vagaries, & voluntary discourses of mine own: when as in deed there is not one passage of them, but in answer to another of his, there also set down, as every one may see. And that the reader may take a vieu of his substantial answering my book, may it please him to consider, that in my whole book there are but two hundred, fourscore and six pages in quarto. unto threescore and one whereof, M. Abbot's answer doth extend only: he beginning at the 87. and ending at the 148. and yet hath he chopped of by the way 7 pages at one blow, as he confesseth himself in the 227. page of his book: so that in all, he hath answered unto 54 sides, that is 27 leaves in quarto: which doth not amonut to 7 sheets of paper. Now out of these 7 sheets, you must also draw M. Abbot's own text which is comprised within mine, and taketh up near hand the third part thereof; so that in true reckoning his pretty thick book in quarto, is but an answer to little more than four sheets of mine; And yet the vanity of this braggadochio is such, that he would make his simple reader believe, that he hath coursed me jolily, following me step by step, and leaving nothing of substance in all my book unanswered.  R. AB. 
OF this work I have finished but one only part, wherein I have at large discovered their vain ostentation of the Catholic name and faith, and showed plainly, that the Romish religion accordeth not with Saint Paul's Epistle to the Romans; nor with his other Epistles which M. Bishrop Calleth to assist him: because he findeth nothing to help him in that Epistle to the Romans. In all which I have been careful (gentle reader) to give thee satisfaction by the Clear testimony, either of some learned Bishop of Rome, or by some other famously approved and commended by that church. Being now required a service of another kind, so that I cannot yet go forward with the rest: I have thought good to publish this in the mean time. If I have promised any thing in this, that is not here performed, expect it in that that is to come. Assist me I pray thee, with thy prayers unto Almighlie God, by whose grace I hope in due time to supply that that is wanting now.  w. B. 
BEcause I have (as I hope) sufficiently displayed in my former book, the man's vain humour in presuming above measure upon his own strength, and showed that his vaunting words do far surpass his slender works: Therefore I do now only desiret the reader to suspend his judgement, till he come to behold the combat itself. which I trust to obtain the sooner, because M. Abbot himself notwithstanding his former flourish, seemeth here to fear some after clapp: And therefore entreateth his gentle reader to bear with him, if he hath not performed in this, that which he promised: and to pray to God to help him forth with it, and then to expect (by tom long the carrier) some more worthy piece of work for a supply. I am glad to see some more modesty in the man then was wont to be. we have not now as he fond vaunted in his first book, the whole truth furnished and set out with all its strength, and such troops and bands levied, as should fright and put to flight all the world: but one part of a poor piece of work, wherein he doubteth also whether he hath performed so much as he promised. seeing the world so amended and such a towardly disposition in him, my poor prayers shall not be wanting that he may have grace to see his wn weakness, to understand daily better and better the badness of their cause, to feel more and more the feebleness of man's wit, setting itself against the might of God's truth; and so by little and little to retire himself from the bolstering out of that which he perceiveth not to be substantial and sound: and begin at length to employ his talents to the honour of him, and in defence of his cause, that hath bestowed them upon him. In the mean season goods it, what reason have you to except against me, for employing the other Epistles of S. Paul, aswell as that to the Romans, in favour of the Roman religion? be not proofs taken out of any of the other as pregnant and forcible, as if they were taken out of that? are they not all alike canonical and of the same divine authority? you do but dream, when you imagine, that proofs taken out of that to the Romans, be more proper than others, for confirmation of the Roman faith. should not the Romans believe any thing delivered in the other Epistles of S. Paul as firmly, & receive it as currently, as if it had been written to themselves? Again, that Epistle was not penned by the Romans to declare their faith, but was by the Apostle addressed to them for their further instruction and consolation. wherefore it can be no more properly called a profession of their faith, then of any other Christians: every Christian being as well bound to believe all written therein, as the Romans.  
M. Abbot contrary to his own knowledge & eyesight, doth say that I craved aid of the other Epistles of S. Paul, because I could find nothing to help me, in that to the Romans. for I do allege many texts out of that very Epistle, in proof of the Catholic cause. I desire thee reader but to turn to the 135. page of my book, and if he there do not find, that I have employed as many sentences thereof to maintain our cause, as M. Abbot (that brags so much of it) hath done to uphold theirs: then let him take M. Abbot for a true man: but it being certain that I have as plentifully produced testimonies out of it, how canst thou choose but censure M. Abbot for a man, that makes small conscience what he says of his adversaries writing? finally to underpropp his credit, which he saw tottering and like to decay; he averreth that he hath been careful to give his Reader satisfaction in his allegations used in this book. having made choice only, either of some learned Bishops of Rome, or of others famously approved by that church. But what if that be not so neither? doth he not by heaping one false tale in the neck of another, much hasten on the downfall of his reputation and credit? who is ignorant that the Roman church hath condemned by name Cornelius Agrippa's book de vanitate scientiarum? and yet M. Abbot page 851 doth solemnly cite him, for one of his grave Authors. All the learned know that the church of Rome doth not greatly approve Erasmus censures and annotations upon S. Hieromes, and other Doctor's works. yet is he one of M. Abbots alleged Authors page 72, Now for watsons Quodlibets, Anianus fables, and other such like puddles, out of which M. Abbot takes some dregs, to give his gentle reader, satisfaction shall I say, or rather infection? I say no more, but that they must needs be very kind, favourable, yea foolish and simple readers too, that will take such base coin for good payment. And M. Abbot thereby is convinced to be no man of his word. for having promised nothing but taken out of Authors famously approved by us, he doth notwithstanding produce many writers of no estimation at all in our church.  
Thus have I briefly run over all. M. Abbot's preface, that the whole drift of his book might be disclosed, and that the unpartial reader might withal take a taste of the manner of his dealing; which if it consist much of craking, shifting, and misreporting, he may conjecture what he is to expect of him in that which followeth. I have stood here upon the particulars, to show the reader what advantage I might take of his words, if I would do the like in his whole book. But well weighing how small profit the reader should reap out of any such verbal contention; I will utterly avoid it, and in as short and perspicuous sort as may be, I will relate truly the sense and substance of what M. Abbot saith, and there unto frame my answer. That the good reader may lose no time, but with ease and speed, trace out and find where the truth resteth. God grant him grace to embrace and follow it, and in his prayers to recommend unto the father of light (from whom all good gifts do descend) my poor endeavours, that through his heavenly blessing, they may yield that fruit which I desire. And that both they and I, may serve his divine majesty faithfully all the days of this life, and finally through his infinite mercy obtain life everlasting. Amen.   

AN ANSWER UNTO M. ABBOT'S FIRST CHAPTER. The contents.  

whether the church of Rome, doth vainly and absurdly challenge to herself, the name of the Catholic church.  
THIS first paragraff or section M. Abbot doth make to justify the manner of his proceeding, before he come to the matter: but before all he thought it expedient, how undecent soever it were, to begin with a flourish in his own commendation thus.  R. AB. 
AS for the victory which I ominated to myself, thanks be to God I have obtained it, being become Master of the field: And M. Bishop enforced to leave the main battle, contented now out of a corner to thrust an ambush, that he may make some show, that he is not quite spent: I triumph over him in his own conscience.  W. B. 
NAturam expellas furca licet, usque recurret. see how hard a thing it is to drive a man from his old by as? M. Abbot hath been prettily well canvased, for his unmannerly vaunting of his own doings: yet he cannot be taught to leave it. custom is another nature. what will you? he dwelleth belike far from good neighbours, and is therefore enforced to praise himself. well, if he will needs prove himself a wizard, and one that can ominate, and tell good fortunes before they fall, how should I hinder him? I willingly confess that he doth but his duty, to thank the Lord for his good luck: and might for more complete joy, have called in his fellow Ministers with their wives, to have congratulated with him. But to put the censure of his triumph to his adversaries conscience, seemeth to excessive an amplification. for he was cock sure to be condemned by me, for singing a triumph before the victory, that before had told him plainly enough, that I scarce found any weighty point in his book worth the answering: and that there was better proof of their doctrine in two leaves of M. Perkins treatise, 
In my preface of the reproof.  then in ten of his. yea I moreover made so bold as to tell him, that his printed papers were more fit and proper to stop mustard pots, 
Ibidem. Page 94.  than any mean scholars mouth. was there any reason after such plain warning given him before hand of my dislike, once to imagine (if he had not been wonderfully conceited of himself) that I so highly esteemed of his writings, that I would without fail give him the prick and price. But why do I exact reason of an Augurer, or wiseman as they call him, that will needs dine into the secrets of my conscience? may not he peradventure by help of his Astronomical skill, see there that, which I cannot espy myself?  
In good sadness honest sir, tell me I pray you, why you say, that I left the main battle, and was content out of a corner to thrust out an ambush? when as I marched in the face of your forces, and encountered with the forefront of your battle; setting down your discourse even as yourself had ranged it, making answer to the very first words, and so continuing without interruption: very impertinently then do you charge me with lying in ambush, and setting on you out of corners. These odd terms of an old rusty ragged soldier, may be much more properly returned on yourself, that hath leapt over so many scores of the first pages of my book, and left as many of the last unanswered; slipping over also some of the midst. what is to lie in ambush and to set on a book out of corners, if this answering of it by snatches be not? but leaving these idle speeches wherewith M. Abbot's book is stiff bombasted, let us come fair and roundly to the matter; which in this section is to show, whether he hath proceeded orderly or no in his discourse? that the learned reader may the better be able to judge of it, I will summarily rehearse how we fell into this Question, whether the Roman church be the Catholic church or Noah.  
I in the Epistle Dedicatory of my first book against M. Perkins, humbly. besought his Majesty that he would be pleased to embrace that true Catholic and Apostolic faith, in which his most royal progenitors lived and died, whereunto M. Abbot answered, that my petition was needles; because his Majesty had already embraced the same true, Catholic, and Apostolic faith. which to prove he made as it were this argument. The Catholic church is that which is spread over all the world, but the Roman church is not spread over all the world, therefore the Roman church is not the Catholic church. To which I replied, that granting the mayor or first proposition to be true; the minor or second was not so direct to his purpose, as if he- should have subsumed: but the English church, (the faith whereof his Majesty embraceth) is spread over all the world. or at least, the English church is a true member of that church, which is spread over all the world; for whether the church of Rome be the Catholic church or no, the faith which his Majesty embraceth cannot be Catholic, unless it be that which either hath been, or now is spread over all the world. therefore no man can deny, but that it had been a more direct and speedy course, to have proved their own church to be Catholic, then to go about to disprove the church of Rome to be Catholic. for let us suppose that which M. Abbot would have, (though it be most untrue) that the church of Rome were not the Catholic church; Doth it thereupon follow, that the church of England is Catholic? nothing less. for there have been and are many erring & no Catholic congregations by the consent of all men, different and dissenting from the church of Rome. as for example were of old the Arrians, the Donatists, Macedonians. and at this time be, the Trinitarians, Anabaptists, and such like. supposing then the church of Rome not to be Catholic, and that the English church doth not agree with the said church; may it not nevertheless be some other erroneous congregation, that is fa●r enough of from being Catholic? there being in the world so many other of that bad mark and stamp? It must needs then follow, that M. Abbot beginning with the church of Rome, neither took a speedy and direct, nor yet a sure course, to prove his majesties faith to be Catholic. M. Abbot in his own excuse saith: that to prove his majesties faith to be Catholic, he must needs declare what the Catholic church was: because of the Catholic church it is, that the faith is called the Catholic faith. This I admit for good doctrine, and do desire the Reader to bear it well in mind: that the Catholic faith must needs be sought for in the Catholic church, and cannot be found out, before we have the Catholic church to teach it us. because as M. Abbot affirmeth here, of the Catholic church it is, that the faith is called the Catholic faith. well go on good Sir, I grant that you did well to declare what was the Catholic faith, and what was the Catholic church too, But having declared what was the Catholic church and faith, why did you not go in hand to prove your English faith that his majesty maintaineth; or your English church, which he upholdeth, to be that same true Catholic church? To say that that stumbling block, to wit, that the church of Rome was the Catholic church) was first to be removed out of the way, will not serve the turn. for that was not necessary. when as the other if it had been true, might have been performed by itself, without any mention made of the church of Rome. And if your fingers itched to have a fling at the church of Rome, would it not have been more seemly and decent, first to have confirmed your own faith to be Catholic, which you took in hand? then having laid that foundation, to have declared that the faith of Rome was not Catholic. wherefore (I did neither idly nor preposterously (as you writ) require so much at your hands. but very preposterously do you proceed, and beyond all measure. extravagantly: that having spoken somewhat to declare what the Catholic church was, and that the church of Rome was not that Catholic church, do afterwards run through seven or eight questions more, and make an end of your book too, before you come to take one chapter to prove that your English church is the Catholic church; or that your English faith, is the Catholic faith. Is not this to forget yourself in the highest degree that is possible? to institute a treatise to prove his majesties faith to be Catholic, and to profess in the beginning of it, that to find out the Catholic faith, we must first find out the Catholic church: which being soon found out, and agreed upon; to be that which is spread over all the world: after wards in all the ensuing discourse, not to have one chapter to prove the English church or faith, to be spread all the world over. was not this utterly to lose himself, and to leave his reader as it were. in the middle of a maze? Peruse gentle reader the contents of all the chapters of M. Abbot's book, which be fowreteene in number, thou shalt not find one of them, so much as pretend to prove directly, the faith of England to have been dilated into all countries, the first is, that the church of Rome doth vainly pretend to be the Catholic church; the second consisteth of a comparison between the Papists and the Donatists. the third is about the Papists abuse of the name Catholic. the fourth, that the church before Christ, was a part of the Catholic church: and that the old and new testament do not differ in substance of faith. The fift, that religion cannot satly be grounded upon the example of fathers and forefathers. the sixth, that the reasons of popery are not urgent and forcible. The seventh, of the flourishing and best state of the church of Rome: and of the fullness of doctrine contained in Saint Paul's Epistle to the Romans: of Idolatry in worstipping of Saints. The eighth of justification before God. The ninth, of justification before man. The tenth, that eternal life cannot be purchased by merit. The eleventh, the first motion of concupiscence is sin. The twelfth; that the spirit gives witness to the faithful, that they be the sons of God. The 13. that good works are not meritorious of life to come The 14. that the Epistles of Saint Paul are loosely alleged by the papists. lo here is the end of the book and as a man may well say, finis ante principium, a conclusion of the work, before he begin to handle the principal point in question. to wit, whether that faith which his Majesty embraceth, be the Catholic faith. that is, whether at any time it hath been received in all Christian countries. so that in one word this book of M. Abbot's may be answered with a nihil dicit, as our common lawyers term it, that is, he hath said just nothing to that which he undertook to perform therein. for having taken in hand to prove, that the faith of the English congregation is Catholic, and consequently that it hath been universally planted in all nations: now to let that stand a cooling, and to argue that the church of Rome is not the Catholic church, but rather Donasticall: and that it abuseth the name Catholic: that the church in old father Abraham's days, was a part of the Catholic church; and such other impertinent questions: was it not rather (as one may say) to lead a wild Goose chase, and to wander up and down very strangely, then to speak to the point of the question propounded? And albeit it draw some what nearer the matter to go about to prove the Protestants doctrine, to be more conformable unto the old and new Testament, than the doctrine of the catholics: yet that is a several distinct question, and to be handled after another manner. for I do in one chapter join Issue with M. Abbot therein, and doubt not to make it good against any protestant, that the Catholic Roman faith is much more suitable even unto the very true text of the Bible, than the Protestants: and that by conference of our doctrine word by word, and sentence by sentence, with the very words and sentences of holy writ. But to prove our faith to be Catholic we take another course, and do demonstrate that the chief prelate's and Doctor's of the Catholic church, who have flourished in most Christian countries since the Apostles time, have taught the very same doctrine which we teach, and maintained the same faith, and served God with the same Religion, that we do. which M. Abbot must perform for their faith and religion, if he will have any wise men believe them to be catholics: even by his own explication of the name Catholic; in his answer to my Epistle; and by his own confession here, when he faith; that we cannot find out the Catholic faith, before we have found out the Catholic church; of which the faith is named Catholic. Now no man can find out the Catholic church, but by tracing out that company of the faithful who have peopled all Christian nations. which M. Abbot not being able to do for the protestants faith, doth return the same question to me: and would have me to do the same for our doctrine, and namely, for that point of the pope's power to depose Princes: which (as he says) Cardinal Bellarmine doth hold to be one of the chief points of our faith, 
Bell. Epistola ad A●b. apud ●ath. To●um.  and the very foundation of Catholic religion. Albeit M. Abbot would not at my request, do that honour to his own religion, and right to himself as to satisfy my just demand, he having before also undertaken it; yet I will not refuse at his instance, to demonstrate that article of faith (which Cardinal Bellarmin there mentioneth) to have been believed, taught, and practised in most christian countries, in the most flourishing time of the Catholic church: And that by the testimony of the best renowned fathers of the very same age. I will bring him in more authentik evidence for this issue than would be the hands and seals of the modern churches of Grecia, Armenia, Ethiopia, Russia, and such like schismatical and erring congregations, (which M. Abbot here demandeth) as the reader shall see in the next paragraph or division, where that question of the supremacy, shallbe treated of. But honest sir, why do you by the way so wound your credit in misalleadging that most learned Cardinals words? doth he in the place by you quoted say, that the supremacly of the pope, for the deposing of kings, is one of the chief points of the Catholic faith? will no warning serve the turn, to make you cite your authors sincerely? if this be the shuffling wherein your best skill consisteth, the reader in deed hath great need to look well to your fingers; Card. Bellarmine, both there and elsewhere doth teach, that the pope's supremacy is one of the principal heads of our religion. But he doth not affirm there, that the pope's power to depose princes, is any chief article of our faith. though he taught that to be a most probable opinion, and in some sort to appertain to the supremacy, as a dependent thereupon. Now to that which followeth out of an other place of Card. Bellarmin; he (you say) shall free us from need to travel for this proof (to wit that our English faith hath been spread all the world over) who saith, that though one only province did retain the true faith, yet the same might properly be called the Catholic church (and therefore their faith the Catholic faith) so long as it could be clearly showed, that the same is one and the same, with that, which at any time was spread over the whole world. whereupon M. Abbot infers, that to prove their faith to be the Catholic faith, it willbe sufficient to prove, that is was that which once was spread over all the world. Now with the proof thereof M. Bishop (saith he) is chook already. Behold the babbling of this vain man. first the Cardinal doth not ease him any whit at all, from proving their faith to have been spread over all the world: but only saith upon supposition, (Si sola una provincia retineret veram fidem, if one only province kept the true faith) that then it might be called Catholic: yet so, that it could be clearly showed, to have been spread in times past, over all the world. where you see, that he requires of necessity, that it must be clearly showed, that the same faith which willbe accounted Catholic, hath been before at lest spread over all the world. so that M. Abbot is as far to seek as he was before, and that he must needs come to this stake, how unwilling soever he be, and either show that their faith hath been received all Christendom over, or else confess that it cannot be called Catholic. Come of then gentle Sir, fly not from the point, seek not to hide your head in a corner, but perform that piece of service bravely, and then hardly talk of chooking M. Bishop. but to avouch that M. Bishop is chook already, long before any proof thereof be brought, with only hearing you to speak of it, is too too childish, and full of doting vanity.  
I found fault with M. Abbot, for shuffling and flitting from the faith and religion of the Romans, unto the particular persons that inhabit the city of Rome: because their faith may be Catholic and spread over all the world, albeit their persons be confined within the bounds of one country or city. he answereth, that he hath shuffled amiss for us: for that he hath shuffled us from b●ing Catholics; and the Roman church, from being the Catholic church. which is not to the purpose: And how true it is, shallbe tried in the next chapter. In the mean season it must needs be taken for a foul fault in arguing, to change the terms, and to flit from one thing to another: and for the faith of the Romans, to take the persons that inhabit Rome; there being no less difference between the person of a man and his faith; then there is between a fox and a fearnebrake. finally M. Abbot saith that, his shuffling will yield us but a bad game, if I cut not wisely: And if we have no better Cards (saith he) we shall s●rely le●se all. well gentle sir, seeing you confess yourself to be such a cunning shuffler, and give me so fair warning of it before hand: I will take the pain to shuffle your Cards after you: or else will cut them in such sort, that your skill in packing shall stand you in little steed. If there be no remedy but that you will needs have about with the church of Rome, be it by order, or be it by disorder; look you handle your weapons more handsomely than you have done hitherto, or else you are like enough to receive the foil.   

An answer unto the second section of the first chapter.  
MR. Abbot to make a smother way to his doughty arguments, by which he striveth to prove the Roman church not to be the Catholic church, saith; that he entereth unto them, to note the absurdity implied in this common style of catholics, the Catholic Roman church. How now good sir? have you so soon forgotten the errand whereabout you went? did not you undertake to demonstrate, that his majesty had already embraced the Catholic faith? And if you will needs leave that which you professed to pursue in the suds for a season, and fall upon the church of Rome; do not stand trifling upon terms and titles, like an idle Caviller: but as it beseems a Doctor of the chair, prove sound if you can that the now church of Rome, doth not believe and profess all points of the Catholic faith. whether the church of Rome, may be called absolutely the Catholic church or no, or in what sense it is so called, are other by questions, scarce incident, at lest nothing necessary, to that we have now in hand. for whether the church of Rome be styled the Catholic church or no, so that it hold entirely the true Catholic faith, then may his majesty lawfully and laudably, receive and defend the whole doctrine of the said church: and to obtain salvation, must make himself a member thereof. which was all that I humbly craved of his most excellent Majesty. The issue then of this present question, and the mark that M. Abbot should level at, is to show, that his majesty embracing the faith of the church of Rome, should not embrace the true Catholic faith. if he do not effect this, he doth nothing. if leaving his issue, he fall to plucking of vizards (as he to excuse his unseasonable digression doth write) from I know not whose faces, (as though he going about this matter, had met by the way, with some mask or mummery) may he not well be resembled to a boy that sent on an errant falleth to blowing of feathers, whither the wind will carry them, and lets his Master's business alone till he hath ended his own sport? but such is the man's humour, he must be dispensed withal for observing any good order; well, seeing there is no remedy, let him range at his pleasure, let us wink at the method, so the matter be tolerable. thus then doth he go about to prove the Roman church not to be Catholic. No particular church can be the Catholic church; but the Roman church is a particular church. Ergo the Roman church is not the Catholic church. Again to the same effect, No part can be the whole; but the Roman church is a part of the Catholic church. therefore it cannot be the whole Catholic church. These be his arguments reviewed, and put into the best frame that may be, to avoid all disputes about the form. As I do very willingly also let pass his most idle babbles of Balaams and Anianus Asses, and his scarce sweet poem of horse balls singing in the pool. Nos poma natamus: because such scurrility becomes not divines, yea is scarce tolerable in any sort of civil men: to the Arguments then thus I answer.  
If the conclusion were granted to M. Abbot, he were no whit the nearer to obtain his intended purpose. for what is there concluded against the church of Rome, may in the very same form be concluded against the church of England. for example; no particular church can be the Catholic church, but the church of England is a particular church, therefore it cannot be the Catholic church? which is so apparent, that M. Abbot cannot deny it. whereupon it followeth most clearly, that this argument can serve no more for dissuading his majesty from admitting the doctrine of the church of Rome, 
Page 13.  then from entertaining the doctrine of the church of England. therefore it is to be rejected, as wholly impertinent to this purpose. But M. Abbot saith, that at least it will serve to convince the absurdity of the papists style, who use to couple together these two terms Catholic Roman: which hangeth no better together (saith he here) then universal particular. though afterward better advised, he within the compass of two leaves doth confess, that both these terms may in good sense be joined together. these be his words. Particular churches are called Catholic, and particular persons are Called Catholics, as a man would say, universalists, for maintaining communion and fellowship of the Catholic faith with the church of the whole world; so that even after M. Abbot's own declaration, a Roman Catholic is not as much to say as a particular universal, but a particular man or church, that holdeth communion of faith with the universal church.  
was it not then a great oversight in a man reputed to ●ee of some judgement, to insist so vehemently upon trifling terms, that were both besides the purpose; and withal true in themselves (as you shall hear afterwards) if they be evenly and fairly taken. Notwithstanding because the foresaid arguments be as it were the common hackneys of protestants, ever and anon in their mouths and writings, and have not been formerly answered by any that I have seen; and for that the solution of them will serve to answer all that M. Abbot hath raked together against the church of Rome in four paragraffes of this chapter, I will more particularly and fully dissolve them.  
I say then first, the argument is mistaken, and doth not conclude that which is in question. the question is not, whether the Roman church be the Catholic church in universal: but whether the Roman church may be called the Catholic church, or rather whether it may be couched together in style with the Catholic church. M. Abbot saith no, these be his words. For the pulling of this vizard from their faces, I noted the absurdity that is employed in that style, of the Catholic Roman church: for the Catholic church (I say) is the universal church, the Roman church is a particular church, therefore to say the Catholic Roman church, is all one as to say, the universal particular church. This was M. Abbots first argument; and the drift of it was to disprove that style of ours, the Catholic Roman church. Now in his latter reformed argument, he is come to change the terms, and in stead of that, the particular Roman church, cannot be said, called or styled, the Catholic church: doth bring in his conclusion, the Roman church is not the Catholic church: wherein lieth a great fallacy; for as the learned do well know, tranfire a rebus ad voces, v●lè contra, à vocibus adres, est agere sophistam. he plays the part of a sophister, that passeth either from things to words, or from words to things. which all protestants do, when they use this kind of argument: for the question is about terms and a style of speech: wherefore the conclusion must be, so it may not be termed, or so it cannot be styled; and not passing from the term or style, to conclude so it is not. here one may well demand how things can be so termed, if they be not so in themselves? I answer that it often falleth out, that one thing is called by the name of another thing, though it be not fully out the same. for example, some part may be called by the name of whole, though it be not the whole, as a part of the air, is called the air: any part of the water, is called water. Against which if a man should reason as M. Abbot doth, no part is the whole, but this is a part of water, therefore it is not the whole; the conclusion might be granted him, and yet had he gotten nothing thereby, but the imputation of misarguing, and not concluding that which was in question; the question being, whether a part might be called by the name of the whole, which he toucheth not: and not whether it were the whole or Noah, which only he disputeth. it fareth even so in the former argument. for the question being whether with the Catholic church, might be linked in the same style, the church of Rome; he concludes only that the church of Rome is not the Catholic church: which if we grant him, he were never the nearer: for albeit the church of Rome were not the Catholic church taken in universo, or absolutely: yet may it be called by the name of the whole, and much more, be in style linked with the whole. first, because every particular church (that keepeth communion of faith and religion with the universal Catholic church) may be called and termed the Catholic church. which M. Abbot himself confesseth, 
Page 17.  and citeth diverse good auctors to prove it: as 
a Leo Epistola 12.  Leo pope of the Catholic church of Rome: 
b Collat. cum donat. cognition 1. c. 16.  Aurelius, Bishop of the Catholic church of Carthage. 
c August. cō●rescon. l. 3. c. 13.  All the African Catholic churches, and so forth. where you see by the ancient style of approved prelate's and Doctor's, Catholic Roman, and Catholic African, and such like may very well in style be joined together, without any fear of being scorned by the unskilful, for a particular universal. The second reason why we rather join Roman to Catholic, than the name of any other church, is for that the Roman church in faith and religion never hath been, nor never shallbe separated from the universal Catholic church, as shallbe here after declared. whereupon as they shall ever hold together in soundness of faith, so may they be always linked together in verity of style. Thirdly, for that we believe (as every good Christian ought to do, which in this section shall beproved) the Roman church to be the chief, and as it were the head of the universal church, and therefore the Roman may rather in style be coupled with the universal Catholic then any other. This then is the first fault and that a very foul one. which M. Abbot doth commit in this argument, he doth not conclude that which is in question, but flitteth away from it and quite changeth the terms. wherefore having altered it he doth say untruly, that he hath reduced it into mood and figure; which if he would have done rightly, thus he should have framed his argument. No particular church can be joined in style with the Catholic church, or can be called the Catholic church; but the Roman church is a particular church: Ergo, it cannot be joined in style or called the Catholic church. If it had been thus reduced into mood and figure, as true scholastical, and plain dealing required, it had not had in it any one good proposition. I have proved already that the mayor is false, because any particular church (sound in faith and religion) may be called the Catholic church, and joined in style with the Catholic: even as well and as truly, as any part of the air, may be called the air. And more specially the church of Rome, for the privileges it hath of continuing always in the true faith; and for her superiority in government. The minor also or second proposition is not universally true. for albeit that church of Rome, that is contained within the walls and Diocese of Rome, be a particular church: yet the church of Rome in a larger signification, may be taken for the whole Catholic church, and design aswell the true church of france, of England, or any other nation, as that of Italy. which I will demonstrate in the next paragraff. wherefore the minor proposition (which is, but the church of Rome, is a particular church) is not absolutely true: because it may aswell be taken for the universal, as for a particular church. both the premises then and former propositions, being subject to reprehension, the conclusion must needs be stark nought. Briefly in that argument whereof the Protestants do make such account, there be three foul faults. Two be in it, as they frame it: the first, in that it mistaketh or changeth the terms, and in steed of concluding the Roman church, not to be called or styled the Catholic church, they conclude, that it is not the Catholic. The second, in that they take for granted, that the Roman church is only a particular church, when as it may and is often taken for the universal. The third fault, will show itself in the first proposition when the argument comes to be rightly framed thus. No particular church can be called or styled the Catholic church: which is most false. because every true particular church may be called the Catholic church or styled with the Catholic.  
M. Abbots second argument being not much unlike the first may in like manner be defeated, yet more shallbe said of it in the fourth paragraff.  
Now to make good the reasons that I have given, why the church of Rome may be more specially linked with the Catholic in style, namely, for her superiority in government; this present paragraff must be employed. where M. Abbot doth what he can, to infringe the same. in the next section it shallbe proved that the Roman church may well signify the whole Catholic church. in the last section of this chapter, we shall speak a word or two of M. Abbot's later argument.  
Concerning the supremacy of the church of Rome, M. Abbot acknowledgeth to belong unto that church as it then was, eminency of place, precedence of honour, authority of estimation; but no authority of power, or superiority in government, over any of the rest. which to make good, he suiteth a long disorderly discourse, now carping at that which I said before, in defence of that superiority of government: then pouring forth many arguments confusedly, some here, some there, to disprove the same: so that, I can scarce devise how to range them in any good order. yet to make the matter as sensible and perspicuous, as his perplexed proceeding will give me leave: I will gather into the first place what he hath scatteringly disputed against the supremacy of the church of Rome, and give answer to that. Secondly I will confirm our part. Lastly, I will examine how sufficiently he hath answered my former arguments, made to prove the same. M. Abbots first argument against the primacy of the sea of Rome, is taken ab authoritate negative, as scholars do use to speak, from authority negatively. which kind of reasoning, though among the protestants it be holden for currant in matter of faith: yet he can not be ignorant, that we allow not of it; who hold some points of faith to be delivered by unwritten tradition: wherefore if he had not wanted judgement, he should not so confidently have used such kind of arguments against us.  
But let us hear them such as they be. S. Peter and S. Paul, do make no mention of this superiority of the church of Rome in their Epistles, therefore there is none such: this is a very vain and insufficient argument, even in the way of protestants. for albeit they would grant, that if there were no warrant for it in all the old or new testament, that then it were not to be credited: yet they would not deny, but that it might be a matter of faith, though there were no mention made of it in S. Peter, or S. Paul's Epistles, so that it be recorded in any other part of the scriptures: for all parts of the holy scriptures are alike true: wherefore any thing written in any parcel thereof, is as well to be believed, as if it were written in S. Peter's or S. Paul's Epistles. But M. Abbot urgeth in this manner: S. Paul writ an Epistle to the Romans, and therefore he would not have omitted that their privilege, if any such had been. I answer that S. Paul writ to the Romans not of all matters, but to instruct them in some important points of doctrine, and to comfort them in their tribulations: which he might well do, without making any mention of the privileges of their church. beside neither M. Abbot not any man else (I think) is able to show, that S. Paul in all that Epistle doth so much as once treat of Bishops, or church government: wherefore he had no occasion ministered to talk of the Roman churches supremacy. Let it for this time suffice, that S. Paul doth else where acknowledge S. Peter for a person of excellency, and his superior: as the holy learned Doctors do gather out of these his words. Then, after three years I came to Jerusalem to see Peter, 
Gallat. 1.18.  and tarried with him fifteen days. That going up of S. Paul to Jerusalem to visit S. Peter was not of curiosity, but of duty, and by the law of faith, as 
a Tertul. de praescrip. cap. 23. Paulus sicut ipse narrat ascendit Hierosolymam cognoscendi Petri causa ex officio, & turc scilicet eiusdem fidei & praedicationis.  Tertullian taketh it. S. chrysostom 
b 
Chrysostomus superillum locum.  
Vi les quemad ●odum illis tribuit congruentem honorem, neque solum non ducit scipsum illis meliorem, verum ne parem quidem esse putat, id quod ex ipsa profectione liquet: non dixit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. quomodo loqui solent, quiinvisunt magnas urbes vel viros sanctos.   out of the Energy of the greek word collecteth, that it was to see and to visit Peter, as a person of excellency and majesty. And upon S. john's 
c Chrysost hom 87. in joannem. Petrus os erat Apostolorum, & Princeps, & vertex ipsius coetus, propterea & Paulus eum preter alios, visùrus ascendit, simul ut ei ostenderet tam ei fiduciam habendam.  Gospel addeth another cause of. that visit to have been, to certify Saint Peter of his extraordinary commission to preach the Gospel, that he might be credited of the Christians. which Saint Ambrose confirmeth in these words: It was meet 
d 
Ambros in 1 cap. ad Galatas.  
Dignum fuit ut cuperet videre Petrum, qui primus erat inter Apostolos, cui delegaverat salvator curam ecclesiarum: non utique ut aliquid ab eo disceret, quia iam ab auctore didicerit, à quo et ipse Petrus fuerat instructus; sed propter affectum Apostolatus, & ut sciret Petrus illi datam licentiam, quam & ipse acceperat.   meet that Saint Paul should covett to see S. Peter, who was the chief among the Apostles, to whom our Saviour had comitted the charge of the churches. Not that he should learn any thing of him, who had before been instructed of the same master, that S. Peter was: but for the quality of his Apostleshipp, and that S. Peter might know the same commission to be given to S. Paul of preaching which he had before received. 
e 
Hieronimi Epla 89.  
Denique tantae authoritatis Petrus fuit ut Paulus in Epistola sua scripserit: deinde post annos tres veni Hierosoliman videre Petrum, etc.   S. Hierome saith to the same effect. S. Peter was of so great authority, that S. Paul writeth he went to jerusalem to visit him. 
f 
Theodoret in 1. ad Galatas.  
Et hoc rursus Pauli virtutem ostendit: etenim cum humana doctrina non indigeret, ut qui ab universorum deo eam ante accepisset, Apostolorum principi quem par est honorem tribuit.   Theodoret thus: when S. Paul needed no instruction of men, having been taught by the Lord of all, he nevertheless deferred that honour to the ptince of the Apostles which was due. 
g 
Theophilactus ibidem.  
Paulus ad Petrum abijt non utilitatis gratia sed solo visendi study, honoranseum maiorem se, & notat ibidem verbum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 significare, cum observatione intueri.   Theophilact. S. Paul desired to see S. Peter, as a parsonage greater than himself, and went up with reverence to behold him.  
By the record of all these ancient fathers S. Paul went up to jerusalem to visit S. Peter, as the prince of the Apostles, and as the chief governor of the church: & to acquaint him with his extraordinary vocation; that having gotten his approbation, he might without contradiction be received of all others. Now to M. Abbots second argument, which is yet worse than the former. S. john did honour to the seven churches of Asia, 
Apoc. 2. & 3.  writing to them; and yet he would never speak of the seven hills of Rome, but as of the seat of the whore of Babylon. Ergo what you please: a mess of plum pottage if you will, for this pleasant jester, rather than disputer. hath this sophism so much as the shadow of a sorry argument? S. john in the 2. and 3. chapters of the revelations, makes no mention of the church of Rome's supremacy: Ergo there is no such matter in all the scripture. M. Abbot blushing at the ugly shape of this ill-favoured argument, to botch it out, doth add: that by those seven churches, are figured the whole church of Christ, and yet there is not a word in them of the supremacy of the church of Rome. I think well, nor of thundereth matters more that belong to the christian religion. for these seven short letters which S. john writes to the seven churches, are contained within the compass of three pages of one little leaf in octavo, in their own bible: and can any man be so simple as to dream, that all the points of our faith are comprehended within them? S. john commends the virtues, & reprehends the vices of those churches; but doth treat of very few points of doctrine: and therefore no strange case, if he spoke not of the supremacy of the church of Rome.  
M. Abbots third argument, the church of Rome hath a special caution given her, not to presume upon her stability in the faith, lest she fall. 
Rom. 11.20.  S. Paul saying to her: Be not high minded but fear: for if God spared not the natural branches, take heed also lest he spare not thee. Behold the bountifulness of God towards thee, if thou continue in his bountifulness, or else also thou shalt be cut of. Ergo what: he had need to be a cunning fletcher, that could make either a bolt or a shaft of this, fit for the purpose. First, here is nothing at all against the church of Rome's supremacy, nor yet any certain assertion against her stability in the received faith. For here is aswell a promise of God's bountifulness towards them, if they will do well: as a threat against them, if they do evil. Again, all this is beside the cushion: for though that Epistle be to the Romans, yet S. Paul there doth expressly direct that discourse not to the Romans in particular, but in general to all the Gentiles, beginning it thus: for to you Gentiles I say, etc. 
Ibid. v. 13  and goes on with a comparison between the jews and the Gentiles: so that nothing is more perspicuous, then that the warning there given, is not special to the Romans, but general to all Gentiles. These (lo) be the foregallants (shall I say) or rather the forlorn hope of M. Abbot's terrible arguments, marshaled by himself in the forefront of his batlle, to daunt the Enemy; are we not like (think you) to have a hot skirmish of it, where such dross and refuse of arguments, are thought worthy the first and best place? but it were pity that such a bad cause should be burnished & set out with any better.  
M. Abbot having given such a mighty push at our position, cometh to confute that I said, to wit: that it is deduced out of God's word rightly understood, according to the interpretation of the ancient fathers, that the church of Rome, is that rock upon which Christ built his church, against which the gates of hell shall never prevail. To which M. Abbot as though he went about to choke daws, says; that I give him chalk for cheese; because I promised a deduction out of the word of God, and in steed thereof, bring an exposition of the ancient fathers. Mark gentle reader my words, and then thou canst not but find M. Abbot to be an egregious wrangler. for I performed that deduction which I promised out of God's word, naming the very place out of which it is deduced. but because I joined with it, (according unto the exposition of ancient fathers) he like a man scarce well in his wits cries out, that in steed of scriptures I bring in an exposition of the fathers. when I do make mention of the father's exposition, not as the ground of my deduction, but only for the true sense of those words of holy scripture, out of which I do make the said collection. The deduction in my former book was very brief, because I did there point only at the places of holy scriptures, out of which it might be gathered; the question of the supremacy being there but touched by the way. whereof M. Abbot takes advantage and says, that I am dumb, and can say no more: because I will not be like to him, and out of season thrust forth long discourses of by questions. I having also before written a whole chapter of the supremacy, in my second part against M. Perkins: where M. Abbot saw well enough, that I could have said here much more of the same matter if need had so required. but such is his impudency, that he cares not what he say, so he may make a show to his simple reader, that he hath canvased his adversary. seeing that M. Abbot hath here huddled together very much of that matter, I will more at large set down these deductions, and orderly confirm each member thereof. The first fountain out of which all the rest do flow as rivers, is this. The chief superiority in government, and authority of power over all the church, was by our blessed Saviour given to S. Peter, and to his successors unto the end of the world: but the Bishops of Rome, are S. Peter's successors: therefore the Bishops of Rome have from our saviours grant and gift authority of power, and superiority of government over all the church. The mayor of this argument is to be deduced out of the word of God. the minor being a matter of fact, and that which happened after S. Peter's death, to wit, who was his successor: shall have sound proof out of the most approved testimony, of the best witnesses since that age. All which being performed, the conclusion, that the Bishop of Rome hath supreme commanding power over all the church, must needs stand most assured. That our blessed saviour gave superiority of government to S. Peter, under the metaphor of a rock or foundation in building when he said, Thou art Peter, 
Math. 16  and upon this rock I will build my church; Thus I prove. Christ made Peter the rock or foundation of his church: therefore he gave to him the chiefest place of government in it. for as the foundation is first placed and doth uphold all the rest of the building: so he that is the foundation in the spiritual building of Christ's church, hath the chiefest place therein, & is to command over all the rest. To make this more perspicuous, we must call to mind, that amongst other titles and names of the church of God, one is a house, as the Apostle showeth: that thou mayst know how to converse in the house of God, 
2. Tim. 3.15.  which is the church: and the faithful are called by the same Apostle, 
1. Cor. 3.9. Ephes. 4.12.  the building of God, Dei aedificatio estis. Again God gave some Apostles, some Doctors, etc. to the building up of the body of Christ. S. Paul as a wise Architect laid the foundation, and others builded thereupon. Now in that supernatural and heavenly building, 
1. Cor. 3.  though our saviour Christ jesus be the chief foundation and corner stone: yet next to himself he hath placed Saint Peter, and hath upon him, as upon a firm rock, builded his church: which is as much to say, as that he gave him firm and infallible authority, upon which all the faithful should rely, for final resolution, in all doubts of faith, religion, and manners, which do necessarily appertain to the edifying of Christ's church. this may serve for a cursory exposition of the first fountain of holy scripture, out of which I derived that our Saviour bestowed upon S. Peter the supreme place of government in his church: a fuller confirmation of it shall follow by and by.  
6 I might add for further proof of the same position out of Saint john's Gospel, how our blessed Lord severing Saint Peter from the rest of the Apostles, and intimating how S. Peter loved him more than any of them; gave to him as head pastor, the charge of both his sheep and lambs, that is, of all Christians, aswell the clergy as the laity, to be by him instructed, ruled and governed, as the flock of sheep is fed and ruled by the shepherd, which according to the ancient doctor's testimony, doth very plainly confirm Saint Peter's supremacy, as you shall hear presently out of their own words. yet this, though it be most pregnant among the rest, I then omitted: because the question of the supremacy was not to be handled there at the full. I touched also a third text to prove that the Bishop of Rome, as Saint Peter's successor, should never fail in confirming of his brethren in the true faith; taken out of Saint Luke. where our Lord saith. Simon, Simon, behold, 
Luca 22.  satan hath required to have you for to sift as wheat; but I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not; and thou once converted, confirm thy brethren. where upon it followeth that all others ought to repair to him and his successors for resolution of all controversies in faith, to be confirmed by him; and are bound thereby to obey him as the person, to whom Christ gave power to confirm his brethren. Of the first text of scripture shallbe treated more at large in this section; for the others I will only note some places of the holy fathers, where the reader may see the very same explication of Christ's words and deduction that I make here by their authority approved: because M. Abbot doth here very hotly call for such testimonies, and seemeth so earnestly set upon the sight of them, that I must needs give him out of hand, at least the quotations of them in the margin, and then (small doubt) but he will presently be satisfied, if there be such honesty in him, as he makes show of, well, if it be no more then for the good reader's content, I will give him more than he demandeth, that is not only the quotations in the margin, but their words also in the text.  

a Origenes in cap. 6. ad Rom. Petro cum summa rerum de pascendis ovibus traderetur, & super ipsum velut super terram, fundaretur ecclesia, nullius confessio virtutis alterius ab eo, nisi charitas cuigitur.  To begin Origen saith when the church was founded upon S. Peter and supreme power of feeding Christ's sheep was comitted to him, the profession of no other virtue then of charity was demanded of him. 
b 
Cipri. de unitate eccles.  
Petro post resurrectionem dominus dicit, pasce oves meas: super illum unum aedificat ecclesiam suam, & illi pascendas mandat, oves suas.   S. Cyprian Christ after his resurrection said to Peter: feed my sheep, and upon him alone doth build his church. In both these sentences are linked two texts of the Evangelists, that concern Saint Peter's supremacy. 
c 
Ambros. 10. in Lucam cap. 24.  
Contristatur quia tertio interrogatur, Amas me? i● enim interrogatur de quo dubitatur: sed dominus non dubitabat, qui interrogabat, non ut disceret, sed ut doceret, quem elevandus in caelum amoris sui nobis velut vicarium relinquebat. & paulo post: ideo quia solus profitetur ex omnibus, omnibus antefertur. ibidem: tertio dominus non iam diligis me●? sed amas me, interrogavit, & iam non agnos ut primo, quodam lact pascendos; nec oviculas ut secundo, sed oves pascere iubetur, perfectiores ut perfectior gubernaret.   Saint Ambrose. Our lord not to learn himself but to teach us, did ask him, whom he (being to ascend into heaven) would leave us as it were the vicar of his love. for so thou hast: Simon son of john: dost thou love me, etc. Peter testified his affection, and therefore because he alone made that profession, he is preferred before the rest. and a little after: he is commanded to feed the sheep as well as the lambs, that the perfecter sort might be governed by him that was more perfect. behold sheep and lambs to be governed by Saint Peter. 
d 
Chrisost. homil. 1. de penitentia.  
Poenitentia post tantum malum iterum cum ad priorem honorem revehit, & ecclesiae primatum, gubernationém que ipsi per universum orbem tradidic. Chrisost. homil 80. in joannem. Cum magna Christus Petro communicasset & ei orbis terrarum curam demandasset, etc.   S. chrysostom: the primacy of the church and the government throughout the whole world is by Christ committed to S. Peter. see him also in his last homily upon S. john's Gospel, and in his second book of priesthood. whom 
e 
Theophil. cap. 21. joannis.  
Totius orbis onium praefecturam Petro committit, non autem alij, sed huic tradit.   Theophilact upon the same place doth follow saying. Christ granteth to S. Peter and to none else, the government of the church through the whole world.  

f 
Leo sermo 3. de assump.  
De toto mundo unus Petrus eligitur, qui & universarum gentium vocationi & omnibus Apostolis, ●unctisque Ecclesiae patribu● praeponatur: ut quamuis in populo dei mul●● sacerdotes sint, multiqu● pastors; omnes tamen proprie regat Petrus, quos principaliter regit & Christus.   S. Leo among all the men of the wo●ld only Peter is chosen, who is placed over the Apostles and fathers of the church, and over the vocation of the Gentiles. And albeit among the people of God there be many priests and many Pastors, yet Peter doth rule all them properly, over whom our Saviour Christ doth rule principally. observe the rule over all that appertain to Christ, to be given by Christ to S. Peter.  

g 
Eucherius Lugier in vigilia S. Petri.  
Dicit ei, pasce oves meas: prius agnos, deinde oves commisit ei. quia non solum pastorem, sed pastorum pastorem eum constituit. pascit igitur Petrus agnos, pascit & oves pascit filios, pascit & matres: regit & subditos & praelatos: omnium igitur pastor est, quia praeter agnos & oves in ecclesia nihil est.   Eucherius Archbishop of Lions. Christ said unto peter. feed my sheep. first he committed to him his lambs, than his sheep, because he did not only constitute him a pastor, but the pastor of pastors. therefore Peter doth feed the lambs and the sheep; he feedeth the younglings and their dams, he doth govern the subjects and the Prelates. wherefore he is pastor of all, because besides lambs and sheep, there is nothing in the church.  

h 
Gregorius lib. 4. Epist. 32.  
Cunctis ergo evangelium scientibus liquet, quod voce dominica, sancto & omnium Apostolorum principi Petro Apostolo, totius Ecclesiae cura commissa est. ipsi quip dicitur Petro, amas me? pasce oves meas: ipsi dicitur, ecce Satanas expetivit cribarevos sicut triticum, & ego pro te rogavi Petre ut non deficiat fides tua, etc.   Gregory the great. it is manifest to all that know the Gospel, that the charge of the whole church, was by our lords voice committed, to holy S. Peter prince of all the Apostles. for to him it was said: Peter, dost thou love me? feed my sheep. to him it was said; behold Satan hath desired to sift you as wheat. And I have prayed for thee Peter, that thy faith shall not fail: and thou once converted confirm thy brethren.  
In which passage you see that other place of S. Luke employed to establish the supremacy. which 
H 
Leo ser: 3. ass:  
Commune erat omnibus Apostolis periculum de tentatione formidinis, & divinae protectionis auxilio pariter indigebant, etc. & tamen specialis a domino Petri cura suscipitur & pro fide Patri proprie supplicatur, tanquam aliorum status certior sit futurus, si mens principis victa non fuerit.   S. Leo also doth in the forealleaged place in these words. Our lord took special care of Peter, and for the faith of Peter did he pray peculiarly: for the state of others should become more certain, if the mind of the Prince were not overcome. And after a little. Christ made Peter prince of the whole church. S. chrysostom understood the supremacy to be given to S. Peter in the same words, when he thus reasoneth.  

I 
Chrisostom. in 3. act. Apostolorum.  
Quam est feruidus? quam agnoscit creditum a Christo gregom? quam in choro princeps est, & obique primus onnium incipit loqui?   Behold the fervour of S. Peter how well did he know the charge of the flock to be committed to him by Christ? how well doth he show himself the prince of that company? and doth always speak first: mark the reason. for to him had Christ said: And thou once converted confirm thy brethren. In like manner 
k 
Ambros. in Psalm: 43.  
Denique Petrus ecclesia praeponitu● postquam tentatus a diabolo est adeoque ante significat dominus quid est illud quod postea cum pastorem elegit dominici gregis, nam huic dixit: tu autem conversus confirma fratres tuos, etc.   S. Ambrose. Peter is made Precedent of the church; Christ did signify before what he meant by that, that he chose him pastor of our Lord's stock: for to him he said, thou being converted confirm thy brethren. So doth 
l 
Theophil in c. 22. Lu●ae.  
Tu conversus: planus huius loci intellectus est, quia te habeo ut principem discipulorum, postquam me abnegato, fleveris, & ad panit●ntiam veneris, confirma cet●r●●, hoc enim tedecet, qui post 〈…〉 petra es et firmamentum.   Theophilact. the plain sense of this place is: because I esteem of thee, as of the prince of my disciples, after that thou (having denied me) shalt weep, and come to repentance, do thou confirm the rest: for that becometh thee, who after me art the rock and foundation of the church.  
These texts of holy Scriptures, and testimonies of ancient fathers (to omit many others) I deliver by the way, in confirmation of S. Peter's primacy, to give M. Abbot a proof, that I could have said more for that cause, than I said in my former book: where I did pass over that point speedily, as scarce belonging to the question then in hand.  
7 Now I return to that text recorded in S. Matthew. Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my church: upon which we must stand the longer, because M. Abbot doth say what he could devise, against the true sense of it. by it therefore I will prove according to my former deduction, first that the primacy was given to S. Peter: and afterward show that it is derived to the pope's of Rome his successors. M. Abbot confesseth that the fathers sometimes take Peter to be that rock, upon which Christ built his church; but avoucheth that none ever said that the church of Rome was the rock, yea adds very grossly, that I bely the fathers, and father that on them which they never meant, when I say, that they out of that text gathered the Pope of Rome's supremacy, how audaciously and untruly this is spoken shall appear, assoon as I have dispatched the former part, about S. Peter himself. Let it therefore be first duly considered, what a worthy company of the ancient renowned fathers, both Greek and Latin do interpret S. Peter to be that rock, upon which our blessed saviour built his church, and therewith gave him power & authority to govern the same: that no man may doubt that to be the true literal sense first intended; though secondarily, it may admit other constructions. I will begin with that famous Clerk Origen, who is one of the auncienst amongst the Greeks', that hath written commentaries upon the Testament: he styleth 
1 
Origin. homil. 5. in Exodum.  
Vide magno illi ecclesiae fundamento, & Petrae solidissimae, super quam Christus fundavit ecclesiam quid dicatur a domino, modicae inquit fides, quaro dubitasti?   S. Peter the great foundation of the church, and most sound rock upon which Christ built his church. Hippolytus, 
2 
Hipolit de constructione mundi  
Princeps Petrus, fidei petra, quem beatum iadicavit Christus deus nost●r, ille doctor ecclesiae, ille primus discipulorum, qui regus claves habuit, etc.   Peter the prince, the rock of faith, the Doctor of the church, the chief of the Apostles whom our lord pronounced to be blessed. Eusebius 
3 
Eusebius lib. 6. historiae. 19 resert ex Origine.  
Petrus super quem Christi ecclesia (contra quam ●nferorum p●rtae non praevalebunt) aedificata est, etc.   reciteth these words: Peter upon whom was built the church of Christ, against which hell gates shall not prevail. 
4 
Epiphan in Ancorato non long a principio.  
Ipse dominus constituit Petrum primum Apostolorum, petram firmam super quam ecclesia dei aedificata est, & portae inferorum non praepraevalebunt adversus illam.   Epiphanius. Our lord made Peter the chief of the Apostles a firm rock upon which he built his church.  

5 
Basilius super 2. cap. Esaiae.  
Apost●loram unus erat Petrus, super quam petram pollicitus fuerat s●am se aedificaturum ecclesiam & statim: anima autem beati Petri nominata merito est petra sublimis, quod in● de radices solide infixerat, & adversus plagas stabiliter segesserit.   S. Basil. One of these Apostles or mountains was Peter upon which rock our saviour promised to build his church for the soul of Blessed peter was worthily called a rock, for the fastness of his faith, and fortitude against tribulations etc. 
6 
Gregor. Nazianz oratione 26 de moderatione in disputatione servanda.  
Vide quemadmodum ex Christi discipulus, magnis utique omnibus & excelsis, atque electione dign●, hic Petrus petra vocetur, atque ecclesiae fundamenta in fidem suam accipiat   S. Gregory Nazianzene, thous●est how among Chr●sts disciples, who were all surely great worthy p●rsons, Peter was called a rock: and the foundation of the church committed to his fidelity. 
7 
Chrisost. de laudibus Petri & Pauli.  
De Petro quid dicemus, qui dulce spectaculum est ecclesiae, splendortotius mudi, Apostolorum doctor, Angelus & homo, firma fidei petra, semlu ecclesiae sapientia, etc. Idem homil. 1. de penit. Petrum cum dico, petram omnino infragilem, crepidinem immobilem, Apostolum magnum, primum discipulum, etc.   S. chrysostom Peter the brightness of all the world, an Angel and a man, the Doctor of the Apostles, the firm rock of faith, the grace and sage wisdom of the church etc. and in an other place, when I say Peter, I name a rock that cannot be battered, an unmovable turrett. Cirill 
8 
Cirill. Alexand. l. 2. c. 12. in joannem.  
Respicit ut deum decet qui corda & renes scrutatur, videtque qui nihil ignorat, ad quantam & fidem & virtutem discipulus perventurus sit, etc. nec Simon fore tam nomen sibi, sed Petrus, pradicit, vocabulo ipso commode significans, quod in eo, tanquam in l'etra, lapideque firmissimo, suam esset adificaturus ecclesiam.   Alex. Christ did hereby teach Peter, that he knoweth all things before they be done, & did tell him before hand that his name should not be Simon, but Peter (whi●h is interpreted a rock) by the name itself fitly signifying, that upon him as upon a rock, and most firm stone he would build his church. Theodoretus libro 3. 
9 
Psellus apud Theodoretum lib 3 in Cantica.  
Per hutus crura Petrum intellige Apostolorum principem, in hoc enim dominus in evangelio, se Ecclesiam adificaturum promisit.   in Cantica doth out of ancient Psellus teach, that our lord, promised to build his church upon S. Peter Prince of the Apostles. 
10 
Evagtius in lib 2. histor ca 4.  
Petrus, qui est petra, et basis Catholicae Ecclesiae, et fides Orthodoxae fundamentum, resert ex Concilio Chalcedonensi.   Evagrius: the most blessed Apostle Peter, with all praise to be extolled, who is the rock, the base and foundation of the Catholic Orthodox faith. 
11 
Damascen. historia barlam. cap. 10.  
Princeps Apostolorum Petrus, fidei petra, magister orbis ordinatus fuit.   Damascenus, the Prince of the Apostles Peter, the rock of faith, who as he was made master of the whole world, so was he a pattern of penance. 
12 
Theophilactus in 22. Lucae: & ad cap 16. Math.  
Remunerat Petrum Dominus, mercedem illi dans magnam, quod super eum aedificavit Ecclesiam.   Theophilact before cited, Peter after Christ is the rock and fondat●on of the church. and upon Saint Matthew: saying, our lord rewarded peter, bestowing on him a great recompense in that he built his church upon him.  
Let these twelve renowned Grecians serve for the testimony of the Greek church: now to the Latin, I will begin with 
a 
Te●tul. de praescriptione c. 22.  
Latuit aliquid Petrum adificandae E●clesia Petram dictum, claves regni coelorum consecutum?   Tertullian for his antiquity. Peter was called the rock, upon which the church was to be builded. 
b 
Cyprianus.  
Deus unused & Christus unus, et una ecclesia, et Cathedra una super Petrum Domini voce fundata epist. 40. Petrus supra quem aedificata ab eodem domino fuerat ecclesia, epistola 55. Loquitur hic Petrus super quem aedificata fuit ecclesia epist 69. Petrus, quem primum dominus elegit, et super quem aedificavit ecclesiam suam, etc epist 71.   S. Cyprian, Our lord chose Peter to be the chief, upon whom he built his church. which he repeateth very often. 
c 
Ambrose serm. 2. de sanctis.  
Petrus pro soliditate devotionis ecclesiarum petra dicitur, sicut ait dominus: Tu 〈◊〉 Petrus, & super hanc petram aedificabo ecclesiam meam. petra enim dicitur, eo quod primus in nationibus fidei fundamenta posuerit: & tanquam saxum immobile operis totius Christiani compagem molemque contineat, recte confortium meretur nominis, qui consortium meretur et operis.   S. Ambrose. Peter for the soundness of his devotion, is called a rock, as our lord doth say, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, he is called a rock for that he first laid the foundation of faith among the Gentiles, and like unto an unmovable stone, doth uphold and contain the frame and weight of the whole christian work. 
d 
Hilar. in Psal. 131.  
Petrus super quem Ecclesiam aedificaturus erat, adversus quam portae inferorum nihil pravalerent. Idem in can. 16. in Mathaeum. O in nuncupatione novi nominis faelix ecclesiae fundamentum. Hieronim in 2. Esaiae. unde & super unum montium Christus fundavit ecclesiam suam, & loquitur ad eum Tu●es Petrus, & super hanc petram aedific●ho ecclesiam meam. Idem in 16. Matthaei. Simoni, qui credebat in petram Christum, Petri largitus est nomen, ac secundum Metapho●●m petrae, recte deitur ei, aedificabo ecclesiam meam superto.   S. Hilary. upon peter our lord was to build his church and in another place; o happy foundation of the church i● the imposition of a new name, a rock worthy that building, that should dissolve the laws of hell. Hierome in 2. Esaiae. Christ built his church upon one of the mountains, saying to him; Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my church. Again according to the Metaphor of a rock, it was rightly said to Peter, upon thee will I build my church; which he doth confirm expressly in divers other places. 

August. in Psal. 69.  
Petrus qui paulo ante eum confessus erat filium dei, & in ●lla confessione appellatus est petra, super quam labricaretur ecclesia. Paulinus epistola 4. ad severum. Christus est petra: sed etiam discipulo suo buius vocabuli gratiam non negavit, dicens illi: super hanc petram aedificabo ecclesiam meam: & portae inferi non praevalebunt adversus eam.   S. Augustin. Peter did confess● Christ to be the son of God: and in that confession was called a rock, upon the which Christ was to build his church. Paulinus. Christ is the rock and yet he denied not the grace of this name to his disciple (peter) saying to him: upon this rock I will build my church: and the gates of hell, shall not prevail against it. Petrus Chrisologus. Peter is the keeper of the faith, 

Petrus Chrysolog. serm 107.  
Petrus est custos fidei, petra ecclesiae ●anitorque coelorum. Leo hom. de transfigurat. Tantum in hac fidei sublimitate com●la●rit, ut beatitudinis felicitate donatus, sa●rae ●nviolabilis Petrae acciperet firmitatem, supra quam fundata Ecclesia, portis inferi & ●●ortis legibus pra● aleret.   the rock of the church, the porter of the heavens. Leo the great. Peter did so much please ●n the sublimity of this faith, that he being rewarded with the felicity of blessedness, received the holy ●oundnes of an inviolable rock, upon which the church being founded, doth prevail against hell & the laws of death. 

Gregor. lib 6. regi● epist 37.  
Quis enim nescit sanctam eccles●am ●n Apostolorum principu solid●tate firmatam? qui firmitatem mentu traxit in nomine, ut Petrus à ●●tra 〈◊〉 ●retur.   Gregory the great: who knoweth not the holy church to be settled in the soundness of the prince of the Apostles: because he, in his name hath drawn firmeness of mind, that of a ro●ke was named Peter. S. Isidore, Simon Peter, the son of john, 

Isidor. de vita sanctorum. cap. 69.  
Simon Petrus filius joannis, frater Andreae, Apostolorum princeps est, pastor humani gregu, petra ecclesiae, Clavicularius regni. etc.  
Idem de officijs eccles. lib. 2. cap. 5.  
In novo testamento post Christum sacerdotalis ordo à Petro Apostolo caepit: ipsi enim primus pontificatus datus est in ecclesia Christi. Sic enim loquitur ad eum dominus: Tu es Petrus, & super hanc petram adificabo ecclesiam meam, etc.  
Prosper de vocatione gentium. l. 2. cap. 28.  
Quis ergo ambigat, quis ignorat, hanc fortissimam petram, Petrum, (qui ab illa principali petra communionem & virtutis sumpsit & nominis) hoc desiderium habuisse, etc.   the brother of Andrew, is prince of the Apostles, pastor of the flock of men, the rock of the church. Again, in the new testament, priestly order after Christ began of S. Peter, for to him was given the chiefest bishopric in the church of Christ. for thus doth our lord speak unto him. Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church. Prosper. who can doubt that this most valiant rock Peter, (who received of that principal rock Christ participation both of name and virtue) had always a burning desire to die constantly for Christ. Maximus: this is Peter, 

Maximus sermone. 51. de Petro & Paulo.  
Hic est Petrus, cui dominus communionem sui nominis libenter indulsit: ut enim sicut Apostolus Paulus edocuit, Petra erat Christus, ita per Christum Petrus factus est petra: dicente ei domino: tu es Petrus, & supra hanc petram aedificabo ecclesiam meam.   to whom our lord favourably gave the fellowship of his own name. for as the Apostle S. Paul teacheth, Christ was the rock: even so by Christ, Peter was made the rock, our lord saying unto him. thou art Peter, and upon this rock, will I build my church.  
Lower I will not descend. for these Latin fathers do suffice to certify any reasonable reader, that this was the common opinion of the most approved writers in the west church. which being linked unto the other dozen of most renowned Grecians, all famous Authors, and for the greater part, the most godly, and best learned prelate's of most Christian nations of the world.  
These (I say) such excellent qualified personages, the masters and mirrors of Christian Religion, with one consent agreeing, that our Saviour Christ jesus did communicate his own name of Rock unto S. Peter, and upon him as upon a most sound rock built his church: by which (as they understood it) he gave unto him the Charge over the whole church, to govern and rule it, as chief pastor thereof; to contain and uphold the whole frame of that heavenly building, and holy house of God, next unto Christ, the principal foundation, and head cornerstone. All this and much more they (whom both Catholics and Protestants hold for the best learned, and most worthy prelate's of Christ's church) teaching so plainly, what Christian heart (that hath any spark of godliness or any care of embracing the truth, when it is showed him) had not rather believe and follow their judgement therein, than the new opinions of late writers, partially pleading for their own fancies? specially if they please to consider, what weak reasons they allege, to delude that common exposition of the ancient father's: Among which these as principal M. Abbot hath here made choice of.  
The first is, that Christ is the rock, upon which he built his church, upon this that thou hast confessed (saith saint Austin) and acknowledged, that is, upon myself, I will build my church. I Answer out of the fathers before rehearsed that both be true: Christ is the rock, and yet he gave the same name and title to S. Peter, as both S Hierome, Paulinus, Prosper, and Maximus abovecited do testify. with whom 
a 
Ambrosi. l. 6. in Lucam cap. 9 Tertul. l. 4. Co. Marcio. c. 13.  
Christus chariss. discipulo nomen communicavit suum.   S. Ambrose doth agree, affirming our Saviour to have communicated most of his titles to his disciples, 
b 
S. Basil. homil. 29. ex varijs ad populum, de poenitentia.  
Licet Petrus sit petra, non tamen sicut Christus, nam Christus vere est immobilis petra: Petrus vero propter petram, axiomata namque sua, jesus largitur alijs, non evacuatus, sed nihilominus habens. lu●e est: vos estis lux mundi inquit. Sacerdos est, & facit Sacerdotes, petra est, & petram facit. qua sua sunt largitur servis suis, argumentum hoc est opulenti.   and in particular to S. Peter, that of a Rock. and so doth Tertullian. to whom S. Basil addeth: Christ is the rock, and Peter is the rock, Christ an unmovable rock of himself, But Peter through Christ. Christ (saith this great doctor) imparts his dignities unto others, without depriving himself of them, he is the light of the world, yet says to his Apostles, ye are the light of the world; he is the priest, and he maketh priests: he is the rock, and he maketh a rock, with whom accordeth S. Leo saying; I am (saith our Saviour) a rock, 

S. Leo 3. assump suae.  
Cum ego sim inviolabilis Petrae ego lapis angularis qui facio utraque unum. Tamen tu quoque Petra es, quia mea virtute solidaris; ut quae mihi potestate s●nt propria, sint tibi mecum participatione communia.   yet thou (Peter) art also a rock, because that thou shalt be made sound by my virtue. & these things which are proper to me by power, shall by participation be comunicated to thee. so that argument of M. Abbots is nothing worth. for albeit our Saviour Christ be the rock in a far more eminent and excellent manner, (as he that upholdeth all the church from the beginning of the world unto the latter end; and is by his own merit and power unmovable; yea he is the builder of the same church; and out of his side the same Church is builded, as Eve was out of one of Adam's ribs;) yet it followeth not thereof, but that S. Peter may be the rock chosen by Christ, to be his vicegerent, & chief governor of his Church under him; by the soundness of his faith, made fit to confirm all others, that shall have any doubt there about. like as in the state of the old testament, Notwithstanding Christ was the head corner stone thereof: yet there was one high priest, that had under him supreme authority over all the rest, and sovereign power to determine all doubts arising about their law. Albeit our Saviour be the rock, upon which the church is built in a most peerless manner: yet that those words of his (upon this rock I will build my church) were not meant of himself, but of S. Peter, is most evident first, by the uniform consent of all the ancient fathers, both Greek and Latin before rehearsed. true it is that 
a Augustin l 1. retract c. 21. ●arum autem duarum sententiarum, quae sit probabilior, eligat lector.  S. Austin sometimes applies them, both to Chr st, and to S. Peter: and leaves to the reader's choice, whether he will take. which choice is easy to be made, when S. Augustin with all the rest before recited, stand clearly for S. Peter; and he alone maketh some doubt of it. more over, all the circumstances of the text be on the other father's side. first, the words next before are plainly addressed to S. Peter. Thou art Peter, and upon this rock, will I build my church. Again in the language which our Saviour spoke, it is so clear, that there can be no doubt of it: for it is: thou art Cephas, that is a stone, and upon this stone I will build my church: the very same word without any alteration, being used in both places. Besides, these words contain a reward bestowed upon Saint Peter for the sincere confession of that high mystery of faith; as the ancient fathers do testify with S. Hierom upon that place, 
Hieron. in c. 16. Math. Hilarius can. 16. in Math. Confessio Petri praemium consecuta est. Theophila. in c. 16. Math. Maximus ubi supra.  Mercedem recepit vera confessio, the true confession of S. Peter received due reward. but it had been no recompense of Peter's confession, for Christ to have built his church upon himself. doth it not in very common sense seem very harsh, for our Saviour to pretend a great favour to Peter, as to say to him, Happy art thou Peter &c: And I say to thee, thou art Peter: and in fine, to fall from Peter to himself, and say; upon myself I will build my church? Lastly the church being understood to be built upon Peter, the reason is declared why our Saviour changed the name Simon into Peter, as if he had said I gave thee the name Peter, that doth signify a rock. because that upon thee, as upon a rock, I will build my church. As God said to Abraham, thou shalt be called Abraham (that is say, father of many people) Quia patrem multarum Gentium constituite, because I have appointed thee the father of many nations: All this by the way, to show the true literal sense of that text to be the very same, which the Orthodox fathers have uniformally delivered.  
M. Abbots second objection against the father's interpretation is this: Christ built his church upon the true faith and confession of Peter, therefore not upon Peter. which doth not follow: for the true faith and confession of Christ being in S. Peter; if Christ built his church upon them, he did withal jointly buile it upon him, in whom they were, for the further explication of this difficulty, it is to be understood, that the church being a congregation of men, it is to be ruled by men: who indeed are to be chosen rulers thereof, for the excellent qualities of faith, constancy, and charity. for example, to rule the temporal state, temporal Magistrates are chosen, endued with wisdom, justice, fortitude, and other virtues, that make men fit to govern. but to speak properly, not the virtues, which be accidental qualities, but the men so qualified, be governors: A judge is chosen for his sound skill in the laws, & for his upright conscience in the administration of justice. A Bishop for his deep knowledge in Divinity, for his wisdom in governing, and holiness of life: yet not these virtues, but those persons, be this the judge; that the Bishop. S. Peter for the soundness of his faith, and for the invincible valour of his mind, as 
a Basil. ad cap. 2. 2. Esa.  S. Basil writeth: and for the fervour of his charity and devotion, as 
b Ambr. serm. 2. de sanctis  S. Ambrose noteth, was by our Saviour chosen to be the supreme pastor of his church, and chief Governor in Ecclesiastical affairs, which is the same in effect, that 
c Chris. hom. 56. in Matth.  S. chrysostom and 
d Theod. in cant. l. 2.  Theodorete by M. Abbot alleged do say, upon this faith and confession, that is, in respect of those virtues, which were eminent in S. Peter, I build my church on him. for they both do teach the church to be builded upon S. Peter; but would have us to know, that that great dignity was not bestowed on him, upon mere affection to his person, but in regard of those his excellent and worthy qualities. whence it doth not follow, that whosoever hath the like qualities, shall have the same dignity; unless they also be thereunto lawfully called and chosen, as S. Peter was by our Saviour. No more than it doth follow, that all they shallbe made Bishops or judges who have the virtues requisite for Bishops and judges. Now to that taken out of 
e Ambr. ad Ephes. cap. 2.  S. Ambrose; upon this rock will I build my church, that is, in this confession of the Catholic faith, will I establish the faithful to life. I answer first that M. Abbot hath clipped of the former part of S. Ambrose words, in which he saith, that our Saviour did declare S. Peter to be the foundation of his church, in that he built his church upon him, when he said to him, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my church. these words would have marred M. Abbot's market, therefore he did wisely, to overskip them. now that which followeth, may serve rather to confirm our opinion, then make any whit for theirs, for thus it may be understood: Saint Peter for that his confession of faith, received power and virtue from Christ to confirm others in the faith, thereby to establish them to life. And so by that confession of faith made by Saint Peter, the faithful are established to life. Again Saint Ambrose (who elsewhere often, and in that very place teacheth S. Peter to be that rock upon which the church was built) might make a secondary good moral construction of those words, teaching every man to believe as Saint Peter did, and to make the like confession of their faith, that they might be settled in the right way to life everlasting which moralization of Christ's words doth not cross, but suppose the true literal sense, to be as before you have heard out of Saint Ambrose with the uniform consent of other fathers. To that which followeth in the same Author: these words of the Apostle, in him all the building is coupled together etc. are the sense and meaning of that which our lord said: upon this rock I will build my church. I answer there is a cunning trick used in cutting of the Apostles words in the midst with an &c: and making that to be the exposition of the first part of the sentence, which Saint Ambrose makes the interpretation of the last, as may appear unto him, that will see the place. for his reason is, fideles enim sunt superficies templi dei, etc. for the faithful of holy conversation, be the walls or over parts of that temple of God. which suiteth well with the latter end of Saint Paul's sentence, which is, in whom you also are built together into an habitation of God in the holy Ghost: in brief S. Ambrose meaning in that place is no other, then that the Apostle used the same Metaphor of building, which our Saviour did when he said, Thou art Peter and upon this rock, I will build my Church. Of which spiritual building the faithful are the over parts, the Apostles the foundations, among whom S. Peter is the rock, and Christ the head corner stone, that closeth all together, and beareth up both people's, aswell those that went afore as those that came after his incarnation.  
M. Abbots fourth objection: 
Epla Juvenalis ●t Epist pal. in Apendice Concil: Cholced:  the whole number of the Bishops of Palaestina in the council of Chalcedon, understood Christ's words so: upon this confession, the church of God is confirmed and strengthened.  
ANSWER. THat whole number I find to be but two or three, and they not in the council neither, nor during the time of that council: but after they came home from the council. and their meaning is plain for us. They having been at the council of Chalcedon, and there heard and saw, how Discorus patriarch of Alexandria was for his heresy and obstinacy censured and condemned, by the sentence of Leo the great Bishop of Rome, did certify all them that were under their charge, that the church of God was confirmed and strengthened, by the confession and declaration of the Bishop of Rome S. Peter's successor: and how in him was verified that sentence of our Saviour, upon this rock I will build my church: and that other also, Thou being converted, confirm and strengthen thy brethren. which is all as direct for us as can be. beside, what other pregnant proof there is in that general council for S. Peter's supremacy, and that the Bishop of Rome is his successor in the same supreme authority, shallbe hereafter declared more at large.  
Out of these former arguments M. Abbot maketh this inference; that by the exposition of the ancient fathers it may appear that Christ, even the true faith of Christ, (for Christ is nothing to v● but by faith) is the true rock, whereupon the church is builded. to which S. john accordeth. This is the victory, that over cometh the world, even our faith; for who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that jesus is the son of God. what is this (good Sir) to the present purpose of the pope's supremacy? though faith in some good sense may be called a rock, because it is the foundation and ground work of all other Christian virtues: yet how doth it follow thereof, that S. Peter is not that rock, upon which it pleased Christ to build his church? what, because there is an order in the frame of a virtuous life, must it needs there upon ensue, that there is no order in the government of Christ's Church? is not this a very strange inference? For the clearer explication of this doubt, ●●t this distinction be observed: the building of Christ's church as it is like to a kingdom, differeth much from the building of a spiritual temple unto the holy Ghost in our souls. to the first kind of building belong subjects and magistrates, Bishops, Archbishops and so forth, the highest whereof under Christ was S. Peter. To the other inward building concur all such divine graces and qualities that serve for the reformation of our soul, as faith, hope, Charity, humility, and such like. among which virtues, faith in Christ jesus, is at it were the fundamental stone. to the argument than this is the answer, that albeit faith in Christ be as it were the rock and foundation of all Christian virtues: yet that is no let, but that in the order of Christian magistrates, S. Peter may be the rock, and have the chief commanding power given to him, and to his successors the Bishops of Rome. purity of faith, boldness of confession, fervour of Charity (rare gifts of God bestowed on S. Peter) were the principal dispositions in him to that other high dignity and authority: but the authority itself of government was not bestowed on those virtues, but upon the person of Saint Peter: though in regard of the same divine qualities.  
After these arguments M. Abbot inferreth; that if Christ be the rock properly and truly, Saint Peter cannot be the rock, but accidentally and unproperly, in respect of his doctrine and example of saith, uttered in his confession: As Abraham is the rock from whence we are hewed so is Peter the rock whereon we are built; not that either of them conferreth any thing to us, but only for that they stand before us for patterns of imitation.  
I answer that he should rather have made this inference: because Christ is the rock of the Church most properly: therefore S. Peter is the rock thereof also properly. both for that Christ made him the rock, who maketh all things well and properly: and also because the properties of a rock, do fitly agree to S. Peter: that is, to be constant and firm in the faith; to strengthen and uphold others, as hath been before declared. To imagine Saint Peter to be called a rock, because he is a pattern of imitation, is as dull and blockish, as to call a dusk dark stone, a clear looking glass. Abraham was more properly by the prophet called though in another sense, a rock, out of which the jews were hewn and a pit out of which they were digged; because all the Israëlites descended out of his loins, as stones are hewn or digged out of a rock.  
10 M. Abbot not being able to disprove S. Peter to be the rock, because our Saviour Christ alone is the rock, turns himself on the other side and will needs prove that all the Apostles were rocks, and Peter therein not to have been alone, but that as he spoke in the person of all the Apostles; so Christ's words returned in answer to Peter, should appertain to them all. for says he, Saint Austin affirmeth, that Peter answered for all, 
a Aug. in psal. 8●.  one for unity. And Hierome by the words here spoken to Peter concludeth: 
b Hieron. in Amos l 3 c. 6.  that Chr●st the rock, gave not to one only Apostle, but to his Apostles, that they also should be called rocks. And in like sort Origen conceiveth when he saith. 
c Orig in Math. c. 16.  If thou think that the church was built upon Peter only, what wilt thou say to Ioh● the son of thunder, and to every of the Apostles, etc. we must rather say that in all and ev●rie one of th●m is verified, upon this rock I will build my church. and in a word he reasoneth thus: because that which followeth after; I will give to th●e the Keys of the knigdome of heaven, is co●●on to them all: therefore that going before, is also common to them all. and this the scripture confirmeth, in that it saith; 
d Ephes. 2.20.  the household of God are builded not upon the foundation of Peter only, but upon the foundations of the Apostles and Prophets. 
e Reuel●t. 21.14.  And not Peter only, but the lambs twelve Apostles, have their names written in the twelve foundations of the City of God. hitherto M. Abbot.  
Doth not this great inconstancy in answering, argue plainly that there is no settled soundness in the protestants doctrine, but that they are carried about with the wind? Before you heard that no other body saving Christ alone, could be that rock; and to make that good M. Abbot was very earnest there: now the wind blowing in an other door, not only Peter is the rock, but all the Apostles aswell as he, yea and every Christian man too is a rock, as you shall hear hereafter. And all this to make men believe, that it is but an ordinary matter to be that rock, upon which Christ built his Church. we that hold it to be one of the greatest privileges that could be granted to a mortal man, do notwithstanding grant, that the Apostles may be called rocks as they are called foundations, after a certain proportion; that is, as S. Peter was the fundamental rock, placed next unto our Saviour over the whole Church: So the Apostles were constituted principal pillars or rocks of certain countries, laying the foundation of Christian religion in them, by preaching the Gospel, and by ruling the several flocks committed to their charges. As Metropolitans & primates may be said to be the rocks and foundations of Christian religion in their provinces, because they do principally command over all Ecclesiastical persons therein; and do keep all under them in unity of faith; In like manner to preserve all Christian countries in the said unity of faith and uniformity of religion; there ought to be one supreme pastor over all the world; who first was S. Peter, and ever since have been his lawful Successors, the Bishops of Rome. All this is good doctrine, but to say that these words in S. Matthew. were spoken aswell to the rest of the Apostles as to S. Peter, which M. Abbot would feign have his reader believe, is flat against the evidence of the very text. For S. Peter is there severed from the rest by all circumstances that can be devised in so few words. first by his own proper name: for our Saviour said to him, happy art thou Simon. then by the name of his father: the son of jonas. thirdly by mention of a special revelation made to him: for flesh and blood hath not revealed this to thee. four by express direction of this speech to him: I say to thee, (not to all the Apostles) thou art Peter; none of the rest were so called. Out of which it doth ensue most clearly, that the words immediately following (and upon this rock I will build my church) were particularly spoken to S. Peter, and not to any other of the Apostles. To the others afterward was given the power of binding and losing, remitting of sins and retaining: yet with out any mention made of the keys of the kingdom of heaven: which albeit they do signify there a supreme commanding power: yet they may in a certain sense be said to be given unto the other Apostles, as is the title of a rock. though they be not that principal rock upon which Christ built his church, so they had not the prime use of the keys, which was appropriated to S. Peter. I do also further grant●, that the name of a rock, may be in a good moral sense applied unto every constant Christian, that doth confess the true faith with S. Peter, and is constant and unmovable in the same confession, like unto a rock: And this is all which Origen and S. Ambrose cited by M. Abbot do say, as may be seen by him that pleaseth to read the circumstances of those places. for Origen discourseth how all may be called rocks, that have this effect of a rock. And that the gates of hell cannot prevail against them; that is, all that do persevere constantly to the end in the true faith. S. Ambrose exhorteth all men to endeavour to be ro●kes, that is to have soundness in constancy and steadfastness of faith. Origen addeth, that which I before said, that the Apostles and Prophets may be called rocks in a higher degree; because they are the foundations of others, that are builded upon them; but these expositions (as M. Abbot saith) be Allegorical, or rather moral explications of these our Saviour's words: that do not destroy the prime literal sense thereof, which according unto the general consent of the ancient fathers is, that Christ built his church upon S. Peter, as the supreme governor thereof, as hath been already proved.  
Now to M. Abbots last evasion, that the fathers in all this matter make Peter to bear the figure of the whole church, and therefore that to be applied to all and every one in the church, which was there spoken to Peter. for these fathers he allegeth only S. 
a August. Epist. 165 Idem de verb Domini ser. 13.  Austin and S. 
b Gregor. expos. in 1. Reg li. 6. cap. 3.  Gregory, yea and S. Gregory speaking of another matter, thus; that which never was said to them of the old testament, is now said to the universal church, whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth. which showeth some difference between the old and new testament; but nothing concerneth these words of Christ. Thou art Peter, and upon this rock, I will build my church. which is another kind of matter then that: whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, etc. Again, is M. Abbot so simple as to think that the power of binding & losing is given to every particular member of the church? can women and Children bind and loose? all a like perhaps in the protestants church, but it is not so with us. yet that power may be said to be given to the whole church, because it is given to the benefit of the whole. though the charge and administration thereof, be not committed and given to all and every person in the church. But to return to S. Austin, he saith, 
Aug de ver. Dominiser. 13.  that the name Peter was given to him, that by that figure he might signify the church. because Christ is (petra) the rock, therefore Peter is the people of Christ. So M. Abbot. well, let all this be true, what is this allegorical interpretation of the name of Peter to our present purpose? It cannot be but a great honour to Saint Peter, to have had a name given him by our Saviour derived out of his own name; and that may represent the people of Christ: and further (which followeth in that place of S. Austin: though M. Abbot thought it policy to suppress it) Apostolorum principatum tenens. S. Peter held the principality among the Apostles. all this maketh much for S. Peter's pre-eminence. but doth it follow thereupon, that nothing which Christ said to S. Peter, doth properly appertain to him, but all is to be imparted to all Christian people? how absurd were it to understand so judicious a Doctor's words as S. Austin was, after that childish manner? thou art Peter, that is after this new gloss, all my people; and upon this rock, which contains also all Christ's people, I will build my church. so that the sense after M. Abbot's exposition must be: Christ did build all his people, upon all his people. One might very well be chosen out of the rest, as a foundation upon whom Christ might lay all the rest: but how all the people, should be built upon all the people, passeth (I think) all understanding. 
Epistola 165.  But S. Austin elsewhere (saith M. Abbot) hath these words: to S. Peter, bearing the figure of the whole church our lord said, upon this rock etc. be it so that S. Peter bore the person of the church: that doth not hinder the words to be spoken to him effectually: but rather argueth him to be the chief governor of the church, 
Aug. in Psal. 108. c●cione 1.  as the same saint in the like places doth express, in this manner: Cuius Ecclesiae ille agnoscitur in figura gestasse personam, propter primatum quem in discipulis habuit. the person of which church, Peter is acknowledged in figure to have represented, by reason of the primacy that he had among the disciples. And yet more plainly in another place thus. 

Aug. Quaest. ex novo testam. quaest. 75  
salvator cum pro se & Petro dari jubet, pro omnibus ●xoluisse videtur, quia sicut in domino erant omnes causa magisterij: ita & post salvatorem in Petro omnes continentur. Ipsum enim constituit esse caput eorum, ut pastor esset gregis dominici.   when our Saviour commanded tribute to be paid for himself, and for Peter, he seemeth to have paid for all. for like as in our Saviour there were all the parts of a master; so after him all were contained in Peter. for he constituted Peter head of the rest, that he might be the pastor of our lords flock. By which words of S. Austin we gather, that S. Peter sometimes did represent the whole church, because he was head and chief pastor thereof: as a king doth in some cases represent a kingdom. which is so for of from disproving S. Peter's supremacy, that hence we may take a strong argument to prove it, and withal, the propagation thereof to his successors. for we are taught out of these words of S. Austen to say, that S. Peter may be considered, either as a private person, or as a public magistrate. that which pleased our Saviour to bestow upon him as a private person, was proper to himself, and continued no longer than he lived: but that which Christ bestowed upon S. Peter as a public magistrate; that was granted to the whole church, and was to continue with the church to the world's end. like as that which is granted to a king as a public person, is holden as annexed to the Crown and to descend always after to all his successors. now to our purpose: S. Austin when he said that that prerogative was given to S. Peter, as representing the whole church; doth not deny it to be given him truly and actually: but doth signify that it was given him, not for his own proper use, but for the benefit of the whole church, and therefore given in remainder for ever unto his successors, which was in the fullest and best sort that could be.  
Having thus answered all M. Abbot's objections, and declared how S. Peter is the special rock upon which our Saviour built his church, and how the other Apostles and every constant Christian may be called rocks, one truth not destroying, but rather fortifying the other: I now come to clear that imputation of dishonesty, which M. Abbot would with no great honesty, have cast on me. I did affirm that it might be deduced out of the ancient fathers, that the Bishop or sea of Rome, was that rock upon which the church was builded. M. Abbot was bold to say that I belied the fathers therein; and doth avouch peremptorily, that never any of them so understood these words of our Saviour. well let us see, whether of us is like to prove the honester man of his word. I do here omit the manifold deductions in this Chapter before mentioned, and will add one more out of Saint Augustine's words, by M. Abbot himself last before cited, thus; whatsoever was said to S. Peter as representing the person of the church, is taken to be said to all his successors, as before hath been declared: but those words of Christ, upon this rock I will build my church, were spoken to S. Perer as representing the person of the church, by the verdict of S. Austin approved by M. Abbot himself: therefore these very words are to be understood as spoken unto all S. Peter's successors: who being the Bishops of Rome as in due place shallbe proved, it followeth evidently, that the Bishops or church of Rome, (for I take both them for the same thing in this matter) is that rock upon which Christ built his church. Is not this deduction plain enough? But what will you say, if the same most authentic Doctor do in express terms affirm the church of Rome to be that self same rock, than all the world may see, that to be most apparently true which I said: And M. Abbot must needs confess that he overshot himself very grossly. These be S. Augustine's own words; come my brethren if you please, 

August. in Psalco: partem donati.  
Venite fratres si vultis, ut inseramini in vite. dolour est cum vos videmus praecisos ita iacere. Numerate Sacerdotes ab ipsa Petri sede, & in ordine illo patrum, qui● cui successit, videre, ipsa est petra, quam non vincunt superba inferorum porta.   and be graffed in the vine. It grieveth us to behold you lying so cut of. Reckon the priests even from the seat of Peter: and in that rew of fathers, regard to whom who succeeded. that (seat) is the rock, which the proud gates of hell do not overcome. The seat of Peter, and succession of Bishop● of Rome, is that rock in S. Augustine's judgement, against which hell gates shall not prevail. was not that the very same rock, upon which Christ built his church?  
S. Hierom was another most learned Doctor of the ancient church, 

Hier. Epist. 57 ad Damasum.  
Ego nullum primum nisi Christum sequens, beatitudini tua, id est, Cathedra Petri communione consocior: super illam petram aedificatain ecclesiam scio,   as all the learned know, he testifieth the same most plainly in these words unto Damasus then Bishop of Rome. I following none as chief, but Christ, am in communion associated unto your holiness, that is, unto the chair of Peter. upon this rock I know the church of Christ to be builded. Lo S. Hierom knew and confessed S. Peter's chair, in which Damasus the pope than sat, to be the same rock upon which Christ built his church. Pope julius the first was yet a more ancient, and a very holy and grave father, he teacheth the same plainly in these words. 

Ex julij increpatoria ad Orientales.  
Ipsa Romana sedes, omnibus maior & praelata est ecclesijs. quae non solum Canonum & sanctorum patrum decretis, sed D. salvatoris nostri voce, singularem obtinuit principatum: Tu es, inquit, Petrus, & super hanc petram adificabo ecclesiam meam.   The sea of Rome is preferred before all churches: which not only by decrees of Canons, and holy fathers, hath obtained that singular principality, but by the voice of our lord when he said, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church. If the church of Rome by these words of our Saviour (upon this rock I will build my church) were preferred before all others, as that grave holy prelate teacheth, then must it needs follow, that the church of Rome, was the rock upon which Christ built his church.  
Damasus was also a very ancient, holy, 

Ex Epistola 4. B Damasi ad Stephanum Epist. & Concilia Afti●ae.  
Scitis fratres dilectiss. firmamentum à deo fixum & immobile, atque titulum lucidissimum suorum sacerdotum, id est, omnium Episcoporum, Apostolicam sedem esse constitutam, & verticem Ecclesiarum. Tu es enim (sicut divinum pronuntiat verbum) Petrus, & super hanc petram ad●ficabo Ecclesiam meam.   and learned Prelate; he writeth in this sort. you know most beloved brethren, the Apostolic see (of Rome) to be constituted by God a fixed and unmovable firmament, a most bright title of all bishops, and top of churches, even as the word of God doth pronunce, saying: thou art Peter, and upon this rock, I will build my church. he then also took and expounded those words of Christ, to appertain unto the see of Rome.  
The testimony of these few ancient renowned fathers, is more than sufficient to justify what I said: and to assure the upright readers, that some of the ancient fathers did interpret the church of Rome to be that rock, upon which our Saviour built his church. whereby they may see how uncivilly M. Abbot dealt with me, having no other ground for it, than his own ignorance coupled with audaciousness.  
Because M. Abbot doth in this paragraff thrust in here and there, many broken sentences out of the fathers, against the supreme authority of the Bishop of Rome: I hold it convenient to fortify the same, with some select testimonies of the best renowned prelate's of the Greek and Eastern churches. for if they (whom it concerned most to stand for the dignity and prerogatives of their own churches, being the greatest personages in that part of the world, which was farthest of from Rome) do nevertheless acknowledge the Bishop of Rome, to have had in the time of pure antiquity, commanding authority and power over themselves, and their churches: then no unpartial and upright mind can doubt, but that the church of Rome always hath had, or should have had authority of power, and superiority in government, over all other churches of the world. Athanasius one of the prime Doctors of the Greek church, both for holiness of life, greatness of learning, & soundness of faith; and by his place patriarch of Alexandria, which was the highest seat in the eastern coasts: This most reverend Archbishop and renowned Champion of Christ's church, being grievously persecuted by the Arrian heretics, and very injuriously thrust out of his Bishopric by their means, made his recourse unto julius then pope of Rome, and besought him to call his adversaries (being also Eastern Bishops) to Rome, to answer there for those wrongs that they had done him. by which fact of his he acknowledged most perspicuously the church of Rome to have power and authority over Eastern Bishops, to determine their ecclesiastical causes. Thus it stands of record in the Ecclesiastical history.  
Athanasius flying from Alexandria, went to Rome. 

Zozomen. lib. 3. histor. cap. 7.  
Athanasius autem fugiens Alexandria, Romam venit: codem tempore Paulus etiam Constantinopolitanus Episcopus, forte illu● accessit, & Marcellus quoque Episcopus Anciroe, & Azelopus Gazae etc. & Lucius Adrianopoli: Quorum criminationes cum Episcopus Romanus intellexisset, & omnes fidei Concilij Nicen● consentientes reperisset, in communionem recepit. Ac cum propter sedu dignitatem cura omnium ad cum spectaret, singulis suam Ecclesiam restituit: scripsitque ad Episcopos Orientis, cosque incusavit, quod inconsulto de his viris iudicassent deditque mandatum ut quidam, illorum nomine, ad diem constitutum accederent qui etiam minatus est, se de reliquo non passurum eos inultos, nisi novis rebu● studere desisterent.   Paulus Bishop of Constantinople (another great sea of the Greek church) was also fled thither for succour, and divers other Bishops of the said Eastern church. whose accusations when the Bishop of Rome had heard, finding these Bishop's conformable to the faith of the Nicene council (of which Athanasius had been a principal pillar) he admitted them into communion of all spiritual matters. And whereas by the dignity of his sea, the charge of all persons did appertain unto him, he restored them back to their bishoprics.  
And did write unto the Bishops of the east blaming them, for that they had unadvisedly judged of those personages; and sent them a mandate that some of them should appear at a certain day, in the name of the rest: who also threatened, that he would not afterward let them pass unpunished, if they gave not over to molest others.  
Is not here plain proof of the Bishop of Rome his power and commanding authority, over the greatest Bishops in the east? They appealed unto him for judgement, he heard their causes, he reversed the sentences given against them by the Bishops of the east, he finally restored again their Bishoprics unto them. cited the others to appear before him; and theatned to punish them, if they continued in their ill doing.  


Hosius ad Imperator: Constantium Citatus ab Athanas epist. ad solit. vitam agentes.  
Ne te misceas Ecclesiasticis, neque nobis in hoc genere praecipe, sed potius ea à nobis disce, tibi Deus imperium commisit: nobis quae sunt Ecclesiae concredidit, & quemadmodum qui tuum imperium malignis o●ulis carpit, contradicit ordinationi divinae: Ita & tu cave, ne quae sunt ecclesiae ad te trahens, magno crimini obnoxius fia●.   The same is also witnessed by Athanasius himself in his epistle to them that lead a solitary life, and in his second Apology, where he doth relate the whole business, and teacheth expressly that it did not belong to Constantius then Emperor, to determine ecclesiastical causes, but that he ought to learn them of Bishops.  
To Athanasius I will join Cirillus because he was patriarch of the same sea of Alexandria, 
Cirillus' epist 18 ad Celestinus.  and as learned and valiant a maintainer of the third general council held at Ephesus, as Athanasius had been of the first kept at Nice. 
Extat Tomo 1. Concil. Ephes. cap 29.  This most learned Archbishop confesseth the like commanding power to have been in Celestinus then pope of Rome, that tother did before in julius. 
Quoniam vero deus hisc● in rebus prudentiam à nobis exigit, long aque ecclesiarum consuetudo suadet, ut istiusmodi sanctitati tuae communicentur, non possum equidem, quod apertum est, ad pietatem non perscribere. post malefacta exposita, subiungit. Et quamvis res ita se habeat, non prius tamen illius communionem confidenter deserere ausi fuimus, quam haec ipsa p●etati tuae indicaremus. Digneris proinde quid hic sentias decl●rare, quo liquido nobis constet, communicare ne nos cum illo oporteat, an vero libere eidem denunciare, neminem cum eo communicar● qui eiusmodi Erroneam doctrinam fovet & praedicat. Porro t●a integritatis mens ac super hac re sententia, non modo pijssimis Macedoniae Epistopis, sed totius quoque Orientis Antistibus perspicue per literas exponi debet.  Thus he writeth to him. Because in business of this nature God requireth of us wisdom, and the long continued custom of the church doth admonish us to communicate them with your holiness, I cannot but give your piety to understand, what is here discovered of Nestorius' Bishop then of Constantinople. whose foul crimes and pestilent errors when he had laid open; and certified how he had done his endeavour to move him to repentance, but all in vain, he afterward addeth. Albeit these things be so, yet we durst not forbear communicating with him, before we had related these things to your piety. Vouchsafe therefore to declare what you deem to be done therein, that we may assuredly know, whether we ought to communicate with Nestorius, or else boldly denounce, that no man ought to communicate with him, that doth defend such erroneous doctrine. your holiness good pleasure and sentence in this matter is to be notified not only to the Bishops of Macedonia, but unto all the prelate's of the east. Behold the manner of proceeding in these pure times of the church: S. Cirill who for learning was perhaps better able than Celestinus to judge of the error of Nestorius: and being patriarch of Alexandria by his place, held the highest court of judgement in the east church: 
Celestin. Papa Cyrillo Archiepiscopo habetureodem Tomo 1. Concil. Ephes. cap. 16.  yet would he not take upon himself to determine of Nestorius' heresies, or to excommunicate him: but referred both unto the Bishop of Rome; whose sentence therein both he and all the Bishops of the east did require and embrace. In this manner did the same pope Celestinus return answer unto S. Cirill. Most Reverend brother, do you take unto you our authority, 
Quamobrem nostra autoritate ascita nostráque vice & loco cum potestate usus, eiusmodi non absque exquisita severitate sententiam exequeru; nempe ut nisi à decem dierum intervallo ab huius nostrae admon●tionis die numerandorum nefariam doctrinam suam conceptis verbis anathematize●, eamque de Christi dei nostri ●eneratione fidem in posterum confessurum se spondeat, quam & Romana & tuae sanctitatu ecclesia & universa denique religio Christiana praedicat, illico sanctitas tua illi ecclesiae prospiciat  and using our power and place, do you execute against Nestorius the sentence of excommunication, with exquisite severity; unless within ten days after he hath been admonished from us, he do recant and recall his errors: and let your holiness provide a more worthy person for that Bishopric. which mandate of his, Cirillus with the whole council, following, proceeded to the deposition of Nestorius in this manner. No man doth doubt, 

Tomo secundo eiusdem Concil. Ephes. cap. 16.  
Nulli dubium, imo seculis omnibus n●tum est, sanctum beatissimumque Petrum Apostolorum principem & caput, fide●que columnam, ecclesiae Catholicae fundamentum, à Domino nostro jesu Christo caelestis regni claves accepisse, solvendique atque ligandi potestate, quam acceperat usum fuisse: necnon per successores suos huc usque semper vivere, causas decernere, semperque victurum esse. Huius itaque ordinarius successor & vicarius, sanctus, beatissimusque papa & Episcopus noster Celestinus, nos suos pro se quasi vicarios misit, etc. Et hac est praefatio sententia. Nos canonum vi sanctissimi que patris, & comministri nostri Celestini ecclesia Romanae Antistitis epistola compulsi, hanc tristem in illam sententiam tulimus.   nay it hath been in all ages notorious, that the most blessed S. Peter (prince & head of the Apostles, the pillar of faith and foundation of the Catholic church) did receive of our Saviour jesus Christ (the redeemer of mankind) the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and the power of losing and binding. And that also even unto these days, he doth in his successors live and determine causes, and shall always live. To him doth Celestinus now Bishop of Rome, in right order succeed; finally by virtue of power received from the said Celestinus they proceed to pronounce sentence against Nestorius' Bishop of Constantinople.  
All which set together, standing of record in the third general council, doth demonstrate that the Eastern church did acknowledge both the Bishop of Rome to be S. Peter's lawful successor: And that it also did appertain to him, to excommunicate and depose principal Bishops of the Greek and Eastern church. which no man can doubt to be principal and most proper acts of supreme power in government. with this I will link another like example practised and recorded in the fourth general council held at Chalcedon. Dioscorus patriarch of Alexandria, being for his erroneous opinions, and enormous actions called in question, was convented to answer in that general council: first, all the actions that are entered against Dioscorus, are styled thus. 

Concil. Chalced. actio 3.  
Libellus Theodoridiaconi ad Leonem Papan & ad Chalced concilium. Libellus Iscyronis ad Leonem nem Papan & Chalcedon concilium.   Unto the most holy and most happy Archbishop of the great and old Rome Leo, and to the general council assembled at Chalcedon. Setting the Bishop of Rome, as head, before the general council, as his body. which in express terms the whole council acknowledgeth, writing unto the said pope Leo the great: That he was Precedent over them, 
Quibus tu quidem sicut membris caput prae●ras quam velut auro textam seriem ex vest Christi & praecepto legislatoris venientem usque ad nos ipse servasti. vocis beati Petri omnibus constitutus interpres, eius si lei beatificationem super omnes adduc●ns.  even as the head is to the rest of the members: that the custody of our lords vineyard, was committed to him; that he was the interpreter of Saint Peter's sentence. Observe secondly the form of their definitive sentence which is thus set down. The most holy and most blessed Archbishop of great and old Rome Leo, 

Ibidem in exemplari epist. Paschacini.  
unde sanctissimus, ac beatissimus Papa caput universalis ecclesiae Leo per nos ut l●gatos suos sancta synodo consentiente, Petri Apostoli praeditus dignitate, [qui ecclesiae fundamentum, et petra fidei & calestis regni lanitor nuncupatur] Episcopali eum Dioscorum dignitate nudavit, & ab omni sacerdotali opere facit exortem.   by us, and this present holy council, together with the most happy & most worthy Apostle S. Peter, (who is the rock and top of the Catholic church) he who is the foundation of the Orthodox and true faith, hath deposed Dioscorus from all Episcopal dignity, and deprived him of all priestly function and ministry.  
First let it be well observed and borne in mind, that all the parts of this my discourse be verified, in the sentences of these two general councils. First that S. Peter was that rock upon which Christ built his church. secondly that the Bishop of Rome succeeded him therein. thirdly that in the virtue thereof, is comprehended, power and authority to uphold the Orthodox saith, and to punish and depose the highest patriarchs in the church, aswell of the east, as of the west, if they do obstinately trouble the peace of Christ's church.  
This having been by the verdict and practice of the pure Church in ancient time so clearly testified, in two of those prime general councils, which the Protestants themselves do confess to be Orthodox and authentical, what reasonable Christian can take any exception against it? yet for more full confirmation of this most important point of our faith, I will pass through all the patriarchal seas, and out of each of them choose some sufficient proof, for the pope's supremacy in government. Athanasius patriarch of Alexandria was absolved, and restored by julius pope of Rome. Dioscorus of the same sea was excommunicated, and deposed by Leo the great. Nestorius' patriarch of Constantinople, was in like manner censured and deprived by Celestinus pope of Rome: of whom we have already treated. Now to S. john Chrysostom Bishop of the same city of Constantinople, who was absolved and restored to his Bishopric by Innocentius the first pope of Rome. This very learned zealous and godly prelate and most eloquent preacher, was through the malice of the Empress Eudoxia, assisted by her husband the emperor Archadius, deposed & hoist out of his seat, even by the verdict of many Eastern Bishops assembled in a council, whereof Theophilus patriarch of Alexandria was the head. where upon he treading in the noble steps of Athanasius and diverse other good Bishops, made his appeal to Innocentius pope of Rome, craving of him to reverse that unjust sentence which had been given against him: 

Innocentio Papae joannes Chrisost: ex palladio in vita eius.  
Quapropter ne confusio haec, omnem quae sub coelo est nationem enuadat, obsecro ut scribatis, quod baec tam inique facta, & absentibus nobis, & non declinantibus judicium, non habeant robur, sicut nec sua natura habent. Illi autem qui inique egerunt, poena ●cclesiasticarum legum sub●aceant: nobis vero (qui nec convicti, nec redarguti, nec habiti ut rei) literis vestris & charitate vestra aliorumque omnium, quorum scilicet & an●ea societate fru●bamur, f●ui conc●dite.   these be his words. I beseech thee (holy father) that their sentence, so unjustly given in my absence, (I not refusing judgement) may be of no validity: furthermore that they who have done me that wrong, may according to the laws of the church be punished: And command that I being innocent and not to be convicted of any crime, may be restored to my church again. See most evident acknowledgement of the Bishop of Rome's power, to repeal the sentence of a council holden in the greek church, by the greatest patriarch of those coasts; yea and to inflict punishment upon them: Item to restore Saint john chrysostom to his Bishopric again; which Innocentius effected, 

Ex epist. 30. Innocent. ad Archadium, ex Nicepho. 10 l. 13. c. 34.  
Itaque ego minimus & peccator, cui thronus magni Apostoli Petri creditus est, segrego to & illam a perceptione immaculatorum mysteriorum Christi dei nostri. Episcopum etiam omnem aut clericum ordinis sancta dei ecclesiae qui administrare aut exhibere ●a vobis ausu● fuerit ab ea hora qua presente● vinculi meilegeritis literas, dignitate sua excidisse decern.   thundering out a most terrible sentence of excommunication against the Emperor Archadius in these terms.  
I the least of God's servants and a sinner, unto whom the throne of the great Apostle S. Peter is committed, do excomunicate and exclude thee, and thy wife, from the communion of the immaculate and sacred mysteries: And do declare that what Bishop or priests soever, shall presume (after the knowledge had of these my letters) to minister the same to you, thereby to fall from his dignity and function.  
This learned and holy pope (much commended by S. Austin) doubted not, but that the Bishop of Rome had sufficient authority, not only to depose and restore patriarchs, but also to excommunicate Emperors. Now to the patriarch of Antioch; though Saint john Chrysostom's testimony (who had been thirteen years preacher in that city) might suffice, yet we want not others. First Flavianus patriarch of Antioch was summoned to appear at Rome, 

Flavianus apud Theodoret: l. 5. c. 23.  
Cum eo agit Imperator, ut Romam adiret, cui respondit. Si qui me O Imperator, ut fidem minime sinceram ac sanam profitentes insimulent, dicantve vitam me traducere indignam sacerdotio, tum illis ipsis judicibus utar; tum pronunciatam ab eis sententiam lubens subibo.   there to answer unto matters objected against him. who put not in the protestāns plea, that the Bishop of Rome had no authority over him, being the highest Bishop in all Asia: but made means unto the said pope by the friendship of Theophilus patriarch of Alexandria, and S. chrysostom, and so appeased that matter, as the Ecclesiastical histories do testify.  
And Theodoret that renowned Hstoriographer, 

Theodoret Leoni Episcopo Romano.  
Post lo● sudores & labores ne in ius quidem vocatus, sum condemnatus. Ego autem Apostolicae vestrae sedu expecto sententiam & supplico & obsecro vestram sanctitatem, ut mihi opem ferat, justum vestrum & rectum app●llanti judicium, & iubeat ad vos accurr●re, & ostendere meam doctrinam vestigia Apostolica sequentem: & ante omnia rogo ut s●iam a vobis, an in in●●sta hac depositione me oporteat acqui●scere, an non: vestram enim expecto sententiàm, & si iudicatis s●are me iusserie, stabo, nec ulli deinceps homini molestiam exhibeb●.   being Bishop of Cirus, under the patriarch of Antioch, did nevertheless fly by appeal to Leo the great pope of Rome, for redress: Thus he writeth unto him. I attend the sentence of the sea Apostolic, and do humbly beseech your holiness that you defend and protect me appealing unto your just and upright judgement seat. If you command me to submit myself to their sentence that have condemned me, I will yield to it, and never be troublesome to any other. Let these suffice for th● patriarkship of Antioch. There remains only the patriarch of jerusalem for whom Anastasius patriarch of the same sea, 

Anast●sius p●tri●●cha Hie●osolym●●●l●us epist. ad Foelic●m papam  
Fuit se●per ●postolicae sedis v●stre li●●ntia, unjust damnatos vel ●xcommuni●atos potestatis suae auctoritate restitu●re, & sua omnia eu r●dder●, & illos qui eos c●●demnarunt aut excommunicav●●unt, Apostolico punire privilegio: sicut etiam nostris & anterioribus novimus factum temp●ribu●. & antiquis regulis sanc●tum est, ●t quicquid, quamuis t●●●●otu provinces, super corum querduant accusationibus ageretu●, non pr●●s tractandum vel accipiendum esset, quam ad notitiam alma vestra sedis esset deductum: ut hu●us auctoritate, juxta quod fuisset faciendum, infirmaretur aut firmaretur.   about the same time in his letters unto foelix pope of Rome writeth in this manner. It was always the liberty of your Apostolic sea, by the authority of your power, to acquit them that were unjustly condemned and excommunicated, and to restore them to all they had lost. even as we have seen done in our times, and have heard in the days of our predecessors: for (saith he a little after) it is by ancient Canons decreed, that whatsoever be handled about the affairs of Bishops, yea though in provinces far remote, that the same should not be fully determined, before it were brought to the notice of your holy sea, and by the authority thereof, be either confirmed or rejected.  
This great and ancient Patriarch not only witnesseth such sovereign power and authority to belong unto the Bishop of Rome, but pleadeth also for the same out of the former approved Canons of the Church: Among which that of the council of Sardica I hold to be the chiefest. 

Ex concilio Sardicense c. 4.  
Quod si aliquis episcopus adiudicatus fuerit in aliqua causa, & putat se bonam causam habere, ut iterum judicium renovetur, si vobis placet, S. Petri Apostoli memoriam honoremus, ut scribatur Romano Pontifici, & si iudicaverit renovandum esse judicium, renovetur, & det iudicos. si autem probaverit talem causam, ut ea non refriceutur quae acta sunt. Quae decreverit Romanus Pontifex, confirmata erunt. Si ergo omnibus placeat, statuatur. synodus respondit: placet, etc. 5. Alter episcopus post talem appellationem in eadem cathedra no admittetur, nisi causa fuerit in judicio Romani Pontificis determinata.   where it is in express terms decred; that if any Bishop of what country soever, have his cause judged otherwise then he thinketh right, he may appeal unto the Bishop of Rome: who may appoint new judges and send them to hear it again, and finally determine it. Now that they who have less skill in ancient histories may understand of what credit that council of Sardica is, Let them know first; that it was called by julius Bishop of Rome. Secondly there were present that famous Hosius (who was one of the precedents of the Nicene council) And Athanasius, with many other renowned Bishops which had been members of the said first general council of Nice: and above 300. Bishops came thither both out of the East and west as 
a Athan. Apolog 2 in medio.  Athanasius writeth. wherefore he termeth it, instar Niceni, such an other as the first Nicene council was. 
b Sulpit. l. 2. sacra histor.  Sulpitius Severus termeth it a council called from all parts of the word, 
c Socrat. l. 2 hist. c. 16.  Socrates in his history, a general council. Briefly, the Centuriators of Magdeburg Centur. 4. cap. 99 do approve the same council for Authentical.  
These few testimonies for the supreme power and authority of the Bishop and church of Rome, being taken from very eminent, sincere, and learned personages, who in the flourishing time of Christianity, governed the patriarchal seas of the greek and east churches; confirmed also with the acts and sentences of the general council of Ephesus, Chalcedon, and Sardica, cannot but give full satisfaction unto all true Christians, that even in the purest antiquity, the pope's commanding power, and superiority in government was believed, practised, and approved all Christendom over.  
14 After so many plain demonstrations of the Bishops of Rome's supremacy in causes ecclesiastical, I hope the courteous reader will give me leave to employ one probable presumption, that in my poor opinion doth much fortify the same. It is collected out of those letters which in ancient time were called, literae formatae, and granted either unto Bishops at their first creation, or unto priests that were dismissed by licence from their ordinary.  
This kind of letters was in great use in the primitive church; for no stranger was admitted into communion among the catholics without them. The invention of these letters is referred to the first general council holden at Nice: and the form of them, is recorded authentically in the end of the Chalcedon council (immediately before the letters of the Illustrious persons that wrote in or about that council) under this title. Atticus Episcopus, qualiter formata Epistola fiat. In this epistle, four letters principally were set for an assured token, that he in whose favour they were granted, was a sound Catholic. The three former letters, were the first letters, of the father, of the son, and of the holy Ghost; to testify that he believed aright in the blessed Trinity, and therefore was no Arrian, Sabellian, Macedonian or such like heretic. the fourth letter in that formal Epistle was a the first letter of S. Peter's name: thereby to signify, that the bearer was received into the unity of that church, of which S. Peter, as chief governor, kept the keys. the other letters, of his name that granted that Epistle, 
Distinct. 73. ca 1.  & to whom it was granted, I omit as not necessary to this purpose, he that will may see a copi● of such an Epistle set down at large in Gratian: where the mystery also of these letters, is deciphered to be such, as I have declared; namely that the fourth letter was put for S. Peter's name to make known that the bearer thereof was a true member of that church, in qua, Petro datum est ius ligandi atque absoluendi, in which, to S. Peter was given the right of binding and losing. Out of which notable monument of antiquity, I draw this argument. so well assured it was, and a thing so notoriously known and approved, in those purer days of the primitive church, that S. Peter, and the pope's of Rome his successors, were the chief governors of Christ's church, and the insoluble band of the unity thereof; that the first letter of S. Peter's name, was chosen for an undoubted badge and token of being a sound member, received into the unity of the said Catholic church. for why should the first letter of S. Peter's name, rather than any other of the Apostles, be taken for such an infallible mark of society with the catholic church? had it not been a clear overuled case, that he who like an even squared stone lay upon that rock, and did adhere unto the head of the church, was undoubtedly a true member thereof. This argument as it shall serve for a conclusion of that which goeth before, so it will make a convenient passage to that which followeth in M. Abbot's text.  
15 There was (saith he) a church, when there was no Roman church at all; how then could that church be builded upon the Roman church?  
This is a very poor objection: for speaking (as we now do) of the church, which was since our Saviour's time; if he take that season next to Christ's ascension; S. Peter was head of that church, during his own life: and after him, the Bishops of Rome his lawful successors. No man ever said that the church, or Bishop of Rome was head of the church, before S. Peter had placed his seat there. If M. Abbot will accord us that ever since that time, the church of Rome hath been head of the rest (as in truth it hath been) we will easily grant him, that before it had no such privilege.  
Another like slug M. Abbot thrusteth forth thus. If the church of Rome be that rock, and other churches be builded thereupon; than it would follow, that the gates of hell should never have prevailed against any other of those churches: but it hath prevailed against them. Ergo. True good Sir, if those other churches had stuck close to the said rock, the gates of hell had never prevailed against them: but they foolishly flitting from that firm rock, were soused in the surging seas, and swallowed up by the gulf of hell.  
M. Abbot saw this to be so full an answer, that he could not tell what to say to it: but that we have no assurance that the church of Rome shall continue always builded upon Christ jesus. this is M. Abbots last refuge, and to it as to a safe anchor, he doth twenty times fly in this book wherefore it shall have a full answer in its due place. but let us first see whether the Bishops of Rome be S. Peter's lawful successors, because that comes next. M. Abbot doth either grant it to be true, or at least he supposeth it for true: for he disproves it not: wherefore I need not stand long about it, & so much the rather because it is recorded by S. Iraeneus, 
Iren. l. 3. v. 3. Tertull. de prescr. 36. Euseb. l. 2. hist. c. 2. Epiphar. heres. 27. Optat. mi levit. l. 2. perm. Hieron. de viris ill. 1. August. Epistola. 1●5.  Tertullian, Eusebius, Optatus milevitanus, S. Hierom, S. Austin, and briefly by the full consent of all that have made any Catalogue of S. Peter's successors. It is evident and confessed by both sides, that our Saviour established such a form of government in his church, that he would have to continue, as long as the same church continued, that is always to the world's end. which was according to our doctrine, that one should be head and supreme governor over all the rest: to preserve unity in faith, and conformity in rites of religion. And by name that one was S. Peter for his life time. All which I have before proved out of holy scriptures, and the ancient fathers. S. Peter finally making choice of Rome for the seat of his Bishopric, lived there many years, and in the end, died Bishop of Rome. wherefore they that were choose Bishops of Rome, were to succeed him, as in that seat, so in that supreme government of Christ's church: which daily experience teacheth us. for we see that whosoever is chosen bishop of any place, for example of Canterbury; he presently upon his installing, entereth upon all the privileges of honour, and government, which the former Bishops, his predecessors, died possessed of. so that no sooner any man is created Archbishop of Canterbury, but that immediately he is thereby Metropolitan of England, and hath commanding authority over all the Bishops of that province, with law full jurisdiction to hear and determine all such causes, that by appeal do come to his courts. In like manner Linus being chosen Bishop of Rome after the death of S. Peter, entered into possession of full power & authority, not only over the Diocese of Rome, but also over all the Bishops of Christ's church, in all such cases and causes, that do belong to the supreme governors court and cognizance, in as large and ample manner as S. Peter had before enjoyed, and died possessed of. this being a matter depending upon common equity, and daily practise, doth require no other proof, nor can have any better; then the aknowledgment of all the Orthodox and most eminent christian prelate's of both Latin and Greek; east and west churches; which I have before plentifully produced, and when more need shallbe, will yet produce more.  
17 M. Abbot admitting as I said, the pope of Rome to be S. Peter's successor yet argueth that they may fail in faith; because Caiphas did succeed lineally to Aaron, & yet Caiphas gave sentence against Christ. & further he allegeth that sentence out of the law. All are not the children of Saints, that hold the places of saints, but they that practise the works of saints. M. Abbot foreseeing that we would answer, that many successors though not so holy, just, and wise, as their predecessors were: yet have the same authority and jurisdiction over their floc, k which their predecessors had. And albeit they may commit some fault, unworthy their calling, yet they do not thereby lose the dignity of their place. And that namely our Saviour had prayed for S. Peter, that his faith should not fail; but that he not withstanding his own frailty, should have strength from God through the virtue of Christ's prayer to confirm his brethren in the true faith: This M. Abbot foreseeing doth acknowledge it to be true, yet that he may not be thought to have nothing more to say, doth ask us with Austin as he speaketh. Did he pray for Peter and did he not pray for james and john, to say nothing of the rest? it is manifest that in Peter they all are contained, and praying for Peter, he is known to pray for them all. All this is true, but not against any thing that we say. for it being granted that our Saviour made many good prayers for all his Disciples, doth it follow thereof, that his prayer made for the preservation of Saint Peter's faith, was not heard? nay rather doth it not thereupon most evidently ensue out of M. Abbot's own discourse; (which is, that every one of the elect obtaineth that without fail, which Christ prayed for, in their names) that Christ his prayer made for S. Peter, obtained for him that his faith should never fail? But M. Abbot like an ill Alhymist would feign distill out of those words of S. Austin; that Peter by that prayer had no privilege above the rest. which is both contrary to the express words of our Saviour, who doth distinguish Peter from the rest, and to him apart did speak those words. 
Luca 22.  Behold (saith our Saviour) Satan hath desired to sift you (that was all the Apostles, to whom those words were spoken) but I have prayed for thee Peter, see how particularly he cometh to him, that thy faith do not fail; and thou (Peter) once converted, strengthen thy brethren.  
M. Abbot's collection is also against S. Austin himself. for though S. Austin do say, that in praying for Peter, he prayed for them all: his meaning is not, that he prayed, that every one of them in particular might receive the same gift, which was bestowed on S. Peter: but that Christ, in praying that Peter's faith might not fail, & that he also might have strength to confirm his brethren, may be truly said, to have prayed for them all. because they were to rely upon the stability of Peter's faith, and to receive comfort from him. wherefore they being assured, that Peter's faith should not fail, they joining in faith with him, were also assured that they should not fail. 
August. quaest. & novi testa q. 75.  And this to be S. Augustine's meaning the words following in the very same sentence, (which M. Abbot did guilefully clip of) do manifestly show: In praying for Peter, 
Quid ambigitur? pro Petro rogabat, & ●ro jacobo & joanne non rogabat, ut caeteros taceam? manifestum est in Petro omnes contineri: rogans enim pro Petro, pro omnibus rogasse dignoscitur: semper enim in praeposito populus aut corripitur aut laudatur.  Christ prayed for them all. for that always in the Governor the people are either corrected or praised. So that he prayed for them not in particular, but as they were contained in their precedent, Saint Peter. Out of which so far of is it, that thence can be gathered as M. Abbot did, that Peter had not any privilege above the rest of the Apostles, that it followeth clearly in S. Augustine's judgement, that he was precedent and head of that college of the Apostles.  
18 M. Abbot being amazed at this point of succession, and not knowing well what to say to it, makes a stand, and admitting Christ to have meant some singular favour to Peter doth ask, by what art I can derive the effect of Christ's prayer from Peter to the pope's, from an holy Apostle to a rank and succession of men, amongst whom there have been so many Atheists, Infidels, Idolaters, heretics, and so many incarnate Devils, and hateful monsters of mankind. This foul troubled flood of his currish eloquence, I omit as uncivil. To the matter I have already answered, that it very much concerned the perpetual purity & unity of Christ's church, that the effect of our Saviour's holy prayer, should not be closed up with S. Peter's life, but be continued to the world's end: that there might be always in the church one living, visible, and certain Oracle, to consult in all doubtful questions, which should arise: And one supreme governor to confirm the weak, to correct the proud, and to hold all in one uniform order of perfect discipline which to have been S. Peter's successors the Bishops of Rome, Christ's institution, joined with the ordinary manner of proceeding of the universal church, from the purest antiquity doth testify, as hath been declared. And whereas M. Abbot doth demand of me, by what art I can derive the effect of Christ's prayer from Peter unto a succession of men? I might better ask of him, what ignorance oppressed him, when he could not understand that that which was granted to one man, might not as well be granted to another man, and so continued from one to another to the world's end. But (saith he) Peter was an holy Apostle, and the others were sinful creatures. Be it so. Did not M. Abbot himself immediately before confess, that evil men might be lawful successors even unto Saints? as Caiphas was to Aaron? And here (as though he had clean forgotten himself) doth seem to wonder are my art, that would make evil Bishops of Rome, Successors to good S. Peter. how can a man of discretion rely upon any thing M. Abbot says, when he findeth him so contrary to himself within the compass of so few lines? yet it is well known to all the learned, that exceeding many Bishops of Rome, were very worthy successors of S. Peter's fervour in faith, constancy in suffering, & great learning: above thirty of them in a rew shed their blood most valiantly, in testimony of the Christian religion. Many of them that lived after, were very great lights of the world, & Doctors of the church: as Leo the great, Gregory the great, Damasus, Innocentius, Gelasius, and divers others. To let pass very many among them of exceeding religious, holy, and exemplar life. whom if one would parallel with the protestants chief governors, men, women, and Children; what odds between them would be found I leave to the discreet reader's judgement. But be it so, that some Bishops of Rome have not lived so godly & virtuously as they ought to have done (though M. Abbot's proof thereof taken up of a hearsay out of M. watsons' Quidlibets, or quodlibets, is too too simple) yet it hath pleased god many times to serve himself of evil Instruments, to do very good offices. The scribes and Pharisees in Christ's days were very bad men: yet our Saviour himself commanded the common people to hearken unto them, and to obey them. Because they did sit in the chair of Moses, it pleased god to assist them in their doctrine, though their lives were nought. 
Aug co. eras Petil e. 2. ca 51.  S. Austin hath a passage to Petilianus the Donatist (one of M. Abbot's cousins) so fit for this purpose, that we need seek no further for the cleared thereof. Thus he greeteth him, and in him M. Abbot. 
Quare appellas cathedram pestilen ●●e, cathedram Apostolicam? si propter homines quos putas legem loqui & non facere, nunquid jesus Christus propter Pharisaeos, [de quibus ait: dicunt enim & non faciunt] cathedrae in qua sedebant ullam fecit iniuriam? nun illam cathedram Moysi commendavit, & illos seruato cathedra honore, redarguit? dicens. super cathedram Moysi sedent, quod dicunt facite: secundum autem opera eorum, nolite facere.  why dost thou call the Apostolic chair of Rome, the chair of pestilence? if for the men's sake that sit in it: what, did our lord jesus Christ for the Pharisees sake, any wrong to the chair wherein they sat? Did he not commend the chair of Moses, & preserving the honour of the chair, reprove the men? saying, They sit upon the chair of Moses; that which they say do ye, but do not according to their works. These things if you did well consider, you would not for the man whom you backbite, blaspheme the sea Apostolic, wherewith you do not communicate. And in another place. Into that pedigree of Bishops which is derived from S. Peter unto Anastasius, 

Aug. Epist. 165.  
In illum autem ordinem Episcoporum qui ducitur ab ipso Petro usque ad Anastasium, qui nunc eandem cathedram sedet, etiamsi quisquam traditor penilla tempora surrepsisset, nihil praeiudicaret ecclesiae & innocentibus Christianis, quibus dominus providens ait de praepositis malu. Quae dicunt facite, quae autem faciunt, facere nolite, dicunt enim & non faciunt ut certa sit spes fidelibus quae non in hominibus, sed in deo collocata, nunquam tempestate sacrilegi schismatis dissipetur.   (who now sitteth in the same chair) albeit some traitor had crept, it should not have prejudiced or hurt the church, and innocent Christians, for whom our Lord providing, said of evil prelate's, do that which they say, but do not as they do, for they say, but do not: That the faith full might have assured confidence, which placed not in man but in our Lord, by no tempest of sacrilegious schism can be disappointed. Behold out of saint Austin, first that the Bishops of Rome are the true successors of S. Peter, Then that in doubts of religion, recourse is to be made unto them for resolution. And lastly, that our blessed Lord hath taken such order for their sure direction of others in the right way: that though some traitor or evil man should creep into that chair, yet every good Christian may for ever repose assured confidence in them. This being the ancient doctrine, and assured persuasion of all good Christians; M. Abbots stolen jest of the pope's sitting down in a chair when he is to define a matter, is to be laughed at, as an idle and ignorant imagination.  
It were indeed very simple to think that the only sitting down of the pope in a chair, should be a sufficient help to define hard and doubtful questions. But to define ex Cathedra, as it is termed, hath a far other meaning among Catholic Doctors, which may be thus declared. The pope as a learned Divine may, writ many large discourses in matter of divinity, and make goodly commentaries upon sundry books of holy scripture, as S. Leo, S. Gregory, and divers other of them have done: in which his works, he having no further assistance of the holy Ghost, than another private Doctor of the same learning and holiness of life hath, may as a man mistake somethings, and be deceived. But when as chief pastor of Christ's church, he comes to define any deep question for the instruction of the whole church; then he hath (through the virtue of our blessed Saviour's prayer) assistance of the holy ghost. First to cause that matter to be duly sifted and considered of by learned Divines, according to the importance and difficulty thereof either by the assistance only of his own ordinary council in his courto of Rome, if the question be but ordinary: or if it be of greater consequence, and do concern a whole nation, or the universal church: then with the aid of a national or general council; And finally after such mature advise taken, to give his sentence and to determine it. this is that which we mean, when we say, that the pope's holiness can never err, when he comes for the information and instruction of the church, to define any doubtful question ex cathedra, that is, judicially after due examination. the infallibility of which sentence we do not attribute to the learning, wisdom, or godliness of the pope, and much less to the sitting down in his chair (as M. Abbot dreamt) who being a mortal man may ere and do amiss: but unto our Saviour's provident foresight, and unto the most assured verity of his promise made to S. Peter, and his successors; which prayer and promise of our blessed Saviour can never fail. Against the evidence of which truth M. Abbot having nothing to say in reason, falls a railing at his own misconceit of it, and calls it a drunken man's dream. which if he himself will needs have to be so, who can let him to term his own dream as he list. Many men of a more sober and advised spirit can easily understand, that there was very great reason why our blessed Saviour (being to establish an ecclesiastical state, which he would have tossed and to the world's end, incorrupt in Doctrine, & uniform in holy rites and manners) should establish some one at the least, to resolve infallibly all the rest in all doubtful questions, that should arise among them, which he foresaw would be almost innumerable. And to endow him with sufficient power and authority, to keep all the rest in order and due obedience. This is that which we maintain he did for S. Peter, and his successors the Bishops of Rome: having his own express word for our warrant, being understood according unto the learned exposition, and prudent practice of the most ancient holy pastors, and prelate's of Christ's church, as hath been before declared.  
Thus much to show how unsoundly M. Abbot interpreteth that text of holy scripture, and how unproperly and feebly he seeketh to shift from the most literal and uniform exposition of the ancient Doctors. Now I come to examine the exceptions that he taketh against some sentences that I alleged out of the said holy fathers to the same purpose.  
My first and principal author, was the most learned and holy Archbishop of Lions S. Ireneus. who with his blood sealed his doctrine 1400 years ago. He teacheth plainly that the Roman church is the greatest and most authentic: and that he and others by alleging the traditions (which the Apostles had lest to that church) and their faith by succession of Bishops descending down to his days, did confound and put to shame all wranglers, who either of ignorance, vain glory, or envy, did teach otherwise then they should have done. And for an upshott, addeth this reason, which I did before cite, to prove that we must all join in matter of faith with the church of Rome: to wit. For it is necessary that every church (that is all the faith full every where) do agree with the church of Rome, 

Irenaeus lib. 3. cap. 3.  
Sed quoniam valde longum est in hoc tali volumine, omnium ecclesiarum enumerare successiones, maximae & antiquissima & omnibus cognitae à gloriosissimis duobus Apostolis Petro & Paulo Roma fundata & constituta ecclesiae eam quam habet ab Apostolis traditionem, & annunciatam hominibus fidem, per successiones Episcoporum pervenientem usque ad nos, indicantes, confundimus omnes eos, qui quoqu● modo vel per sui placentiam malam, vel vanam gloriam, vel per caecitatem & malam sententiam, praeter quam oportet colligunt. Ad hanc enim ecclesiam propter potentiorem principalitatem necesse est omnem convenire ecclesiam, hoc est, eos qui sunt undique fideles, in qua semper ab his qui sunt undique, conservata est ea quae est ab Apostolis traditio.   for her more mighty principality: Because in it the traditions which descended from the Apostles, hath been always preserved round about. Note first a most clear proof of that for which I cited it, to wit; that every church, yea every faithful man, must not of courtesy, but of necessity, accord with the church of Rome, in matter of faith and religion. Because in it as in a rich treasury, that doctrine which the Apostles taught, is kept whole and sound. to which M. Abbot saith, that if we take the reason added by Irenaeus, but concealed by me, it will plainly appear why it was necessary for the other churshes to accord with the church of Rome. for this church (saith he) for the renown of the place, being then the seat of the Empire, was the most eminent church of the world.  
I answer that I concealed nothing. And this reason added by M. Abbot is wholly mistaken. for there is no mention in Irenaeus of either the Emperor's power or seat, for that mighty principality is proper to the church of Rome, for her spiritual dignity. And it is most absurd to think that the church of Rome in those ancient days of S. Irenaeus, (when the Emperors were most deadly enemies of the Christian name) got any reputation with other churches, by the worldly renown of those persecuting Emperors, who reigned there. for that their wicked glory was rather a whetstone to hatred and contempt, than any allurement to love and estimation.  
This great respect then being borne unto the church of Rome, before the Emperors of Rome were converted to be Christians, is a most manifest argument that the principality of the church of Rome, was not gotten by the renown of that city, nor by the glory of these heathen peesecuting Emperors: but for that the best learned, and most holy prelates of all countries, were taught by the Apostles and their scholars, that it was our blessed Saviour's pleasure and ordinance, that such regard and obedience should be yielded unto the church of Rome: were the Emperors thereof heathens or Christians, good or bad. It was in deed very convenient, that the prince of the Apostles, and head of Christ's church, should be there seated, where the Monarch of the temporal estate held his court: to the intent, that impiety being there crushed as it were in the head, might the sooner decay all the body over: And true godliness being happily planted in the chief place, might with more facility and speed be spread in all other nations; and also that men might be more easily induced to yield religious obedience to the Bishop of that place, unto whose temporal magistrates, the whole world before had obeyed in temporal affairs. But this is to be attibuted to our Saviour's divine wisdom, order, & institution: Not unto the greatness or worldly policy of any earthly Emperors. M. Abbot seeing little hold to be taken upon the renown of that place, as the state of things went then, doth acknowledge that in those days the church of Rome was pure & sound, & therefore fit to be propounded as a pattern for other churches to imitate: But now the case is altered (as he saith) because the church of Rome itself is now questioned, for swerving from the tradition of the Apostles: which being so, that cannot be said to be necessary now, which was necessary then.  
This answer hath as little solidity in it as the other. For the church of Rome itself, was as well challenged in those days for swerving from the Apostles tradition, by the Montanists, Marcionists, and such like Heretics, as now by the Lutherans, Calvinists and Anabaptists. And nevertheless the renowned prelate's of Christ's church, and most firm pillars of our Christian religion, did then teach all Christians to make their recourse unto the same church for resolution of the true faith, wishing them to conform themselves thereto, and by avouching boldly that doctrine, which they found there maintained, to confound all them that taught the contrary, as ye have heard out of Irenaeus. Let us therefore as kind children treading in the right steps of those our most laudable forefathers, seek with them unto that same church of Rome, for the verity of that doctrine which descended from the Apostles, embrace it most willingly, and profess it as constantly: though we hear our holy mother to be called into question by untowardly and degenerous Children, that either wilfully run out of her house, to follow their own pleasure and fancies; or are for pure fear, fallen away from her and forsaken her ordinances.  
M. Abbot admitting as it were, that other churches should according to S. Irenaeus rule, conform themselves in matter of doctrine to the church of Rome: yet to give us a taste of the subtlety of his shifting wit, addeth, that there is in that place of Irenaeus nothing for her superiority in government.  
well, that being once granted, that all other churches should for matter of doctrine, accord with the church of Rome; it would thereon necessarily follow, that the church of England, and consequently his majesty ought to do the same: which was all that I sued for. yet over and beside, Irenaeus words being well weighed do import also a superiority in government, to be resident in that church. which I prove, because he says, that other churches must of necessity accord with the church of Rome for her more potent principality. Now if the church of Rome have power and principality over other churches; And do impose a necessity upon them of according unto it: it must needs have superiority in government over them: or else the other could not be bound of necessity to follow it. M. Abbot doth grammatically descant first upon this word (principality) and says that it may signify eminency in estimation, though not superiority in government. And that it may be potent also, to move by example and persuasion only, not by commandment. Be it so, that these words may be wrested into some such signification: as what words be there, that may not be diversly construed? yet every reasonable man will soon see, that power and principality, do properly import a commanding superiority. And will as easily grant, that the father's words are rather to be fairly taken according to the more usual signification, then in any such forced sense and construction.  
Again, seeing that power and superiority did (even as S. Irenaeus expresseth) impose a necessity upon others of conforming themselves to the church of Rome: it could not be that imagined superiority of M. Abbots, which imposeth no such necessity. wherefore it remains evident, that M. Abbot is driven to fly from the usual signification, & true meaning of S. Irenaeus words. In like manner M. Abbot to cast some better colour, upon his new devised principality, or rather to shift over into another matter, that seems more plausible, writeth thus.  
20 That M. Bishop may understand I do not answer him by a devise of mine, 
Cypr. l. 1. Epist. 3.  but according to the truth, he shall find that Cyprian calleth the church of Rome, the princ palls church: and yet in the same place, he denieth the authority of the Bishops in Africa, to be inferior unto the Bishops of Rome.  
M. Abbot and other Protestants cannot choose but stand in bodily fear, so often as they appeal unto the ancient fathers for support of their novelties. for you shall scarce find any one of them, that doth not in the very place alleged by the Protestants, give them such a bob, that every beholder may plainly see, they do not favour their cause; nor are content to be called in for their witnesses. Let S. Cyprian now cited by M. Abbot serve for an example. This is the sentence out of which M. Abbot picked the former words. 

Cypr. l. 1. Epist. 3. juxta pamel Epist 55.  
Post ista, adhuc insuper pseudo-Episcopo sibi ab haereticis constituto, navigare audent ad Petri cathedram, atque ad Ecclesiam principalem, unde unitas sacerdotalis ●rta est, a schismaticis & profanis litteras far: nec cogitare eos esse Romanos (quorum fides, Apostolo praedicante, laudata est) ad quos perfidia habere non posset accessum.   After those things, and more also after a false Bishop appointed them by Heretics, they dare sail to the chair of Peter, and unto the principal church, whence priestly unity hath its beginning, and carry letters from schismatics, and profane fellows: not remembering that such are the Romans (whose faith is praised by the Apostles voice) unto whom perfidy can have no access. I set down the whole passage because by and by we must treat of the later part thereof, as well as now of the former. where is sufficiently declared, that S. Cyprian took the church of Rome to be principal, not only in estimation, but in order of government. which I prove First, because he affirms the church of Rome to be S. Peter's chair, and consequently to be endued with like authority, that S. Peter enjoyed, upon whom (as S. Cyprian in twenty places avoucheth) the church of Christ was builded. Secondly, he describes it to be that principal church, which is the fountain of priestly and ecclesiastical unity. which could not be, unless it had power and authority to compel all other churches to stand to her order, and thereby to hold all in unity of faith, and uniformity of religion. For as all the world now seethe, there neither is, nor can be (in man's judgement) any unity in faith, or religious rites, among Protestants, because there is no one sovereign commander over them all, endued with authority to compel the rest to agree in one. And in the self same Epistle S. Cip. confirmeth this very point in these memorable words. Heresies have not risen, 

Cyprian. ibidem.  
Neque enim aliunde haereses orta sunt, aut nata sunt schismata, quam inde, quod sacerdoti dei non obtemperatur, nec unus in ecclesia ad tempus sacerdos, & ad tempus judex, vico Christi cogitatur.   nor schisms sprung from any other root, then for that obedience is not yielded to one priest: and for that one priest for the time, and one judged is not accepted of in Christ's steed.  
Do you see by S. Cyprians sentence, that the only way to root out heresies and to accord schisms, is to acknowledge one priest for sovereign judge in ecclesiastical cases, and to obey him as Christ's vicegerent on earth. Such a sovereign judge is he that sits in S. Peter's chair, and that principal church of Rome, by S. Cyprian's own assertion in the former period; or else Ecclesiastical Discipline could not draw its original unity thence. Thus much here to prove that the principal church in that place of S. Cyprian, is to be taken for the principal in authority and government. Now to the other part. S. Cyprian denieth not the Bishops in Africa to be inferior unto the Bishop of Rome, but blameth such troublesome fellows, that would not rest quiet and content, with their own Bishop's judgement, but fly abroad to molest others with their brawls: as though their own Bishops had not sufficient authority, or wit, to compose and end their quarrels at home. S. Cyprian supposeth, that their churches in Africa, had no less authority than others churches to order such matters; but neither names the church of Rome, nor makes any comparison in matter of higher nature. but all this is devised and thrust in out of the fecundity of M. Abbot's understanding. yet let us grant that S. Cyprian might mean, that the Bishops in afric had no loss authority to judge of their own subjects faults then any other Bishops; yea then the Bishop of Rome himself hath: It doth not thereupon ensue, that he thought the Bishops in Africa, not inferior unto the Bishop of Rome. For in times past, in our own country when it was Catholic, and now in France; men cannot appeal to Rome from the ordinary courts of their own country, without special licence: and yet in far greater matters, they acknowledge the pope to be their supreme governor in causes Ecclesiastical. But of this point we shall speak more in the next objection, which is thus propounded by M. Abbot.  R. AB. 
21 The African council acknowledged the church of Rome, for the first and principal sea, 
Concil. Afric. cap. 6.  and the Bishop thereof they term the Bishop of the first and principal sea: and yet they deny the Bishop of Rome to have any authority over them. yea when zozimus, Bonifacius, and Celestinus, challenged the same by a forged Canon of the council of Nice: 
Ibid. can. 101.  Those African Bishops for the disproving thereof, sent to the patriarchs of Alexandria and Constantinople, for authentical copies of the same council, wherein they found no such matter. And thereupon wrote to Celestinus, that he should forbear to send his legates to intermeddle in their matters. 
Ibid can. 105.  And forbade all appeals, saving to their own councils: excommunicating them that presumed to appeal to Rome. 
Ibid. can. 92.  And in this recusancy of subjection, they continued afterward for the space of an hundredth years, until Eulalius the Bishop of Carthage submitted the same to Pope Boniface.  w. B. 
This council of afric, and fact of the African Bishops there assembled, is very often in all protestants mouths and writings; therefore I will more particularly examine it, and make somewhat a longer stay upon it. M. Abbot commits two faults in his first allegation out of the sixth canon of that council. the former of ignorance, in that he doth apply that to the Bishop of Rome, which the council speaketh of the Archbishop of Carthage, their own primate and Metropolitan: whom though they would have to be obeyed, as primates are in all other countries: yet they desired that he should forbear that statlie style and title of primacy, and be contented to be called Bishop of the first sea. his other fault is an audacious averring them to deny that Bishop to have any authority over them; of which in that canon there is never a word But the plain contrary is therein implied. For they there speaking of their own Metropolitan, they must needs be understood (being no Puritans) to acknowledge him to have authority over all other Bishops in the same province. In the 101 Canon (which M. Abbot doth allege in the second place) he over reacheth also not a little. For whereas those Bishops do humbly request his holiness, not to grant deputies to every one that shall come to Rome to demand them; he says they willed the pope not to intermeddle at all in their matters. And in the third place cited by them, to wit, Canon 92, there is a notorious falsification. for whereas that council doth forbid only priests and deacons, & other inferior persons to appeal to Rome: M. Abbot says, they forbidden all appeals: whereas they speak not of Bishops, of whom principally the question was: but leave that in the state wherein it was before. This by the way, to show how corruptly M. Abbot cities his authors, and how little conscience he makes, to deceive his silly reader, that is so simple as to believe what he saith. Now to the main matter of the 101 Canon, which he cities in the second place, which well considered, doth rather confirm the pope's authority over those African bishops, then infirm it. For albeit the Bishops of afric did not acknowledge any such canon to be in the council of Nice, which by the pope's legate was alleged to prove that appellations might be made out of afric, or any other country unto Rome in some cases: yet they did so behave themselves therein, that any reasonable man may perceive their great affection, and humble obedience unto the same sea of Rome. For they not finding in their own copies of the Nicene counsel that which was put into the Legates instructions, desired respite to make inquiry after the best copies, and in the mean season promised obedience: These be their words. These things that out of the said instructions are alleged unto us (concerning the appeals of Bishops, 

Concilium Carthag. nomine sextum, ordine 5. n. 4.  
Ista nos tamen tantisper seruatioros, (ut antea● dixi) donec integra exemplaria veniant, profitem●r. Petendus est autem litteris nostris & venerabilis Ecclesia Romanae Episcopus Bonifacius, ut ipse quoque dignetur ad memoratas ecclesias al●quos mittere, qui eadem exemplaria praedicti Niceni Concilij secundum eius possint scripta proffer. In Epistola Concilij ad Bonifacium, cap. 101. Quod donec fiant hac quae in commonitorio supradicto nobis allegata sunt de appellationibus Episcoporum ad Romanae sedis Sacerdotem & nos usque ad probationem seruaturos esse, profitemur: & beatitu inem tuam ad hoc nos adiuturam in dei voluntate confidimus.   unto the Bishop of Rome &c: & of priests causes to be determined, by the Bishops of their own provinces) we do profess and promise to observe, until due trial of those canons be made, & trust in the will of God, that your holiness will help us thereunto. If those Reverend and holy Bishops of Africa, had been infected with the leaven of the protestants, they would have soon answered as M. Abbot here untruly reporteth they did: that the Bishop of Rome had no authority over them; and have willed him to keep himself within his own bounds, and not to intermeddle with the matters of afric: But they contrariwise promised obedience, until true trial were made. which argueth that the custom before was for bishops to appeal to Rome, and therefore that to be continued, until proof could be made to the contrary: according to that axiom of the law. Let him that is in possession keep his possession, until good proof be brought against him. Quia melior est conditio possidentis. Secondly, when those reverend fathers had received copies from Alexandria and Constantinople, wherein were not contained any Canons for appealing to Rome, they certified the same in these submissive words. Praefato debito salutationis officio, impendio deprecamur, &c: 
Cap. 105. Prafato it aque debita salutationis officio, impendio deprecamur, ut deinceps ad vestras aures hinc venientes non facilius admit tatis.  The duty of our bounden salutations premised, we do earnestly request and pray you, that you will not too easily admit to your audience them that come from hence. And before their letters they set this title: Dilectissimo Domino, to their best beloved Lord, and most honourable brother. Do not these humble words of bounden duty unto their Lord, notify what esteem they made of the Bishop of Rome? They say indeed, that they found neither in the Canons of the Nicene council, nor in any other of their fathers, that the Bishop of Rome should send any legates into their country, to hear and determine their causes. wherein (by the leave of such worthy personages be it spoken) they show, that they had not read or well considered the Canons of the council holden at Sardica, which was both very general, and most authentical, as I have proved before. for in that council it is expressly decred, that any Bishop of what coast or country soever, may appeal unto the Bishop of Rome. 
Concil. Sard. ca 4. & 7.  And that the said Bishop of Rome may depute and send others to the place, where the Bishop's appellants do dwell, to hear and determine all such causes. And most probable it is, that those holy pope's Zozimus, Bonifacius, and Celestinus, meant the same canons of the council of Sardica, which they called the Canons of the Nicene council: because that council of Sardica was both holden by some of the same principal persons that were at the Nicene council, as Hosius, Athanasius, and such like; and did also treat much about the same matters. wherefore it is said to be joined in the Roman copy with the council of Nice, and reputed as an appendix or parcel of it. And therein perhaps was the error committed, that the pope's having both these councils compact into one, named the canons of both, after the more principal and more renowned council of Nice: calling them the canons of the Nicene council; which in rigour were but the canons of the council of Sardica. yet that council of Sardica being of the same authority and binding power, they in alleging them under the name of the Nicene, did not offer any wrong unto those Bishops of afric, exacting only that that their right might be preserved entire among them, which by the approved canons of the church, was due unto their seat. And these reverend prelate's of the African church were the more excusable, for that they had not seen perhaps any true copy of the approved council of Sardica at that time; the place being very remote from them, and the little space of time, which was between the two counsels of Sardica and Africa, having been also most troublesome, by reason of the Arrians manifold violent persecutions. this much in brief of that great business. whereby it appeareth clearly that although these reverend prelate's of afric, held it much more expedient, that all particular controversies about meum & tuum, & concerning misdemeanours and crimes, should be handled in the place where the parties and witnesses were known, & where all particulars might be more narrowly sifted, and with more speed and less charges tried, than a far of in a foreign country: yet for matter of faith, and rites of religion, they never denied the explication or determination thereof, to appertain to the Bishop of Rome. Appeals to Rome in matters of law, have been in our own country, (when it was Catholic) forbidden, without the express leave of the prince; and at this day are in the Christian country of France, without any denial of the pope's supreme commanding power in cases Ecclesiastical: which is all and more too then the African council did; 
Conc. Afri. c. 92. Item placuit, ut presbyteri diaconi, vel caeteri inferiores clerici, si de judiciis episcoporum suorum questi fuerint, etc.  for that doth only forbid priests and inferior persons to appeal thither: leaving all Bishop's art their liberty. so that in fine if all were granted, which M. Abbot goeth about to prove, yet it is not sufficient to infringe the supremacy of the pope. for albeit appeals to Rome in matter of law were prohibited; yet recourse thither for matter of faith and religion being approved, & standing good, the supremacy is sufficiently maintained.  
21 notwithstanding because the fact of the African council is held by the Protestant's (who for want of greater proof, are feign to make much of a little) to be very prejudicial unto the supremacy of the sea of Rome: I will here produce some testimonies of the best learned & most approved African Doctors, in favour of the pope & church of Rome's supreme power over Africa itself. The first shallbe S. Cyprian, who as in dignity was primate of Africa, so for his great wisdom and learning was inferior to few, and in his glorious martyrdom over went the rest. This right worthy archbishop declareth plainly, that they were not accustomed to end all their controversies at home: 

Cyprian. Epistola 45. ed: Pam.  
Sed cum statuissemus collegae complures qui in unum conveneramus, ut legatis ad vos Episcopis nostris Caldonio & fortunato, omnia interim integra suspenderentur, donec ad nos ijdem collegae a nostri venirent.   But he himself with the assent of other Bishops, did send two Bishops, the one called Calidonius, the other Fortunatus, unto Cornelius then pope of Rome, recomending their causes unto him; And showeth, how in the mean season whiles their causes were before him, the Bishops of Africa would live in suspense, expecting his judgement. Is not this an evident demonstration, that the Bishops of afric in S. Cyprian's times (which was within 200. years of Christ) held the court of Rome to be over and above their own. which yet S. Cyprian in the same epistle doth more expressly declare. 

Ibidem.  
Nos etiam singulis navigantibus, ne cum scandalo ullo navigarent rationem reddentes, scimus nos hortatos eos esse, ut ecclesiae Catholicae radicem & matricem agnoscerent actenerent.   when he doth exhort and council the appellants, that went to Rome, to carry themselves there without scandal; and to aknowledg and observe the church of Rome, as the root or foundation, and mother of the Catholic church. 

Ex Epistola Stephani Archiep. & council. Africa ad Damasum Papam habetur: Tomo 1. Concil. inter Epistolas damasi.  
Notum vestrae facimus beatitudini, quod quidam fratres in confinio nobis positi, quosdam fatres nostros, venerabiles videlicet Episcopos, vobis inconsultis, a proprio deijciunt gradu, vel deiicere moliuntur: cum vestrae sedi, Episcoporum judicia, & summorum finem ecclesiasticorum negotiorum, in honore beatissimi Petri, patrum decreta omnium, cunctam reseruavere sententiam, etc.   Stephen a reverend Bishop of Mauritania in Africa, who lived before that African council, thus writeth to pope Damasus. we make known unto your holiness, that some Bishops our neighbours have gone about to depose other reverend Bishops, not acquainting you with that matter: whereas the judgement of Bishops, and final determination of their principal causes, by the decrees of our fathers doth in honour of blessed S. Peter, belong unto your sea. Is not this a most plain aknowledgment of the Bishop of Rome's commanding authority over the churches of Africa? And because no exception can be justly taken, either against pope Damasus learning and integrity, or against his writings (whose secretary sometimes was S. Hierome) I will set down his answer unto the said African Bishop. These be his words. 

Ex Epistola 4. damasi ad eundem Stephanum & ad concilia Africa.  
Nos qui supra domum eius, hoc est, universalem ecclesiam Catholicam, Episcopale suscepimus ministerium, solicit vigilare de bemus, etc scitis fatres dilectissimi firmamentum a deo fixum & immobile, atque titulum lucidissimum suorum sacerdotum id est, omnium episcorum, Apostolicam sedem esse constitutam, & verticem ecclesiarum. Tu es enim [sicut divinum pronunciat verbum veraciter] Petrus, etc. cuius vice dei gratia hody fungimur ideo omnia quae innotuistis non licere mandarem, nisi vos tam plene instructos scirem, quod cuncta super quibus consuluistis, illicita esse non dubitetis discutere namque episcopos, & summas ecclesiasticorum negotiorum causas, metrapolitano una cum comprovincialibus licet: sed definire ecclesiasticarum summas querelas causarum, vel damnare episcopos, absque huius sanctae sedis auctoritate minime licet, ad quam omnes appellare, si necesse fuerit, & eius fulcire auxilio oportet.   It behoveth us that have received Episcopal charge over the house of our lord, that is, the universal church to watch carfully, that nothing which belongs to that function be wanting, etc. you (most beloved brother) do know the sea Apostolic constituted of God an unmovable fortress, and the head of all churches. which he proves by our Saviour's words (Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church) averring the Bishops of Rome to be S. Peter's successors and Christ's vicar's. and at length saith; That it is lawful for Metropolitans to hear and discuss the causes of Bishops their suffragans; but unlawful to determine them finally, without the authority of the sea of Rome. unto which it was lawful for all Bishops to appeal, when need required, and there to find relief. I come now to some other councils, that were held in afric, immediately before that African, in which were present most of the same prelate's. The council holden at Milevitan writeth to Innocentius the first (who was pope next before Zozimus, to whom succeeded Bonifacius, and Celestinus, in this manner. Because our lord of his special grace, hath placed you in the sea Apostolic, and hath afforded you such a one in our times, 

Ex Epist 92. inter ep. D. Aug.  
Quia te Dominus gratiae suae precipuo munere in sede Apostolica collocavit, talemque nostris temporibus praestitit, ut nobis potius ad culpam negligentia valeat, si apud tuam venerationem, quae pro Ecclesia suggerenda sunt, tac●erimus; quam ea tu pos? is vel fastidiose vel negligenter accipere, magnis periculis infirmorum membrorum Christi pastoralem diligentiam quaesumus a●hibere digneris etc. Multo plures qui eius sensuo diligentius indagare potuerunt, adversus eum progratia Christi, et Catholicae fidei veritate confligunt, praecipue sanctus filius tuus, frater & compresbiter noster Hieronimus. Sed arbitramur, adiwante misericordia Domini Dei nostri jesu Christi, qui te & regere consulentem, & orantem exaudire dignatur, autoritati sanctitatis tuae, de sanctorum scripturarum autoritate de promptae, facilius eos qui tam perversa & perniciosa sentiunt esse cessuros.   that it may be rather imputed to the blame of our negligence, if we conceal from your holiness those things that are to be referred to the church; then that you can either disdainfully, or carelessly hear us. we therefore beseech you that you will vouchsafe to apply your pastoral diligence unto the weak members of Christ, etc. Many others that could trace out the errors of Pelagius, have entered the combat with him, in defence of the grace of Christ, & of the truth of the Catholic faith, namely your holy son, our brother & fellow priest Hierome: but through the mercies of Christ (who will vouchsafe to hear you praying, & direct you giving counsel) we be of opinion, that they will sooner yield unto the authority of your holiness being derived from the authority of holy scriptures. This epistle is recorded among S. Augustine's. so is another of that council held at Carthage about the same time, wherein the Bishop of Africa wrote thus to the same pope. Holy Lord and brother, we have thought good to relate to you what we have done, 

Ex epist. xc. inter D. Aug. epistolas.  
Hoc itaque gestum Domine frater sancte charitati tuae intimandum duximus, ut statutis nostra mediocritatis etiam Apostolicae sedis adhibeatur autoritas pro tuenda salute multorum, & quorundam perversitate etiam corrigenda.   that unto the decrees of our mediocrity, may be adjoined the authority of the sea Apostolic, aswell for the preserving of many men's salvation, as for the correcting of some persons depravation. By both which Epistles we may easily perceive, how the African Bishops esteemed the church of Rome to be the sea Apostolic, to be that head church, unto which the affairs of higher nature, are to be referred; That it had pastoral charge over the Churches of Africa; that it had authority (warranted by the word of God) for the defining of matter of faith; unto which even heretics would yield sooner, than unto any other though esteemed never so learned. And therefore they sent the decrees of their council up to Rome, to be confirmed by the pope. All this being of record in approved African counsels holden about the same time, and by the same persons, that were at that other African council; what reason hath any man to think, that therein the Bishop of Rome was forbidden to intermeddle in their affairs of Africa.  


Ex Epist. D. Aug. JOB.  
Missae sunt itaque de hac re ex duobus conciliis Carthaginensi et Mileuitano relationes ad Apostolicam sedem, etc. scripsimus etiam ad beatae memoria papam Innocentium, etc. Ad omnia nobis ipse rescripsit eodem modo quofas erat atque oportebat Apostolica sedis Antistitem.   S. Austin himself relateth both that these two councils, to wit, of Carthage and of Milevitane, had written unto pope Innocentius, and further doth assure us, that the pope's answer to them was sound, & such as did well beseem the sea Apostolic. I will therefore be bold to acquaint the Reader with the same his answer. These be his words.  
You do diligently, 

Ex epistola 93.  
Diligenter ergo & congrue Apostolico consulitis honori, honori (inquam) illius, quem praeter illa quae sunt extrinsecus, solicitudo manet omnium Ecclesiarum, super anxijs rebus, quae sit tenenda sententia: antiqua scilicet regulae formam secuti, quam toto semper ab orb mecum nostis esse seruatam, verum haec missa facio, neque enim hoc vestram credo latere prudentiam. Qui id etiam actione firmastis, scientes quod per omnes provincias ab Apostolico font, potentibus responsa semper emanant? praesertim quoties fidei ratio ventilatur, arbitror omnes fratres & coepiscopos nostros, non nisi ad Petrum, id est sui nominis & honoris autorem referre debere, velut nunc retulit vestra dilectio, quod per totum mundum possit omnibus Ecclesiis in common prodesse.   and as it becometh you respect the honour of the sea Apostolic: the honour (I say) of it, that besides her own particular, hath a great care of all churches to declare unto them, what is to be holden of controversies that do arise; wherein you do follow the form of the old Canons, which (as you know) have been observed all the world over. This I let pass, because your wisdoms be not ignorant of it, but have by your own deed confirmed it: knowing that answers do flow from the sea Apostolic, as from a fountain, into all countries that demand the same, and specially where the substance of faith is sifted out, than I think that all our brethren and fellow bishops, aught to refer the decision and determination thereof unto no other than unto S. Peter, the author of their own name and order, as your charity hath now done. This I hope is plain enough, to demonstrate that in pure antiquity, the Bishops of afric and other countries for the decision of controversies in matters of doctrine specially, were bound to seek unto the Bishop of Rome.  
S. Austin (as all men know) was one of the greatest lights, not only of the African church but of the whole world since his days, He was also present at the same African council: let us hear whether he thought that the Bishop of Rome, had nothing to do with the affairs of afric, or that the African Bishops might not appeal to Rome. First he with the other Bishop's present at the counsels of Carthage, and Milevitan, did send the decrees of the same council to be confirmed of the pope, of which I have already spoken.  


Ex epistola D. August. 261. ad papam Celestinum.  
Collabora obsecro nobiscum pietate venerabilis domine beatissime papa, & iube tibi qua directa sunt omnia recitari, vide Episcopatum qualiter gesserit, etc. existat exemplo, ipsa sede Apostolica iudicata firmante. & subveni hominibus, opem tuam in Christi misericordia multo avidius quam ille poscentibus.   2 He writeth unto pope Celestinus about the cause of an African Bishop requesting him to peruse all that had passed about him in afric, and to confirm their former judgements. wherein he acknowledgeth the court of Rome, to be above the highest courts in afric.  
3 He testifieth that pope Zozimus had authority to establish Bishops in afric, and to call a council there. showing how he himself was by him summoned to assist at the same council in these words. 

Aug. epistola 157.  
Litera quas ad Mantoniam Caesariensem misisti, me apud Caesaream present venerunt, quo nos, iniuncta nobis a venerabili papa Zozimo Apostolica sedis Episcopo, Ecclesiastica Necessitas traxerat.   Ecclesiastical necessity being enjoined us, by the venerable pope Zozimus bishop of the sea Apostolic, we were drawn unto Caesarea in Mauritania.  
4 In the same Epistle he declareth how two notable heretics Pelagius & his disciple Celestius were condemned (unless they did repent) all the world over, 

Ibidem.  
Cuius (haeresis) vel auctores vel certi acerrimi suasores cum Pelagius & Calestinus extitissent, conciliorum Episcopalium vigilantia, in adiutorio salvatoris qui suam tuetur Ecclesiam, etiam a duobus venerabilibus Antistitibus Apostolicae sedis, papa Innocentio & papa Zozimo, nisi correcti etiam egerint paenitentiam, toto Christiano orb damnati sunt.   by two renowned pope's Innocentiu, and Zozimus. wherefore he took their power to stretch all the world over. where also having cited the decree of Zozimus in his own words, adjoineth this high commendation to it: in these words of the sea Apostolic, is comprehended so authentic, so well grounded, so certain and clear a definition of the Catholic faith, that it were an impiety for any christian man to doubt of it.  
5 So doth he commend the sentence of Melchiades pope of Rome given for Cecilianus Archbishop of Carthage against Donatus in these words. The final sentence pronounced by Melchiadis, 
Qualis ipsius beati Melchiadis ultima est probata sententia, quam innocens, quam integra, quam provida atque pacifica? & paulo post. O virum optimum, o filium Christianae pacis, & patrem Christianae plebis.  how innocent was it, how sound, how provident, & peaceable? and a little after. O most excellent man, the son of Christian peace, and the father of Christian people. And of the same good Archbishop Cecilianus, 

Ibidem.  
Episcopus Carthaginis Cecilianus potuit non curare conspirantem multitudinem inimicorum, cum se videret & Romana Ecclesiae (in qua semper Apostolica cathedrae viguit principatus,) & cateris unde evangelium ad Africam venit, per communicatorias literas esse coniunctum.   S. Austin saith in the same place; that he needed not care for the multitude of his enemies conspiring against him; so long as he saw himself by comunicatory letters joined with the church of Rome, in which always the principality of the Apostolic chair did flourish, etc.  
Saint Austin then, directing with others the decrees of their council to be confirmed by the pope, teaching also that it were an impiety to doubt of his sentence; further affirming, that he could condemn heretics all the world over; doth plainly signify that he held the definition of the sea of Rome, for matter of faith to be inviolable. Again, walking himself with other Bishops of afric, to a council at the pope's commandment, and holding the pope's sentence for a final determination of the African bishops Ecclesiastical affairs; yea avouching in plain words, that the primacy of the Apostolic sea had always flourished at Rome; All these specialties considered, who can doubt, but that Saint Austin both in that African council, and ever after was of opinion, that the pope of Rome might intermeddle with the Ecclesiastical causes of afric: and that the African Bishops, and their causes and counsels, might be very well, and aught in some cases to be referred unto the judgement of the Bishop of Rome.  
23 Not long after Saint Augustin lived, pope Leo the great, who directed a most grave and learned letter unto the Bishops of Africa, wherein he decreed some Bishops there to be deposed, 

Leo episcopus universis Episcopis per Caesariensem Mauritaniam in Africa constitutis Epistola: 87.  
Cum de ordinationibus sacerdotum quaedam apud vos illicit usurpata, crebrior ad nos sermo perferret, ratio pietatis exegit, ut pro solicitudine quam universae ecclesiae exdivina institutione dependimus, rerum fidem studeremus agnoscere, etc.  
Ibidem. c 2.  
Causam quoque Lupicini episcopi illic jubemus audiri cui multum ac saepe postulenti communionem hac rai●one redd●mus, quoniam ad nostrum judicium prouocass●, immerito cum, pendente negotio a comunion● videbamus fuisse suspensum.   others to be continued in their office: and restored one Lupicinus by name to his Bishopric, who being deposed by the Bishops of that province of Africa, had appealed from their sentence unto the same Leo Bishop of Rome. which is a manifest evidence that the Bishops of afric did aclwaies aknowledg the Bishop of Rome his superiority, and commanding power over the Bishops of their country. victor uticensis lived also very shortly after S. Austin, and before Eulalius: he writing in that interim, in which M. Abbot doth bear us in hand that the church of Africa was fallen out with the Church of Rome, he (I say) a very godly Bishop, a grave, and learned Historiographer, rehearseth: How Eugenius Archbishop of Carthage, for conferring with the vandal Honoricus (then by invasion king of the greatest part of afric and an Arrian heretic) said unto his deputy. If the kingly power desire to know our faith, 

Victor uticens: de persecut. vand: l: 2.  
Si nostram fidem (quae una & vera est) potestas Regis cognoscere desiderat, mittat ad amicos suos: scribam & ego fatribus meis ut veniant coepiscopi, qui communem fidem nostram valeant demonstrare, & praecipue Romana ecclesia, quae caput est omnium ecclesiarum, etc.   which is the only true faith, you may consult with your council; And I will write unto my brethren, and especially unto the church of Rome (which is the head of all churches) and we together will declare unto your Majesty, that faith which is common to us all.  
Behold how even immediately after that council of afric, when M. Abbot dreamt the Bishops of Africa to be fallen away from the sea of Rome, The primate of Carthage (the chief city in all Africa) acknowledged the church of Rome to be the head of all the churches, and that for the resolution of matter of faith, that sea of Rome was principally to be consulted. I need not descend any Lower because M. Abbot himself doth relate how Eulalius Archbishop of Carthage, (who lived the next age after) acknowledged the pope's supremacy, and made that country of Africa subject unto it.  
Seeing then that cleaven hundredth years ago (when Eulalius lived) by M. Abbot's own confession, the pope's had sovereign command over the churches of afric, and before: even up to Saint Cyprian and Tertullia's time (which was within 200. years after Christ) the same church of Rome was by the principal pillars and lights of afric, esteemed the mother church of the world, and root of Christian unity, unto which some of their Bishops in all ages did appeal for succour, some others did refer the decrees of their counsels to be confirmed, acknowledging the Bishop of Rome to have power to assemble counsels in afric. and to condemn heretics all the world over: was not M. Abbot foully over seen, and did he not overreach most grievously when he said, that the Bishops of Africa denied the Bishop of Rome to have any authority over them, and forbade him to intermeddle with matters of their country.  
I have stayed the longer upon this fact of the African Bishops, because the Protestants make such reckoning of it: I will with more speed dispatch that which followeth. M. Abbot objecteth, that Anicetus the pope could not persuade Policarpus to keep the feast of Easter, after the manner of Rome. thereby intimating, that Policarpus was not acquainted with that potent principality of the church of Rome. I answer that not withstanding the confessed acknowledgement of the pope's supremacy, no man is bound to follow all his opinions, or to embrace his advises or persuasions: only he is of duty to obey his express commandments. wherefore Anicetus not binding Policarpus by any mandate to alter his opinion: thence cannot be gathered any disobedience of Policarpus; though it be most certain, that Anicetus was in the truth, and tother in error. for that the feast of Easter, should have been kept of all churches, according unto the manner of Rome, And so it was afterward defined in the first general council of Nice. As do witness, 
a Athanas: epistola de Ariminensi concilio.  Athanasius, Eusebius, 
b Euseb. de vita constant: l. 3. v. 17.  Epiphanius, heres. 69. Socrates' histor. lib. 1. cap. 6. Theodoret. histor. 1. cap. 10. Nicephorus histor. lib. 8. cap. 19 Nevertheless Anicetus out of the spirit of lenity, was content to bear with Policarpus, being a holy, reverend, and Apostolical man. Pope victor afterward seeing the same error creeping further abroad, and beginning to infect even the western church, thought it fit to use his authority to drive the churches of Asia from the custom of the jews, unto conformity with the church of Rome. Neither is it apparent, nor so certain as M. Abbot would have it seem, that Polycrates did disobey his sentence of excommunication. for those his words cited by M. Abbot, are set down in Eusebius, 
Euseb. l. 5. histor. c. 22. & 23.  when the question was yet in examination, and before the sentence pronounced. So that he might very well (as his duty required) after he saw the pope's definitive sentence, conform himself thereunto, though before he was of another mind. And he being otherwise a very godly and a learned prelate, is to be presumed and taken to have done that which he ought to do. the contrary not being able to be proved. S. Cyprian (whom M. Abbot citeth next) as all the learned know, erred in that point of rebaptizing them, that were before baptised by heretics; and therein out of human frailty offended, by not conforming his opinion unto Stephen Bishop of Rome; forgetting his own judgement given, and often repeated when he was out of that distempered mood, to wit, that heresies and schisms do 
Cypr. Epistola 55. Neque al●unde haereses ortae sunt, aut nata sunt schismata, quam inde, quod Sacerdoti Dei non obtemperatur, etc.  grow out of no other root, then that the voice of one priest, and judge for the time, in Christ's steed is not hearkened unto. and many such like. M. Abbot to testify to the world that he is a blind guide, and willing to lead his feollowers into the ditch, is not ashamed to propound unto them for imitation, the known and confessed faults and blemishes of men otherwise good. How much more sincerely deal we, who desire all men to follow S. Cyprian in all other matters, saving in that one, wherein he failed, and not to lay hold of words then spoken in passion by him to make good his error, specially when they be contrary even unto himself, when he was his own man, and out of that distemper? whence also we do gather this Christian observation worthy to be deeply printed in every Christian man's heart. If such great learned personages as were S. Cyprian and Polycrates, when they would not hearken unto the sentence of the Popes of Rome, did fall into error: what a warning is that unto men of meaner wits, and much lesser learning, to take heed, that they swarm not one hairs breadth from the pope's definitions in matter of doctrine; lest withal they decline from the truth, as their betters by many degrees have done before them, when they would not be ruled?  
25 Out of Africa M. Abbot sails into Asia, taking over great pains to search out some poor relief for his bad cause, and says: they did not imagine any such principality to appertain unto the church of Rome; And for proof thereof brings in that which rather proveth the contrary, to wit, that Leo the great for the love of peace yielded to them in a faulty definition of theirs, about the observation of Easter. If that worthy pope should have condescended unto those Asians rather then to have contended with them, doth not that rather argue, that he was their superior, and might have dealt more severely with them, if he had taken it for the better course? 
Leo Epistola 93. n. 4.  But I reading over all that Epistle cited by M. Abbot, do not find it so as he reports: but that these Asians were rather Priscilian heretics, whom that holy pope much blameth and condemneth for their evil observation of Easter, without any yielding unto them. wherefore I cannot see to what other purpose that can serve, than to show that the bishope of Rome had commanding power in Asia. M. Abbot recuils back to Hierome, affirming him not to have believed any such matter of the pope's principality, who of purpose as (he feigneth) did write in the derogation of the church of Rome, saying: 
Hieron. Epist ad Evagrium.  that if authority be required, the whole world is greater than one City. why dost thou bring me the custom of one City? why dost thou uphold a few, who being proud, usurp upon the laws of the church?  
Saint Hierom was always a most valiant Champion of the church of Rome's authority, 
Epist. 57  and of her infallible definitions in matter of faith, as every one may plainly see in his epistle to Pope Damasus and elsewhere. 
Epist 57  yet for matter of fact, neither he nor any other (I think) will go about to excuse the church, or rather the court of Rome wholly. In the place that M. Abbot doth allege, 
Hieron. Epist. 77.  he find● fault with some Deacons of the court of Rome, that did take place before priests, which seemed in that humble Doctor's eye a great moat, growing out of the presumption of some few, usurping against ●he laws and common custom of the church. And in such a case as that, the custom of all the world besides, was (no doubt) to be preferred before the custom of that city only, or rather (as Saint Hierom himself interpreteth it) of some few proud deacons of that city. But herehence to infer that S. Hierom did not acknowledge the primacy of that sea, is too too simple, and rather to be laughed at, than otherwise answered. That which followeth out of S. Ambrose is of the same soary suit: for that most grave holy father saith, I desire in all things to follow the church of Rome, 

Ambros. de Sacramentis lib. 3. ca 10.  
Cupio in● omnibus sequi Romanam● Ecclesiam●, sed tamen & nos homines sensum habemus, ideò quod alibi rectius servatur, & nos recte custodimus.   but we also are men that have understanding, and therefore what is more rightly observed elsewhere, we justly observe the same. S. Ambrose speaks there of rites and ceremonies used in the administration of the sacraments: in which it was lawful then for so excellent a prelate as saint Ambrose was, to make his choice of the best. Yea S. Gregory the great would not so strictly tie S. Austin our English Apostle (brought up at Rome) unto the ceremonies of the church of Rome: but willed him if he saw any ceremonies in the church of France, 

Ex Bedae Histo: l. 10. c. 27.  
Mihi placet ut sive in Romana, sive in Galliarum, siue in qu ilibet ecclesia aliquid invenisti quod plus omnipotenti Deo possit placere, solicit eligas etc.   that might better please God or more move those new converted Christians unto greater devotion, to make his choice of them, rather than to retain the rites of Rome. whereupon if any man should be so simple as to collect, that S. Gregory did not aknowledg the pope or church of Rome's principality; were he not to be begged for an innocent? In the like terms stands M. Abbot, that would out of Saint Ambrose choice of some ceremonies, different from the church of Rome, Infer that S. Ambrose did not acknowledge the pope of Rome's supremacy. Let it be noted by the way, that S. Ambro●e (who was so grave and judicious a Doctor, and S. Augustine's father in Christ) desired in all things to follow the church of Rome. That their spirit and disposition who desire in all things to departed from the same church, may be discovered and taken to be quite contrary to the holy spirit, of the most approved ancient fathers.  
26 M. Abbot like unto a man that is shooting at Rovers observing no certain method, returns back to the council of Chalcedon, avouching that it did not acknowledge that principality of the church of Rome: 
Concil. Chalced. Act. 15. can. 28.  These be his words drawn out of that council. The privileges of the church of Rome, were given to it by the fathers before, because that city was the seat of the Empire; and upon the same consideration doth give the church of Constantinople equal privilege with the church of Rome, it being then the seat of the Empire.  W. B. 
HEre are two or three gross faults: First, whereas this council is cited, as not acknowledging the principality of the church of Rome; It doth clean contrary in the first words cited by M. Abbot, acknowledge that privilege to belong unto the same church of Rome. whether it had that by the institution of Christ, or for that it was the seat of the Empire, is not now material: of it I have said something before, and have much more to say, when occasion shall serve. But to M. Abbot's condemnation, his own witness doth depose, that the church of Rome had that privilege of principality, and that in government, as by many circumstances of that council, I have once already proved: to wit, All the 
a Ibid. Act 3  bills preferred to that council, were directed to pope Leo, and to the council. The 
b Ibid. Act. 16. in Epist. Pascasini.  sentence was pronounced in the name of Pope Leo; The council is sent to 
c In epist. Concilij ad Leonen.  pope Leo to be confirmed. And all the Bishops there assembled, in their Epistle to pope Leo, do declare that he was over them, as the head is to the rest of the members. And much more is there said to testify the church of Rome's principality. so that M. Abbot could not have. directed us, unto a more sound and evident witness against this his position. Thus much of the first fault.  
Secondly, he puts the sentence of 150. Bishops, that were of the Constantinople council, for them of Chalcedon. yet I am content to let that pass, because it makes no great matter. But I may not conceal how he, to serve his own purpose, hath cut of the counsels words in the midst. For those fathers do say; that the Bishop of Constantinople, 
Concil. Chalced. cost. 15. can. 28.  was to have the like privileges, yet, secundam post eam existentem, to be second after the Bishop of Rome. And as it is in the council of Constantinople, which they follow: ut obtineret secundum gradum d●gnitatis post antiquam Romam. 
Concil. Constantin●p. 1. Can. 3.  That the sea of Constantinople should obtain the second degree of dignity after old Rome. Did he not warily pair of those words? would they not have displayed and laid open his cozenage? what is like to become of this honest man's credit, that durst cite this sentence to disprove the church of Rome's principality, which doth so plainly approve it?  
But what meant the council then to say, that the sea of Constantinople, should have like, or equal privileges with Rome? Marry they were equal or like in some privileges, not in all. They desired that the Bishopric of Constantinople might be erected unto the title and dignity of a patriarchal sea, as Rome was: secondly to have spiritual jurisdiction over all Thracia, Asia minor, and Pontica: Further also that it might be placed immediately after Rome, and honoured before the other patriarchal seas of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, even as Rome was. Therefore in those two points specially, of being a patriarchal sea, and of being preferred before the other patriarchs, they desired it should be like to Rome: yet not Equal to Rome itself in dignity or principality, but to obtain the next place after it. this was the highest point of their ambition then, and the uttermost that was requested. To wit: That old Rome should enjoy the primacy, and that Constantinople should have the next place of dignity after Rome, and be invested with patriarchal jurisdiction, over the Metropolitans of Pontica, Asia, and Thracia. Against which grant made by many of the council, 
Concil. Chalced. Act. 16.  in the absence of the pope's legates, being precedents, public exception was made by the same precedents, in the behalf of the other patriarchal seas: who were in the council of Nice declared to have next after Rome the highest seats of dignity. 

Ex Epistola 54. Leonis ad Martian Augustum:  
Privilogia enim ecclesiarum, sanctorum Patrum canonibus instituta, & venerabilis Nicenae synodi fixa decretis, nulla possunt improbitate convelli, nulla novitate mutari. Hanc impij desiderij conceptionem, nunquam debuit intra cordis sui recipere secretum.  
Abstineat ergo ab ecclesiasticarum iniuria regularum, & illicitos declinet excessus, ne se ab universali ecclesia, dum inimica pacis tentat, abscindat.   And Leo the great when he came to confirm that general council, approving all the rest, protested against that ambition of the Bishop of Constantinople, as both derogatory to the Decrees of the Nicene council, and injurious unto the right honourable patriarchal seas of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem.  
well howsoever it were for the rest, certain it is to M. Abbot's great confusion, that the Bishop of Constantinople did not in those days so much as pretend any higher pre-eminence, then to be next after the Bishop of Rome, and therefore it remaineth evident that he as well as all others did acknowledge the principality of the sea of Rome. Thus much touching the testimony of S. Irenaeus, my first auctor, who averreth all churches to be bound to accord with the church of Rome for her more potent principality.  
27 Now I come to examine what M. Abbot can say against the evidence which I produced out of S. Cyprian, 
Cyprian. Epist. 55. juxta Pameli.  my second witnesses the position, in favour of the same church of Rome, his words be these (which we touched before upon another occasion) After these things, yea they having furthermore a false Bishop set over them by heretics, yet they presumed to sail unto S. Peter's chair, (whence priestly unity doth spring) and carry with them letters from schismatics, and profane persons: not remembering the Romans (whose faith is by the Apostle praised) to be such men, as perfidy can have no access to them. Ad quos perfidia non potest habere accessum. Because perfidia is the contrary to fides, and here by S. Cyprian opposed to the faith of Romans commended by S. Paul, I with perfidiousness (which hath also another signification) did for explications sake, join falsehood in matter of faith. Against which M. Abbot excepteth, as that which turneth S. Cyprian's words, from his true meaning. for he saith, that it made nothing for S. Cyprian's purpose to say, that error in faith could have no entry to the Romans. because the question than was not about any point of faith, but about matter of jurisdiction, and the bad demeanours of some perfidious Africans: who having been justly punished at home, fled to Rome for relief, and were like to abuse the pope with false tales, if he took not the better heed unto their reports. It was therefore impertinent, (says M. Abbot) to say in such a case, that error in faith could have no access to Rome. Yet he was not so blind, but did see that on the other side it were much more impertinent, yea uncredible that such a grave wise prelate as S. Cyprian was, should affirm that perfidious and untrue informations in matter of fact could find no entry in the court of Rome. He (I say) considering this absurdity is driven to a great exigent, and hardly can with all his skill excuse that glorious martyr from colloging, and glozing (which no man did more abhor than he) and from too excessive commendation of the Roman courts integrity, in ordering matters brought unto it by appeal, out of other countries. For never any man of experience yet held (as I ween) that the court of Rome could not give ear to false informations in matter of law, if they looked not the better about them. well to come to the answer, there we have first the ancient custom of appealing out of afric to Rome confirmed by saint Cyprian's authority, and that by M. Abbot's own confession.  
secondly, that the word (perfidia) is to be taken rather for error in faith, then for perfidious reports, appeareth, for that it is there by S. Cyprian opposed as the contrary to the true faith of the Romans which was by saint Paul commended: and in the same Epistle saint Cyprian saith: nulla societas fidei & perfidiae potest esse: still opposiing perfidiousness to faith. So is it in the 57 Epistle, where he affirmeth, that if a novatian heretic should be put to death by the heathen persecutor for the Christian faith: that death to him that dieth out of the church, should be, non corona fidei, sed paena perfidiae, not a crown of faith, but a punishment of his misbelief and heresy.  
Again, that you may perceive there to have been good cause for S. Cyprian to commend the faith of the Romans, you must observe that there is mention made in the same sentence, of false Bishops chosen by heretics, who sailed towards Rome: were not they fit instruments to prepare the way to heresy and misbelief? and towards the end of the same Epistle he plainly intimateth, that they were to be assaulted by heretics, when he saith: albeit I knew you could not be taken with the venom of heretics etc. It was then not besides the purpose to intimate, that such fellows should find cold entertainment of the Romans, unto whom misbelief could have no access. besides in the next period going before, speaking of the same sailors to Rome, he cast this imputation upon them: quibus satis non fuit ab Evangelio recedere. who thought it not enough for them to departed from the gospel. And was it then from the purpose, to give them that caveat, that they were like to lose their labour in sailing to Rome for relief? Because misbelief could not be welcome to the Romans, whose faith the Apostle had commended. In a word, was it not just as much to S. Cyprian's purpose, to say that falsehood in faith, could have no access to the Romans, as to speak of the Romans faith, commended by the Apostle? where faith being (as every man seethe) to be taken properly, it must needs argue, that that perfidiousness in the next line linked with the other must be taken for the flatr contrary. Seeing then that the nature of the word doth allow that signification, which I gave it, and saint Cyprian did so use it often in that sense, namely when he opposeth it against faith; the circumstances also of the place, and Author's intention better agreeing with the same: it is evident that M. Abbot doth but cavil against the true sense of the word which I gave; And would very absurdly have it so taken, that you must either plainly say, that S. Cyprian spoke glosingly and untruly; or else did strangely mistake his words: putting (could) for (should.) Ad quos perfidia non potest habere accessum: for, non debuit habere accessum. unto whom (saith S. Cyprian) perfidiousness can have no access. unto whom (saith his corrector, or rather corruptor M. Abbot) perfidiousness ought to have no access. Betwixt which two propositions there is very broad difference, as each man knoweth. Now that in some rare case, non potest, is taken for non debet, it cannot, for it ought not: doth not enforce that it must be so taken, when it pleaseth M. Abbot; but he must give men leave to prefer, and to follow the natural and usual signification of the word, before such a strange interpretation and wresting thereof.  
To that which in the end of his needle's discourse (of it cannot, for, it ought not) He addeth; that S. Cyprian with a council of African Bishops did teach the rebaptising of them that were before baptized of heretics, against the known sentence of pope Stephen. whence it followeth (saith M. Abbot) that they thought they might in matter of doctrine descent from the Bishop of Rome, or else they would have submitted their opinion unto his verdict. To which I answer: That either they took that doctrine which the pope of Rome delivered unto them in his letters, to be delivered as his own private opinion, to which they were not bound to conform themselves: Or else that in the heat of upholding their errors, as they declined from the true doctrine, so they forgot their duty to the sea of Rome. Because the obstinate maintaining of one error, doth oftentimes push on hot disputers into another: But when S. Cyprian was out of that human passion, 
a Cyprian. Epist. 55.  he wrote as plainly as any man could; That schisms and heresies do not spring from any other fountain, then for that the sentence of one priest and judge in Christ's steed, is not hearkened unto. That 
b Epistola 45.  the church of Rome is to be stuck unto, as to the root of unity; and as the mother church to be observed and obeyed. And elsewhere. 

De unitate Ecclesiae.  
Qui Ecclesiae renititur & resistit, qui cathedram Petri, (super quam fundata est ecclesia) deserit, in ecclesia se esse confidit?   Can he that forsaketh the chair of Peter (upon which the church was built) have any confidence that he is himself in the church? This and much more wrote Saint Cyprian to the very high commendation of the church of Rome, when he was out of that humour of rebaptisation. which fault of his, was afterward by his constant martyrdom purged, As S. Austin testifieth. who also saith, 
Aug. epist. 48. item l. 1. de baptis. co. donatistas, ca 18.  that there wanted not some who held those writings which M. Abbot citeth for S. Cyprian's, either to be none of his; or that he repent himself or them before he died. And therefore should not now be cited for his. But such oversights of the fathers, are the fittest food for heretics to feed upon; in them they find the best relish, and therefore this taint of S. Cyprian is twice or thrice served in as a dainty dish: and dross though it be, yet is it often set up as a bright star to give light and lustre to their goodly cause. Now to that which followeth in his text, he saith, that my proofs hitherto were vain, yet those which follow are more vain. But god be thanked, that the bare word of a vain man, is but mere vanity.  
28 You have already heard how frivolous and idle his exceptions were against the sentences, that I took out of those golden pair of most ancient Doctors, and very glorious Martyrs, S. Irenaeus and S. Cyprian. Now attend how simply he behaveth himself in answering to that, which I cited out of S. Ambrose, S. Austen, and S. Hierome. No man can deny, but that these holy learned fathers are for their persons without all exceptions: but M. Abbot sainth over lavishly and as it were dotingly, that I do report them falsely. for he himself (as you shall presently see) cannot deny but that I allege them truly. Let us examine the particulars. 
Ambros. in oratione de obitu satyri fratris.  S. Ambrose (say I) took it to be all one to say, the Catholic or the Roman church, yea he putteth the Roman church as an explication of the Catholic church. His good brother satyrus after a shipwreck arrived in Sardinia (which was infected with the Luciferiam heresy) & being careful not to communicate with any heretics demanded of that Bishop whom he had sent for to baptize him, 
Aduocavit ad se Episcopum, nec ullam veram putavit nisi vera fidei gratiam, percontatusque ex eo est, utrumnam cum Episcopis Catholicis, hoc est, cum Romana Ecclesia conveniret, & sort ad id locorum in schismate, regionis illius ecclesiae erat.  whether he did accord with the Catholic Bishops, that is, with the church of Rome. He feared lest the name Catholic was not sufficient to describe true believers, in an heretical country, (because heretics do oftentimes call themselves Catholics) and therefore asked whether they were such Catholics, as accorded with the church of Rome: that is, whether he was a Roman Catholic or no? giving us to understand that they only were true Catholics, and only to be communicated withal in holy rites, who accorded with the church of Rome in faith and religion. All this is so true and evident, that M. Abbot cannot deny any one word of it. Did he not then spitefully overreach when he said, that I reported my authors falsely? He hath no other shift, then to say; that in those days the church of Rome, as the most famous and chief church, was most fit to be named in such a case. But now the case is altered, because the church of Rome is fallen from that eminent perfection, and is itself now called into question. This answer is nothing else then in plain terms, petere principium; that is, to give that for the solution as a confessed truth, which is the main question. is he so destitute of common sense, as to think that we will, or aught to take that for currant coin and good payment, which we hold for very refuse and dross? All the world knows that we believe the church of Rome, not to be changed in any one article of faith. wherefore he ought not to return to us for a known truth, that the church of Rome is changed. yet the poor man's feeble forces being quite spent, he is constrained to give the same unreasonable answer again & again, for he maketh the same answer unto the like testimony taken out of S. Hierom who demandeth of Ruffinus (speaking of his faith) which he calleth his faith? 

Hieron. Apol. 1. c. Ruff.  
Fidem suam quam vocat? eamne qua Romana pollet Ecclesia? an illam quae in Originis voluminibus continetur? si Romanam responderit? ergo Catholici sumus, qui nihil de Originis errore transtulimus.   either that which the church of Rome professeth, or that which is contained in the books of Origen? If he answer the Roman, faith; then are we Catholics, etc. which doth imply, that it was all one with S. Hierom to say the Roman faith, and the true Catholic faith. All which M. Abbot confesseth to be true, and thereby cleareth me from that imputation of misreporting my authors. Afterward he asketh what is here said of the Roman church, that might not likewise have been said of any other church, professing the true faith? well, let us admit that the same might have been said of any other church under that condition that they had professed the true faith: yet because the ancient Fathers were not so well assured of the perpetual infallibility of any other church, as they were of the church of Rome, therefore they preferred the communion of the Roman Church before all other, and therein ordinarily made their instances. And for that M. Abbot doth ever and anon come in with this answer, that the church of Rome was then the true Church, but now it is clean changed, and takes this to be as sharp as the sword at Delphos, and as fit to cut all knots asunder that can not otherwise be loosed: I will here set down some reasons which did induce these holy Doctors, and much more ought to persuade us to believe that the church of Rome shall ever continue firm in the faith. The ancients made no doubt, but that Christ's Church should continue to the world's end, and retain the same form of government, which he himself had established in it. which most Protestant's now are also come to confess. but as I have before proved, the same most learned and blessed fathers both believed and taught the Bishops and Church of Rome to be as it were the rock and foundation of Christ's church. wherefore like as the house must needs fall to the ground, whose foundation faileth: so the catholic church could not stand inviolable to the later day, if the Roman church which is the chiefest member & support thereof, should perish. It were needless to repeat here those sentences of the ancient Doctors once before produced in confirmation of this argument. I willbe content with one text of S. Austin, that doth both directly cross M. Abbot's supposition, and manifestly prove this my assertion. These be his words.  
If the Pedigree of Bishops succeeding one another be to be considered, 

August. epistola 165.  
Si enim ordo episcoporum sibi invicem succedentium considerandus est, quanto rectius & vere salubriterab ipso Petro numeramus, cui totius Ecclesiae figuram gerenti Dominus ait, super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam.   how much more rightly and assuredly, do we reckon from S. Peter himself, unto whom (bearing the figure of the whole church) our Lord said upon this Rock I will build my church. To Peter succeeded Linus, etc. Behold how fully S. Austin had 1200. years before hand confuted M. Abbot's proposition: M. Abbot saith that the fathers might as well have alleged their communion with any other church as with the church of Rome. Not so saith S. Austin; but if the succession of Bishops be to be regarded (as it is very highly to be esteemed,) and the communion in faith and Religion with them, then that of the Bishops and church of Rome is more right and better assured then any other. Observe also the same reason given by that most renowned Doctor which I before delivered. because upon S. Peter (who was the root and stock of the Roman Pedigree) as upon a Rock, Christ built his church, against which the gates of Hell shall not prevail. wherefore in another place he is bold to tell the donatists, that the see or church of Rome is that rock, against which the proud gates of hell shall not prevail. Again doth not our Saviour comparing it to a Rock, intimate that it should never decay? Besides had not the gates of Hell mightily prevailed against the church of Christ, if it had overcome the church of Rome, & thereby overthrown as it were the foundation of it? finally,  


August. ibid.  
 certa sit spes fidelibus qui faciunt ea quae Romani Pontifices cis facienda praecipiunt) quae non in homine sed in Domino (quidixit, qua dicunt facite,) collocata, numquam tempestate sacrilegi schismatu dissipetur.   S. Austin in the same place holdeth himself so well assured of the perpetual stability of the Bishops of Rome in the true faith that he doubteth not, even from our saviours own mouth, to assure all them that cleave fast unto it, and do believe, and do that, which the Bishops of Rome teach them, that they shall never be carried away into any sacrilegious schism. if they shall never fall into schism, that stik fast unto the Roman church then without all doubt, the Roman faith should never after be changed. The second text of holy scripture out of which it may be proved that the Bishop and church of Rome shall never err in matter of faith, is this. I have prayed for thee Peter that thy faith fail not and thou being converted, confirm thy brethren. Our blessed Saviour by the virtue of his holy and effectual prayer obtained, that S. Peter's faith should not at any time fail, that he might be always able to confirm all Christians that staggered in any point of faith. And because our sovereign Lord did not establish a church that should endure no longer than S. Peter Lived, but would have it continue for ever: in like manner he would have one sure pillar at the least in the same, to uphold all in the true faith, that should become members of it at any time after. This to have been S. Peter's successor the Bishop of Rome, I have before proved by the consent of the ancient holy fathers. I will here repeat one sentence of S. Cyprian, because it seems to be grounded upon these very words of our Saviour. The Romans faith is such, 
Cip. epist. 55.  that perfidy or misbelief can have no access unto them. which is the very same in effect, that S. Peter, and the Bishops of Rome his successors faith, cannot fail. for if misbelief could seize or take any hold upon their faith, it should surely fail: because belief and misbelief cannot dwell together. but the Roman faith being by the efficacy of our saviours prayer warranted from failing, it remaineth most assured, that misbelief can have no access unto it. which could not be true if M. Abbot's exception might take place; that forsooth for three or four hundredth years it should not fail; but for a 1000 years after it should mightily be corrupted. which if it were admitted, it had been truer to have said that their faith should fail, then that it should not fail. because for longer time according to their fantasicit had failed, then continued without fail. wherefore, that their new gloze (being directly opposite to our blessed saviours own words, which are without any limitation of time) is to be abhorred, as that which doth corrupt the text: and the old doctors most literal interpretation to be embraced. unto S. Cyprian I will here only join the Zealous and most holy Father S. Bernard, who writing unto Pope Innocentius the third, doth take for most certain out of this text of holy scripture, that the faith of the Roman Bishops had not failed for a thousand years after Christ's days, nor should ever afterwards fail. These be his words. we must refer unto your Apostleship the dangers and scandals that arise in the kingdom of God, but especially those that appertain to the faith. 

Bernardus epist. 190.  
Oportet ad vestrum referri Apostolatum, pericula quaeque & scandala emergentia in regno Dei, ea praesertim quae de fide contingunt. Dignum namque arbitror, ibi potissimum resarciri damna fides, ubi non possit fides sentire defectum. Hac quip huius praerogativa sedis. Cui enim alteri aliquando dictum est. Ego pro te rogavi Petre ut non deficiat fides tua? Ergo quod sequitur, de Petri successore exigitur, & tu aliquando conversus, confirma fratres tuos. Id quidem modo necessarium est. Tempus est ut vestrum agnoscatis principatum, probetis Zelum, Ministerium honoretis, in eo plane Petri impletis vicem cuius tenetis & sedem, si vestra admonitione corda in fide fluctantia confirmetis, si vestra auctoritate conteritis fidei corruptores.   for I esteem it fit that the defects of faith should be there principally repaired, where faith cannot fail: which is the prerogative of this seat. For to what other was it ever said, I have prayed for thee Peter, that thy faith may not fail? therefore that which followeth, is to be exacted of S. Peter's successor: And thou once converted, confirm thy brethren. which truly is at this present needful. for it is high time most beloved Father, that you acknowledge your principality, show your zeal, and honour your ministery. you shall therein rightly supply the office of S. Peter in whose seat you sit, if you do by our admonition confirm their hearts that waver in the faith; and by your authority do suppress the corrupters of the same.  
Can any thing be more perspicuous than that the holy, learned, & religious Abbot S. Bernard (whose testimony the Protestants do often use) did acknowledge that which our Saviour said to S. Peter, to belong unto the Bishops of Rome? and that they had, and should ever have by virtue of our said Redeemers prayer, power and grace to strengthen good Christians in the right faith, and to beat down all enemies of the same. If M. Abbot were not an Abbot in name only, but had in deed some of that holy Abbot's heavenly light in him, he would soon see and confess the same. Albeit those two texts of holy scriptures be more than sufficient to confounded M. Abbot's bare supposition, nakedly put down, and very often repeated without any kind of proof; yet for more complete confirmation thereof, I will cite a third sentence out of S. Paul, which rightly understood, doth greatly fortify the same. 
Rom. 16.  These be the Apostles words. The God of peace crush satan under your feet quickly. 
Chris. in illum locum  Or as it is in the Protestants translation out of the Greek. The God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly. These words of the Apostle (are as Saint Chrysostom witnesseth) both a prayer, and a prophecy: a prayer as they stand in our text. a prophecy, as they are in Greek, which Caluin upon the same text doth grant. the true purport thereof is, that God should in short space so bruise and crush Satan in the head, and as it were beat him into powder under the feat of the Romans, that he should never afterward be able to lift up his head against them in any matter of faith. wherein S. Hierom seems to be so confident, that he doubts not to write to Ruffinus, that which M. Abbot may take as spoken to himself. Notwithstanding know you that the Roman faith by the Apostles mouth praised, 

S. Hieron. Apol. 3. con. Ruffinum.  
Attamen scito Romanam fidem Apostolico ore laudatam eiusmodi praestigias non recipere. Etiam si Angelus aliter annunciet quam semel praedicatum est, Pauli auctoritate munitam non posse m●tari.   doth not admit any such deceits and trumperies. yea if an Angel should preach any other thing besides that which hath been already preached, yet that faith, being by the Apostles authority fortified, could never be changed.  
will M. Abbot yet be so shameless as to stand up, and to give this grave holy doctor the lie? as he must needs do, if he will yet sing his old song and say, that the Roman faith notwithstanding all the Apostles prayer and prophecy, is foully changed, and that in very many great points. with the foresaid testimonies may be linked for the antiquity of it, this that standeth on record in the third general council holden at Ephesus. S. Peter the head of the Apostles and pillar of faith, etc. did receive from Christ the keys of the kingdom of heaven, etc. and doth unto this day live in his successors and determine causes, And shall always live. Behold S. Peter always liveth in the Bishops of Rome his successors, to determine causes, and govern the church, what then shall become of M. Abbot's change? will he make S. Peter also a changeling? This point I will close up with this memorable sentence of S. Leo. The soundness of that faith praised in the prince of the Apostles is everlasting. 

Leo in serm. 2. Assumptionis suae ad sumum Pontificem.  
Soliditas enim illius fidei quae in Apostolorum Principe est laudata, perpetua est. Et sicut permanet, quod in Christo Petrus credidit: ita permanet quod in Petro Christus instituit, etc. Manet ergo dispositio veritatis & beatus Petrus in accepta fortitudine petra perseverans, suscepta ecclesiae g●bernacula non reliquit.   and like as that which Peter believed of Christ, continueth for ever: so doth that which Christ did institute in Peter, etc. Therefore the ordinance of the truth standeth fast, and blessed Peter persevering by his successors in that strength of a rock, hath not forsaken the government of the church. Seeing the faith and fortitude of Saint Peter shall continue for ever in his successors the bishops of Rome, that cuckoos song of M. Abbots, that the now church of Rome is in matter of faith degenerated from the old, must needs be false. And what more manifest sign can one demand thereof, then that all the wits of the protestants, having travailed after nothing more for this fifty years, cannot yet find out any one error in matter in faith, wherein the church of Rome hath at any time dissented from herself in former ages? I know right well that they avouch boldly that it hath changed many articles of faith: but let him that will have credit given to him so saying, name the error itself in particular, and the time when it was first received, and by what pope it was approved. which if no learned Protestant be able to perform, let them be well assured that repeat it never so often over and over, that the church of Rome is not the same now as it was in S. Augustine's time; they deserve not to be believed. Neither am I ignorant that some more hardy than their fellows, have gone about to design the time, when the church of Rome began her Apostasy. But therein they agree no better than the false Elders (that accused Susanna of adultery) did of the tree, under which the feigned fact was pretended to be done. And therefore be no more worthy of credit, than they were.  
30 M. Abbot goeth on to prove, that I racked and wronged my authors and saith; that Tertullian whom I alleged, as sending to the church of Rome to learn the true doctrine, doth send also to other churches as well as to the church of Rome. Be it so, but if he appealed unto the church of Rome, as well as to others; did I him any wrong in saying that he appealed unto the church of Rome? I did not say, that he excluded all, or one  other. Doth not M. Abbot rather rack my words, and wrong himself in imposing that upon me, which I said not? Besides M. Abbot doth offer great wrong to Tertullian, not so much by racking his words as by chopping them quite of in the midst: for where Tertullian saith, If thou border on Italy, thou hast the church of Rome, unde nobis authoritas presto est. whence authority comes to us. M. Abbot cuts of the latter part of the sentence, which imports that men in afric (for that was Tertullia's country) did acknowledge the church of Rome to have authority over them; M. Abbot then having so cunningly conveyed the matter, by cutting of that which made for us, doth afterward ask me what was there left to serve my turn? if his conveyance be no cleanlier than so, it were better for him to leave those tricks ro them that have more nimbles fingers. The Cathalogue of the Bishops of Rome set down by Epiphanius doth serve to show, that the Bishops of Rome are S. Peter's true successors: which M. Abbot and the protestants sometimes, when they are at a stand, do not stick to deny.  
Optatus Bishop of Milevitane S. Augustine's ancient did prove (as M. Abbot cannot deny) his part to be Catholic, in that it comunicated with the church of Rome: yet M. Abbot to detract some what from the see of Rome addeth, that Optatus did not prove his part Catholic by communicating simply with the church of Rome, but for that communicating with the church of Rome, it communicated with the church of the whole world. which words of Optatus are so far of from detracting any thing from the church of Rome, that they do much magnify the commodity of her communion: for he saith not, that he communicated with the church of Rome, and with all other churches, making them several parts: but that in communicating with the church of Rome, he communicated with the churches of the whole world. thereby declaring the communion with the church of Rome, to be the means of communicating with all others; which is the very same that we do now go about to prove. His words (which contain many memorable instructions) are these, spoken unto Parmenianus a Donatist. Thou canst not deny, but that thou knowest an Episcopal chair to have been placed in the city of Rome, 

Optatus milevit. l. 2. co. parmenianum.  
Igitur negare non potes scire te in urbe Roma Petro primo Cathedram Episcopalem esse collatam in qua sederit omnium Apostolorum caput Petrus: in qua una cathedra unitas ab omnibus seruaretur, ne caeteri Apostoli singulas sibi quisque defenderent: utiam schismaticus & peccator esset, qui contra singularem cathedram, alteram collocaret. ergo cathedra unica quae est prima de dotibus sedit prior Petrus: cui successit linus, etc. damaso Siricius hody qui noster est socius. Cum quo nobis totus orbis commercio formatarum in una communionis societate concordat. vestrae cathedrae vos originem reddite, qui vobis vultis sanctam Ecclesiam vindicare.   wherein Peter (the head of all the Apostles) sat first; in which one chair unity is preserved amongst all, etc. That he is now to be taken for a sinner & a schismatic, that would against that singular or only chair oppose another. Therefore in that one chair, (which is the first in dowry) sat Peter, unto whom succeeded Linus, (and so in ●ew down unto Siricius that then lived) who is (saith Optatus) our companion, with whom the whole world by intercourse of form letters, doth concord with us in the same society of communion. Hitherto Optatus. where you see by the judgement of so great a Prelate (who lived in the time of pure antiquity) that the chair of Rome is the only chair of unity: with which if you join, you are in the unity of Christ's church. against which if you oppose yourself you become a sinner and a schismatic. further, that by communicating in faith with it, you do enter into the society of all Catholics dispersed over the whole world. I do now stand more particularly upon those holy father's words, because M. Abbot was so shameless as to write, that I did before of set purpose omit their words: because if I had set them down, every one might have seen (as he saith) that they said nothing for our purpose. when as for brevities sake, I was then content only to point at these testimonies, not thinking that any man would have been so careless of his credit, as to have denied them to be most effectual to our purpose. Now that Optatus did prove the Donatists, to be a particular straggling congregation like the Protestants, not only for that they did not communicate with the church of Rome, but also for want of communication with the churches of Asia, that makes nothing against the singular esteem he had of the church of Rome. for learned writers do use divers sorts of arguments to make their party the more strong and probable. One argument not destroying, but fortifying the other. The Donatists were schismatics (saith that noble Author) because they opposed themselves against the church of Rome. They were also astraying company, for that they held no communion with the churches of Asia, or any other part of the world besides Africa.  
From Optatus M. Abbot comes to answer that place I quoted out of S. Austin, (which I have before set down at large) and confesseth, 
August. epist. 165.  That Austin setteth down the succession of the Bishops of Rome, and upbraideth the Donatists, that no Donatist, eversate in that chair. But M. Abbot doth add, that as well doth he object to them, that whereas they read the Epistles of the Apostles, they divided themselves from the peace and fellowship of those churches, to which the Apostles wrote the same Epistles.  
Is not this a worthy answer trow you? because S. Austin used as a second argument to confute the Donatists, their separation from the known fellowship of the world: Therefore his former argument taken from the communion of the sea of Rome was nothing worth? whereas contrary wise acute disputantes, (like to wise warriors,) do commonly range the strongest arguments in the forefront. Or is there nothing to our purpose in the former place of S. Austin, as here M. Abbot (having put on a brazen forehead) doth avouch? Turn to it good Reader, and see. First that profound Doctor teacheth, that among all the successions of Bishops, that of Rome is most to be regarded: because the gates of hell shall never prevail against it. Secondly, that there had sitten from Peter unto Anastasius then pope; about forty pope's, and that not so much as one of them had been a Donatist, wherefore the Donatists were to be rejected of all men. He thirdly teacheth in the same place, that if any traitor should by chance creep into that chair of Rome yet the wickedness of that man should not be prejudicial unto the innocent faithful, that do rely upon Christ's promise made to that chair: because our Saviour's singular care thereof is and willbe always such, that they who put their trust therein, shall never be confounded. Is all this nothing to our purpose, that the gates of hell cannot prevail against the chair of Rome? That they who rely upon it, cannot fail, no not if there should be a naughty Bishop sitting in that chair? beside as S. Austin did then argue, because not one of the Bishops of Rome had been a Donatist, therefore the Donatists' religion was to be rejected: why may not we in like manner make a stronger argument against the Protestants and conclude; that seeing among all the Bishops of Rome (that have been from Saint Peter unto Paul the fift which are in number not 40. only, but more than 200) yet not one of them hath been a protestant: therefore the protestants religion must needs be stark nought, and of all men to te utterly rejected. This I hope will serve to discover M. Abbots over hardy audacity, who noteth here that the cause why I did set down my author's names without their words, was for that their names might get some credit to my cause; but their words would have showed, that they had said nothing for me: when as now every man may see, that their words truly set down, do make much more for me, than a very good friend would have imagined, unless he had seen them himself.  
M. Abbot proceedeth to another great privilege, which I related in honour of the church of Rome, to wit, that there hath not been any general council of undoubted and sound authority, unless it were by the same sea confirmed. which is a point of such importance, that whosoever doth maturely ponder it, it is alone sufficient to persuade him in all controversies of religion, to make his recourse unto the church of Rome, and to follow that full and wholly, which he shall find to be resolved by it. For if the wisest and most learned heads of the world, assembled together in a general council, after all their own advises upon long examination of all particulars given, do yet hold it expedient, to send to the pope of Rome, to have his approbation and confirmation thereof: how much more ought any particular person (be he of never so exquisite gifts for judgement and literature) to refer himself unto the determination of the same seat? whereunto what doth M. Abbot answer? first as it were he granteth that it is in deed a thing greatly to be observed. yet that he may not seem thereby to be driven to a dumb blank, he says: That it is as greatly to be noted, that the sentence of no bishop of Rome, was anciently holden sufficient for the deciding of a question of faith, except the same were confirmed by a general council. which his assertion is not true, as I will presently prove, after I have disproved his silly proof thereof; which is, 
Leo epist. 61. Idem Epist. 61.  that Leo the great doth make mention of an Epistle of his, against the heresy of Eutiches sent to be confirmed by the universal assent of the whole Synod. Item, he nameth certain other writings of his, as having the confirmation of the general council added thereunto. And that he sent Deputies unto the general council of Ephesus, by sentence in common to decree with the rest, what should be pleasing to god.  
Is not this a poor proof, out of the fact of one pope to gather a common law for all pope's? one pope (forsooth) had some sentences of his confirmed by a general council; therefore neither he, nor any other could give any sentence available, unless it were confirmed by a general council. what an absurd paralogism is this? true it is, that pope's do commonly, when there is any general council called, send their legates thither, to be the precedents of the council; and use to deliver to them their own opinions also in manner of instructions: partly to direct the council, and in part also that they may be more maturely and thoroughly discussed and ratified, by the same council. not that they could not many times sufficiently otherwise with the assistance of their own learned council at home, or of some one province, define what were to be believed and holden: but for that matters so fully sifted and debated, as they are in a general council, may with more facility and fuller applause, be received of all persons through the whole world; And namely of them that have been deceived by heretics: who do generally seek to make the sea of Rome so odious to their followers, that they will not like of any thing that comes from Rome alone, be it never so true and clear. For the sake of such abused souls specially, there needs the Assembly of general councils, though the Pope's sentence without them were never so well assured. To that alleged here by M. Abbot out of the counsels of Chalcedon and afric, answer was made before.  
Now that many heresies have been extinguished by the pope's of Rome with the aid of provincial counsels, without the help of any general, is most manifest to them that are conversant in the ancient histories of the church. and therefore M. Abbot who affirms the contrary, doth nothing else than bewray his great ignorance in antiquity. Their error, that thought those who were baptized of heretics to be rebaptized by catholics, 
August. l. 5 de baptismo co. donat c. 23.  was by Pope Stephen the first condemned, and without any general council repressed. So was the novatian heresy by pope Cornelius, as may be gathered out of Eusebius. 
Euseb li. 6. hist. ca 35.  The heretic jovinianus with his adherents were condemned by Siritius and the Clergy of Rome in these words. we following the Apostles commandment (who holdeth them accursed that preach otherwise then we had received) by common consent 

Siricius apud Ambrosium Epistola 6.  
unde Apostoli secuti praeceptum, quia aliter quam accepimus annunciabant iovinianus, Auxentius etc. divinae sententia & nostro judicio in perpetuum damnati, extra Ecclesiam remaneant.   have condemned, and cast out of the church jovinianus and his companions: And writing unto S. Ambrose, and the church of Milan doth say; that we doubt not but your holiness will observe our decree. To which S. Ambrose assembled in council with divers other Bishops doth give this answer. 

Ibidem Epistola 7.  
Recognovimus literis sanctitatis tuae, boni Pastoris excubias, qui fideliter commissam tibi ianuam serves, & pia solicitudine Christi ouile custodias, dignus quem oves domini audiant & sequantur, et versus finem. Itaque iovinianum Auxentium etc. quos sanctitas tua damnavit, scias apud nos quoque secundum judicium tuum esse damnatos.   That Siricius as a good pastor of Christ's fold had done worthily. and desired him to assure himself that jovinianus, with his complices (whom his holiness had condemned) stood also according to his judgement condemned with them. which S. Austin also intimateth in his second book of retractation, the 22. chapter, when he saith, 

Aug. lib. 2. retract. ca 22.  
Huic monstro (joviniano) sancta Ecclesia quae ibi est (scilicet Romana) fidelissime ac fortissime restitit.   That monster jovinianus was by the church of Rome withstood most faithfully, and most valiantly. The Pelagian heresy was spread all the world over, and yet by the Popes of Rome Innocentius the first, and Zozimus, with the assistance of some provincial councils, without calling any general council, it was condemned all the world over: 
Aug. epist. 157.  as witnesseth the most faithful Register of Antiquity Saint Austin in these words. That new heresy against the grace of Christ, 
Cuius haeresis, vel auctores, vel certe acerrimi notissimique suasores cum Pelagius & Celestius extitissent, Conciliorum Episcopalium vigilantia in adiutorio salvatoris (qui suam tuetur Ecclesiam) etiam à duobus venerabilibus Antistitibus Apostolica sedis, Papa Innocentio & Papa Zozimo nisi correcti etiam egerint poenitentiam, toto Christiano orb damnati sunt. De quibus exempla recentium literarum. sive quae specialiter ad Asros, sive qua universaliter ad omnes Episcopos de memorata sede manarunt, vobis curavimus mitti.  where of Pelagius and Celestius were the Authors, or most sharp defenders, by the vigilancy of Episcopal counsels, in the help of our Saviour (who doth preserve his church) and by two most reverend prelates of the Apostolical sea, Pope Innocentius, and Pope Zozimus, are condemned all the Christian world over, unless they amend and do penance.  
The Donatists in Africa were finally repressed by Gregory the great, Pope of Rome, as it is recorded in his life. The instances of these heresies of the Donatists, Pelagians, jovinians, Novatians, and old Anabaptists, to omit many others, who have been condemned by the sentence of the Bishops of Rome for heretics, and so taken at length all the world over, without any decree of general council, are more than sufficient to confront and confound M. Abbot's bare annotation, as naked and destitute of truth, as it is of proof, to wit, That it was greatly to be observed, that the sentence of no Bishop of Rome was anciently holden sufficient for deciding of a question of faith, except the same were confirmed by a general council. which if he would have any man to believe, let him but prove, that any one of the afore rehearsed heresies were condemned in general council: or that those pope's of Rome by me named, did not condemn them.  
32 It is to small purpose which M. Abbot saith (that notwithstanding the opposition of the legates of the Bishop of Rome and the pope's own reclaiming also, yet it was decreed in the council of Chalcedon, that the Bishop of Constantinople, should have equal privileges with the Bishop of Rome, save only that the Bishop of Rome had the precedence) because the opposition of the pope's Legates, with some others in that council, and the pope's disclaiming from that point, when the council was sent to him to be confirmed, as most opposite unto the first general council of Nice, was sufficient to reverse and annihilate that decree, which needs no other proof, than one argument, which the same Legates used then and there to suppress that ambition of the Bishops of Constantinople. For the like decree had been made once before in the second general council holden at Constantinople: and yet the pope not condescending thereunto, it took no effect. whereupon the precedents made this witty dilemma. If the Bishops of Constantinople having the like Canon made in their favour fowrscore years before that time, had ever sithence enjoyed that prerogative and pre-eminence, why did they now again seek after it? And if notwithstanding that decree made in their favour, they could then not obtain it; why did they now seek to have the like Canon again made for them? which would no more prevail for them, than the other given before by the same authority. For that this would be as well withstood by Leo the great, as the other was rejected by Pope Damasus.  
33 M. Abbot following his accustomed humour of excepting against whatsoever I writ, doth say that another note of mine is fond and a vain presumption: I would have it to be noted, that all heresies lightly which sprung up ever since the Apostles days, even to our time, have opposed themselves against the church of Rome, and have been by the same sea overcome. which argueth most clearly, that the church of Rome is the seat of Christ, and fortress of verity; against which all of the band of Antichrist do continually and daily wage battle, but all in vain and with very ill success: for they all vanishing away like smoke, it continueth still, and shall do for ever, because it is an invincible rock which the gates of hell shall never over come.  
M. Abbot crieth out against this as a fond presumption, but doth not bring any one instance to the contrary; so that his exception being without reason, may well be passed over without answer.  
whereas I countenanced my assertion with the authority S. Austin, who writeth, 

Aug. de utili. credendi ca 17.  
Dubitabimus nos eius Ecclesiae condere gremio, quae usque ad conf●ssionem generis humani ab Apostolica sede per successiones Episcoporum frustra haereticis circum latrantibus & culmen auctoritatis obtiwit?   that the sea Apostolic obtained the top of authority, heretics barking round about in vain. which did prove that all heretics, how soever they snarl one at another, yet do commonly join all in one to bark against the church of Rome. And (which is most to be noted) all in vain.  
M. Abbot to show the profundity of his skill, doth say that I take there sedes Apostolica wrong, for the sea Apostolic of Rome; when as it signifieth (saith he) the Apostles time. And albeit the native signification of the words be plain for me, yet he avoucheth S. Austin to use these words to signify the time of the Apostles. And for proof thereof, he citeth two places out of S. Austin; 
Aug. count. saustum mam. li. 11. ca 2.  in neither of which Apostolica sedes is used at all in the singular number, nor in the plural neither, to signify any other thing then the seats and chairs of the Apostles. Take one of those places of his own alleging for example. 
Ibidem l, 29. ca 2.  universa Ecclesia ab Apostolicis sedibus, usque ad presentes Episcopos certa successione perducta. The universal church derived from the Apostolical seats by certain succession unto the Bishops that now are. where mention being made of lineal descent of Bishops from the Apostles seats, Great injury should be done to those Bishops by him that would say they descended indeed from the Apostles times, but not from the chairs of the Apostles.  
For if they had descended from Simon Magus, or some other arch-heretic of the Apostles time, they might be said to have descended ab Apostolicis sedibus, from the Apostles times, according to M. Abbot's interpretation: because their descent was from the time of the Apostles: yet could not be said to have descended from the Apostles chairs, as their lawful Successors, according unto S. Augustine's, or any other approved ancient Authors true meaning. therefore M. Abbots depravation, rather than interpretation of those words is too too absurd.  
That S. Austin did commonly take sedes Apostolica for the Bishop or church of Rome, is most evident to all that have read his works: let them that are not so conversant in him, take these few places for a taste thereof. in his 106. Epistle. Missae sunt literae, ad Apostolicam sedem, Letters were sent to the sea Apostolic, that is to the Bishop of Rome. And in the 157. Epistle. Zozimus Apostolicae sedis Episcopus. Zozimus Bishop of the Apostolic sea, and Pope Innocent, Bishop of the Apostolic sea. And in his book, De peccato originali, the sixth chapter: to make profession before the sea Apostolic, and the seventh, the letters of the sea Apostolic. And that you may be well assured, that in Africa at those days sedes Apostolica was the common title of the church of Rome, both that African council cited by M. Abbot in the 35. Canon, and the fore-alleged epistles of the counsels of Carthage and Milevitan unto Pope Innocentius, do by it ordinarily design the Bishop of Rome. which may suffice for a proof, that sedes Apostolica in that place of saint Austin, is to be taken for the sea of Rome. And whereas M. Abbot says, that in all that book of S. Austin, there is no mention made of any particular church, and therefore unlike, that those words should bear any special application to the church of Rome.  
I in answer do say that sides Apostolica used there by S. Austin in the singular number, is sufficient to give us bi●h to understand that he spoke of a particular church, & also to lead us to apply these his words unto the church of Rome, which he commonly through all his works doth describe by those very words: which may also be much confirmed, by the like sentence used by S. Austin to the same purpose in another place. where he saith. 

Aug. co. Epist. fundam. ca 4.  
In Ecclesia gremio me tenet ab ipsa sede Petri Apostoli [cui pascendas ones suas dontinus commendavit] usque ad praesentem Episcopatum successio Sacerdotum.   The succession of Bishops from the seat of S. Peter even to this present Bishop, doth hold me in the bosom of the Catholic church. Are not these words plain enough to expound the other? Let us repose ourselves in the bosom of that church, which by succession of Bishops from the Apostolic sea (to wit, of S. Peter) hath obtained the top of authority. Compare the bosom with the bosom: the succession of Bishops of the one, with the other, and they will easily lead us to take the chair of S. Peter, to be the exposition of the Apostolic sea. This is so sensible, that M. Abbot himself after he had a little wrangled against it, comes to admit of it. how little care, than had he of his own honesty, that before charged me with dishonest falsifying of those words of S. Austin, and yet in the end, is forced to take them even so as I did? And that you may in him behold the picture of one that will never yield to any truth that we say, be it never so apparent: He admitting that we ought to repose ourselves in the bosom of that sea Apostolic wherein S. Peter sat: yet he says that it doth not hereby follow, that we ought rather to repose ourselves in the bosom of the church of Rome, them in the church of Antioch; where Peter sat aswell as he did at Rome, and where there had been Bishops succeeding him until that time. how now good sir, had you liefer send your reader to Antioch, to rely on some schismatik under the Turk, then to Rome?  
But this is a mere cavil, for though S. Peter was for a season Bishop of Antioch, and of some other cities also, which he first converted to the Christian faith, until he had provided them of some others: Yet he finally making choice of the city of Rome for his residence, and dying there, consecrating that place to God by the shedding of his blood for the Christian faith; The Bishops of Rome, and not of Antioch, have by consent of all antiquity been ever taken for S. Peter's successors. I have before produced sufficient testimony for this matter, so that it were needles here again to repeat the same; when it will serve for this turn to prove that S. Austin (of whose words we now treat) took the Bishops of Rome for S. Peter's successors, and never the Bishop of Antioch. Let M. Abbot if he can, give me● thereof one instance; but because I know he cannot do that, I will give him some to the contrary.  
S. Austin taught the church of Rome to be S. Peter's chair, 
Aug. co. literas Peril. l. 2. ca 51.  and the Bishops of Rome his successors in these words: what hath the church of Rome done to thee, in which S. Peter sat, and now sitteth Anastasius? who was then Bishop of Rome. Again, 
Idem epist. 1●5.  where he expressly inquireth after S. Peter's Successors, and by name affirmeth Linus Bishop of Rome to have been his successor, and consequently, all other Bishops of Rome to his own time. He doth in like manner declare Rome to be S. Peter's chair, and the Bishops of Rome his successors In the Psalm he made against the part of Donate, 
In Psal. co. partem don.  and writing against the Donatists fundamental Epistle. Finally in the tenth question of the old and new testament, 
Con. Epist. fundamenti cap. 4.  to omit many other places of his works, out of the which the same may be evidently deduced.  
well, it being manifest by the verdict of S. Austin, that we must repose ourselves in the bosom of the sea Apostolic, and further that the same sea is the church of Rome; M. Abbot will now surely at the length to his own eternal rest repose himself in the same holy bosom of the church of Rome: beware of that in any case. He hath yet bethought himself of another sorry shift. Let (says he) M. Bishop take those words, as he will: yet there is nothing therein concerning the church of Rome, but that as the principal church, and specially in the western parts, it served most conveniently for instance of the succession. But as for the height and top of authority there spoken of, it belongeth to the Catholic or universal church. And mere impudence it is, by those or any other words of Austin, to challenge to that church any superiority in government over other churches, when (as we see) both Austin, and the rest of the Bishops of Africa did with one consent utterly disclaim the same.  

Turtull. co. Valent. c. 2. vinci possunt, suaderi non possunt.  O how true is that ancient saying of Turtullian? heretics may be overcome, but they will never be persuaded to yield and acknowledge it. M. Abbot granting that S. Austin having first resolved us to repose ourselves in the bosom of the sea Apostolic, that is, to embrace what that church should teach us, and wholly rely upon her definitions. Secondly, that the church of Rome was that sea Apostolic, which had obtained the top of authority, heretics in vain barking round about it: yet presently, as if he had wholly forgotten that which stood before his eyes, ot else not caring what he said to avoid a dumb blank; he falleth to his old bias, and flieth back to that which he said in the beginning, albeit it had been so often before confuted: That forsooth, the church of Rome is only the principal church, and fittest to be taken for instance in succession in western churches, but it hath not (saith he) any superiority in government. when as S. Austin plainly teacheth, that we must repose ourselves in that church's bosom, and set up our rest upon her decrees, that is, be sure to join in faith and religion with the Bishops of the same; and that because that church hath obtained the top of Authority, and highest degree in government. M. Abbot confessing the former part of the sentence to belong to the church of Rome, hath left himself no shadow of reason to dismember from it, that which S. Austin doth so expressly join and link with it. Hear once again his words. shall we doubt to repose ourselves in the bosom of that church, which ever by the confession of mankind &c: hath obtained the top of authority, heretics barking round about it? Do you not see even by the clear words of S. Austin, that he must confess himself not to be a member of mankind, that will deny that church (which he there spoke of) to have the top of authority? what then shall become of M. Abbot, that granteth the church there spoken of to be the church of Rome, yet will not confess it to have that top of authority? Either he must be razed out of the number of men, or at the least be ranked in the rew of those heretical men, that did so vainly bark against that so apparent truth, which the sound corpse of all true believing men, do most constantly and gloriously confess. I having before showed at large, how neither S. Austin, nor the African Bishops did deny any one branch of the Bishop of Rome's primacy, no not so much as forbid their own Bishops to appeal unto the court of Rome: And did otherwise in sundry sorts declare their dutiful obedience unto the same sea of Rome: M. Abbot's inference out of his own mistaking and error, is wholly disappointed. To conclude then this paragraff it doth remain most assured and clear, that our blessed Saviour made S. Peter and his successors, that rock upon which he built his church, thereby giving them supreme power and authority, to govern his whole church, not for any limited nunber of years, but for so long as his church should continue a church, that is, to the world's end, for against it the gates of hell shall never prevail. Secondly, it is as certain that the Bishops of Rome be in that charge of government over all the church, S. Peter's lawful successors: with whom therefore whosoever joineth in matter of faith and religion shall never be deceived nor fall in to schism. and against whom whosoever barketh and opposeth himself, he not only barketh and laboureth in vain, (as S. Austin speaketh) but if he do obstinately persever therein, he thereby (to use Optatus words before rehearsed) becometh both a sinner and a schismatic. From which most heinous crimes our sweet Saviour of his infinite mercy and goodness deliver all my most dear friends and best beloved countrymen.   

THE SUM OF THE third paragraff or section.  W. B. 
ALBEIT the church of Rome strictly taken, doth comprehend those Christians only, that dwell within the city and Diocese of Rome: yet it is used by men of both sides, to design the faithful of all countries, that in religion do fully agree with the same: and that specially because they do acknowledge the Bishop of Rome to be under Christ, the supreme governor thereof: As in times past the Roman Empire did not contain the territory of Rome alone or country of Italy, but all lands and nations, that professed obedience to the Emperor of Rome. And like as in the primitive church, the title Catholic was added to Christian, to distinguish true Christians from heretics: Even so now a days when heretics are grown so audacious as to arrogate unto themselves the name of catholics (though their religion be nothing less than Catholic) the word Roman is joined to Catholic; to separate true Catholics from counterfeit; the Roman Catholic signifying those catholics, that in faith and religion do perfectly agree with the church of Rome.  R. AB. 
I Do confess myself to be one of those Doctors, that know not this new found distinction of the Roman church: to wit that it may be taken either for the Diocese of Rome, or for all churches that in faith fully agree with the Roman. M. Bishop can bring neither scripture nor any ancient writer for the warrant of it.  
Secondly, it being admitted that the church of Rome may be taken for all churches agreeing in faith with it: yet it remaineth still a particular church; because there be many other churches in Europe and Asia, that do not agree with it in faith, nor acknowledge her chiefty over their churches. For example, the churches of Luther, Caluin, and such like in Europe; and certain other schismatical churches in other parts of the world. And as in the time of the Roman Empire, there were many other kingdoms in the world: so now besides the Roman church, there be many other churches. Moreover the fathers have told us of the Latin and Greek, of the East and west churches: 
Pighius. Eccl. Hier. l 6. c. 3.  but never specify the Roman, to signify the whole church. And Pighius asketh, who did ever by the Roman church, understand the universal church? Albeit the Bishops of Rome, wrote themselves Bishops of the Catholic church: Yet they meant of that part of the Catholic church, which was in Rome. when the Catholic french man doth say; we be of the Catholic Roman church. we understand them thereby to take part with the church of Rome; but the church of Rome, is that of Rome only and is factiously called the Catholic church, which is the whole; and the Roman put to it, is a term of diminution, and abridgeth the whole to a part. To them therfoee may be applied that of Optatus against the Donatists, you would have yourselves. 
Optat. l. 2. con. Po rin.  only to be the whole, who are not in all the whole. And if in ancient times, when there were so many heresies, it was thought a sufficient distinction to join Catholic to Christian; why is it not sufficient now a ●●ies? It is the Invention of Antichrist and his badge, to challenge to himself and his only, to be the whole Catholic church. That name Roman is a name of sect and schism. This is the sum of all which M. Abbot saith in this paragraff or section.  W. B. 
IN this section is discovered a second fallacy of that false argument, which they so often use. No particular church can be the Catholic church; but the Roman is a particular church, Ergo it cannot be the Catholic church. In the precedent section, I have laid open the manifold faults of this their argument; showing first the conclusion (if it were granted) not to be to the purpose. for the point in question was not whether the Roman church were the whole Catholic church or no: but whether the word Roman in style might be couched with the Catholic church, that is, whether one might sensibly and truly say and write; The Catholic Roman church: they say yea, we say no, to make good their assertion, they a vouch the church of Rome not to be the whole church: we answer that the proof is not to the purpose, albeit that were true, for though it were not the whole church, yet it might be called by the name of the whole: not only because every part of that kind may be called by the name of the whole; but also for that it is such a part as shall never be separated from the whole: and consequently as in existence it is always close coupled with the whole, so may it very well in style be interlaced with it.  
Secondly I affirmed that taking the church of Rome for a part, yet it being the most eminent part, it might very justly give name to the whole, according to that axiom approved by all the learned; A part principaliore denominatur totum. the whole is named after some principal part. the whole land of Israel was called jury, of the principal tribe thereof juda. And our own country wherein dwelled both Saxons and Vites aswell as English men, was named England, when one of the English attained to the monarchy. in like manner the church of Rome being the head of the rest (as before I have proved) though it be not the whole yet may very well denominate the whole. And so it hath done by the consent of both friends and foes. for as we term all of our religion, Roman Catholics. so the protestants do nickname them Papists or Romanistes, both taking the name from Rome or the bishop of Rome. wherefore it is manifest that that common hackney of the protestants doth not conclude the point that was in question: which no man doubteth to be one of the foulest faults, that can be in arguing. I laid in a second exception against the second proposition of that argument which is, But the Roman church is a particular church. For that the Roman church may be either taken precisely for the Diocese of Rome; or more largely for the faithful dispersed through the whole world, that do embrace the same faith, which they of Rome do profess. The Roman church so taken (say I) is no particular church, but extends itself unto the utmost bounds of the whole Catholic church. to which M. Abbot doth make answer in this section: And in the beginning confesseth very strangley, that he is one of those Doctors, that do not understand this new found distinction.  
He might perhaps have said truly, that he liked it not: but for a Doctor to say, that he could not reach to that, which a meanewitted scholar would make no difficulty to conceive, cannot be but a great disparagement either to his wit, or to his will, or to both. About the first acception of the Roman church there is no manner of doubt; And touching the 2. what difficutie is it to understand all those to be members of the Roman church, who take the Bishop of Rome to be their chief pastor, and beside are in all articles of faith, and form of government united with the Roman. Do not the protestāns themselves in every country, by nicknaming us Romanists, and Papists give all men to understand, that they take all such to be members of the Roman church? If then both in England, France, Germany, and other countries, by the testimony aswell of protestants as Catholics, all they that in faith and religion agree with the church of Rome, be taken for members of the same church: would any man master of his own wits make any difficulty to grant that all such may be said to be of the church of Rome? And that therefore the church of Rome may be taken to comprehend all them of what nation soever they be? what warrant I can bring for this out of the ancient writers shallbe shorrly after showed; though this matter be in itself so sensible and almost palpable, that he must needs confess himself to be little better than a very blockhead that cannot understand it. yea M. Abbot presently after shows himself to perceive that well enough, for better advised he admits it for true, and disputs against it in this manner. Be it so, that the church of Rome is usually taken to signify other churches submitting themselves to the church of Rome; yet it doth not comprehend other churches that do not submit themselves to the same, nor acknowledge her chiefty As the protestant churches in Europe, and some schismatical churches in Asia. Ah sir, you show clearly enough that you understood before that distinction of mine, why then did you that wrong to your own reputation, as to confess yourself to be one of those Doctors that could not conceive it? You meant then (belike,) to make some simple fool believe, that I to uphold my part was forced to coin a new found distinction never heard of before: but the wind being presently changed, it is but an ordinary and usual distinstion, and may be answered in the manner that you have endeavoured to answer it. To which I reply briefly and roundly, that those churches which acknowledge not the chiefty of the church of Rome, or do obstinately deny any other article of the christian faith professed by the same church, be no Orthodox nor true churches at all; but either heretical or schismatical congregations, members only of the malignant church. And therefore though the church of Rome do not comprehend them, yet it doth nevertheless comprehend all Orthodox and Catholic churches. That all those malignant churches, and every member of them that either ere in matter of faith defined, or are by schism divided from the church of Rome be no true churches at all, To omit diverse other arguments, (because this is not a place to handle at large that question) let these few testimonies suffice. Saint Austin saith. He that believeth any false thing of God, or of any part of the doctrine that appertains unto the edification of faith, 

Aug. l. quest. in Math. q. 11.  
Si enim falsa de deo credit, vel de aliqua part doctrinae quae ad fidei pertinet aedificationem, ita ut non quaerentis cunctatione tentatus sit, sed inconcusse credentis, nec omnino scientis opinione atque errore discordans, Haereticus est, & foris est animo, quamuis corporaliter intus videatur.   & that not doubtingly, with a mind to be better instructed, but resolutely & obstinately; he is an heretic, and in soul out of the church; though in body he seem to live in it. which elsewhere he repeats coupling schismatics and heretics together, and declaring both their congregations to be no part of the Catholic church in these words. we believe the holy church, that surely which is Catholic. 

Idem de fide & Simbolo ca: 10.  
Credimus & sanctam Ecclesiam, utique Catholicam: nam & haeretici & schismatici, congregationes suas Ecclesias vocant. Sed Haeretici de deo falsa sentiendo ipsam fidem violant: schismatici autem discissionibus iniqùis a fraterna Charitate dissiliunt quamuis ea credunt quae credimus. Quapropter nec haereticus pertinet ad ecclesiam Catholicam, quae diligit deum; nec schismatitus, quoniam diligit proximum.   for heretics and schismatics do call their congregations churches: but heretics believing false things of God do break their faith; and schismatics by wilful divisions do leap from brotherly charity: wherefore neither doth the heretic belong to the Catholic church, because she loves god: nor the schismatic, for that she loves heir neighbour. which doctrine he might have drawn out of Saint Cyprian, who under the name of the Novatians doth teach: That heretics be like unto Apes; who though they be no men, 

Cyprian. epistola 73. ad jubaianum.  
Novatianus simiarum more (quae cum homines non sint, homines tamen imitantur) vult ecclesiae Catholicae auctoritatem sibi & veritatem vindicare, quando ipse in Ecclesia non sit, imo, etc.   yet do counterfeit men: so heretics, albeit they be out of the church, yet do challenge to themselves the truth and authority of the church. with them accordeth Saint Hierom saying. when you shall hear of any Christians that take not their name from jesus Christ, 

Hieron. co. lucif in fine.  
Sicubi audieru eos qui dicuntur Christi, non a jesu Christo sed a quoquam alio nuncupari, utputa Marcionistas, valentinianos, montenses: scito non Ecclesiam Christi sed Antichristi esse synagogam.   but from other men, as Marcionists, valentinians, (or such like as are now a days, Lutherans, Zwinglians, etc.) be you well assured, that they belong not to the church of Christ, but to the Synagogue of Antichrist. Out of this sound doctrine of the ancient fathers, and approved doctors, M. Abbot's objection is easily solved. For albeit there be many erring congregations, which would gladly be called churches, and do challenge to themselves the name and authority of the church, which the church of Rome doth not comprehend: yet those congregations being no more true churches, than Apes be men: the church of Rome may be truly said to comprehend all the Catholic church, though it do not contain any of them: they being for their ertors in faith, and disunion in matter of religion, by the verdict of the ancient fathers esteemed rather schismatics & parts of satans synagogue, than any members of Christ's Catholic church.  
I am not ignorant that there be certain good fellow libertines, who more willing to please men with plausible doctrine, then to acquaint them with God's just judgements, And to make some show that their church hath been always a member of the visible Catholic church do teach, that even schismatics and heretics (so they err not in some fundamental points of religion) be notwithstanding real and true members of the Catholic church. Against whose error I mean god willing to make a chapter in this book, wherefore I will not here stand to confute it: But admitting it here for passable, I do not see any reason why in the way of that opinion, the Roman church may not comprehend even those unpure churches too. For albeit they do not acknowledge the chiefty of the Roman church, nor agree with it in all articles of faith yet they acknowledging the Roman to hold all those fundamental articles of faith, must needs grant that they do agree with it in all points that are of necessity to be believed. On the other side they cannot deny but that they are all descended out of the same Roman church; not being able to show any other stock or pedigree, out of which their church is issued and sprung. why then should they not yield that honour unto the same, as to acknowledge themselves members of her from whom they derive their descent and pedigree? and with whom they do agree in all fundamental points of doctrine, though in some other (not necessary in their opinion to be believed) they do dissent from her? Neither is that example of the Roman Empire well applied by M. Abbot: For albeit there were and be many kingdoms in the world besides the Roman Empire, not subject thereto, nor any members thereof: yet there be not, nor cannot be many christian churches, whereof the one is not a member of the other. For all Christian creeds do teach us to believe, that there is but one only church, not many: 
Ephes. 4. Cant. 6.8  One spouse of Christ one body of Christ, una est columba mea, etc. which is the common doctrine of the ancient fathers, after S. Cyprian and Saint Austin, who have made whole treatises of the unity of the church. So that though there be many distinct kingdoms independent one of the other; yet there cannot be many such churches; but all and every particular true church is a true member of the one only Catholic church. All of them perfectly agreeing together in society of faith, in unity of sacraments and in form of government. Consequently, the head & mother church, (such as before I have proved the Roman church to be) may conveniently be used to signify all the rest. No man denies the more proper signification of the church of Rome to be the city or Diocese of Rome itself; in which sense Albertus Pighius doth truly say of it, That it is a particular church, and not to be taken for the universal church: Notwithstanding it is in more large signification often taken for the whole Catholic church, not only of modern writers, but also of the most ancient and holy fathers. to witness whereof I take these few following. Saint Cyprian sent the copy of Antonianus letter to Cornelius bishop of Rome, 
Cipr. epistola 52.  to assure him that the said Antonian did communicate with him, that is, with the Catholic church. ut scires illum tecum, hoc est, cum Catholica ecclesia comunicare. where that most learned prelate, and glorious Martyr put as a thing by itself well known, that to communicate with the pope of Rome, is to communicate with the Catholic church with him accordeth Saint Ambrose, 
Ambros. oratione defratic Satyro.  relating how his brother Satyrus was cast on shore in Sardinia or thereabout, where catholics and heretics were blended and mixed together: and being desirous to be baptized by a Catholic Bishop, when one was presented to him to do that good office, he to try wh●ther he were Catholic or no, demanded of him. Si cum Catholicis, hoc est, cum Romanis consentiret. If he did agree with the Catholics, that is to say, with the Romans. Putting as we do now Roman for a certain mark, and as it were an explication of a true Catholic. The like doth Saint Hierom, when he asked of Ruffinus, what faith he professed, 
Hic any. Apol 〈◊〉 c●● Ruffinum.  whether that that flourished in the church of Rome, or that which was contained in the books of Origine? Si Romanam responderit, ergo Catholici sumus. If he answer the Roman faith, then hew catholics, and free from the errors of Origen. where he setteth the Roman faith, to signify the Catholic faith, yea showeth that of the Roman faith, Christians are denominated Catholics. The same doth the ancient christian poet Prudentius chant in these verses.  

Fugite (o miseri) execranda Novati  
Schismata, Catholicis vos reddite populis, 
Prudent. in hymno de Hippolito.   
Vnasedes vigeat, prisco quae condita seclo est,  
Quam Paulus tenuit, quamque cathedra Petri.   

O poor souls from Novatus cursed schism do you fly,  
And with speed yield yourselves unto the Catholic party.  
That only seat flourish, which in ancient time founded,  
S. Paul upheld, and where the chair of Peter was grounded.   
This godly and holy man esteemed it all one to yield yourself to the Catholic party, and to unite yourself to the sea of Rome. So did that puissant Christian Emperor Theodosius the younger, when he exhorted the Bishop of Berca and his followers, to declare themselves approved priests of the Roman religion; imploing the Roman for the Catholic religion, which was with all persons so usual and current in those better times, 
Concil: Ephesin. Tom. 1. c. 10.  that even the old rotten Arrian heretics did by the same name of Roman, design all true believers, as may be gathered by that godly Historiographer Victor Bishop of utica in Africa: who relateth, how locundus, to dissuade the cruel Arrian Theodoricus, 
Victor uti: de pers: vand: l. 1.  the king's son, from putting a Christian to death used these words. If you put him to the sword, the Romans will honour him for a Martyr. By the word Romans, signifying the true Catholics. And another worthy witness hereof is Gregory that learned and Zealous Bishop of Toures, who citing these words of the Arrians, 
Greg de gloria Martyrun l. 1. c. 25.  Quia ingenium est Romanorum, doth interlace this explication, Romanos enim vocitant, nostrae religionis homines) they do commonly call men of our religion (to wit, the true catholics, by the name of Romans. These ancient grave and renowned authors may serve to convince any reasonable man, that the name Roman both anciently did, and now very well may comprehend all the true believers of the universal world. what shall we then say to M. Abbot, that in all his reading (as he confesseth to the reproach of his ignorance) could never light upon any one that by the Roman church, did signify the whole Catholic church? He must acknowledge either that there remaineth very much in antiquity, which he hath not yet read; or that passing over much in post, was not at leisure to mark that which made against himself. He found the East and the west, the Greek and Latin churches: but he could never find, that by the Roman church was signified the universal church. Be it so good Sir, because you will needs have it to be so, that you through the dimness of your sight could not discern that which stands on record in Saint Cyprian, Saint Ambrose, Saint Hierome, and divers others well known and approved Authors: doth it there upon follow, that no man else could do it? or that I upon the acknowledgement of your want of reading the fathers, was presently blanked, and had not a word to say? Alas silly man have you never heard of this trivial Adage? Bernardus non vidit omnia. If that enlightened and Eagle eyed Abbot did not see all; what marvel though a poor purr-blind Abbot oversee & mistake many things? Learn gentle sir by this little, not to bear yourself to confidently upon your own reading; be you well assured that there be many worthy things in antiquity, that you have not read; many also that you do not understand: and not a few (if I do not greatly mistake) that you having both read and understood, yet will not acknowledge, for fear of hurting your own cause. Out of the premises it followeth most manifestly, that the word Roman (taken in that larger signification) is no term of diminution, nor abridgeth) the whole unto a part, but is of as large extent, and hath the same latitude, with the whole Catholic and Orthodox church. So that whosoever is of the Roman church, is a true member of the Catholic church. And on the other side, whosoever will be esteemed a member of the Catholic church must not refuse to be made a member of the Roman church. It only separateth Catholics from heretics, 
Epist. 73.  who like Apes (to use S. Cyprian's term) sergeant the Catholic, & would very fain be so saluted: but because they will not acknowledge, 
Epist. 45.  radicem & matricem, (as the said Doctor speaketh elsewhere) the original & mother church of Rome, they cannot be lively branches & true children of the same.  

Optatus l. 2. co. parmen.  The Donatists (as Optatus wisely noteth) because they separated themselves from the communion of the church of Rome, avouching their particular sect to be the whole church, were no part of the whole: but lay like rotten boughs cut of from the body of the Catholic church. In the same terms stand protestants & all other sectaries of what sort soever they be, that after the fashion of Donatists divide themselves from the same church of Rome, and make peculiar separations. And if the particular church of Rome would and could forsake their Ancestors faith, and divide itself from other Catholic churches as protestants do, And nevertheless avouch itself alone to be the whole church: then in deed it might well incur that censure of Optatus. But because it cannot so do, being by the virtue of our Saviour's prayer, and continual assistance of the holy Ghost, always preserved from all error in matter of faith: therefore it cannot be separated from the rest of the Catholic church, as the Donatists were, but be perpetually so closely united, & inseparably associated with it, that whosoever joineth himself with the church of Rome, doth even thereby enter in to society of the whole catholic church. which the same ancient prelate Optatus doth teach in these most express words which I have cited before. Si●icius, [that now sitteth S. Peter's successor in the chair of Rome] is our companion, with whom the whole world by enter course of form letters, agreeth with us in one uniform society of communion. Behold how by society with the Bishop and church of Rome, the Bishops of Africa entered into communion, and kept correspondence with the universal church dispersed overall the whole world.  
4 M. Abbot would gladly learn, seeing that in ancient time when there were very many heresies, the addition of Catholic was taken for sufficient to distinguish the Orthodox from all kind of sectaries; why it will not now serve the turn, but that Roman must be added thereunto. The answer is ready, because sectaries be waxen more audacious now, than they were of old: for in S. Augustine's days, 
Aug 〈◊〉 till. cred c. 7.  albeit the heretics c veted to be called Catholics, and so did call themselves, putting names of reproach upon the true believers, as Protestants use to do now: yet as the same most trusty Doctor witnesseth: when any stranger came to demand of them, which was the Catholic congregation, 
Idem de vera rel. c. 7.  they always directed and sent them to the true Catholic, & not to their own, well knowing that he who inquired after the Catholics, meant not their sect. neither could they otherwise be well understood, unless they called the true church by the same name, as it was called all the world over.  
But the heretics of our times having put on more brazen faces than their predecessors, though there be no universality neither of time, place, or people in their congregations; yet forsooth will needs be called catholics, by Antiphrasis or contraries (belike,) ut Lucus dicitur a Lucendo, quia minime lucet, lucus that is Latin for a wood is derived of lumen, light, because in it is little light; so Protestant's may be named universalists, because there is among them little or no kind of universality. To the purpose then, to declare what manner of catholics we mean, we add Roman: to signify that we understand not a counterfeit, or corner catholic that lay lurking in obscurity for a thousand years together, and whose faith was never spread one quarter of the world over. But such Catholics as join with the church of Rome, whose faith and religion was first commended in the Apostles days, and hath continued ever since unmovable, and besides hath florishedd in all christian nations of the world, and therefore is indeed truly Catholic. Our conjunction therefore with the Roman church associateth us with the faithful not only of all Europe, Africa, and Asia; but also with the faithful of the East and west Indies and of all the world beside.  
wherefore M. Abbot was foully deceived, when he said that the word Roman, was a term of diminution, or that it abridgeth the whole unto a part; whereas the Roman is fully as large and ample, and hath the very same, and no narrower limits and borders than the Catholic faith and religion: excluding none of any nation of the world out of that communion, but heretics only and schismatics, and such like counterfeit Catholics. And let him and his companions that blush not to lay that imputation of sect and schism upon the Roman church declare if they can, from what church the Roman divided itself? in what pope's days it became schismatic? And in what country was the unity of the true church then preserved? None of all which if they be able to declare, we must needs take their words for wind, if not for passionate and womanish scolding without any colour of reason.  
I marvel where M. Abbot hath read, that it is the peculiar badge of Antichrist, to challenge to him & his alone to be the whole church of Christ. May not Christ's lieutenant on earth challenge that truly, which Antichrist by intrusion will presume to do unjustly? Or is there no whole church of Christ in the world out of Antichrists tents? And may he not rather be thought to rove at random, then to speak in his right senses, that averreth Antichrist to be willing to stand for Christ, and to profess to fight under Christ's banner? against whom as the holy scripture and ancient fathers most manifestly teach, he will proclaim open war, and do the uttermost of his most wicked endeavour to compel all Christians openly to forsake and forswear Christ too, and that not covertly and by consequencies, but in plain and formal terms, and to acknowledge no other sovereign lord besides himself. wherefore to conclude this section, let the indifferent reader duly consider whether I have delivered in sufficient premises to prove, that the church of Rome may be used to signify any church of the world, that in faith and religion doth agree with it. My promises are, not the practice only of catholics but also of Protestants, who in all countries give us a name taken from the church of Rome, as Romanists or Papists; to signify that we all be members of the same church in what country soever we dwell; And not only men of our d●●es do so commonly speak, but in ancient times also it is as well recorded of the Orthodox fathers as by heretics; that men of all countries who embraced the true faith were called Romans, as I have once before proved at large. wherefore it is no novelty to avouch the church of Rome to comprehend all the true Christians of the world. Against which it maketh nothing that heretics and schismatics be no members of the church of Rome: for they be no better than rotten boughs cut of from the vine, & like scattered sheep out of Christ's fold, wherefore no part nor parcel of Christ's church.   

THE FOURTH paragraph.  w. B. 
NOw to M. Abbots second sophistication. The Roman church by your rule is the head, and all other churches are members to it: but the Catholic comprehendeth all. Ergo, to say the Roman is the Catholic church, is to say, the head is the whole body.  
To which I say first, as I said to the former argument, that it is missshapen, and by the like it may be proved, that their English church is not the Catholic church, which M. Abbot is content to grant. Se●ondly I say, that it is a fault in arguing when a word is used Metaphorically, to take hold upon any other property of the Metaphor, besides that wherein the resemblance lieth. I gave for example, that our blessed Saviour is called a Lion for his invincible fortitude. Now if any man would out of that metaphor argue, that our Saviour had four feet, because a Lion hath so, he should be not only ridiculous, but also blasphemous. In like manner though the church of Rome be by us called the head church, because of her superiority: Yet doth it not follow, that any other properties belonging to a head, be of necessity attributed to the same church. And to our present purpose, though a head cannot be called by the name of the whole, it being but one part of the whole, called dissimilare, that consisteth of divers parts, one unlike to the other; yet might the church of Rome, not withstanding that it is the head, be called by the name of the whole Catholic church. For that the Catholic church is, totum similare, a whole consisting of parts, that be all a like as the air is: every part whereof is called by the name of the whole, as every part of the air, is called the air, every part of water, is called water: so every particular church, that is part of the Catholic church, may truly be called the Catholic church: though it be not the whole Catholic church. To which M. Abbot after much idle speech mingled with scornful scoffing, answereth nothing else in effect, but that he had said before, these be his words.  R. AB. 
TAke a head in what sense you will, it must needs be a distinct part from the rest of the body, and then repeats his goodly argument in these terms. The church of Rome is by their learning the head of all other churches, and all other churches are as the members and body of this head. But the Catholic church comprehendeth all both head and body. To say then that the Roman church is the Catholic church is all one, as if a man should say, the head is the whole body. After which he addeth, who can speak more clearly than I have done? where if you willbe his favourable and fast friend, you must applaud him and say, that no man is able to do better, nor to set it out more clearly than he hath done. A high conceit of his own writing, uttered with vanity enough. Now of me his poor Antagonist he saith, who can answer more absurdly than he hath done? I have put him to his trumps I warrant him &c: to omit much such trumpery which followeth, without any fortification of reason, or temper of modesty.  W. B. 
I am so far of from being troubled with his trumps, which are nothing else indeed then very frumps (besides that one old halting spurgald jade of an argument so confusedly set down by him, even there where he cracks most of clearness) that I will do that for him, which he blinded with self love imagined impossible for any man to do, to wit; I will put down his argument more clearly and formerly, than he hath done himself, as every scholar that can judge of the form of an argument may easily perceive, in this manner. No part can be the whole, but the church of Rome is but a part (to wit the head of the church) Ergo it cannot be the whole. This his so often repeated argument, without any new fortification, needs no other refutation, than that which hath been once or twice given before.  
Thus at length we come to the end of M. Abbots first chapter, which was divided into four sections or parts; and have by the help of God's good grace both defended and proved that supreme commanding power of jurisdiction, which consisteth in the chief government of Christ's church upon earth, to have been by our blessed Saviour first established and placed upon the person of S. Peter Prince of the Apostles; that there should be perfect unity in his Ecclesiastical kingdom: then that the same might endure not for term of S. Peter's life only, but always continue unto the world's end, He ordained that S. Peter's successors the Bishops of Rome should enjoy the same sovereign authority, over the whole Catholic church until the world's end. which I made good specially by the confession and acknowledgement of the greatest patriarchs, most learned and best approved Prelates of the East churches; because the better learned Protestants do after a manner grant unto the Bishop and pope of Rome, 
Of this read more in the note at the end of this chapter.  as patriarch of the west, supreme authority and jurisdiction over all the west churches. Moreover, because the protestants do all and some object that fact of the African Bishops, wherein they seemed to deny appeals of all under the degree of Bishops unto the court of Rome, as an argument of great moment against the said supreme commanding power of the sea of Rome, I have produced testimonies of the most ancient, and best learned Bishops and Doctors of the African church, averring the jurisdiction of the church of Rome over themselves and their country. So that there can remain no scruple in the upright and judicious Readers understanding, but that the Bishop of Rome's supremacy hath been acknowledged, witnessed and obeyed all the world over, even in the pure times of most flourishing Christianity. And consequently, that all they who desire to be sound and perfect catholics, must embrace and profess the faith and religion of the same Roman church, or else be content to be reckoned in the rew of heretical or schismatical Congregations. And as in this life they willingly take part with them in their schism and errors: so they may assure themselves (unless God give them grace to repent) to be against their wills, sorted with them in the final separation at the last day, and to have their unlucky lot with them in the lake ever burning with fire and brimstone. from which our most merciful Lord and sweet Saviour Christ jesus deliver all them that profess his truth and holy name. Amen.  
M. Richard field Doctor of divinity in his fift book of the church printed at london 1610. of the bishop and church of Rome hath these positions.  
FIrst in the 32. chapter: that the Bishop of Rome doth succeed S. Peter in the bishopric of the City, and in the honour of being one of the prime Bishops of the world.  
Secondly in the 34. chapter: that the church of Rome was head of all churches, that is first in order and honour among them, but not in absolute supreme commanding power.  
3 That the same church was in more special sort head of such churches as were within the Patriarchship of Rome, as was all the west church.  
To which effect his majesty of England (our sovereign lord) writeth to all Christian monarchs: 
Pag 46.  If there were yet question among the patriarchs for the first place, I would with all my heart give my consent that the Bishop of Rome should have the first seat. I being a western king would go for the patriarch of the west.  
4 That the Bishop of Rome had the care of all churches, not as absolute supreme commander, but as most honourable among the Bishops: who were first to be sought unto in matters requiring a common deliberation, and from whom all things generally concerning the state of the whole church were either to take beginning, or at the least to seek confirmation, before they were generally imposed and prescribed.  
The same Doctor in his preface to the reader teacheth, that to compose variances rising between patriarchs and their Bishops, or among themselves, he that was in order and honour before the rest might lawfully interpose himself, and in his synod judge of such differences. And in such cases as could not be so ended, or that concerned the faith, and the state of the whole universal church, there remained the judgement and resolution of a general council, wherein the Bishop of the first sea (that is the Bishop of Rome) was to sit as Precedent and moderator.  
Observe how easily that which we teach of pope's the supremacy may be gathered out of these principles. for if it appertain unto the Bishop of Rome as prime Patriarch, to compose the differences rising betwixt other patriarchs and their Bishops; if he must be principally sought unto for final resolutions in matter of faith; if care of all churches belong to him and from him all things generally concerning the state of the whole church, were either to take beginning or else to seek confirmation: let any understanding man exercised in government tell me, how patriarchs and Bishops may be convented to appear without commanding authority; and how without compelling power, the pope's final determinations would be of all parties obeyed.    

THE SECOND CHAPTER.  
M. ABBOT. 
The comparisons between the Donatists and Papists justified and enlarged, page 51.  R. AB. 
IT is a mere usurpation whereby the Papists call the Roman church the Catholic church, and the same that the Donatists of old did. They held the Catholic church to be art Cartenna in afric, and the Papists hold it to be at Rome in Italy.  W. B. 
THis comparison is a fond new devise of M. Abbot, wherein there is scarce one spark either of wit or learning; wherefore it deserved rather to be abridged or wholly canceled, then to have been enlarged. justified it can never be, because it hath not many true words in it. Take a taste of this first branch which is false on both sides. for neither was Cartenna in Africa, but in Mauritania: nor did the Donatists hold their pretended Catholic church to be at Cartenna, but esteemed the Rogatists (who so much magnified Cartenna) to be wicked schismatics, altogether unworthy the name or communion of their supposed Catholic church; as S. Austin (M. Abbots own author) doth testify, 
Aug. Epist. 48.  in the place cited by himself. was he not then foully mistaken to father such a strange untruth upon S. Augustin? And on the other side, is it not a prodigious impudent assertion to avouch, that we catholics do maintain the Catholic church to be enclosed within the walls of Rome, or confined in those quartiers, as the Rogatists did their church to be concluded within the Coasts of Cartenna? whereas we teach it to be dispersed all the world over.  R. AB. 
I Confess I committed some oversight by understanding that generally of the Donatists, which belonged only to the Rogatists. Let this be amended thus. The Donatists did set up a particular church, all of them first in the south of Africa, some afterward (as the Rogatists) at Cartenna in Mauritania. And so have the Papists done at Rome in Italy. Against which M. Bishop gives two exceptions: First, that they do not hold the Catholic church to be enclosed within the walls of Rome, as the Rogatists did theirs within Cartenna: but do say that it was dispersed all the world over; whereas the rogatist's congregation was holden to be confined within the bounds of Cartenna. The first part of which answer on their behalf is false; and the second part concerning the Rogatists is vain: for it is false that the Romish church is dispersed over all the world: because the Greek and Eastern churches disclaim subjection to the church of Rome; and although the communion of the church of Rome be far larger than that was of the Rogatists at Cartenna; yet doth neither of them contain any more than a part. And we cannot doubt but that the Rogatists would as willingly have had the whole world to join with their church, as the Romans: And so it was not by position of doctrine that their church was not of larger extent; but forwant of better success. And the exprobration of the same mad fancy lieth upon the church of Rome, to wit, that whosoever in the further parts of the world shallbe desirous of salvation, unless he come to Rome, or into some place where he may meet with a Popish priest, he cannot be baptized or reconciled to God. As touching the second exception though it be not generally true, that the Donatists placed the Catholic church at Cartenna, yet it is not altogether untrue. because the Rogatists were a kind of Donatists, albeit divided from them by schism. Again although the Donatists did not place the Catholic church at Cartenna, yet they designed the place thereof to be Africa; for albeit they acknowledged the church by the Apostles preaching to have been spread over all the world; yet they held that it was perished in all other parts of the world, and only remained with their part in Africa: they did not exclude the rest of the world out of their communion, so they would be of their opinion. The foundation of their church was laid in Africa, and from thence they would have it dispersed all the world over. In the same sort standeth the mattr with the Papists, they tell us that the other patriarchal seas are all either extinguished or fallen into Schism, and the Roman church only remaining: whence all other churches of the world are to be reduced to the Pope.  
They tell us of strange wonders done amongst the Indians, whither they know it unlikely for us to come to search out the truth: but those nations pretended to be converted by them, are either colonies of their own, or some Infidels forced to accept of Baptism without religion, or such as by wiles they have surprised. Thus is M. Bishop by avoiding to be a Donatist by putting the matter over to the Rogatists, become both a Donatist and Rogatist, by tying the seat of the Catholic church to one only particular place.  W. B. 
M. Abbot perceiving well that he had behaved himself exceeding drowsily in that comparison between the Donatists and Catholics, yet being (as it seemeth) over far in love with his own conceit simple though it were, would not so give it over: but to make up the full measure of his folly, will needs go forwards with it; and endevoreth not only to justify that which he had before written, but doth also make some new additions. If I could persuade myself that my time should be fruitfully spent in answering him at length, I would not desire greater advantage to be given me, to display and lay open to the view of the world his lack of judgement, lack of learning, and l●cke of honesty: but considering that this comparison can be no great matter of edification to the Reader, I hold it not worthy any amplification, but will abridge it as much as I may: yet so, that no substantial point of it be left unanswered. M. Abbot not finding any poor means to underprop his palpable absurdities, is driven to confess them in the very first branch, and doth therefore post that over to the latter place, and preposterously maketh answer before unto the second part of the comparison; which was, that we Roman catholics do not tie the Catholic church to the City of Rome, as the Rogatists did theirs to Cartenna. For we hold that men may be baptized and saved in any part of the world, without repairing to the City of Rome, or to the coasts adjoining near thereunto; whereas the Rogatists did hold, that in what part soever of the world any person were converted, he must of necessity go unto Cartenna, or thereabouts to be baptized and obtain salvation. To which M. Abbot replies that the former part on our behalf is false. because our church is not spread over all the world, and therefore salvation cannot be gotten all the world over. for that to obtain salvation as he saith, a popish priest must needs be found out. This reply is not to the purpose. For whether our church be spread over all the world or no, of which more shallbe said presently: yet it is certainly known to be in divers great monarchies besides Italy: in all which if any person be to be baptized or reconciled, we send them not to Rome to receive those sacraments, but administer them in the place where the person is by the inspiration of God converted, which is clean contrary to the doctrine of the Rogatists, that exacted the personal repair of all such convertites to Cartenna, or to her confines which doth most clearly overthrow M. Abbot's answer. Yet to bolster out his flaggy resemblance he addeth, that it was not by position of doctrine, that the Rogatists forced all convertits to come into that country; but because they had not any Bishops of their sect else where, which if they had had (as no doubt they desired to have) than they who were touched with the preaching of the Gospel, might have been baptized by them in any other country where these godly prelates were. To which I rejoin, that had there been Rogatists all the world over as they desired to be, them there had been no place for this branch of the comparison, which likeneth the Roman Catholics to the Rogatists, in that they be both of them private and confined within the compass of some particular places. M. Abbot therefore full wisely goeth about to uphold his former resemblance by the quite overthrow of it. for herein (said he before) stands the resemblance between the Papists and Rogatists, that both of them do restrain the universality of the Catholic church to one particular place or country. And now confessing the Papists communion and fellowship to be far larger than the Rogatists, he flies to this silly shift, that the Rogatists desire to have their church as largely extended as the Romanists, that is both of them all the world over. So that the wind being come round about and sitting now in the clean contrary corner, the resemblance is to be turned the other way; to wit, that as the Roman church desireth to be spread all the world over, so did the Rogatists. But good Sir tell me I pray you, is it sufficient to make a church Catholic to desire to be dilated all the world over? Then without doubt not only Rogatists, but all other sectaries too, were also catholics; for none of them surely wanted that desire. yet being bastard slips, and destitute of that virtue, which proceedeth by the trunk of true succession from the right root, they could never be generally received all the world over, and therefore could not be called Catholics. whereas the Roman church engraffed by the Apostles in to the true Olive Christ jesus through the force of his blessed passion, and by power of the holy Ghost, hath not only desired to spread her branches into all nations, but hath actually performed that her holy desire. for truth is strong, and doth prevail. wherefore it alone hath worthily achieved the name of Catholic, which all other congregations have in vain gaped after and desired.  
Observe by the way M. Abbot's gross ignorance in two points of our doctrine: the former, when he imagineth us to hold that no man can be baptized to salvation without he meet with one of our priests. whereas we teach the Baptism even of Protestants, be they men, be they women, to be available to salvation. The latter, in that he affirmeth us to hold the same of reconciliation; we teaching that any person of discretion may by true contrition and repentance obtain salvation, albeit they cannot meet with any priest. Let therefore these his assertions be scored up for an after reckoning.  
Now to the second exception, albeit the Rogatists were a Cantell or fragment broken out of the Donatists, yet they by their division from them forsook the name of Donatists, and took their own proper name of Rogatists, and in that question of the true church were at open war with the Donatists. so that it was a gross oversight in M. Abbot to say the Donatists held the Catholic church to be at Cartenna: Because they esteemed no better of that church at Cartennna then of a den of thieves. In like manner they of Cartenna reputed the Donatists for damned creatures. wherefore albeit the Rogatists in some other matter, wherein they did agree with the Donatists, might have passed under that general name: yet they could not in that point, wherein they were at so great square. It is then clear that M. Abbot's error therein cannot be excused.  
well if he hath hitherto behaved himself like one that being half a sleep knew not well what he said; yet now being awaked by his adversary he will (no doubt) spit on his fingers, and take better hold, secundae enim cogitationes sunt prudentiores. To it then jolly Sir, touch the Papists home, and if you cannot force the Rogatists upon them, yet drive them at the least to be Donatists, and you shall do somewhat. That (saith M. Abbot) I will easily perform by this new framed resemblance. like as the Donatists held the Catholic church to have perished in all other countries, and to have remained only with their part in Africa, and desired that from thence it might be spread into all other nations: Even so the papists tell us that the churches in all the far parts of the world have failed, that the patriarchal seas are all fallen away, and only the Roman remaineth, whence the rest are to be reduced to the obedience of the pope.  
This lo seems to be something. True it is that the Donatists did in many things things sergeant the true catholics, and among the rest pretended (as all other heretics commonly do) that their congregation was the only true reformed church, and that the ready way to salvation was to enter into their society. But this is so trivial and common aswell to the true Catholic, as to all manner of dissembling congregations that he who delights to enlarge himself therein, shall but lose his time, abuse his reader, and purchase to himself the reputation of a trifler. yet let us descend to the particulars of this new coined comparison, and see whether it will abide the touch are no. The Roman church and the Donatists did not agree in the first point of that resemblance. for whereas the Donatists held the church to have perished all the world over, saving in some part of afric: the Roman Catholic doth not hold the true church to have perished all the world over, saving in Italy, or in some parts of Europe: but teacheth that it hath always continued, and even in this last hundredth years, to have gained more both in the East and west Indies, than it hath lost in these parts of the world. Secondly, it is not long sithence all the patriarchal seas did openly agree with the church of Rome, to wit, in the year of our Lord god 1439. as may be seen in the council of Florence, and by the profession of faith which joseph patriarch of Constantinople, 
Concil. florent. sess. 25.  then and there made in these words. whatsoever the Catholic church of our Lord jesus Christ, which is of old Rome doth believe and worship; 

joseph miseratione divina Constan. Patriarcha.  
Quoniam ad extremum vitae mea perveni, idcirco pro meo munere dilectis filijs benignitate dei meam sententiam his literis palam facio. Nam quae jesu Christi catholica & Apostolica Ecclesia Roma veteris sentiat ac celebrec, omnia me quoque sentire credereque profiteor, at ipsis plurimum acqui●sco. Beatissimum autem Patrum Patrem ac Summum Pontificem Romaque veteris Papam, domini nostri jesu Christi vicarium esse concedo, etc. datum Florentiae 8. julij, anno 1439.   all the same do I confess myself to believe and think, and thereunto do yield my perfect consent. And I do further confess, the most blessed father of fathers, the chief Bishop and pope of Rome, to be the vicar of our lord jesus Christ. To these points of doctrine, and to all other of the church of Rome, did at the same time subscribe the legates and deputies of the other three patriarchal seas, Alexandria, Antioch, and jerusalem; as is recorded in the same council. In which faith continued the said three patriarchal seas, till the year of our lord 1517, (when Luther began his tragedy) as stands of record in the general council of Lateran held under Leo the tenth. where the obedience also of Peter Patriarch of the Armenians unto the church of Rome was presented by his orators since which time (as sometimes also before) albeit those churches for the greater part fell often away into schism and heresy; yet there remained always, and do to this time continue still among them, many good souls that do constantly retain and keep the true doctrine of the church of Rome in all points. And the Greek church hath in Rome itself a Seminary (as many other nations have) at this day, to breed and train up their young students, as in all other virtues and piety, so principally in the true faith of the church of Rome. wherefore albeit the public face of religion be now in those churches as it is in our country, yet there want not true Roman Catholics in those parts no more than there do (God be thanked) in our country to baptize, reconcile, and to perform all other christian duties appertaining to the rites of the Roman church. whence it followeth, that there are two untruths in the former part of M. Abbot's new resemblance; for we are so far of from saying the Catholic church to be perished over all the world, that we affirm it rather to be at this present day much increased and multiplied, which doth control the former part of M. Abbot's position: we say more over that in those very patriarchal seas, though the outward face of religion be disfigured and corrupted, yet doth the Roman religion remain there entire and sound, though not openly countenanced by the state, yet by the godly practised in secret.  
Let us now proceed to the second particularity, to wit that the Donatists laid the foundation of their church in Africa, and from thence would have had all other churches to have been restored to their former integrity: when did they begin to lay that foundation? about 300 years after Christ in constantine the great his reign. who was he that laid that foundation? One Maiorinus or Donatus, of whom the rest took their name, doth it not here-hence (that I go no further) presently appear a great difference between the church of Rome, and the church of the Donatists? The church of Rome began in the Apostles days, and had for her chief Architects the princes of the Apostles S. Peter, and S. Paul; whereas the Donatists began their revolt from the said church of Rome 300 years after, under the afore said blind guides. wherefore there is no comparison to be made between either the foundation or founders of the one with the other. But saith M. Abbot. The Donatists gave their church as gallant and brave a title as the church of Rome had, for they called it the Catholic church: and desired as earnestly as the Romanistes do, to have had it spread all the world over. True for the title of Catholic; true also that they had a fervent desire to have had it spread far and near. But their doctrine being the vain leasings of feeble mortal men, had too small force and virtue in it, to disperse itself so far abroad; and not being planted by the heavenly father, it did not take any deep root. so that albeit those busy fellows laboured tooth and nail to in large the limits of their doctrine into the out most coasts of the earth, that it might have won the name of Catholic, yet they could never obtain it, nor come within tenthousand mile of it. whereas the doctrine and religion of the church of Rome, as a fruitful tree planited by the watet side, did spread her branches unto all nations, and hath even since the Apostles days even to our time continued a true part of the Catholic church by M. Abbot's own confession, as you shall see hereafter in this chapter. so that in fine there is left no resemblance at all in this reformed part of the comparison, saving that the Donatists had a vain desire to have their sect dilated as amply as was the Catholic Roman faith. But it began 300. years after the Roman, and hath not by 1300 continued so long, nor yet could for any short space of time dilate itself so largely. wherefore it could not come near unto a shadow of the title of Catholic. Touching the conversion of the Indies, it must needs grieve any good christian heart to hear how contemptuously and prophaneliet his unsanctified Abbot doth speak of it: first he writes that we may say of their conversion what we list, because those countries are so far of, that they are not like to travail so far to search whether we say true or no. They are peradventure more like to make some journey thitherward to search out some of the Indian gold, then to seek after the conversion of the poor Indian souls: yet if they will not of themselves take the pains nor undergo the hazard to win souls, let thenat least afford others their good word that will refuse no pains nor peril in so blessed an enterprise. If there were any spark of Christian Charity in them, would they not rather rejoice then repine, that the faith of Christ is so universally embraced, so religiously observed in those most ample and rich dominions? If M. Abbot hath not (as he here pretendeth) inquired after the manner of their conversion, how knows he that there be so few, and they so bad Christians? should not an even mind out of common christian charity in cases unknown, judge the best and give his sentence rather in favour of the Christian Religion then against it? but M. Abbot making out of his own mind that bad construction, may not that of the poet be justly cast upon him? mala men's, malus animus. for unless he did carry a wicked affection towards the enlargement of Christ's kingdom, not knowing how the case there standeth, he would never have chosen, to make the worst report thereof that can be imagined. well, he that doth not desire to remain wilfully blind, and altogether ignorant in those happy tidings of the reducing of so many millions of souls from Idolatry to the knowledge of the true & living God, and unto the participation of the merits of our most blessed Saviour jesus Christ, may read the histories of their conversion, composed by men almost of all nations (of whom many were eye witnesses of that they writ.) There shall they find many notable monuments aswell of the holiness of their preachers testified by miracles, as of the devotion of the people newly converted, and of their great sincerity. If among the soldiers and merchants, which went with the religious priests and preachers, th●re were more covetousness, cruelty and disagreement than was convenient, let not the disorders of those worldly and unruly creatures be brought to disgrace the good meaning & godly endeavours of others most godly and religious persons, who in true Apostolical manner, have through God's inestimable mercy, converted infinite multitudes of those heathens unto the Christian religion. I have stayed the longer in this paragraff (because M. Abbot by the way touched many great matters in it) rather to give the Reader reasonable satisfaction therein; then that his resemblance deserved half the pains: which holdeth no proportion at all in the main point. The reader shall do well to note by the way, how many untruths M. Abbot let's slip in this section, because he doth in the end of this chapter brag, that he hath not once lied in all this discourse, h●re we have these. I. that we teach the Catholic church to be in closed within the walls of Rome, and do tie the seat thereof to one particular place. secondly, that we hold no man can be baptized to salvation unless he meet with a priest. 3. That no man can obtain salvation unless he repair to Rome, or meet with a Roman Priest. whereas we hold milliō● to be saved, that never saw Rome, Again that any true repentant soul, that cannot meet● with a Roman priest to make his confession, may nevertheless by true contrition obtain pardon of his sins and eternal salvation. I omit as flea-bite those other his peccadilias of taking Donatists for Rogatists, and Cartenna for Africa, because M. Abbot by confessing that oversight hath made satisfaction.   

THE SECOND SECTION of the second chapter.  W. B. 
THE second branch of M. Abbot's comparison between the Roman church and the Donatists, is as faulty as the first. Thus he proposeth it. The Donatists would have the church to be called Catholic, 
Aug. in bre: collate diei. 3. c. 2.  not by reason of the communion thereof throughout the whole world, but for the perfection of doctrine and Sacraments, which they falsely challenged to themselves. The same perfection doth the church of Rome arrogate to herself. This halteth on both sides, as the former did: for the Donatists (as S. Austin M. Abbots Author relateth) did not call their church Catholic for perfection of doctrine or Sacraments, as M. Abbot fableth: 
Epist. 48.  but for the fullness of Sacraments and for observation of all gods commandments: they were not so dull and blockish (as S. Austin noteth) to argue an universality out of perfection, which is seldom universal, but aimed always at some kind of universality. On the other side there is no Roman Catholic that would have the church be called Catholic, rather for her perfection in doctrine and Sacraments, then for her communion over all the world.  R. ABBOT. §. 2. 
IT is true, that S. Austin challenged unicentius the Donatist for interpreting the word Catholic, 
Aug. epistola 48. Idem in Brevic: collat die 3. cap. 2.  not for the communion of the whole church, but for the observation of all God's commandments, or for the fullness of Sacraments. yet I did not amiss to put perfection for fullness; because they do both signify the same thing. for is not fullness of Sacraments, the same with perfection of Sacraments? and observation of all gods commandments, with perfection of observing them? 
Collatine 3. cum donat. cap. 102.  like as perfection of doctrine is to teach all truth. Besides Gaudentius a Donatist doth tell us, that by Catholic they understood perfect, when he said: the word Catholic importeth, 
Replito fulc. c. 10. dem. 6.  that which is full in Sacraments, which is perfect, and which is unspotted. To the second member I say, that Bristol a great Romanist, granteth the church to be called Catholic, because she is universally perfect, halteth in nothing, and is spread over all the world: and Austin himself in his younger days did so expound the same word, though in his further experience and judgement, he abhorred from it, and left it wholly to the Donatists. So did Ciril of jerusalem and also Pacianus. wherefore M. Bishop showeth himself scarce wise in denial of it,  W. B. 
I have M. Abbot guilty and confessing that he changed his Author's words, yet never without one idle excuse or other; he hath (forsooth) given another word, but which signifieth the same in effect. If the words had been of the same signification, yet it had been plainer dealing to have kept the authors own words; but if there be great diversity between them, than there was little show of honest dealing to shift from the one to the other. who but M. Abbot will say, that perfection of Sacraments, and fullness of Sacraments be all one? where fullness is referred to the complete number of Sacraments: and perfection may be attributed to the right use of them, or to the virtue and efficacy of them. For they be two distinct controversies between the Protestants and us. The one, how many sacraments there be; the other, of what perfection and efficacy they are. That is, whether they confer grace or no. wherefore it was not well done to thrust in perfection for fullness, there being such odds between the nature and use of those two words. Again, between the observation of all God's commandments, and perfection, there is a notable difference in the way of our religion; for it appertains to all the faithful to observe all God's commandments; but the counsels of perfection are left to the free choice of them, whose hearts it shall please God to dispose that way. wherefore if M. Abbot had had an honest good meaning he would not have so changed his author's words, but he more like a jolly wise politic protestant, that believeth neither the full number of the sacraments, nor thinketh it possible to keep all God's commandments, flieth from those terms of fullness of sacraments and observation of all the commandments as from checks and reproves of their new belief; and choppeth in perfection of doctrine because he can therein better wrangle. And albeit Gaudentius did join perfect and unspotted with fullness; yet it followeth not thereof, that he took those words for all one; but rather joined together many words of divers significations, to explicate more fully the force of the word (Catholic.)  
Now to the second member albeit Doctor Bristol (a man of singular virtue and learning) and some others have taught the word (Catholic) to comprehend within the latitude of his signification that which is universally perfect, and halteth in nothing; yet no one of them doth exclude the more usual and better allowed signification of the same, which is to design the communion and society of the whole world. Nay Doctor Bristol in the very words cited by M. Abbot doth expressly include it (and is spread over all the world,) and that after the example of Saint Austin even by M. Abbot's own confession. For albeit that great Doctor in his youth used the wor● Catholic to signify perfection of doctrine; yet growing to riper judgement and being of better experience, he abhorred that signification of the word as donatistical, & left it wholly to the Donatists. wherefore let the indifferent reader judge, who dealeth more sound in the exposition of this word Catholic, whether I, that do follow S. Austin in his more advised and riper judgement: Or M. Abbot that would have him followed in that he taught being yet young, and which he himself afterward upon better consideration thought good to alter. Is it not a sign of most wilful blindness to allege that as imitable out of an Author, which he himself advisedly corrected, and taught to be abhorred?   

THE THIRD SECTION.  W. B. 
THE third particle of the resemblance, M. Abbot hath couched in these words. That as from Cartenna the Donatists did send Bishops to other countries, even to Rome itself: so from Rome by the papists order Bishops be authorized to all other countries. This is of small moment, if it were true. But I read not in S. Austin that the Rogatists sent any Bishops from Cartenna into other coasts, but rather required men of all other places, to come to their quarters if they would obtain Salvation: That then may pass for another oversight. Neither be all Catholic Bishops consecrated at Rome, and thence sent into other countries: but they be ordinarily made in every Catholic country, though to preserve unity and good order, their election be approved by the Bishop of Rome Christ's vicar general on earth, and supreme pastor of his church.  R. AB. §. 3. 
PUT Africa in steed of Cartenna, and then M. Bishop can say nothing against the resemblance. 
August. epist. 48.  I not weighing the matter so strictly did put Africa for the third part of the world, and in that signification Cartenna is within Africa. well, let Cartenna be put out, because Libya and Mauritania refused to be called by the name of Africa (as Austin noteth,) and let it run thus. The Donatists sent Bishops out of Africa to dwell at Rome, or some Bishops out of Africa to create some other bishops of their faction at Rome. So doth the church of Rome send Bishops into all other countries of their religion, or if they do not send such bishops abroad; yet in that Bishops made in other countries must have the Bishop of Rome his confirmation, it is all one as if he had sent them from thence.  w. B. 
well seeing the poor man acknowledgeth his error, let him be pardoned. Let Cartenna and the Rogatists (who only reigned there) be changed into the Donatists of Africa. That silly excuse that Africa contains the third part of the world, might be to purpose, if Africa had been set for Cartenna; Continens pro contento: but Cartenna was set for Africa, which being so obscure a part of Africa, could not decently be put for the whole. wherefore M. Abbot hath reason to wish Cartenna to be blotted out, and so might he have done by all these resemblances, had not his fingers itched to blaze abroad his own folly. As for his reformation of it, though he saw the disproportion, yet could he not let it alone. For he was not ignorant that most Catholic Bishops neither went to Rome to be there consecrated, nor were consecrated by any Bishops that came from thence: As all the Donatists were either consecrated in Africa, or else by Bishops who were sent out of Africa to consecrate them. what salve then hath he for this sore? Marry that it is all one to have the pope's confirmation, and to be consecrated by Bishops sent from Rome.  
Some what like he might have said, but not all one. for to approve the election of a Bishop, and to elect a bishop, or to consecrate him, be far different things, as every man that is acquainted with these matters can readily tell. I admit Donatists would gladly have had Bishops of their own sect in every country, that they might have had no need to send Bishops out of Africa to consecrate them in other places: And thereupon I do infer, that even thereby they were convinced not to be Catholics. because their pastors & preachers were not universally spread over all countries. contrariwise the Roman church is proved to be Catholic, because it had in every country Bishops of their own faith and communion. So that M. Abbot winding and turning on both sides to get out of the briers, doth still more and more entangle and fasten himself in the same.   
§. 4. w. B. 
THe fourth point of M. Abbot's comparison is this. The Donatists would be taken to be catholics, for keeping communion with the church of Cartenna, even so will the Papists for holding society with the church of Rome. The former point of the resemblance is too too absurd. for the Donatists abhorred the Conventicle of Cartenna as schismatical, as hath been often repeated. And the second part taken as true proportion requireth, is not perfect: for we should not esteem men catholics for communicating with the church of Rome, if that communion were closed up within the walls of Rome, or within her confines; as the Rogatists were pinned up in Cartenna: but for that by communicating with the church of Rome, we do enter into communion with all other churches of the same religion, which are spread over all the world.  R. AB. 
I Said the Donatists, I should have said the Rogatists, who expounding the word Catholic for integrity and perfection of faith, as before we have seen, and affirming themselves only to be catholics, left it as a consequent, that none could be called catholics, but by joining with them. The Donatists were in the same error concerning their church in Africa. The Papists are like unto them both, who plead the same for the church of Rome: but M. Bishop tells us that they do not call men catholics for communicating with the church of Rome, if it be taken for that particular church, which is closed within the walls of Rome: which is contrary to that he taught himself a little before. For he taught before that men became Catholics by holding the Roman faith, and communicating with the church of Rome. but to shift over this, he addeth; that therefore they become catholics in communicating with the church of Rome, because that by that communion, they enter into society with all other churches of the same religion, which are dispersed all the world over. But against this it may be said, that then men do not now become Catholic as they did of old: because of old it was enough to communicate with the church spread over the world: but now it is to be added, that by communication with the church of Rome, we must communicate with the church spread over all the world. what if the church of the whole word do not hold communion with the church of Rome? as when Arrianisme had in a manner overflowed all the world, and when the East and west churches were divided from Rome: and before the brood of Ignatius had converted the Indians; whence was the name of Catholic to be taken then? Put the case that all other churches save the Roman do ere (as they say they may) how shall a man then in communicating with the Roman, communicate with all other churches? then must you needs say, that by communicating with that particular church of Rome you do become Catholic. finally M. Bishop doth overthrow himself. For if a man become a Catholic by communicating with the church of the whole world; and by communicating with the church of Rome he doth communicate with the church of the whole world: then communicating with the particular church of Rome, the name of Catholic doth belong to him. To be short, if the Donatists could have had their way, they would not have doubted to say as much of their church, as M. Bishop doth hereof his; to wit, that men should be called catholics by communicating with the African church, not as it was contained within the bounds of Africa, but for that in communicating with that church, you did enter into communion with all other churches spread over all the world.  w. B. 
IN the forefront of this chapter M. Abbot engraved this title: The comparison betwixt the Donatists and Papists justified. And yet we see in the beginning of every section an open confession of some fault made by himself in the same comparison. I said the Donatists, I should have said the Rogatists &c: well, though it cannot be denied but that this is a very simple kind of justification, yet I am content it pass for some kind of satisfaction. be it permitted to M. Abbot for a sorry shift, to flit up and down, before from the Rogatists in Mauritania, to the Donatists in Africa; now back again from the Donatists to the Rogatists: who (saith he) did expound the word Catholic, of perfection of faith. which to have been otherwise I have showed in the second section of this chapter. well, those honest Rogatists affirmed themselves only to be true catholics, and by consequence held none to be Catholics but such as joined with them. So did the Donatists in Africa. The Papists do the like for their church, therefore they resemble the Donatists. And do not the protestants put in the same plea for their church? therefore they be also Donatists. And did not the old Arrians affirm and say as much in favour of their church? were they also Donatists? Is not this then a proper resemblance betwixt the Donatists and Papists, that will agree unto all kind of sects? yea unto the true Catholic church itself, to which alone in deed it doth rightfully appertain. yet it is usual to all sectaries that take their errors for truth, to qualify and grace their sect with the title of the true reformed church. This resemblance than is so trivial, that a man of any sharpness of wit, would have been ashamed to have framed it. But if M. Abbots invention were dry and dull when he proposed that, we shall now find it fluent and acute in reproving what I answered of the church of Rome, to wit: If the communion of the church of Rome passed not out of the walls of Rome, then by communicating with the church of Rome we should not become catholics. But because it is far otherwise with the church of Rome, than it was with the church of Cartenna, and that in communicating with the church of Rome, we enter into the communion of the church dilated all the world over, therefore we become catholics in communicating with the church of Rome; about which M. Abbot makes a foul fumbling, but in fine cannot impeach it; he saith first it is contrary to that which I had before taught, viz: to communicate with the church of Rome, was to become Catholic. But this he saw to be so simple, that he corrected it himself presently, for I never said otherwise, but by communicating with the Roman church, we became catholics. And my reason always was, because the communion of the church of Rome did reach into all the coasts of the earth. He giveth the second assault against it, by averring that thereof it would ensue, that one became Catholic now a days, otherwise then of old; because than it was sufficient to communicate w●●h the church dispersed over all: and now we must communicate with the church of Rome, to communicate with the church spread over all. Is not this a high point, and a very great subtlety? when one doth communicate with the church spread over all, doth he not even then communicate with the church of Rome also, that is the chief of them all? Or was there any time since the Apostles days when there was no church of Rome, that one might have communicated with the church spread over all, and yet not have communicated with the church of Rome? Yea did not they that wrote against the Donatists, (I mean S. Austin and Optatus) make special instance in the communion of the church of Rome, (aswell as I do now) to prove their society with the whole Catholic church? S. Austin saith of Cecilianus Archbishop of Carthage, who was principally oppugned by the Donatists, that he holding communion with the church of Rome, as with the chiefest Apostolical chair, needed not care for the conspiracy of the Donatists against him. And Optatus speaketh just to the same sense that I do. In the Bishop of Rome the whole world doth accord together with us in one society of communion.  
Note how in those old days, by communion with the pope & church of Rome, the prelat● in Africa, esteemed themselves to hold communion with the whole world. M. Abbot puts forth a new case. what if the church of the whole world do not hold communion with the church of Rome, as it was when Arrianisme did overflow the whole world? Then at least by holding communion with Rome, one held not communion with the church of the world. M. Abbot is content to leave the Donatists to dream awhile, and flieth for advantage to the Arrians, but they will help him no more than did the Donatists. For though their heresies infected many cities & countries, and drew many Bishops to their party: yet M. Abbot I think can hardly name me any one city of the world so wholly possessed with that Arrianisme, that it had not at the same time many true believers in it, that would not join in faith and religion with the said Arrians, but stuck close to the church of Rome, and to all other true believers. The like we say of the Eastern churches when they fell into schism and heresy: that albeit the outward face of their congregations were schismatical; yet there remained always in those countries, as there do now in England, very many that did constantly defend and embrace the Roman religion. The Indians for the most part of late time were converted: yet many millions of souls were won unto Christian religion in the west and East Indies by good priests, Franciscan Friars, and other religious men, before any mission of jesuits were sent into that heavenly harvest, as the Indian story doth testify, yea before their society was established and confirmed. If through the abundance of iniquity it should come to pass, that the Catholic religion should be clean rooted out of many countries (for I make no doubt but that it shall also continue in many besides Rome unto the world's end) yet those countries that retain the ancient faith, shall also keep the old title and name of the Catholic church, though their faith be not then spread over all the world. Because it was the same faith which had been in time passed preached and believed over all. for no man holds it necessary that at one and the same time, it should be embraced of all nations. The Donatists I grant (if they might have had their way) would have oversowed their tars in the fields of all countries. They lacked not good will then, no more than the protestants do now, to sow their cockle far & near; but with all their tossing and turmoiling they were not able to infect half Africa only; God sending unto cursed cows short horns, and not yielding such success to the false doctrine of vain men, as to his own divine word. when will M. Abbot take out this lesson, that the church is called Catholic, not because it desireth and wisheth to be spread over all, but for that it is so really and actually, at one time or another? which the Donatists, protestants, nor any other sectaries were yet ever able to compass; but must perforce whether they will or no, leave that singular privilege unto the Roman church.   

THE FIFTH SECTION.  W. B. 
THe fifth branch of the comparison M. Abbot doth propose in this manner: As the Donatists held there could be no salvation out of the church of Cartenna: so the Papists hold there can be none out of the church of Rome. this is minced out of the fourth, and in the like sort to be confuted. It is a principle received of both catholics and sectaries, that there is no salvation out of the true church, no more than there was life to be hoped for out of the Ark of Noe. Sectaries do attribute that salvation each unto their own church. But the church of Rome (as hath been heretofore largely proved) hath always been and ever shallbe a principal member of the same true Catholic church. wherefore whosoever doth not hold communion with the church of Rome, he is out of the state of salvation according to that memorable sentence of S. Hierom written unto pope Damasus. I following no chief but Christ, 

Hieronim. Epist. 57 ad Damasum Papam.  
Ego nullum primum, nisi Christum sequens, beatitudim tuae, id est cathedrae Petri, communione censocior; super illam Petram aedificatam Ecclesiam scio. quicunque extra have domum agnum comederit, profanus est. si quis in ar●ha No● non fuerit, peribit regnant dilwio.   join in communion with your holiness, that is, with the chair of S. Peter, upon this rock I know the church of Christ to be built: whosoever doth eat the Paschall lamb out of this house he is profane: he that is not found within the Ark of Noah shallbe drowned when the floods do rise: where is much more to the same purpose.  R. AB. 
M. Bishop acknowledgeth the Donatists to have been of opinion, that to obtain salvation one must communicate with their church: what then hindereth but that the resemblance standeth good? for the Papists be of the same mind touching their church. but he saith, that the Donatists, and all other sectaries do untruly atttibute to their congregations, that which is truly appropriated unto the church of Rome, which was and is the chief member of the Catholic church. so was jerusalem the chief member of the synagogue, and yet it put Christ to death, in that communion then there was no salvation. Is not a chief member of the same substance with the rest of the body? and what hindereth then but that the chief member may aswell as the rest be corrupted and wounded? notwithstanding I desire him to prove that it is the chief member? I regard not what human estimation it hath had for the eminency of the place. But with god there is no more respect of the church of Rome then of any other church. If they will have any more, 
Aug de unit. eckl. cap. 6.  let them read it to us out of the scriptures, as saint Austin said to the Donatists. But they love not to be called upon for scriptures. he hath out of Jerome that he joined with the pope of Rome, that is with Peter's chair, because upon that rock he knew the church of Christ to be built, and that he was profane and not of Christ's flock, that out of that house did eat Christ the Paschall lamb; and further that he who dwelled not in that Ark should be drowned.  
To the which I answer that albeit Jerome did join with Damasus, yet he would not have joined with Liberius, whom he reporteth to have subscribed to the Arrian heresy. wherefore jerom did warily expound himself that he gave the primacy to none but to Christ: 
Hiero. in Catalogo.  In fellowship of faith, he joined with Damasus: yet no further than he followed the doctrine of S. Peter; which he signifieth by adding the chair of Peter. He would not have joined with pope Liberius, because though he were Bishop of Rome, yet he sat not in Peter's chair, that is, he held not the doctrine which Peter taught. Of S. Peter's chair in Rome w● deem the same, as of S. Peter's chair in Antioch, wherein then sat Paulinus: yet Jerome there disclaimeth Paulinus, because he taught not the doctrine of Peter. upon Peter's faith and confession it is that jerom knew the church to be built, as Erasmus upon that Epistle very well noteth. Not upon Rome, for Rome also may hap to degenerate. The communion of this faith is the house wherein Christ our Paschall lamb must be eaten; And the Ark of Noah to save us. So long as the pope shall hold the doctrine of Peter we will join with him. But M. Bishop can show us no warrant that the church of Rome shall always continue in the doctrine of Peter, and therefore his conclusion; that out of the church of Rome there is no salvation, is but a vain presumption.  w. B. 
ALbeit the resemblance were true, because heretics in some things are like unto true believers, ye● it was nought worth; because it maketh the catholics no more like to the Donatists, then unto any other sort of sectaries, nay then unto the very true church of Christ, in whose participation only there is that salvation which all sectaries do vainly pretend to be found in their company. That the church of Rome is the chief and principal member of the Catholic church, and that it never did, nor never shall fail in matter in faith, I have already proved at large, not only by the depositions of the most and best approved ancient fathers and Doctors both of the Greek and Latin church; but also by divers plain texts of holy scriptures rightly understood according unto the same most holy and learned Prelate's interpretation. whom all good Christians are bound to believe as the Pastors and Doctors, to whom our Saviour Christ committed both the preaching of his word, and government of his church in the purer times thereof. To repeat the same here again is needles, and would be over tedious. The reader may if he please but turn back to the second section of the first chapter, where he shall find them: there M. Abbot himself attributeth to the church of Rome, eminency of place, precedence of honour, authority of estimation and account: and yet here would seem to deny the same church to be the chief member of the Catholic church: as though eminency of place and precedence of honour, could belong to any other then to the chief church. how simple is that which followeth? that albeit in human estimation the church of Rome may be more eminent than any other, yet with God there is no more respect of the church of Rome then of any other. For those men (of which he himself is one) should be much to blame, if they would account that more eminent and honourable, which they know God to esteem but as equal and of the same degree. because we are bound to conform our judgements, to the strait rule of Gods upright censure. wherefore for that we are fully persuaded that it hath pleased god, to grant that pre-eminence and privilege unto the church of Rome, we do attribute the same unto it. If we did think that god did not allow of it, neither would we condescend thereunto. And who in his right senses can imagine that God doth not esteem better of them, whom it hath pleased his divine bounty to make better? As for the church of jerusalem it had no such promises, that hellgates should not prevail against it: or that their governors faith should not fail. Nay rather it was by the prophets foretold, that they should fail both in 
a 
Ezechielis 7.26.  
Lex peribit à Sacerdote, & Consilium à Sapientibus.   knowledge, by not believing in their Messiah, and in 
b 
Hierem. 11.19.  
Ego quasi agnus mansuetus qui portatur ad victimam: & non cognovi quia cogitaverunt super me consilia dicentes, mittamus lignum in panem eius, & eradicemus eum de terra viventium.   practice also by compassing of his death. Thus much for the church of the jews. Touching the Rulers of several churches since Christ his time, others not having the like good assurance from our Saviour as the pastors of the church of Rome had: we have more reason to rely upon the perpetual stability of the church of Rome, then upon any other. This (I say) having been proved already not only by the testimony of all antiquity, but also by the express word of God, M. Abbot's demand is fully satisfied, and therewith (I hope) he will rest content. Now to his answer unto that place of S. Hierom. first, whilst he would seem an over subtle sifter of S. jeroms words, he overthroweth himself horse and foot. For whereas he affirmeth that jerom would not have said the same of joining with Liberius that he said of Damasus, it is very clear that he would, and might also very well have so done, according as M. Abbot himself expounds S. Hieroms words. For if S. Hierom said no more of Damasus, then that he would join with him so far forth as he sat in S Peter's chair, that is, so long as he taught the same doctrine that saint Peter taught: might he not have, said boldly as much of Liberius, though he took him to halt in some things? he needed not doubt I hope, to follow him so far forth as he followed S. Peter. was he not sure enough if he followed him no further never to fail? M. Abbot's answer then destroying itself, needs no other confutation. Yet for the reader's further satisfaction concerning pope Liberius I add, that there be many 
c Ruffin. l. 10. eccl. hist. 17. Theodor. 2. hist. eccl 16. Sozom 4. hist 14. Niceph. 9 hist. 35:  ancient good Authors who writ that Liberius was not faulty in any matter of faith, though he yielded unto the condemnation of S. Athanasius. because he was by the Arrians accused not of his faith, but of many pretended heinous crimes. And albeit Liberius subscribed to the council of Smirna, yet he could not be condemned therefore of heresy: for therein was not couched any one word contrary to the true faith, though the word Consubstantial were left out. yet 
d Athanas Apol. de fuga. Hieron. in Catal. in fortunate.  others who for their greater judgement and knowledge are to be more respected, do blame Liberius as favouring the Arrian heresy: not that he believed any point of it, but for that he through tediousness of exile, and fear of torments, yielded to do that which redounded unto the countenancing of the Arrian heresy. And in like manner though there were nothing in that confession of faith to which he subscribed that was not true; yet in that time when there was so much ado about the word consubstantial, to consent unto them that rejected that word, was interpreted and taken of many for little less than to reject the Catholic faith. Briefly although his faith was sound, yet his fact was prejudicial unto the Catholic faith, and very advantageous for the Arrian heresy wherefore not to be excused. nevertheless albeit of human frailty he therein failed, yet afterwards he made good satisfaction therefore, & carried himself so uprightly and virtuously, that he died a Saint: as testifieth beside other 
a Ambr. de virg. l. 3. in initio. Soles mecum Beatae memoriae Liberij praecepta revolve re, & quo virsāctio● eo sermo accedat gratiosior  S. Ambrose, who citeth his testimony as a man's of holy and happy memory. And 
b Basil epist. 74. Quae illia beatissimo Liberio proposita sunt.  S. Basil, who styleth him a most blessed man. This by the way of pope Liberius. Now to the true meaning of S. Hieroms words, which cannot be drawn to that sense that M. Abbot would rack out of them, to wit, That he would join with Damasus so farforth only as he followed S. Peter: for so might he have been bold to say of Liberius and of his own prelate Paulinus, or of any man else; but his true intent was to declare, that in all doubtful questions of faith, every good Christian ought to make his recourse unto the Bishop of Rome, who sitteth in S. Peter's chair as his lawful successor; And therefore by virtue of our Saviour's prayer (made for S. Peter, and his successors) shall never fail in question of faith. whosoever therefore cleaveth fast unto the pope's resolution, is assured never to fail. This to have been the true meaning of that famous doctor, may most easily be perceived by the occasion and circumstance of the very same Epistle. S. jerom finding the Bishops of the East (under whom he then lived) to be at fowl square about the word Hypostasis (which may signify either a substance or a person) and being vehemently solicited as a very learned man, to deliver his opinion whether they should say one, or three hipostases, would neither trust his own learning, which was singular, nor rely upon the judgement of Paulinus (by whom he was made Priest) who was both a very learned man, and the patriarch of Antioch, his proper pastor and prelate; but knowing well that the final and infallible resolution of all such doubts appertained unto the Bishops of Rome, addressed himself unto him as unto Christ's vicar and S. Peter's successor: And was so far of from saying, that he would follow it no farther than he followed S. Peter, or from taking upon himself so much as once to judge of the pope's sentence; that he would believe and embrace whatsoever he should determine, 
Hi●ron. epist 57 ad dama sum papam Dis●ernite (si placet) obseero, non ti meho tres hypostases dicere si iuhetis. Ibidem. Obtestor beatitudinem tuam per crucifixum &. ut mihi Epistolis tuis sive tacendarum, sive dicendarum hypostaseon detu● auctoritas. Ibidem. Non novivitalem, miletum respuo, ignoro Paulinum. Quicunque tecum non colligit, spargit: hoc est, qui christi non est, Antichristi est.  and most instantly besought Pope Damasus to command him, and give him authority, to say either three hypostases or but one. And finally doth conclude, that he who would not be ruled by the pope in such doubtful causes, was none of Christ's flock, but belonged to Antichrist. Let S. Hierom then be taken for a perfect pattern of true obedience unto the pope's sentences: and let M. Abbot stand for an example of wranglers, and perverters of the ancient father's true meaning.  
And for that M. Abbot brags in the end of this discourse that he told not one lie in it (which might be taken for a miracle if it were true) Let the reader know that he belieth here that worthy patriarch Paulinus, 
Ex phan. heres. 77.  when he saith of him, that he taught not the doctrine of Peter in that question. For Paulinus was of no other opinion touching the blessed Trinity then was that great light of that part of the world S. Athanasius, as witnesseth that sound recorder of antiquity & most holy Bishop Epiphanius. So that for no other cause in the world did S. jeron write unto pope Damasus for final resolution of that difficulty, them for that he was fully persuaded that it belonged unto the Bishop of Rome rather than to any other Patriarch, to determine all such hard & doubtful questions. M. Abbot's key-cold gloss taken out of Erasmus his scholies upon that Epistle, is not worth the answering; for he being but a late and slippery writer, no fast hold can be taken on him. Again his words be as uncertain, as he that spoke then: he supposeth that the City of Rome may hap to degenerate in the end. May hapso, may hap no. So the Bishop of Rome do continue always Orthodox (as we make no doubt but through the virtue of our Saviour's prayer he shall) our pole-starr in dark questions shall always remain firm and clear, Though the city of Rome (which god forbidden) should be overrun either by the Turk, or by any other wicked race of misbelievers to wars the later end of the world, as it was in the beginning of the Christian religion ruled by heathen Emperors. Of M. Abbot's interpretation of S. Peter's faith and confession, hath been spoken sufficiently (I hope) in the first chapter, whither I refer the Reader. Hitherto of M. Abbot's former resemblances between the Donatists and the Papists, in steed of justification whereof, he hath in each of them confessed some one oversight or other: besides he hath made many sorry shifts to uphold them; And hath powdered them also with divers untruths. M. Abbot having acquitted himself so bravely in his precedent branches of comparison, now he will no doubt as worthily and wisely multiply and increase them. The first staff of his multiplication standeth upon Donatus the pope (as he styleth him, but he might more modestly have termed him the Abbot) of the Donatists.  R. AB. 
THAT arch-heretic exalted himself above the Emperor; 
Optatus l. 3. co. ●arm.  and thereby (as Optatus reporteth) made himself more than a man, even as it were a God, because there is none above the Emperor but God. And albeit he did not expressly call himself God, yet he did that which was equivalent; for he made his party to stand in more fear of him, than they did of God. He advanced himself above all other Bishops; thinking none comparable to himself. Is not the pope of Rome such another? He hath exalted himself above all other Bishops, he hath lifted himself above the Emperor, and thereby (as Optatus concludeth) made a god of himself. 
Extrauag johis, 22. Cum interim, in glossa in edit. Par. 1601. cum privilegio Gregorij 13.  besides he in effect taketh upon him to be God by dispensing against the law of God, and by disannulling the institution of Christ: yea in very words he hath yielded to be called a god, leaving yet standing in the gloss of the Canon Law uncorrected, Our lord god the pope. he will have men stand in no less awe of him then of God himself, whiles he makes show of God's anger at his command to inflict it where he will.  W. B. 
IF men's own inventions (how silly soever seemed not unto themselves over dainty & precious, M. Abbot would have chosen rather to have blotted out his former childish resemblances, then to have added new unto them of the like light nature. This his first is so general on the part of the Donatists, and so unproper to be applied to the pope and papists, (as he termeth them,) that it is worse than nought. was there ever any arch-heretic that preferred not his own judgement and invention before both Popes and Emperors too, if they could not get them to embrace their heresies? and in this high kind of pride and disdain, there was never any perhaps that passed the protestants Grandsire and Ringleader Martin Luther, who with his Bible, 
Luther: libro adversus Regem Angliae. Ibidem.  was (in his own conceit) to be preferred before a thousand Augustine's, a thousand Cyprian's, and a thousand churches. In the eye of the world I willbe (saith he) so honest, that they shall not be worthy to lose the latchet of my shoe. And touching my doctrine, I am to Devils, Kaisars, kings, princes, and to all the world too too froward and proud. 
In glossa co: praeten sum edictum Imperiale.  And in another place. I Doctor Martin Luther of jesus Christ an unworrhy Evangelist do say, that the Emperors of Rome Turkey and Persia; the Pope, Cardinals, Bishops, priests, friars and Nuns; kings princes and Lords with all the world, and all the devils must approve this article: that faith alone without any work doth justify before god: and they shall have over and above the fire of hell on their heads, and no thanks for their labour. This is Martin Luther's inspiration by the holy spirit, the true and holy Gospel. behold the superlative pride of this pelting Apostate, he and his spirit, are to be preferred before all the world. How scornfully and contumeliously he esteemed of kings and Emperors, and how contemptuously they were to be dealt withal in his judgement, any man that will read his answer unto king Henry the eight may see. I say (saith he) openly without a vizard, that this Harry king of England doth plainly lie, and with his lies resembleth rather a most light scoffer then a king, etc. this for a taste of his uncivil and spiteful demeanour towards monarchs, conformable to his doctrine of kings delivered in these terms. A wise king is a rare bird, and more rare yet is an honest king, they are cmmonlie the greatest fools and the most wicked knaves on the earth; wherefore the worst that can be, is to be expected at their hands, & little good specially in matters that belong to god: for they are gods Catchpoles and hangmen, 
Luther de potesta te secui. ad Ioh du●em sa●o:  Our god is a great Lord, and therefore will have noble illustrious and rich catchpoles and hangmen. It is god's pleasure that we should call his hangmen our clement Lords, etc. This and a tumbril more of like scurrility may be raked out of that rude renegats writings against the Majesty of kings and Emperors, with more contempt scorn and contumely out of him alone, than out of all Catholic authors that have written this five hundred years set together: so that none may be compared to Protestants (if they willbe sib to their sire) for abusing kings and Emperors, and for exalting themselves above them. But let us leave Luther's pride, and descend to the particulars of donat's presumption, and see how it may be applied to the pope. Donate would not acknowledge 
a Carthagini se principatum ●enere credidit donatus.  the Emperor's Sovereign temporal power, 
Optatus l. 3. co: Parm.  but out of his own pride sought to withstand even the Emperor's pious gifts of holy vestments to the church, and of alms to the poor, charging his party not to receive any such gifts from the Emperor's officers. what like to this, is there to be found in any pope? They acknowledge themselves to have received of the Emperor's courtesies most of all their 
b Miserat Imperator ornamenta domibus dei, m●serat eleemosinam pauperibus: d●natus literu praemisit, ne id quod allatum ●uera●, pauperibus d●spensaret●●.  temporalties, and never yet was any one of them found that did not acknowledge the Emperor to be supreme governor of his Empire in all temporal affairs; although there have been among them that thought Emperors might for some enormous faults deserve to be punished even by deprivation from that dignity. 
Ibidem.  Donatus took himself to good to 
c Dat donatus solus secreto nescio quid agebat.  pray in company with others, The pope daily not only prayeth with others, but also humbly confesseth his sins to others. Donatus took himself to be better than all other bishops yea did scarce vouch safe to be called a Bishop: 
d Raro est appellatus episcopus, sed donatus carthaginis.  The pope's albeit higher in dignity then other Bishops, yet in true humility esteem themselves far inferior to many of the common people. The pope's may justly terrify men with gods judgements and indignation, if they presume to transgress Gods or their superiors commandments. For god hath promised to bless them whom his priests, principally such as be in authority do bless, & to hold than for accursed, whom they do deservedly accurse. Marry, so to deliver the matter, as though the pope's were commanders over God's sentences, is as malicious, as that which M. Abbot joineth with it, is slanderous, to wit, that the pope's take upon them to dispense against the law of God, and to disamill the institution of Christ. But until M. Abbot do bring in some better proof hereof then his own bare words, these points may be scored up in the rew of his former slanderous untruths. And I would gladly know how M. Abbot can prove that the pope doth suffer himself to be called by the name of God? right worthily (I warrant you) and like himself. a glosser forsooth upon the Canon law, neither speaking to the pope, nor writing to him but in a by-treatise saith (Our Lord God the pope. (Mark I pray you how handsomely this hangeth together. One, (and he perhaps none of the wisest) writeth such a thing in the latter end of a long gloss, that many a pope never saw, and some perhaps never heard of; how then can that be in any reasonable construction imputed to all pope's? It stands (says M. Abbot) uncorrected in a gloss of his canon law, in the edition of Paris printed 1601 with the privilege of Gregory the thirteen. He should have added thereunto, who died fifteen years before the date thereof; for Gregory the 13. died the tenth of April 1585. Let that pass as a light oversight, this that followeth is worse. for if it stand still in that edition uncorrected, why is not that the fault of the corrector rather than the pope's, who be not at leisure themselves to survey over new impressions? But what if that word (God) be not to be found at all in those copies of the canon law which are in the pope's library, as some right honest men (who have caused diligent search to be made in the vatican copies) have related and certified? then no marvel though the pope's did never correct that, which never was to be found in the true originals. Sure I am that I myself have seen three several copies printed at Paris, one of Anno 1517. another of 1536. & the third of 1550 or thereabout, that had not that word (God) in them. So that all M. Abbot's great outcry so often repeated, hangs upon the oversight of a poor corrector, or at most, depends upon a diverse reading: which every wiseman knows to be a very sandy and weak foundation. And who is ignorant that the word (God) may be attributed unto creatures, 
Exod. 7.1  though in a far different sense? Doth not God himself say to Moses, I have made thee the God of Pharaoh? Our blessed Saviour out of that text of the old Testament, 
Psal 81 6 joh. 10.35  I said you are gods, doth prove that many others beside God may be called Gods, namely princes and chief governors, either ecclesiastical or temporal. having for this the testimony of God himself, I need add none other. Now to Donatus that so behaved himself in some things, as if he meant to make himself a God. 
Optat. l 3 co Parm. Cum per solum deum soleant homines jurare, passus est homines per se jurare tanquam per deum. Ibid. Omnes discipulos suam Partem appel labat, etc. quasi iam populum cum deo diviserat.  among the rest, he would have men to swear in his name, as Christian men use in lawful causes to swear by the name of God. Besides he termed all of his sect, pars mea, my part; severing them (as Optatus takes it) from the part of Christ, and people of God. in these points specially according to Optatus did he aspire to be like God. what pope did ever the like? they are so far of from parting stakes with Christ, as that they profess themselves to be the servants of all Christ's servants. And who was ever yet required to swear by the pope's name? so that M. Abbot by multiplying such lame halting similitudes must needs look for little credit of either judgement or honesty.  R. AB. 
SEcondly the Donatists took upon them that they had always been possessors of unity and of the church of God, insomuch as they reckoned Nero, Domitian, and the rest to have been persecutors of their church; whereas their beginning to be Donatists was after the time of those persecutions. No otherwise do the papists take upon them to have been always the church of God, and that their Martyrs were slain: whereas their beginning to be papists (which properly is for worshipping their Lord God the pope) is of far latter time, etc.  W. B. 
What a ridiculous and lousy resemblance is this? First it differeth little from that which hath been said three times before at the least, that the Donatists take their church for the true church, therefore it deserves to be let pass as it comes. This might have some grace, if it had been applied to the Protestants, who take their beginning of a late upstart Friar not one hunndreth years ago as all the world knoweth; and yet blush not to avouch that it was their church that was persecuted 1400 years before it was hatched. as the Donatists who descending of Donatus, would not withstanding have had the church that was persecuted long before Donatus was borne, to have been their congregation. As for the Roman church M. Abbot doth in this chapter (as you shall see anon) confess it to have been always, and therefore they may truly say even by his own confession, that Nero, Domitian, & the rest persecuted their church. As for those papists that worship the pope for their God. Dic quibus in terris, & eris mihi magnus Apollo. If M. Abbot can tell us where they dwell, or in what land they lived and when, what were their names, I shall hold him if not for a great Apollo; yet for as great an oracle as that of Apollo; in the mean season, let it run on in the reckoning of his other babbles and tales.  R. ABBOT. 
THE Donatists alleged that Emperors and princes had nothing to do in church matters, 
Optat. l. 3. con. Par men.  & held it a great fault in the Catholic Bishops to complain to the Emperor of them: what hath the Emperor to do with the church, said their pope Donatus? 
Aug. con Gaudent l. 2. c. 26.  For the teaching of Israel (saith Gaudentius) God gave charge to prophets not to kings. And Christ sent fishermen and not soldiers, for the planting of the faith. Thus upbraiding the Emperors for condemning their schism, and using force of arms to repress the infinite rage of their mad-braind Circumcellians. Of the same humour be the papists, who make princes to be sons only of the church but no governors thereof: 
Dist. 96. si Imper:  Kings must learn of Bishops and not teach them what appertains to Religion: because God will have church matters governed by priests and not by secular powers. And Christian Emperors must submit their executions unto the rulers of the church. therefore they hold the commissioners and officers of Princes to be no competent judges in their causes, they carry themselves contemptuously towards them, etc.  W. B. 
THE Donatists are no sure cards to trust unto in that cause of princes dealing with ecclesiastical persons, and in ecclesiastical causes. Because they may serve for an example on all sides. For like audacious and restless wrangling spirits, they did run in that cause from one extremity to the other. First, against the rules and practice of the primitive church, they would needs appeal from the judgement of Bishops unto the Emperor, hoping by false informations to have found some unlawful favour in his court. 
a Opt. l. 1. co: Parm. Donatus appellandum esse ab episcopis credidit.  whereof we have for most sound witnesses both Optatus in these words. Donate the ringleader of the Donatists thought good to appeal from the Bishops to the Emperor. And S. Austin, who saith of them. That they wearied the Emperor with their daily appeals. Again they first of all sued unto the Emperor, then appealed unto him, 
Aug. ep. 166. Quotidia nis interpellationibus, ipsi imperatori taedium fecerunt. Ibidem. A iudicibius Episcopis ad constantinum appellaverunt a quo toties convicti & con fusi redierunt, & a pernicie furoris non recesserunt.  and after all that, would not stand to his judgement. This was their first attempt wherein they showed themselves kindly protestants after wards, being beaten with their own rod, they began like wiser children to acknowledge that it did not belong to temporal princes to hear and determine ecclesiastical causes, as their sentences cited by M. Abbot do declare. where if they had stayed, the Catholic Bishops of those times would not have blamed them, as you shall hear. But they fell at last to the other extremity, crying out against the Emperor both for punishing their mad-braynd Circumcellians (that set churches on fire, rob and murdered) and also for that he came over all the Donatists (as schismatics and Heretics) with a pecuniary mulct, making them to pay for their obstinate folly. for which they cried out against the Emperor and his officers. This did the Donatists, Now to the application. Both the protestants and we condemn the Donatists for denying princes to have temporal power to suppress seditious persons, robbers and murderers, and to punish them that be by the church declared heretics, either by the purse or otherwise. But we differ in the other point. The protestants do hold princes to be supreme judges aswell in causes ecclesiastical as temporal, and therefore must needs approve of appeals made fro the Bishops to them. we granting to them full sovereign power in causes temporal, do affirm that they be not ordinary judges in causes Ecclesiastical. I say ordinary because by consent of both parties (as it was in some causes of the Donatists) they may be chosen arbitrators or judges. The Donatists held both these opinions: first, that of the protestāns, & afterwards ours. Now it is to be considered in whether they did well, & in whether ill. To decide this controversy, let us hear the censure of the best Catholic Authors of those times. Optatus a most worthy prelate that lived among the Donatists, 
Lib 1. con Parm.  blamed them greatly for appealing from the judgement of Bishops unto the Emperor constantine the great, & relateth how the same good Emperor detesteth that their appeal, breaking out into these words. O furious and mad boldness: they, 
Ad quam appellatio nem constantinus Imperator sic respondit O rabida furoris auda cia, sicut in causis gentilium fieri solet, appellatio nem inter posuerunt. Aug. Ep. 166. Quia constantinus non est ausus de causa episcopi judicare, eam finiendam Episcopis delegavit. Idem Epistola 162. Neque est ansus Christianus imperator sic eorum fallaces querelas suscipere, ut de judicio episcorum ipse iudicaret, sed alios episcopos dedit, a quibus ipsi rursum ad ipsum imperatorem provocarent. quam re illos quemadmodum detestetur, audistis. eorum perversitatibus tandem cessit, ut de illa causa post episcopos iudicaret, a sanctis antitistibus postea veniam petiturus, etc.  like the pagans, have put in an appeal. which was from the Bishops to the Emperor. S. Austin an other Antagonist of the Donatists, in rehearsing the demeanour of the said Emperor towards the same appeal, showeth his own opinion thereabout. He first recordeth that the Emperor would not take upon him to judge of the judgements of the Bishops, till he was pressed thereunto by the Donatists' impudency; which to repress, he finally gave them the hearing, yet under the correction of the Bishops, meaning afterward to crave pardon of them therefore. all this that great doctor hath set down in express terms. further S. Athanasius of this matter useth these words. If the judgement of this cause belong to Bishops, what hath the Emperor to do therewith? if contrariwise these things be forged by the threats of Emperors, what need is there of Bishops? when was it ever heard that the judgement of the church took its authority from the Emperor? he relateth there this sentemcee of the great Hosius to the Emperor: 

Athanasius epist. ad solitar. vitam agentes.  
Si istud est judicium episcoporum, quid commune cum eo habet imperator? sin contra, ista minis Caesaris constantur, quid opus est hominibus titulo episcopis? quando a condito aevo auditum est quod judicium Ecclesiae authoritatem svam ab imperatore accepit? ibidem in epistola Hosii ad Imperatorem. Ne te misceas ecclesiasticis, neque nobis in hoc genere praecipe, sed potius ea a nobis disce. tibi Deus imperium commisit, nobis qua sunt ecclesiae, concredidit.   intermeddle not with ecclesiastical causes, nor command us in that kind, but rather learn those matters of us: God hath given you the Empire, but hath committed to us the charge of the church. To whom I will join S. Ambrose, who to the Emperor Valentinian addresseth this discourse. when have you heard (most gracious Emperor) that lay-men did judge over Bishops in causes of faith? Surely if your sacred majesty please to peruse the course of holy scriptures, or practise of former times, you shall find none that deny bishops in matter of faith, 

Ambros. l. 2 epist. 13. ad Aug. valentin.  
Quando audisti clementissime imperator in causa fidei laicos de episcopis iudicasse, etc. At si certe vel scripturarum seriem divinarum, vel vetera tempora retractemus, qui● est qui abnuat in causa fidei, in causa inquam fidei Episcopos solere de imperatoribus Christianis, non imperatores de episcopis judicare, etc. Pater tuus deo favente vir maturioris atatis qui dicebat: non est meu● judicare inter Episcopos, etc.   in matter I say of faith to have been judges over Emperors, & not Emperors over Bishops. your father being by the favour of God a man of riper years did say; it belongeth not to me to judge over Bishops. It being then most certain and evident by the verdict of S. Athanasius, Hosius, S. Ambrose, S. Austin, and Optatus, that the Catholic church in that her native purity, did maintain that opinion that temporal Princes had no authority to determine ecclesiastical causes; The Donatists therein agreed with the true Catholic church. and when they did fly from the judgement of Bishops unto temporal princes as supreme judges in causes ecclesiastical, than they traced out the pathway unto the protestants misbelief, and therein were condemned, and the protestants in them, by the verdict of the most approved Prelates and best learned doctors of the primitive church. Let this then be scored up for a principal resemblance between the protestants and the Donatists.  R. AB. 4. 
THe Donatists by false rumours discouraged men from coming to church, and gave out of the Catholic Bishops that some of them at the time of celebration of the sacraments, 
Optatus l. 3. & 7.  did set an image upon the altar, or communion table, whereat the minds of men were greatly moved, and every one said, he that tasteth thereof, tasteth of a profane thing, so contrary was it holden to religion then which M. Bishop approveth now, to set images upon the Altar. But in this also the Papists are their followers, who in the like sort devise rumours and tales of our divine service, to make men abhor to have communion with us.  W. B. 
THis resemblance is more common than the high way. For men of what religion soever they be, do seek out reasons to dissuade others from participation in holy rites with all other religions, and specially from that which is most contrary to their own. And never were any sectaries that devised more lewd and vile slanders of any religion, than the protestants have done of the Roman. And among others they do use the very same motive of the Donatists to discourage men from going to mass. To wit that there are Images in the churches set upon the high altars. So that M. Abbot in multiplying his resemblances, doth but multiply and increase the protestants conformity with the Donatists, to the shame of their own religion. what kind of Image that was, which the Donatists rumoured should be set upon the Altar (for of the communion table or of Ministers, there was no news in the old days of Optatus, but of Altars, sacrifice, and priests) it is not certain: whether it were of Dragons and Leopards, (such as the protestants set up in their churches) or rather of some false God, I cannot find in that Author: Only I am assured it could not be of any holy picture of Christ, or of any of his Saints, such as catholics place in their churches; because long before that, in Tertullia's days, there was engraven upon the chalice (wherein they offered up the sacrifice of Christ's blood) the picture of Christ in the form of a good shepherd carrying home the lost sheep on his shoulders, 
Tertul. de pudicitia cap. 7. & 10.  as witnesseth Tertulian. And that the Crucifix was set up in churches in S. Hieroms days, 
Hieron. epist. 27. de Epitha. Paulae cap. 3.  he declares plainly where he recordeth, how the most holy widow Paula visiting the holy places, was wont to fall down prostrate before the Cross, and to adore, as if she had seen our Lord jesus hanging on it. And Gregory Nazianzene reporteth that his father built to the honour of God a stately church, 
Naz. oratione 19 in laud prat. Bas. con. julianum Imper. citatur ab Adriano, Act. 2. Niconi 2. Nissen de laudibus Theodor. Chrysost. in Liturgia.  and among other ornaments did deck it with very goodly Images. S. Basil testifieth the same, saying, in all our churches we do set up the Images of Saints. So doth Gregory Nissene in his oration made in the praise of the Martyr Theodore. And in the beginning of S. Chrisostomes' Liturgy, translated by Erasmus, it is recorded how the priest turning towards the Image of Christ, was to say a certain prayer. whence it followeth evidently, that the Image of Christ was by the Altar, where that Liturgy or Mass was said. wherefore when so many worthy Prelates and Doctors of both greek and Latin church do teach holy pictures to have been usual ornaments of Christian churches in those ancient and pure times, it remaineth most certain, that true Christians could not be frighted from Catholic churches by setting any pictures of saints in the same, and consequently that which the Donatists spoke of, must needs be the Image of some false God or of some monster, which they did so much abhor.  R. AB. 5. 
THe Donatists alleged their own counsels assembled by their own authority, against the Maximianists their own schismatics, 
August. ep●st. 162.  and against the Bishops of the Catholic church. Even so do the Papists allege against us their own conventicles.  W. B. 
HEre is falsehood upon falsehood: for albeit the Donatists did allege their own counsels against the Maximianists that were fallen from them as the protestants do their new articles and Canons against their schismatics the Puritans: yet M. Abbot cited no place to prove that they alleged their own counsels against the catholics. No more do we use to produce against Protestants any late council of ours, or any late Catholic Author, otherwise then to verify what our doctrine is, and what they do teach. neither can he take any just exception against the council of Trent (if it should be produced against them) as consisting wholly of men of our religion; because men of their party might have been there present if they had so pleased. For they were requested to come, and safe conduct was offered them, the surest that could be devised, to persuade them to have appeared there in their likeness, to have defended their new devised religion: but they like valiant men, feared to show their face before that most learned assembly. They lay barking at home out of their own kennels against it, but durst not in disputation encounter with the Catholic Doctors there assembled.  R. AB. 6. 
THe Donatists not knowing how to make good their rent from the church by argument, 
August. epist. 137.  devised crimes and slanders against their persons that defended the Catholic party. In the same steps walk the Papists, who labour to blemish the names of Luther, Calvin, Beza, and others by whom the Gospel of Christ hath been defended.  W. B. 
THis proper resemblance is borrowed out of the common of Dunces, and by none more practised then by protestāns. who little spare the name or fame of any Catholic writer against them, how high in dignity, how holy and learned soever he be. Nay they are not ashamed to profess openly to the world that they take a special pride in railing against us. 
Luth. Con. Sicarium Dresd●nsem.  Let this one sentence of their great master Martin Luther serve for a pregnant proof thereof. I (saith he) regard not his complaints, that in my book there are few other things than taunts, reproaches and devils; for this aught to be my glory, and from henceforth so will I have it reputed of me, that I am full of reviling, taunting, and cursing the papists, for I will exercise myself against those knaves in taunts and curses even to my grave. And out of calvin's sweet works may be picked a volume of vile railing words, as big as the bible, as Sieur de meres relateth. 
Manifi. n. 17.  As for Luther himself, Calvin, and Beza (to omit others, because M. Abbot for honours sake nameth these three, as the three worthies of their new Gospel) they are even by principal men of their own religion so curried and reviled, that in comparison thereof, all that the catholics do say of them are but flea-bite. Take a taste of these few. First of their holy father friar Luther thus writeth his sanctified son Zuinglius, in his answer to Luther's book of the Sacrament. 
Resp. Zuingly add l. Luther de Sacrament.  Here the word of God shall obtain the victory, and not those frantic reproaches wherewith thou criest out, that we be Lutters, Devils, Lunatic, mischievous, robbers, rebels, dissemblers, Hyppocrites, and what not? Thou coynest rules after which the scriptures must be understood, which otherwise thou couldst not allege for thy purpose, &c: Then he comes to his commendation. Thou canst not deny thyself seized with the passion of Anger to rage, and to be mad, If thou wilt but soberly view over thine own book such a multitude of reproaches and swarm of perverse opinions could never flow out of the fountain of charity, or any reposed premeditation. In the mean season I will make it more clear than the day light, that thou never ye● didst know the glittering brightness of the Gospel, 
Mark this censure of Zuinglius of his master Martin.  unless thou hast clean forgotten it etc. Thou adulteratest, and corruptest the word of God; thou dost imitate the Marcionists and Arrians. Thus much out of Zuinglius may serve for blasoning and displaying the arms of his reverend master Friar Martin Luther. Now let us hear how Doctor Hunneus (a very learned Lutheran) doth describe and paint out the man of God john Calvin. I suppose, 
Hunnaeus de Calvino judaisante. fol. 181.  (saith he) that Angel of darkness john Calvin to be sufficiently discovered, who peeping out of the pit of hell, partly by his detestable frantic lust of wresting the scripture to the subversion of those fortresses, which the Christian religion had against the perfidious jews and Arrians: Partly, by his writing against the sacred Majesty of jesus Christ exalted: and in part also by his perverse opinion of the whole matter of the Sacraments: Finally by his horrible paradoxes of inevitable predestination, hath in these latter times darkened no small part of the sun (as it is in the revelation) drawing after him a great number of the stars, and pulling them down headlong with himself into the pit of hell. Of Beza thus writeth Conradus Sclusselburg a famous superintendant of the Lutheran church. 
Conrade. de Theolog. Calviniana, lib. 2. arb. 1.   
Theodore Beza in his sacramentary Basilisk against Heshusius which he entitleth Chr●ophagia, doth not only in the treatise itself take his leave of all godliness and modesty, letting lose all the reins of railing, but in the very title doth vomit up his blasphemy and devilish scoffs &c: in the first six pages and a half, he hath powered out such horrible filthy and beastly taunts, that even soldiers of his own band have wished them to be suppressed, with his bawdy and most unpure verses made in praise of his harlot Candida. Beza hath with his rotten railing, and beastly belching assaulted the most holy testament of the son of God. He revileth that worthy superintendant Heshusius most spitefully calling him a Buskin or tragical Polypheme, an ape, an huge great capped Ass, a dog in a bath, a most doltish Sophister, an impure sycophant, a most impudent knave. Finally he likeneth him to a devil incarnate, that hath belched up such Satanical blasphemies, that he trembleth to relate them. This may suffice for a scantling to show how the names of Luther Calvin & Beza (the great Rabbins of the protestant Gospel) be already by no mean men of their own coat so canvased, disgraced and vilified, that the judicious reader may see how little need we have to trouble ourselves to search after matter against them, to make known to the world, what odious companions they were: seeing their own brotherhood do so fully paint them out to the life, that any true Christian heart must needs abhor them. And they that will not upon so fair warning take heed of them & fly from them, can have no lawful excuse of their wilful and doting folly.  R. AB. 
PEtilian the Donatist being offended that they were called Donatists retorted upon the godly Bishops the names of Mensurists and Cecilianists derived from two principal Bishops of their party, Mensurius and Cecilianus: 
Collat. Carth. 3. ca 30.  So the Papists being vexed at that name Papists, given to them for being wholly at the devotion of the Pope, seek to disgrace us with the names of Lutherans, Zwinglians and Calvinists, as though we were in like sort devoted to Luther, Zuinglius, and Calvin.  W. B. 
Here M. Abbot being at a low ebb, in steed of the body of the Donatists, is fain to lay hold upon one of the company named Petilian, to patch up a paltry piece of a trivial resemblance. where M. Abbot's gentle spirit is to be observed: for before he would touch us for calling them by their right names, either Lutherans, Zwinglians, or Calvinists; because they left the communion of the whole church, to embrace those Arch heretics doctrine and fellowship: He confesseth ingenuously, that the Protestant's before hand had played with us the part of that Donatist Petilian, by nicknaming us Papists. For he saith, that we being angry with them for giving us the name Papists, did for a revenge call them Lutherans &c: Ergo he granteth that they began with us: but were it before or after, M. Abbot's resemblance may be most justly returned upon themselves. For as the catholics of those times called those Sectaries Donatists, for leaving the communion of the church spread over all, to follow one Schismatical fellow called Donate; so the protestants that were so sottish as to forsake the faith of the Catholic church, to cleave unto the peevish opinion of some lewd or lose renegade, are most worthy to be called after their blind guides names, either Lutherans, Zwinglians, Calvinists, or such like. And they to wreak their teen on us nickname us Papists; wherein albeit they imitate the Donatists, yet their invention is not so proper as was the Donatists: who of some one eminent person, christened the Catholics after their names: but the protestants cannot tell us of what one pope or other we took our name. If it be of all the rank of Popes, then have we no need to be ashamed of it: for the protestants themselves are not yet become so impudent, as to deny thirty or forty of the first of them to have been right believers, yea very holy Martyrs or confessors: And good reason it is, that of the first and best of them, the rest should take their names.  R. AB. 8. 

Aug. co. literas Petil l. 2. ca 43. & co. Gaudent: l 2. c. 28.  THe Donatists complained that the revenues bestowed by their ancestors on the churches were taken a way from them, and given to the Catholic Pastors. The same complaint M. Bishop and his fellows use; that Bishoprics, Deaneries, and other benefices founded by men of their religion and to the use thereof, are now (as they pretend) wrongfully taken from them, and given to us.  W. B. 
I Do not find in S. Austin alleged by M. Abbot, that the Donatists were founders of Bishoprics or any such like church livings; And heretics be seldom any such founders, but as latter comers do rather intrude wrongfully into them that were before founded by the catholics. They complained without just cause, when they were worthily expelled out of them. they pretended in deed that they were lawfully descended of the former Catholic Bishops, and that therefore those live were due to them; which would be just the protestants case, if it should please God to inspire into our Sovereign Lord king james his heart, to dispossess them of their benefices as usurpers, and to restore the dignities and live founded by catholics for the exercise of Catholic religion into the hands of Catholic Bishops and Priests. who seethe not therefore how fairly the Donatists did in most things portrait their white sons the protestants?  R. AB. 9 
THe Rogatists being one part of the Donatists, affirmed themselves only to be Christians: even as the Donatists did challenge to themselves only to be the church of Christ: and so now the Papists esteem themselves only to be Christians.  W. B. 
THis hath been in effect both obtruded by M. Abbot, and by me answered, some four or five times over already, wherefore is to be now loathed as over stolen. what so me man may say in some sense, we do not much esteem: but the body of the Catholic church doth not deny heretics to be Christians: because they be christened, and do hold some points of the Christian faith; though such Christians, as shall never (unless they amend) have any part with Christ in his kingdom. For that they refuse to believe many articles of the Christian faith, & have separated themselves from the union and communion of Christ his true church.  R. AB. 10. 

Aug co. literas Petilian. l. 2. c. 83 & l. 2. cap. 71. Epist. 106  THe Donatist provoking Emperors by their untolerable outrages to make laws against them, yet when the same were executed, complained of persecution, and their church they termed the persecuted church, that did not persecute; And such on their side as were justly punished for murders and other crimes, they called their martyrs, and to their relics they did great devotion. Even the same course do the Papists take, who by their wicked practices having given cause of making laws against them, do upon the execution thereof cry out of persecution; and do call them Martyrs that are put to death for such horrible treasons, and do honour their relics etc.  W. B. 
will not this proper resemblance be much more truly verified in the protestants, who having by their mutinous and seditious practices in many Christian countries, provoked most Catholic Princes to enact severe laws against them: and being afterward for their open rebellions executed, yet the protestāns without blushing, do in print proclaim them for martyrs, thrust their names into their Calendar? In which kind M. Fox (our doting countryman) hath (I think) excelled all his fellows. As for devotion unto their mad martyrs relics, I read not in any place quoted by M. Abbot that the Donatists used any; that is but a flourish of his Rhetoric, to make them seem somewhat more like unto us, that do honour the relics and memory's of those holy personages, that have honoured God by their noble martyrdoms, & traced us out the true steps to eternal glory. but therein they were (for aught I can find) no more devout, then be the protestants, who do little esteem the dead bones of their dreaming Saints and mad Martyrs. nay S. Augustine's words cited by himself do declare, that the Donatists did not, and that the catholics did, worship the relics of martyrs. these they be (l. 2. co. Petil. c. 71) you donatists be not blessed, but you make blessed martyrs, with whose souls the heavens are replenished, and the earth flourisheth with the relics of their bodies: vos non colitis, sed facitis quos colamus: you do worship them, but make them such as may be worshipped by us.  R. AB. 11. 
ALbeit the Emperors to repress the enormous crimes of the Donatists, 
Aug co. lit. Petil. l. 2. c. 92.  made such laws against them; yet they would have it thought, that the Emperors did it not of their own mind, but through the instigation of the godly Bishops: Even so do the Papists, and namely M. Bishop, though they know the Prince to have just cause to deal so severely with them, yet doth he impute his proceed unto the instigation and exasperation of his Ministers.  W. B. 
I Must needs confess, that I know no cause why his Majesty in the first parliament of his reign in England, did confirm all those severe laws (with some additions) which had been enacted against Catholics in Queen Elizabeth's days. for the same Catholics had as much, if not more, travailed to make his highness true title unto the Crown of England known, and his person acceptable, than the protestants, and did as willingly receive him into the possession thereof. And albeit some few Catholics did rashly join with protestants, to have attempted the surprising of his royal person out of their hands, whom they presumed to abuse his Majesty very much with false and malicious informations: Yet that could hardly be (in my poor opinion) any just cause to confirm so many rigorous laws against the whole body of Catholics: no more than to have made the like against protestants, who were principal sticklers in that desperate enterprise. All which considered had I not reason, writing in that time, to remove that imputation which seemed to touch his Majesty, and to impute it rather unto the malice of some certain crept to far into his royal favour, and known to be maliciously bend against our religion, then to his highness: who (as many have reported) did in the beginning often protest that he would take no soul money, and that he would like of no Catholic the worse for his religion, so that otherwise he found him loyal and faithful. Since the horrible plot of the Gunpowder, though there be more colour for those severe laws, yet there is in my slender judgement no just cause. for what equity or conscience teacheth, for the crimes of some few offenders to punish innumerable Innocents', that never consented unto them, nor were any way culpable of the same crime? It is the uniform consent of all the learned, that paena sunt restringendae, non ampliandae. Punishments are to be restrained and shortened, and not to be enlarged or lengthened. To forgive offenders is an honourable duty of Christians: but to inflict punishment where there is no just desert, is not excusable even amongst pagans. Therefore it being the dutiful part of a subject rather to excuse his sovereign, then to accuse him: we that hold ourselves so well assured of his majesties most clement natural disposition, fortified also with just and even proceeding in civil affairs, could not but lay the blame of those extreme courses upon other more violent spirits, were they temporal Lords, or ministerial I know not: but sure I am that they have showed themselves towards men of our religion too too malicious and spiteful, God Almighty pardon them, and give those of them that yet live grace to amend: those that be dead would not have us to pray for their souls, and therefore we can do no more for them, but to leave them to God's merciful judgements.  R. AB. 12. 
THe Donatists albeit they knew well, that it was but a small part of the world that joined with them, yet gloried to use words as though they had had a church throughout all the world. Even so the papists, although they know the communion of the church of Rome to be accepted of but in a small part of the world, yet take pleasure to babble as if the Pope's triple crown were so wide, as to compass the whole earth.  W. B. 
AS the former resemblance was pared out of that which went next before it, so hath this been thrice before touched. The odd idle man that purposed to arrive unto the full number of twelve, is forced to mince them into mammocks, and to make no bones to repeat the same thing in effect very often over; all to return a full jury of twelve, that may bring in a verdict against himself, either of Ignoramus; or else a billa vera, for a poor piece of Invention, to frame resemblances as common as the high way; and for the most part such, as may be imputed to what sect soever you please, but do indeed not more properly appertain unto any, then unto the protestāns themselves. Thus far to refute M. Abbot's addition of trivial and improper resemblances.  
Now I come to confirm those points of comparison, which I to requite him, did propose. I stood not upon common accidents, which lightly are incident unto all kind of sects, as M. Abbot hath done very trifflingly: but at the first do set upon the head of the cause, and propose one similitude between the Protestant's and Donatists of that nature and force, that if it be verified, no upright judge can deny the protestants to be Donatists indeed. This it is. S. Austin, Optatus and all antiquity do testify, that the main point of the Donatists' heresy consisted in this, that they affirmed the church of Christ, planted by the Apostles, to have perished all the world over, saving in those coasts of Africa, where their party remained. Therefore whosoever maintains this error obstinately, though he fail in no other article of belief, he is a very Donatist. And whosoever should uphold all the branches mentioned by M. Abbot, or any other that any man else can produce; if he do not maintain this, to wit, that the Catholic church is perished in most parts of the world, he can never be come a Donatist the reason is most evident. because he doth not concord with them in that error, for which they were Christened by that name. As for the error of rebaptisation it sprung up before their days, and was but an appendix to the other: which the donatists undertook to curry favour in that country, where it had been taught before by great personages. Now then to the purpose, If the Protestants do teach the true church to have perished all the world over for many hundredth years, saving that it remained among men of their religion in certain dark and unknown corners, who can deny them to be as true Donatists as ever were any? which M. Abbot perceiving to be as plain as Dunstable high way, maketh as though the protestants never taught the true visible church to have failed at any time, but to have always, even from Gregory the great his time down to our days, continued visibly in all these parts of the world, though blemished with some corruptions; yea that the church of Rome itself was a part thereof, as also the ancient church of England. doth not this seem strange? was it not their common doctrine that from Pope Boniface his time (that is, for these nine hundredth years at least,) there was a general Apostasy from the true church, and that Antichrist with his band possessed the outward visible church, God's true church lying hid all that while invisible, until friar Luther cast of his frock, coupled himself with a Nun, and began to set abroach the true light of the new Gospel? If M. Abbot will not acknowledge it, let him and the reader that doubts of it, but turn to those Authors of our own country To omit others: M. Parkins in his reformed Catholic page 331. M. Fulke in his answer to the counterfeit Catholic; and against Stapleton and M. Martial page 377. M. whitakers de ecclesia contra Bellarminum page 144. M. Napper upon the revelations page 143. & 126. who with the greater part of Protestants do openly cry out, that from Pope Boniface his reign, the visible church of God Perished from the face of the earth; the pope of Rome and his adherents (whom they make Antichrist and his ministers) having devoured and ruined the Gospel, and in steed of it brought in Idolatry, According unto this opinion of those learned and famous pillars of the new Gospel (which was in times passed commonly taught among them.) The Protestants are Donatists and worse than Donatists, for first they agreed with the Donatists in the essential point of their heresy; that the true church of Christ was perished. And in this they went far beyond them; for the Donatists did not affirm the church to be perished in all places, they themselves having for a hundredth years and more some face of a church in many cities of Africa, and above 300 Bishops of their sect. But the protestants ancient churches were at the first so soar beaten & utterly blasted, that they cannot so much as name one province, where their religion had any bishops or flourished for any one age of the nine hundredth years of that supposed defection. wherefore M. Abbot to avoid the open profession of that damnable Donatism, is feign to fall into a new fantasy, that (forsooth) the Roman church notwithstanding all her gross errors and fowl faults (in their imagination) is a true member of Christ's Catholic church: because she held always the foundation entire, though she built hay, straw, and stubble thereon. well far your heart gentle sir, we are much beholding unto you for the good opinion you have of our church and religion: but how comes it then to pass, that our church herself being so hart-whole and tolerable, the members thereof be by you esteemed so blasphemous & horrible? why are the lawful pastors thereof, only for being consecrated priests, and for coming into England, to execute the ancient and accustomed rites of priesthood made heinous traitors? why are honest and otherwise harmless men for receiving of priests, and serving God after the old accustomed manner, most grievously punished by loss of all their goods, lands, liberty and life? how unreasonable and conscienceles men be you Ministers to cry out for so severe laws, and most bitter execution thereof, against recusants for that religion which you yourselves hold to be Catholic? If there were any good nature left in you, or spark of any kindness; you should rather entreat pardon for men of our religion, of whom you now challenge yourselves to be lineally descended; and in right of which descent you enjoy many high Ecclesiastical dignities, and rich benefices. This in courtesy you ought rather to do, then for human & tolerable faults to incense the prince and state against us. Tolerable I say in the course of man's law, if Almighty God will bear with them. And if they do not exclude a Christian man out of God's Catholic church, as they do not in the way of your opinion, why should earthly potentates deprive them of the common benefits of their dominions, and not rather after the example of the sovereign Lord of heaven and earth, suffer them to live quietly in their kingdom, and to enjoy their own live, which be rightfully descended unto them from their predecessors, men also of the same religion? I cannot see how M. Abbot & all they that embrace the same opinion, can in equity require any recusant to be so highly punished for that religion, which they hold to be good in all substantial and fundamental points thereof, though they think it in other of smaller moment to need reformation. well; though that their opinion be more favourable and indulgent to us, yet in my poor judgement it is far of from being true. And to my slender conceit it doth seem (as it were) prodigious, how they can take that church to be a true member of the right church, whose head they hold to be Antichrist; whose sacrifice and common service, Idolatry; whose Sacraments, sacrilegious superstitions; the greater part of their doctrine, blasphemies: their pastors, beasts, foxes and swine, as M. Abbot here out of his little civility termeth them. Briefly, the whole face of their church being (as he raileth and writeth) bewrayed with the filth of Idolatry. if the church of Rome be such a monster, as he would make her, I desire him to explicate in particular which be those fundamental points that do constitute church a the true member of the Catholic church? In the mean season it is pleasant to hear how roundly he reckoneth up without either staggering or blushing, the jolly agreement which he takes to be between their church and ours. we do not (saith he) take upon us to be any other church then that which they call the old, but the same church reform: we retain still the same scriptures which they acknowledge: true, saving that you have cut of at one clap five books of the old testament. we retain the same articles of faith which they profess; you should for modesty's sake have added except some twenty or thirty. we retain the same sacraments of Baptism, and the supper of the Lord. Just, if bread and wine be the same with the blessed body and blood of Christ. Besides how do we agree about the other five Sacraments, which we retain and you have cast away? They finally retain the same form of service, except that they have cut of the best parts of it, and as it were pulled out the heart and bowels, of the sacrifice and consecration, leaving to themselves and their miserable followers only the pa●ings and offals. Behold the goodly conformity of the old and new English church, of late devised and published by M. R. Abbot minister of the word, and teacher of the reformed church of England; He is so far of (as he says) from Donatism, as that he doth teach the church never to have perished, no not in the City of Rome itself: why then hath he taken so much pains to prove the church of Rome to be turned donatistical, unless he will now also in a very calm and pitiful humour, allow even the Donatists' church itself to have been a part of the true Catholic church.  
And so consequently like a good Atheistical libertine, allow all heretics that professed Christ's name, to have been true members of his church. Having thus confuted that which M. Abbot had to object against their agreement in the main point of the Donatists' heresy; I now come to the second resemblance, that is between the Anabaptists (an offspring of the protestants) and the Donatists; who now do teach rebaptisation, as the Donatists did then: which M. Abbot granteth, but saith my foolery therein needeth no answer. because the Anabaptists be exploded out of all protestant churches; And to that comparison which I made between the division of the protestants into Lutherans, Sacramentaries and Anabaptists; with the partition of the Donatists into Donatists, Maximianists and Rogatists: he saith that I should rather have divided Papists into Anabaptists, secularists, and Iesuists.  
what voluntary light babbling is this? who ever before M. Abbot took the Anabaptists to be papists? when as they as stiffly deny the pope's authority, the sacrifice of the Mass, the real presence, the merits of good works, and most other articles of our religion, as any other protestants. And albeit they differ from the Sacramentaries in some few matters, as the Sacramentaries do also from the Lutherans: yet they be descended from them, and do agree with them in most points of religion; wherefore they may be aswell sorted and ranked with them, as the Rogatists and Maximianists were with the Donatists; neither will it help M. Abbot to say, that they cast the Anabaptists out of their congregation. For the Donatists did no less excommunicate and chase out of their churches the Maximianists and Rogatists, than the Sacramentaries do the Anabaptists. It was then rather a foolery of M. Abbots upon so foolish a reason to deny the Anabaptists to belong unto the common body of the protestants; and more impudent folly is it to associate them to us, from whom they descent further than the other protestāns do. And because we be now entered into degrees of comparison, let it be taken for a superlative folly in M. Abbot, to divide all men of our religion into Anabaptists, Secularists, and Iesuists. for to return the Anabaptists to themselves as their own sweet brood, with whom they consent against us in most controversies of religion: Do the other names of Secularists, and Iesuists comprehend all Roman Catholics? be there no lay catholics at all, nor any other religious persons in our church besides secularists and Iesuists? what was become of M. Abbot's senses when he wrote this? The Seminarists and Iesuists being compared unto all other catholics both religious and lay, do scarce amount, (as I guess) unto the thousand part of that body. So that here M. Abbot infabling, fumbling, and confounding rather then in dividing, surmounts the highest degree of comparison.  R. ABBOT. 
THE third resemblance that M. Bishop mentioneth is this. They held not the faith of the blessed Trinity entire. For some of them like the Arrians, taught the son of God to be lesser than the father. Though (as S. Austin noteth) this was not marked of their followers. This he apply to us in this sort: sundry of their principal teachers, as Melancthon, Caluin, and others do corrupt the sound doctrine of the holy Trinity (as I have showed in the preface of my second part of the reformation of a deformed Catholic,) though the common sort of their followers do not greatly observe it. In which third point he very wilfully belieth S. Augustin, the Donatists, and us. For S. Austin doth not say that of the Donatists, but only of a second Donatus, who was a follower of the first, who had an unsound opinion of the Trinity. which the Donatists were so far of from approving, that there was scarce one among them that knew that he thought so: to him only is that to be referred which S. Austin saith, If any of them have said that the son is lesser than the father; yet they have not denied him to be of the same substance. S. Austin never upbraided the Donatists with this error, 
Aug. Epistola 50  though Theodoret do, But he spoke by hearsay: How M. Bishop dealeth with Melancthon, Caluin, and others, I have fully declared in my answer to that preface.  W. B. 
HERE is a hot charge, and a peremptory condemnation before due examination (as you shall hear) that I have at one clap belied S. Austin, the Donatists, and their good Masters, Melancthon, Caluin, and others. But if M. Abbot can make good no one of those imputations, than it must be granted that he hath at once let slip a leash of slanderous lies. Let us descend to the particulars. I writ that S. Austin reporteth some of the Donatists to have had a bad opinion of the blessed Trinity. M. Abbot taketh me up short, avouching that he affirmeth that of a second Donatus only. well was not that second Donatus a great famous Donatist, and had he not many followers? but not one of them held with him in that error saith M. Abbot. yet he seeing S. Austin to speak of them, as of many more than one, presumeth out of his own audacity, to expound S. Austin contrary to his own express words. what marvel then if the good fellow be bold with me? But if those words be not full enough, (If any of them have said, etc. yet they have not denied, etc.) what can M. Abbot say unto these plain words of the said most sound doctor. Very many of the Donatists do confess the same of the son of God which we do; 

Aug. de verb. Apost. ser. 31. c. 5.  
Donatistae plurimi hoc confitentur de filio quod nos, quod aequalis sit patri filius, eiusdemque substantiae: alij vero eorum, eiusdem quidem substantiae confitentur, sed aequalem negant.   to wit, that he is not only of the same substance with the father, but also equal unto him. Alij vero eorum, etc. note these words; (but others of them) do grant that he is of the same substance, but not equal to the father.  
Now let the indifferent reader judge whether of us two be the liar, I that reported Saint Austin to say, that some of the Donatists held an unsound opinion of the sacred Trinity; or M. Abbot that saith it was but one of them only? when as Saint Austin teacheth, most plainly, that not one only, but divers of them so taught. And thus briefly I have clearly wiped away the imputation of belying both Saint Austin and the Donatists, leaving the shame of that slander to the rash censure and little judgement of M. Abbot. Touching the third, because he referreth the reader to another place, I will also let it alone till we come thither; where he shall see that I have no more misreported their rabbins, than I did here the Donatists: yea that I dealt with them very reservedly & sparingly, when I might have charged them much deeper: because many of their followers have not only observed what evil seeds they sowed against the sound doctrine of the most glorious Trinity, but have also watered and nourished them, till they be now grown up unto the most rank and stinking weeds of the Arrian and Trinitarian heresy.  R. AB. 
THE fourth branch wherein the protestants resemble the Donatists is, (as M. Bishop rehearseth) that among the Donatists were certain furious, and frantic fellows that set churches on fire, cast the blessed Sacrament of Christ's body to brute beasts, threw down Altars, broke Chalices, defiled holy oils, made havoc and sale of the rich ornaments of the church; In all which points the protestants have not been one inch behind them, but rather in those irreligious and furious actions have out stripped them, and gone far beyond them. This I let pass as an other part of his idle babbling, only telling him, that to fit the example of the Circumcellions, he should look unto the acts of the leaguers and Iesuists in France, Germany, Poland, and other countries, whereof histories might be made, if it were to the purpose.  W. B. 
THis fourth resemblance hitting the protestants so right on the head, makes M. Abbot so to stagger, that he hath not one wise word to answer in their defence. Is it idle good S. or of small regard, that the protestants do resemble the wicked Donatists, in their irreligious and malicious carriage towards the consecrated houses of God, yea towards his blessed body in the Sacrament of the altar, towards holy oils, vestments, and all ornaments of the church? Doth it not argue very apparently that there lieth lurking in them a very profane and spiteful spirit, that cannot abide the majesty of God's service; but abhorreth all things thereunto belonging? Hereunto may be added, that like as the Donatists did pluck of the veils of virgins, whereby they professed themselves to be the spouses of Christ, and to have renounced all secular marriages, and vain worldly conversation: Even so did and do the protestants, where any such professed virgins do fall into their hands, robbing Christ of his spouses that profess chastity, fasting, prayer and all holiness of life, and turning them out into the wild and wicked world, there to live at large like other worldlings. for this lo is a special privilege of Luther's sweet Gospel.  
Now for that he fableth of leaguers and Iesuists in France and other countries, he speaking without book, must give me leave to believe mine own eyes rather than his slanders. For I have to my grief often seen the ruins of many goodly fair churches and religious houses blown up, or beaten down by men of their religion; and have read of extreme outrage offered by them to priests & other religious people. To omit their robbing of churches, pulling down of religious houses, deflowering of virgins, with other their outrageous and irreligious behaviour in France only, to say nothing of our own country and others, whereof a large and lamentable history might be compiled.  R. AB. 
THE last point of resemblance M. Bishop maketh to consist in this. That like as the Donatists devised a new kind of psalms to stir up their drunken and drowsy spirits, to their service and sermons: So the protestants have framed a new kind of Geneva psalms to be song before their preachings. A new kind of psalms say you M. Bishop? do not you know that they be the psalms of David, and of other prophets and holy men? And do they seem new because they are translated into English meeter, and fitted with plain and easy tunes to serve for the people's use? Or is it not laudable to use songs and psalms in the church? That the Donatists used such songs in their churches is M. Bishop's lie. For Saint Austin rather signifieth that they used them at their drunken banquets. Saint Austin commendeth sober singing of psalms, and so doth Saint Leo. 
Leo de collec. ser. 4.  But the Papists use to join filthy songs, even with the canon of their Mass, as witnesseth Cornelius Agrippa. 
Cornel. de vanit. scientiarum c. 18.  Thus you see that M. Bishop very unfortunately entered into retorting of this comparison of the Donatists, nothing fitting his turn, etc.  W. B. 
LET that first be remembered, which all the world can witness for our religion, that we both highly esteem, and do daily practise the singing of king David's Psalms, & therefore M. Abbot spendeth his mouth in waist, when he endeavoureth to recommend unto us the laudable use of sober singing them in our churches: which their church hath received of ours, and hath somewhat to do, to maintain the same singing against their younger brethren the puritanes, who like of no such Romish rites. But how dares M. Abbot to avouch so peremptorily, that all their Geneva psalms be nothing else but the psalms of David? How many pieces and broken sentences have they devised of their own heads to patch the rest together, and to make them up into broken meeter? what, will they say that all their additions joined and sowdered to the rest, be inspired by the holy Ghost? Or can that truly be called a psalm of David, that hath one sentence in it not dictated by the holy Ghost? But in their metres many such sentences be added, which are not assured to be of the holy Ghost: wherefore they may well mar, but cannot make up any psalms of David. Besides they have some very heretical sentences interlarded among the rest: As for example this, in the invocation of the holy Ghost before the Sermon: Keep us from all papistry. Finally there be some whole psalms made by by Robin woodcock I trow or some of his fellows no less Dunstical than heretical. Take for a taste thereof the first staff of the last song in their psalter, composed by R. W. which I thought good to record here, that the reader may see how elegant and pleasant they be both for meeter and matter.  
Preserve us Lord, by thy dear word,  
From Turk and Pope defend us Lord,  
Which both would thrust out of his throne,  
Our Lord jesus Christ thy dear son.  
These must needs be very noble verses, that have thrice Lord in them. And as for word and Lord, Throne and son; though the words do end in the like syllables, yet they agree not in sound. If M. Abbot would have the simple reader believe, that S. Austin, and S. Leo (when they speak in the praise of singing of Psalms) did mean David's psalms in meeter, let him produce but one good Author to testify that they were so turned within 900. years of those Doctor's deaths, and then hardly believe him. If he cannot, than every man may see what credit is to be given to his allegations. That S. Augustine's words which I alleged are to be understood of Psalms, which the Donatists sung in their churches, rather than of songs in their drunken banquets; may be gathered out of the comparison that he makes between them, and the psalms that were sung in the Catholic church. And S. Austin might well by a Metaphor usual in the holy scripture, call the Donatists new mad devises against the ancient custom of grave singing in the choir, their drunkenness. As for the worshipful testimony of Cornelius Agrippa of our mingling holy things with profane, it being recorded in a book of condemned memory, I hold it not worth the answering. Sure I am that M. Abbot by producing of such Authors, cracketh his own credit. for he promised in his Epistle to the reader, that he would only use the testimony either of some learned Bishops of Rome, or of some other famously approved author, and commended in that church; And this book of Agrippa de vanitate scientiarum, is by name condemned by the same church, in the catalogue of forbidden books; wherefore M. Abbot is no man of his word. Finally like to a tattling tennis player that comes well beaten out of the tennis court, yet to comfort himself, and to save his poor credit with his friends, brags that those mates with whom he played, were no matches for him: yea that no man that day was able to stand in his hands: Even so M. Abbot having behaved himself as simply, as a man of either wit or learning could do, either for defending of his own, or for offending his adverse party, yet concludeth as though he had gotten the field, and clean foiled his adversary, saying, that I did unfortunately enter into retorting of that comparison, nothing serving my turn, but that he like a nimble tennis player had returned my own balls upon me, & that with very great advantage. well, brag is a jolly dog, and leesers must sometimes be suffered to have their words. Let the judicious and indifferent reader but weigh well, first, what kind of resemblance M. Abbot endeavoured to make between the Donatists and the Papists: to wit, to challenge to themselves to be the Catholic church: To be, or rather to desire to be dilated all the world over: that out of their church there was no salvation; To spread ill rumours of their adversaries: To discourage men from joining with them, with a ragman's roll of such rotten riff-raff common to all sects, and to none more usual then to the protestants themselves; So trivial I say, that any man of ordinary discretion, would have been ashamed to have put them down in print to the view of the world. Afterward on the other side let him but call to mind, what resemblances I have proposed between the Protestants and the Donatists, and weigh how substantial they be in themselves, and how properly they fit the protestants. The first was, that the spirit and soul of Donatism consisted in affirming the church of Christ not to appear in any other part of the world visibly, but to have clean perished, saving in some few places where men of their religion lived: Of the same mind were the chief protestants for many years. Secondly, the Donatists were the first among Christians that appealed from the judgement of Bishops unto temporal Princes, though they afterwards repent themselves thereof, when they saw that the said princes would not help them. Is not this one of the chief heads of the protestants Gospel? yea doth not the whole frame of their new religion hang upon the supreme ecclesiastical authority of kings? Thirdly, they beat down Altars, abused the blessed Sacrament of Christ's body, defiled holy oils, confiscated sacred chalices, and sold them, together with the vestments, and other holy ornaments of the church. All which are so proper to the Protestants, that they blush not daily to practise it, and make open profession of the same. 4. The protestāns (like unto the Donatists) by putting innocent priests to death, make martyrs, whom we may worship. Finally they pulled of the veils of religious women, which were signs of their professed virginity, exposing them to the hazard of the wild world. In which ungodly and irreligious practice, the protestāns have gone far beyond the Donatists. But that they may not take too great pride therein, let them hear the upright censure of the holy prelate Optatus, passed 1200. years agone against them, in the name of their dear brethren the Donatists. In this kind you have done as great damage to god, 

Optat. l. 6. co Parm.  
In hoc genere tanta damna fecistis Deo, quanta lucra diabolo procurastu Conflastis impie calices, crudeliter fregistis & inconsulte rasistis altaria Nudastis denuo capita iam velata: de quibus professionis detraxistis indicia, qua contra raptores aut petitores videntur inventa. Spiritale hoc nubendi genus est, in nuptias Sponsi iam venerant voluntate & professione sua, & ut secularibus nuptiijs se renuntiasse monstrarent, spiritali sponso soluerant crinem, iam caelestes celebraverant nuptias.   as you have procured gain to the devil. you have impiously melted Chalices: you have barbarously broken down Altars etc. and a little before: you have uncovered the heads of virgins, that were veiled, drawing from them the marks of their profession, which were invented to declare that in will and profession they were married to Christ. By these few resemblances hitting the protestants so right on the thumbs (to omit many other) the indifferent reader may see, whether my retorting of M. Abbot's comparisons were to the purpose or no, and whether of us have more fortunately travailed therein.  §. 6. W. B. 
TO conclude this passage, seeing M. Abbot went about to prove the church of Rome to be like that of the Donatists, by no one sound argument, but by divers trifles and untruths, he must look (unless he repent) to have his part with liars in the pool burning with fire and brimstone. And if it please the reader to hear, at what great square the Donatists were with the said church of Rome, (to which M. Abbot would so fain resemble them) I will briefly show it out of the best records of that time. 
L. 2 co. lit. Petil. c. 51.  S. Austin speaks thus to the Donatist Petilian: what hath the church or sea of Rome (in which Peter sat and now sitteth Anastasius) done unto thee? why dost thou call the Apostolical chair, the chair of pestilence? See how friendly the Donatists were wont to salute the church of Rome, styling it the chair of pestilence. That noble prelate Optate to this Issue hath thus deposed. whence is it that you Donatists take upon you to usurp the keys of the kingdom, and that presumptuously, and with sacrilegious audacity, you do wage battle against the chair of Peter? If the Donatists did wage war against the church of Rome, surely there was no likelihood of any good intelligence between them. wherefore like as the catholics of Africa then, so they were linked in communion with the church of Rome, set light by the outcries of the Donatists against them (as witnesseth S. Austin when he said of Cecilianus Archbishop of Carthage, 
Epist. 162  one of the princes of the Catholic party; he needed not to care for the multitude of his conspiring enemies the Donatists, when he saw himself by communicatory letters joined with the Roman church, in which always flourished the primacy of the Apostolical chair etc.) Even so we at this time need as little to esteem of the bitter reproaches, and deceitful arguments of the protestants, So we stand upright and firm in the like society of faith and religion with the same church of Rome.  R. AB. 
MIstake I did in some circumstance, but lie I did not, because to lie is to go against a man's own mind and knowledge. That the Donatists were at square with the ancient church of Rome we confess: But what is that to the latter church of Rome, which is degenerated from the old, and in tying the Catholic church to her own place and function doth rather resemble the old Donatists? besides the Donatists were at as great square with all other Catholic churches, some of which were also mentioned by saint Augustin in that and other places: why then doth M. Bishop make that peculiar unto the church of Rome, which S. Austin leaveth indifferent to that and other churches? and as other churches afterward became chairs of pestilence, so might the church of Rome, for aught that S. Austin there saith of it. The like is to be answered unto Optatus, who teaching the Donatists to have been whole enemies unto the church of Rome, doth not hinder but that the latter church of Rome might agree well enough with them. Finally S. Austin doth not say, that Cecilianus joined with the church of Rome alone, but joining with that and other Catholic churches, needed not to care for the Donatists. So that there is no more there for the communion of the church of Rome, them for the communion of other churches. He will say, that a principality is there attributed unto the church of Rome: I answer as before I have done, that a principality of honour may be given to it, but not a principality of power. And doth it follow that because the principality of the Apostolic chair flourished there till that time, therefore it should do so ever unto the world's end? These are lose and vain collections unfit to 'stablish the conscience of sober and advised men.  W. B. 
FOr a conclusion of this chapter M. Abbot tells us, that albeit he mistook somethings, yet he did not lie in any part thereof; and the proof in part is very pretty: because (for sooth) he went not against his own mind. His mind and pleasure then being to say, that the Donatists taught the true church to be only at Cartenna; Secondly, That the Papists do teach now that the same true church is contained within the walls of Rome only; 3. That no other man's Baptism besides a papist priests is available to Salvation; 4. That none among the Indians be truly converted to the Christian faith, but all of them are forced to receive baptism with out religion; when he (I say) wrote these and twenty more such like most luculent lies, yet in all this he did not once lie; the reason is in readiness, because he never went against his own mind: His mind then giving him (belike) that to vilify and slander the Papists, he might tell a hundredth worse tales of them then those are. Good Sir, if upon Etymologies of words you presume to deliver such senseless and wicked doctrine, it may truly be said to you for aught I see Domine mentiris, whether you teach it against your own mind or no. For although a man that of mere ignorance telleth an untruth, doth not properly lie; yet when he presumeth to shoot his bolt, & to give his censure rashly of things commonly spoken of contrary to the truth, as M. Abbot hath done: then he may be said to lie, though he know not perfectly the contrary; Because he might and ought to have learned out the truth thereof, before he presumed to deliver his judgement thereon in such absolute and peremptory terms.  
As the Donatists were at open war with the old church of Rome: So doth the modern church of Rome, as greatly as the old, detest the same positions of the Donatists. To wit, that the church of Christ is perished all the world over, saving in some odd corners. 2. That men baptized by unsanctified Ministers ought to be rebaptized. And so of all the rest, which either Optatus or S. Austin then recorded for special points of the Donatists' doctrine. That the now church of Rome doth differ in any one article of faith from the ancient, is that which M. Abbot doth often say and repeat, but never yet could, nor here after shall ever be able to bring any one sufficient proof thereof, wherefore by all right and reason, the said church is to retain her former good reputation and credit, with all honest and upright consciences. For if every man have title unto his good name, until he be convicted to have committed some such fault; as meriteth the loss thereof: much more the church of Rome, (being the most honourable congregation of Christendom) ought to hold her due estimation and credit, and enjoy all her privileges, until it be lawfully proved, that it hath justly deserved to be deprived of them. for, in dubijs, mel or est conditio possidentis. In all doubtful causes she that is and hath been fifteen hundredth years in possession, is to keep it still. I grant that when S. Austin either defended the honour of the church of Rome, or magnified the society and communion with it, did thereunto join some other church: But the mention of them not being to our present purpose, what reason had I to recite that which was needless? when as every man knows that aswell as then, so now, whosoever shall reconcile himself to the church of Rome, he shall thereby re-enter into communion with all other Catholic churches throughout the whole world. And whereas M. Abbot would have his credulous reader suppose, that S. Austin made no more reckoning of the church of Rome, than he did of any others; That is flat contrary to that which S. Austin setteth down in the very same place, who to prevent that Cavil, doth interlace this Parenthesis in the honour of the church of Rome (where always flourished the primacy of the Apostolical chair.) And in his Epistle 165. being to give an instance of the perpetual succession of pastors in the church, maketh choice of the church of Rome, as of the better assured and more safe and sound, & there doth intimate that the Bishops of Rome, though they might live amiss, yet should never fail to instruct aright all that seek unto them for resolutions of their doubts in matter of faith. wherefore M. Abbot if he will give credit unto that most holy and learned Doctor (whom aswell protestants as we do esteem for one of the soundest recorders of antiquity) he must needs yield unto the church of Rome; both that it is the principal of all the rest, and that it shall for ever continue the most assured Oracle of the holy Catholic faith. which if he refuse to do, he leaveth apparent proof unto all the world, that he had rather with the Donatists rail at her and revile her; then with S. Augustine and other holy prelates, extol and magnify the primacy of that Apostolical chair, and defend the ever durable succession of her pastors, as well in truth of doctrine, as in order of persons. of which I have more largely spoken in the 2. Section of the first chapter n. 29.     

WHETHER EVERY CHRISTIAN MAY be Saved in his own religion, albeit therein be some errors in matter of faith.  
BECAUSE M. Abbot in the precedent chapter granteth that the Roman church, and the church of our forefathers in England, were true members of the Catholic church, and consequently in the state of Salvation, albeit he esteemeth them infected with sundry gross Errors: And for that I otherwise know, that very many remarkable persons in our country do greatly desire to hear this question more exactly discussed: I thought it more convenient to let the ensuing chapters of M. Abbors trifling book to rest for a season, and presently to fall in hand with this matter, which is no less longed after, than it is necessary to be known. For the more particular explication of this weighty difficulty, whether every one may be saved in his own religion or no, I (leaving a full treatise thereof unto them that have better leisure) think good to touch these three points.  

I. First whether he that believeth aright in the one living and eternal God, and liveth honestly, may be saved without express belief in jesus Christ our Saviour.  
II. Secondly, whether believing aright both in God almighty Creator of heaven and earth, and in jesus Christ our redeemer, with all other fundamental points of the Christian religion, he may be saved that doth therewith believe amiss in some other articles of the Christian faith.  
III. Thirdly, I will add a word or two about the public profession of the same Christian faith: because besides an honest life, and a true belief, that also is necessary, to salvation.   
I took it not amiss to handle briefly the first point, although there be few Christians that make any doubt of it; because I myself have heard some good souls very virtuously given, but not sufficiently instructed, to be of opinion that it made no great matter what religion they professed, so they feared God and led an honest life among their neighbours. Their opinion seemed to issue out of Good nature, and a great love of honest life and upright dealing, which they saw to be wonderfully decayed, and almost perished in our miserable country. The best reason that I can frame in favour of their error is this: Almighty God is most merciful, full of goodness and compassion towards all his own creatures, he knows our inbred ignorance and weakness, and therefore is not likely to be highly offended against them, that do their endeavour to serve him according to their knowledge and capacity, how slender soever it be: Now many there be in the wide world brought up among Turks & infidels that never heard of, or at the least never had sufficiently declared unto them, that jesus Christ is the Saviour of the world: wherefore it seems that such may be saved without faith in him. And among us Christians some be so dull of capacity and blockish, or have been so extreme ignorantly or evilly brought up, that they have not been well taught to believe in the Saviour of the world, Christ jesus; may not their gross ignorance beg their pardon at our most merciful Lord his hands? Besides S. Paul declaring what is necessary for him to believe that will approach unto God, seemeth to require but two things: The one, that he believe that God is, the other that he is a rewarder of all them that seek unto him. 
Hebr. 11.6.  He that cometh to God, must believe that he is, and is a rewarder to them that seek him. But we may well believe that God is, to wit a spirit of infinite goodness, wisdom & power, the Creator, conserver, and sovereign ruler of heaven and earth, and of all things in them: also that as he hath created all things of his inestimable goodness, and preserveth and governeth all with incomprehensible wisdom and equity: So he will in the end as high judge of the quick & the dead, call all reasonable creatures to an account of their dutiful behaviour towards their so good and high maker, preserver, & ruler; and out of his immense bounty most abundantly reward all them that have in this life sought unto him and diligently served him: And on tother side severely punish them that have neglected their duty towards him, and transgressed his holy commandments. All this (I say) and much mor● one may believe. without the knowledge of Christ, therefore it seems possible, that some men may obtain salvation without faith in jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour. Notwithstanding these petty reasons, they must needs acknowledge themselves to be very simple, and utterly ignorant in the new Testament, that believe any salvation to be possible, without express faith in Christ. For there is nothing more clearly taught, nor more often inculcated, then that we shall never be saved, nor so much as attain unto the gate and entry of salvation, which is to be justified, except we believe in him. Let these texts of holy writ be well considered. First our Saviour himself saith to his heavenly father. This is life everlasting, 
joh. 17.3.  (that is the means to obtain life everlasting) to know thee the only true God, and whom thou hast sent, jesus Christ. Behold the knowledge of jesus Christ is as well required to salvation, as the knowledge of the true God: 
joh. 3.18.  Again, he that doth not believe in the son, is already judged, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten son of God. See certain damnation assigned to all them, that do not believe in the only begotten son of God Christ jesus. 
joh. 15.  The same is also confirmed by his own mouth where he taught, that he is the vine, and we be the branches. giving us to understand, that unless we be graffed in him, and made partakers of his merits and grace, we can bring forth no fruit worth life everlasting. Sine me nihil potestis facere, without me you can do nothing. The same doctrine was plainly published by S. Peter prince of the Apostles, 
Act. 4.12  saying: There is no salvation in any other, for neither is there any other name under heaven, given to men wherein we must be saved. with him accordeth that great doctor of the Gentiles, & pure vessel of election S. Paul, very often teaching that no man can be justified by any other means, than through faith in jesus Christ. The justice of God by faith of jesus Christ, 
Rom. 3.22. Gal. 2.16 1. Cor. 3.12.  unto all, and upon all that believe in him. Again, other foundation no man can lay, besides that which is laid, which is Christ jesus. If faith in Christ be the foundation of all our spiritual building towards heaven: then surely without that, no man can enter into possession of the beautiful palace of heaven: no more than a man can build up an earthly house, without laying first the foundation thereof. The dearly beloved Apostle of our blessed Saviour, that Eagle eyed Evangelist, 
Apoc. 7. v 9 & 14.  and high prophet S. john seeing in spirit the innumerable great multitude of the heavenly citizens was told, that they were those that came out of great tribulation, and that had washed, their stoles, and made them white in the blood of the lamb. And there was not one among them that yield not thanks aswell to the lamb, as unto God; saying. Salvation to our God that sitteth upon the throne, and to the lamb. There by giving us to understand that there is not one admitted into the joys of heaven, that had not been before made partaker of Christ's merits, through faith in his blood. The reason why we ought to believe in Christ, to be made partaker of his merits; besides that it is most sensible in itself, may be deduced out of the sacred scriptures. Is it not most meet and convenient, that he who is to receive an inestimable rich gift through the favour and deserts of another, be brought to know his benefactor? that he may at least acknowledge how much he is beholding and bound unto him. Our blessed Saviour then being that lamb of God, that taketh away the sins of the world, that hath fully satisfied his father's just indignation against us; that redeemed us out of the most miserable captivity of the devil, and hath purchased for all such as willbe obedient unto him, the kingdom of heaven: Every man must needs confess it to be very great reason, that all this should be published and made known to them that were to receive the benefit of it, that they might love, honour, serve and obey him, that had bestowed the price of his own most precious blood, to make that heavenly purchase for them. The Apostle doth in effect teach the same, though after his divine manner some what darkly in these words. 
Rom. 3.25  justified gratis by his grace, by the redemption that is in Christ jesus, whom God hath proposed a propitiation by the faith that is in his blood. That is to say, god having of his mere mercy through Christ's merits, pardoned the sins of the world, He sent his Apostles to publish the same into all corners of the earth, proposing and promising remission of sins unto all that should believe the same Christ jesus to be the son of God, made man to shed his blood on the cross, for the redemption of all mankind. This capital article of our belief, God would have preached all the world over, and confirmed by innumerable miracles, sealed also with the blood of infinite Martyrs, to the everlasting salvation of them that should willingly embrace this joyful tidings, and unto their just condemnation, who hearing of such happy news would either not believe it, or not accept of it. This position having so clear evidence in the word of God, needeth small testimony of the ancient fathers, wherefore I willbe content with the brief sentences of a few of them. 
Iren. l. 3. cap. 21.  S. Ireneus saith plainly, that they who know not the Emmanuel that was borne of the blessed virgin, are deprived of that great gift of life everlasting. 
Ambros. li. to. of. sic. c. 29.  S. Ambrose agreeth with him affirming. That the Apostle laid Christ for the foundation, that upon faith in him, we might build the works of justice. S. Gregory the great was of the same mind expounding the same text of the Apostle thus: 
Greg. l 7 epist. 47.  whosoever with the love of God and his neighbour holdeth the firm faith of Christ, doth lay that self same foundation of jesus Christ, which the Apostle speaketh of. 
Aug. de civit. Dei, l 18. c. 47  S. Augustine deposeth the same in these clear words. it is to be believed, that to please God, and to live according to his will, was never granted to any body, unless unto him were from heaven revealed the one mediator of God and man Christ jesus. S. Hierome must not be excluded out of this holy consort, for he upon these words of the Apostle, 
S. Hier. in c. 1. add Ephesios'.  He hath predestinated us unto the adoption of sons in Christ jesus doth argue, that we cannot be the sons of God, unless we do embrace the faith and knowledge of his son jesus Christ. This point being thus proved by the word of God and testimony of the ancient fathers, it willbe very easy to answer unto those poor objections that were propounded in the beginning. God (I grant) will not condemn any man for not believing that which he never heard of: wherefore if in any coast of the world the Doctrine of Christ be not sufficiently published, no man there shallbe condemned for not believing in him; but for other mortal & grievous offences, which they have in their life time committed against the light of reason & law of nature. If any amongst those infidels have been so happy, as not to have committed any such mortal sin, 
Act. 10.  (which cannot be without the special aid of God's grace) if there be any such (I say) like the good Italian Captain Cornelius mentioned in the acts of the Apostles, he shall find the like extraordinary succour from heaven, as to have an Angel to teach him, or at least to direct him to some Peter, that may thoroughly instruct him in the Christian faith. Among Christians there can hardly be found any one (I think) so ungraciously bred, that never heard of Christ: because that is contained in the Creed that all Christians are taught even from their infancy, and are bound to know, so far fourth as their capacity and wit will give them leave: which if they should neglect to learn after they come to years of discretion, they are worthy to be deprived of all benefits issuing and growing by Christ, because they contemned somuch as to know him. To that text of S. Paul, that he who cometh to God, must know that he is, and that he is a rewarder, etc. I answer first, that the Apostle saith very well, that he must know those two points, but he doth noth say there, that he needs to know no more: And elsewhere in all his Epistles doth teach that over and beside that, the faith in jesus Christ is necessary for all men. wherefore this point must be added to the rest. I answer secondly, that one cannot know particulary how God is a rewarder, unless he know the incarnation of jesus Christ. because God will reward no man with life everlasting, but through the merits of jesus Christ, and for that he is a member of Christ, and for such good works, which a man without faith in Christ; and without aid of his grace cannot perform. Thus much of the first point  
Now to the second, which is the principal question. whether holding the right faith in Christ jesus, and believing the other fundamental articles which are contained in the Apostles creed, one may be condemned for not believing any other article of the Christian faith. For the plainer explication of the state of this question it is to be understood, that many of the unlearned and simpler sort, may be ignorant of many matters appertaining to faith, without danger of damnation; because by reason of their lack of capacity, or for other necessary occupations about getting of their poor live, they are not bound to know expressly much more than is delivered in the Apostles Creed, and what doth concern the right use of the sacraments which they themselves are obliged to receive. Nevertheless every Christian man and woman may very well be bound not to defend the misbelief of any one article of faith, after he shallbe given to understand that the Catholic church hath declared the same to be so. There is a great difference between the dispositions of two such parties, for it is one thing to be ignorant what the church teacheth in such a case, and another not to be willing to believe it, abeit he knew well enough that the church commandeth him so to believe. In the former there is a ready good will to obey the truth, assoon as due information shallbe given him, and mere ignorance in the mean season hindereth his consent. But in the other party there is a lose liberty of believing what him listeth, and an obstinate resolution not to believe and obey the church any further than they themselves shall think good. These men I say albeit they believe aright in jesus Christ touching his own person and mediation, and do not deny any article of the Apostles Creed, at least as they understand it; yet do they dwell in the state of damnation, and shall not be saved unless they repent. This proposition I know will seem over rigorous and terrible unto many, but being a matter of eternal salvation or damnation, at least as I take it, they must give me leave, that prefer the honour of God's truth before the fancies of men and the care of their salvation before currying of false favour with them, to advertise them of it whiles they have time to take heed to it, requesting them to consider well of the reasons that I shall now deliver unto them in proof of the same, and then I trust in God they will also come to be of my opinion therein. The first may be thus propounded. If it were sufficient to salvation to believe in Christ, and in the other articles of the Creed (as they take them,) this great absurdity would ensue thereof; that all heretics anciently condemned were unjustly condemned, & might well notwithstanding their heresies and condemnation have lived and died in the state of salvation: which to imagine were to condemn all the Orthodox churches, and ancient fathers, of great impiety, and extreme want of Christian Charity. I will prove that absurd sequel by the enumeration of the most notorious Heretics. The Arrians (for example) did profess to believe in Christ, so far forth as is delivered in the said Creed. To wit, that he was the only son of his father, borne of the virgin Mary and our Lord. They did indeed deny him to be consubstantial, that is of the same substance with his father, and coeternal. but thereupon discoursed much like as some Protestants do now about Transubstantiation, who profess Christ's body to be really present in the blessed Sacrament, because Christ's words do teach that plainly; but they will not admit of Transubstantiation in any case; for that they find not that word set down in the scriptures. So thes Arrians did profess to believe Christ to be the Saviour of the world, to be also the son of God truly and really, yet because there was no mention of Consubstantial in the scriptures, therefore they were content to believe so much as was in the scriptures, but their tender consciences (forsooth) would not suffer them to adventure one pace beyond the express word of God. Notwithstanding their fair pretence they were roundly condemned by the church in the first general council for most damnable Heretics, if under that pretext they refused to believe that Christ jesus was consubstantial unto his father, and coeternal.  
The Nestorians believed all that the Orthodox church taught of our saviour Christ jesus, and of all the other articles of faith, saving that they held him to have two distinct people, aswell as he had two different natures. To wit, the nature of man to have had his own person of man, even as the nature of God had the person of God. The Apollinarists did not serve from the catholics in any other point of faith, except that they maintained our saviour Christ to have had no soul of man, but that his Godhead did supply the place of the soul. Eutiches and his fellows agreeing in the rest, avouched the flesh of Christ to be turned into the divine nature. All these did profess to believe in Christ, and to hold all the articles of the Creed. So did the Macedonians that imagined the holy Ghost to be less than the son. And the latter Grecians also, that deny the same holy Ghost to proceed aswell from the son as from the father. The Pelagians did not deny Christ or any article of the Creed; no more did the Novatians nor the Donatists, at lest as they understood the creed. For albeit the Novatians denied priests to have power to forgive some certain of the most grievous sort of sins, as the Protestants do now deny them to have power to forgive any at all: yet they denied no more than the protestants do, that article of the creed, I believe remission of sins. For they believed that God could at all times forgive all sort of sins, though they denied priests to have power to remit some of the most enormous. So the Donatists though they taught the church to have been decayed all the world over saving in Africa, yet did they profess to believe the Catholic church: But they expounded it to be Catholic, not for that it was spread over all, but for that it retained all the seven sacraments, or for that it professed to keep all God's commandments, as you have heard before. Out of these examples I frame this argument. If it were sufficient to salvation to believe in God our Creator, and in jesus Christ our Redeemer, withal other articles set down expressly in the Apostles Creed, Then were the Arrians, Macedonians, Pelagians, and all those other above rehearsed heretics, notwithstanding their obstinate cleaving to their condemned heresies, in the state of salvation: because they refused not to believe any of the foresaid points: But to hold that any of the above named heretics, dying in their said heresies, died in the state of salvation, is to gainsay and reprove all pure antiquity, it is to condemn the holy prelates and most learned Doctors of the primitive church of want of learning, want of judgement, and want of charity; who cast those erring men, as heretics, out of their churches; condemned them to the pit of hell, as the professed enemies of Christ, and the Devils champions. Besides the best informed Christians of those times chose rather to suffer all kind of torments, then to profess any one point of their condemned opinions; which had been great folly, if with the profession of them they might (holding the other fundamental points) have enjoyed Christ his favour, and been inheritors of the kingdom of heaven. Moreover, what necessity had there been for the most learned and renowned ancient prelates to have taken such pains, either in writing so many learned volumes, or in disputing or preaching against those heretics, if they might have been all saved every one in his own religion? Might not also the huge charges and exceeding great pains of assembling of general counsels have been well spared, if those men for whose right information they were called, might have obtained salvation, though they had been let alone in their own errors? It must needs therefore be granted, that the best Clerks, and holiest personages in the purest times of Antiquity thought it enough to damnation, to deny any one article of the Catholic faith, 
Matth. 7.15.  after it was in any general council declared for such. Doth not our blessed Saviour, when he styleth heretics by the name of false prophets, and resembleth them to ravening wolves that devour Christian souls, clearly demonstrate, that they have no part in his good grace and favour, but be in his sight odious and hateful creatures? Again, when he doth in another place compare than to thieves and robbers, 
joan. 10.1.  that do break into his fold of their own authority, and take upon them to be his ministers, when he sent them not, scattering & killing his flock. Doth he not (I say) plainly intimate them to be guilty of death and eternal Damnation? 
Tit. 3 11.  S. Paul chargeth us to avoid the company of an heretical man, knowing that such be subverted, do sin, and be even by their own judgement condemned. And elsewhere among the works of the flesh rangeth heresies, sects, & divisions, forewarning us expressly that whosoever doth commit any of them, shall never enter into the kingdom of heaven. what hope then can there be of their salvation? wherefore heretics being by our Saviour likened unto wolves, 
Gallat. 5.15.  thieves, and robbers; and by his Apostles declared damnable creatures, uncapable to enter into the kingdom of heaven; who were also in all ancient counsels held for accursed; can any body be either so ill advised, or so foolish hardy, as to persuade them that there is any hope of salvation for them, unless they forsake their errors in season? But because worldlings never want false prophets to lay pillows under their elbows to uphold them in their errors, some such may here step forth, and in their excuse say for them, that seeing they believe in Christ, & hold all the articles of the Apostles Creed, though they err in other points, they cannot be heretics, & therefore whatsoever is said against heretics, doth not touch them that be not of that number. This excuse will not serve the turn: for as I have before showed, neither Arrians, Nestorians, Pelagians, nor any other most notorious heretics did plainly deny either Christ to be Saviour of the world, nor any other express point of any article of the creed? nevertheless they were by the true verdict of the ancient Catholic church denounced and declared for heretics. In a word if to believe in Christ, and to hold the rest of the Apostles Creed, were sufficient to preserve any Christian from the Canker of heresy; then he that would deny both the old and new Testament to be Canonical scriptures, and the true word of God, might be no heretic: because the Canon of holy scripture is not expressed in the creed. So he that would overthrow the whole Hierarchy of the church, and send all the sacraments into banishment, might escape the brand of heresy: because of those points there is no particular mention in the said Creed. wherefore it is most certain, that men may be most wicked and damnable heretics, albeit they profess to believe in Christ, and do not deny any one substantial point expressed in the Apostles Creed, if they shall wilfully defend any other erroneous doctrine, contrary unto the truth revealed by God, and so declared unto us by the pastors and doctors of the Catholic church. For witness whereof I will now cite only two, leaving the rest for the upshot of this question: 
Aug l. q. in Math. q. 11.  the one shallbe the great Doctor of the church S. Augustin, who as I have once before showed, doth teach in formal terms that person to be no member of the Catholic church, who doth believe obstinately any falsehood in matter of faith, knowing it to be such. And the second shallbe Martin Luther, whom albeit we take for an Apostate Augustine friar, yet the protestants esteem him as a great man of God. He for want of one article of belief condemneth all the Sacramentaries to the pit of hell, these be his words. It shall nothing profit the Sacramentaries to speak of spiritual eating, nor to believe in the father, the son, 
Luther lib. quod verba Christi Stint.  and the holy Ghost, so long as with blasphemous mouth they deny this article of faith, which Christ hath proposed to us by his own holy mouth: This is my body that shallbe given for you. Behold, no salvation to be possible, if you deny but that one article of faith.  
Among many other causes, why such misbelievers are esteemed worthy of so grievous punishments, there be two principal: the first is, that they will not believe God himself revealing his divine mysteries unto us; The second, because they will not give credit to the church proposing unto them the same truth. All Divines hold that there is no matter of faith, which is not revealed unto us by God himself. whether the same verity had need to be put down in writing, as the protestants seem to require; or that it sufficeth to be delivered by word of mouth, as we hold, is a question between us: But we all consent, that what soever is propounded unto us to be believed, must needs be first revealed by God. whence it followeth evidently, that he who denieth to believe any one article of faith, is convinced not to believe God himself in that point; for he it is principally that tendereth it unto us to be believed; wherefore he that refuseth to believe it, is forced to this exigent, that he must needs confess himself to be persuaded either that God teacheth not the truth always; or else that we are not bound to believe him in all things either of which is most irreligious, and a very blasphemous crime. For as S. james disputeth. He that hath kept the whole law beside, and doth offend but in one point thereof, is made guilty of the whole. Even so he that believeth God in all other articles yet in some one refuseth to believe him, is made guilty of the whole. That is, as S. james expoundeth it, offendeth against the Majesty and verity of the law giver, not reputing him worthy of credit in all matters what soever. But to think God not worthy to be credited in any one word or title, that shall proceed out of his divine mouth, is in truth to make him no God at all. For he is no God, that either will or can be untrue of his word. Here the poor Christian trembling at this consequence will cry out that he doth believe God in all things, and God forbidden that he should once imagine him not worthy to be credited in whatsoever it shall please his divine majesty to reveal: But he will say, that he knows not that God hath revealed this unto him, or at least is not well assured that he would have him to believe it. This I grant is the lesser fault of the two, yet not in any sort tolerable. For if it hath pleased his divine bounty to reveal unto us, for his own honour, and our instruction such heavenly verities and mysteries; how can he take it well at our hands, that we either will not vouchsafe to take notice of them, or which is worse, will not believe them to be true? They that will not believe, are in the holy scriptures worthily called rebels, because they band themselves against God's truth, according to that of job, Rebels fuerunt Lumini, 
job. 24. v 13.  they were rebels against the Light, and therefore as Rebels and traitors must look to be punished. The others that will not take the pains to learn, according unto the small measure of their capacity, all such matters as appertain to their own estate & calling, must needs acknowledge their extreme undutiful carelessness in the highest matter that can be, and that which doth also most concern them, to wit, in the only necessary business of their own everlasting either salvation or damnation.  
And withal confess, that they are unworthy to be known of God their Sovereign Lord and maker at the latter day, for that they neglected to know their duty towards him, whiles they lived here on earth. Of them the Apostle h●th already pronounced this sentence. 
1. Cor. 14 38  If any man know not (to wit the things belonging to his duty towards God,) he shall not be known of God, but shallbe shut out of the gate of heaven. And if they stand knocking there, thinking to get in by their overlate importunity, they shallbe answered as the foolish virgins were, 
Math. 25 12.  with a Nesciovoes, I know you not. the force of this discourse in brief is: whosoever refuseth to believe God in any one article by him revealed, shall not be saved: but they that think to be saved in any religion, refuse to believe some articles of faith revealed by God: ergo, they cannot be saved. The second cause, why wilful refusers to believe any one arttcle of faith do incur that heavy judgement, is for that they do offer great wrong unto the true church of God his dearly beloved spouse, and our spiritual mistress and mother. It is agreed on by men of all sides, that the holy Catholic church is the temple of the holy Ghost, the mystical body of Christ, and the pillar & fortress of truth. wherefore to offer her that affront and disgrace, as not to give credit to her testimony (speaking specially unto us in the behalf of Christ; 
2. Cor. 5.20.  pro Christo legatione fungimur, for Christ we are legates,) and in the name of the holy Ghost, (visum spiritui sancto & nobis, It hath seemed good to the holy Ghost and us) it not only to contemn her, 
Actor. 15.  but to despise jesus Christ also that hath ordained her to be our instructor and director, & to set nought by the holy ghost that speaketh unto us by her. we cannot be ignorant what our Saviour hath said of the governors, & principal rulers of the church. you shallbe witnesses to me in jerusalem, & in all jury & Samaria, 
Act 1.8.  & unto the uttermost coasts of the earth. If Christ hath made choice of them as of substantial honest men sit to be his witnesses, do not we offer him a great indignity, if we refuse to believe them? namely when we know him to have said of them. 
Luc. 10.16.  He that heareth you, heareth me: and he that despiseth you, despiseth me, and he that despiseth me, despiseth him that sent me. Yea addeth in another place, whosoever shall not receive you nor hear your words, 
Math. 10 15.  going forth out of the house and city, shake of the dust from your feet: Amen I say to you, it shallbe more tolerable for the land of the Sodomites and Gomorrheans in the day of judgement, then for that city: Behold how straightly we are charged to hear and believe Christ's witnesses, the pastors and Doctors of the Catholic church. If we do otherwise, we shallbe taken to despise Christ, and to despise his heavenly father, and shall find no less intolerable judgement, than did the stinking and abominable Sodomites. Moreover, the pastors of the Catholic church are not only Christ's bare witnesses and Ambassadors, but they be also our spiritual governors. 
Act. 20.28.  Posuit vos Spiritus sanctus regere ecclesiam Dei. The holy Ghost hath appointed you to govern the church of God. If they be our governors we must obey them. 
Hebr. 13.17.  Obedite prepositis vestris, & subiacete eyes. Obey your Prelates and be subject unto them; he that resisteth power, 
Rom. 13.2.  resisteth the ordinance of God; And of all governors, the spiritual (that do represent our Saviour in a higher degree) are most to be respected. Therefore more heinous is the offence of every one that doth obstinately withstand them, then of others that withstand their temporal prince. 
Math. 18.17.  Qui ecclesiam non audiverit, sit tibi tanquam Ethnicus & Publicanus. He that will not hear the church, let him be taken for a heathen and a publican. whereupon there is commonly in all general counsels, Anathema, an excommunication and curse upon all them, that shall not believe all and every article of faith in the same general council declared and determined. which doth most manifestly demonstrate, that any man who shall refuse to believe any one article of faith, by the church declared to be such, is worthy to be excommunicated, that is, to be deprived of the society of Christians in this world, and consequently of the fruition of Christ in the world to come, if they do not in time repent. whence I gather this short argument, he that refuseth to believe God's witnesses, the pastors of his church and our spiritual governors, in any one article of faith, deserveth to be condemned: but they that hope to be saved in their own religion (of whom we now speak) do refuse to believe God's church in some article or other of the Catholic faith, therefore they deserve to be condemned. For the further explication of the great conveniency and necessity we have to believe and obey the Catholic church in matters of faith, let is be well weighed, that it doth in manner as much import us upon whose credit we believe any thing, as what we do believe. for such is the weakness and uncertainty of our own judgement, that we need nothing more, then to have an assured guide to conduct us safely in the high matters of divinity, which do far surmount our natural understanding and capacity. Because as the Apostle discourseth divinely, faith is of hearing. How shall we then believe, 
Rom. 10.  without a preacher? and how shall any man preach unto us, without he be sent? which is as much to say, that without the help of some body sent from God to teach us what we have to believe, we cannot believe aright. wherefore it doth wonderfully much import us, to make right choice of this instructor for such as our guide and director is, such is our faith. If our guide be blind, we following him shall blindly fall into the ditch with him. If he see clear, if he be well advised, stayed, and certain; following him, we shall be assured to walk in the straight path. For example. The Turks believe in one God, maker of heaven & earth, as we do; yet have they not the true faith thereof as we have: because they have not the same guide and instructor for that article that we have. They be led to believe that, by the credit which they give to the ministers of Mahomet, who out of his Koran teach them so to believe in God. we believe the same, for that the Catholic church doth so teach us in the first article of our Creed. Ours is the act of true faith, because we are directed by the true church that cannot deceive us. The Turks persuasion is no act of true faith, for that he taketh it on the credit of them that may deceive him: And do without doubt in many other points deceive him: wherefore whether they do in this or no, he is uncertain; and consequently his persuasion being uncertain, he cannot have any true faith, which is certain and without all peradventure. In like manner the jews albeit they have the old testament for their foundation, yet being destitute of an undoubtable director, and taking for their blind guides their Talmud and Rabbins, are clean void of all true faith; because their persuasion also relieth upon them that may, and do very often mislead and beguile them. For come to some other question of faith, yea to the principal and ground of all the rest; that is, to believe jesus Christ to be the son of God, and the true Messiah and redeemer of the world: The Turk not finding that in his Koran, nor the jew in the old testament (according to the exposition of their Synagogue) do most blindly and obstinately refuse to believe it. See then of what importance the direction of a true sincere guide is in all matters of faith. wherefore it hath pleased the unsearchable wisdom of our blessed Saviour, to give unto all his faithful servants for a most assured guide, his best beloved spouse the Catholic church, 
1. Tim 3.  the pillar and ground of truth; to whom he (being to departed out of this world) bequeathed the holy Ghost to teach her all truth, 
joh. 14.16.  and that at all times, unto the world's end. I will ask my father, and he will give you another Paraclete, that he may abide with you for ever: 
joh. 16.  when the Spirit of truth cometh, he shall teach you all truth. Therefore it is great reason, that we should both acknowledge our blessed masters careful providence over us in providing us such a guide; and also take ourselves fast bound to obey the same holy church, in all her declarations made to that purpose. It is not then without exceeding great cause that all good Christians even from their infancy are taught to believe this, that they never afterward fail therein; And that they may the better remember the same good lesson, which doth so much import all men to learn perfectly, they do from thence forth make daily profession thereof, when they say in their creed, I believe the holy Catholic church. That is, I do not only believe, that there is one holy Catholic church; but I profess to believe what the same church doth teach me to believe, all and every article of faith, without exception against any one of them. for if I do believe her in one, and not in another, I am become such a chooser, as the Latins following the Grecians call hereticus, an heretic; and do indeed show that I do not assuredly believe the church, as God's interpreter that cannot err, but only so far forth as I think good. And then it may be asked me, why I do believe her at all, if she do but now and then tell the truth? for it may be that then she doth not say true, when I do believe her. To put us out of all these doubts and difficulties, the selected governors of the church, the masters of the world Christ's hoy Apostles, before they did departed to preach the Gospel to all nations, set down this for a most assured principle of the Christian faith. I believe the holy Catholic church, to teach all Christians, that in those supernatural mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, we must not lean to the light of nature, or trust to our own judgements, or follow the advice of every one that will take upon him to be a master; but hold ourselves precisely to that which the holy Catholic church doth teach us, & obey her fully and wholly in all things. Out of the premises this argument may be framed directly to our purpose. No man can be saved, unless he follow the direction of the one holy Catholic church in all matters of faith: but they that be of opinion, that every man may be saved in his religion, do not follow the direction of the Catholic church (which doth teach all men to embrace and follow one only faith and religion) wherefore they that will not embrace the said one only faith, which the Catholic church teacheth cannot be saved. To make this more plain and probable, let us in a word or two examine the special means that the protestants use to attain unto the true understanding of God's word, and thereby unto salvation. where we must observe by the way that we all agree in this, that there is nothing to be believed, which is not by God revealed unto us. The Protestants do hold all that to be written either in the old or new Testament: wherein we descent from them, teaching all revealed verities not to be written in the Bible, but some of them to pass from father to son, by word of mouth and by tradition. Of which difference here I do not dispute, but we all taking for our ground Gods own and only word revealed, written or unwritten, do inquire how we come to the true understanding of it. we say by the explication and declaration of the Catholic church. The Protestants approve not that means, but under the colour of man's inventions rejecting of it, do either lean to their own judgement & learning, or follow the authority of their chief preachers, or else run to the revelation of the Spirit speaking inwardly to their spirits. Now if none of all these be assured means, to attain unto the true understanding of God's word, than their faith that relieth principally thereon, cannot be assured. Some of them in great zeal & simplicity will say, that they rely only on the word of God: but good poor souls they know not well what they say; for the question being about the understanding of the same word of God, we affirming the word to be for us, they denying that, and challenging it to be for them, who shall judge whether of our pretensions to the same word be true? they will confer one text with another, so will we, and consider all circumstances too; we will repair also to the originals & have respect unto the Analogy of faith. briefly we will use all human diligence & pray also to God to assist us supernaturally: yet when we have all done we come to no agreement. who shall then agree us? If they would come with us to the Catholic churches determination in some general council, we should quickly have an end: but they upon one vain pretext or other fly of, and will finally follow no other, than one of those three guides before named: whereof the first, which is their own learning and judgement, be it never so great, yet they may mistake and fall into error. Omnis enim homo mendax. 
Rom. 3.  For every man is subject to be deceived, specially when they be in passion and strive to uphold and make good their own conceits against others; for than they do oftentimes run astray very strangely. Secondly, the Protestants that rely upon the reputation and credit of their preachers, how can they set up their rest upon them assuredly? for that first their masters being men, may be deceived aswell as other men may be: and that they are in deed deceived, not only the catholics (who are the far greater and founder part of Christians) do affirm, but those also that they themselves hold for men of God, do testify the same. For example Martin Luther with his disciples repute Zuinglius, Calvin, and all the troop of Sacramentaries to be deceiving masters, and to err damnably in the matter of the blessed Sacrament. On tother side the sacramentary protestants do all teach that Luther with all his followers erred as in many other points, so principally in that matter of the real presence. which of these two (to omit diverse other their contradictions) shall a poor protestant believe and follow? both he cannot, because what the one affirmeth, tother denieth, and each of them saith that the other is deceived. He then taking them both for true of their words, must needs believe neither of them, for that the one avoucheth the other to be in error. He may (leaning to his own judgement and liking) rather follow one of them then the other, yet he cannot do that, without some fear of being deceived himself, because he hath so many even of his own side to be against him; wherefore he can have no faith at all in these points. For faith is an assured persuasion of that to be true which you do believe, without any doubt or fear of the contrary. Let us now come to their last refuge and surest hold (as some take it) of the spirit, which is indeed the most wavering and uncertain guide of all the rest. For doth not the Lutherans grosser spirit buzz into their brains that they have found out the light of the Gospel? yes I warrant you says every good Lutheran. Not so saith the purer and nimblet spirit of the Calvinists: it was but the dawning of the day that appeared to M. Luther, the light of the Gospel began then only to peep up; but the bright beams thereof broke not out, till M: Caluins' doctrine glittered. The more brisk spirit of the Brownists, doth assure them that the noonday light of the same Gospel shineth only in their Horizon. And what shall we say to the Anabaptists? who as they be the most frantic of all other, so they brag most of all, of very familiar acquaintance with the same whispering spirit; with which they are so haunted, that they have almost hourly new illuminations and strange revelations. See I pray you into what endless dissensions this doctrine of the spirit doth lead her followers. It being then most manifest that there is such variety, and so great contradiction in the way of the private spirit, every man that hath a care of his salvation, will I hope take heed thereof, and not suffer himself to be abused thereby. He was inspired by the true spirit of God that gave us this fair warning. 
1. job. 4.1  My dearest believe not every spirit, but prove the spirits if they he of God: because many fal●e prophets are gone into the world, which deceive many. And Satan that trudgeth about so busily, seeking whom he may devour, finding so many ready to listen to the cursed council of his wicked spirit, transformeth himself often into an Angel of light, that he may the better beguile them that give ear to such secret whisperings. wherefore they that desire not to be misled, must follow Saint john's counsel, try the spirits whether they be of God or no. 
Ibidem.  If the private spirit do not agree with the public spirit that conducteth the Catholic church in all truth, be well assured that it is an erring spirit, sent by Satan to deceive you and to lead you into error. To recollect this point in brief, If no man may rely either upon his own learning or spirit, not may safely trust any private teacher or preacher; then the protestants best means to obtain salvation be very uncertain, and consequently they that willbe assured never to err in any one article of faith, must not rely upon them: but embrace wholly and fully the doctrine of the Catholic Roman church, and hold themselves close and fast thereunto. 
Math. 16  That church is built upon a rock that always hath and ever shall stand firm, without flitting or tottering too and fro; and Christ prayed, 
Luc. 22.  for her governors faith that it should never fail. 
joh. 16.  The holy Ghost is always with her to teach her all truth. And in very common sense, when a controversy riseth about any point in faith, is it not much more probable, that all the learned assembling together out of all coasts and countries of Christendom to confer thereupon, should boult out the truth of that question better, than some few passionate, and discontented men, that oppose themselves against all the rest? Thus verily stands the case between the Protestants and us. for when Martin Luther, john Calvin, and others (discontented men and none of the best mark) ran out of our church, and cried out that therein were many errors taught, and many foul abuses maintained, a general council was called, the best learned of all Christian countries were assembled to hear and determine those controversies. The ringleaders of the new Gospel were most courteously invited thither, to show what moved them to make that alteration: but their consciences telling them that they were not able to justify their bad cause before so many learned men, they durst not appear in the council. we then have very great reason to follow the judgement of the whole corpse of Christendom. but small probability have the protestants to prefer the passionate opinions of a few malcontents flying from true trial, before the calm and mature acts and definitions of all the rest, that were ready to have performed it. God send them grace to see it in time: lest as they have wilfully followed them in their errors, so they be not here after against their wills forced to follow them to eternal punishment. I have stayed the longer to declare the commodity and necessity of submitting our understanding unto the censure of the Catholic church, because without that be joined to God's word, to certify us both which is the word of God, and what is the true sense and meaning thereof, we can have no true faith at all. for the declaration of the church is necessarily required as a condition, without which our faith cannot ordinarily be assured of that which it is to believe. whereupon that great light of the world S. Austin was not ashamed to say, Evangelio non crederem, 
August. co Epis●. fundamentre. 5.  nisi me moveret Eccl●siae Catholicae authoritas. I for my part would not believe the Gospel, unless the authority of the Catholic church did move me thereunto. whence it is easy to gather, that they who do not take their direction from the said church, (as all they do not, who think every Christian may be saved in his own religion) have no assurance in their faith, and consequently no true faith at all, wherefore they cannot be saved. which I do thus confirm; for the Apostle teacheth that Sine fide impossibile est placere Deo, 
Hebr. 11.6.  It is impossible to please God without faith: which must needs be understood of the true faith, because God is the God of truth, and hateth all that is false: but the true faith is but one only, and of the same nature in all men: which the said Apostle doth confirm, when he writeth that there is but one Lord, one faith, 
Ephes. 4.5.  one Baptism: but they that make account to be saved in their own religion, be not ordinarily, nor cannot be all of one faith. for one faith cannot teach us to believe two contradictory propositions to be true: by the same faith one may believe more, and another less, according to the measure of faith that it hath pleased God to bestow upon them: but one cannot believe clean contrary to the other, As for example, That Saints are to be prayed unto, and that they are not to be prayed unto. That we may pray for the dead, and that we may not praïe for the dead. For one of those propositions must needs be false, wherefore they that believe, men may be saved in both these opinions, have no true faith at all; because true faith cannot believe that which is false, and one of these two must needs be false. This may be yet further confirmed, for that those men who think one may be saved in any religion, do want the aforesaid true and only means of unity and agreement in one faith. for they rely not upon the explication of the Catholic church (which is the only way to hold all men in one faith) no more than if they had never heard of that article of our Creed, I believe the hol●e Catholic church; but take (as it hath been before declared) for their guides in matter of faith, either their own judgement, skill or spirit; or the advice of some of their friends: which are much more like to lead them into a hundredth divers opinions, then to reduce them to unity in faith and religion. wherefore it is evident that the uniform faith of the body of Christendom (which alone is the true saving faith) cannot dwell in one house with that liberty of believing what they like. Moreover, all men seek after the true Catholic church, that they may find out the true doctrine of the Christian faith, and enjoy, the right use and administration of the holy Sacraments: This is so clear and agreeable unto the Protestants marks of the true church, that it cannot be denied: but if in the same church there may be errors maintained in matters of faith, and the Sacraments may be corruptly administered, men should in vain take so great pains to find out the true church and obey it. because in the way of that opinion it is needles to salvation, to be free from error in faith, or to have the Sacraments sincerely administered. for one may be saved (say they) in that religion, where there be errors in faith defended, and the Sacraments unpurelie handled. This argument may be thus enlarged and enforced. They that with the true belief of the fundamental points of faith do mingle some errors in other articles, for those their errors, to what Master do they belong? Not to God, who is the Author only of truth and light, and in whom (as Saint john witnesseth) there is no darkness. Deus lux est, 
1. joh. 1.5.  & tenebrae in eo non sunt ullae. He must needs therefore be one of the devils retainers, 
joh. 8.44  who is father of all liars, and master of them, that do embrace errors: to say, that he is Gods for the truth which he holds, will not avail; for God will not part stakes with the Devil, but either he will have us wholly his; to wit if we will love him with all our hearts, and wholly believe in him: or else he will wholly reject us, if we think to have any other master with him, or believe in any other contrary to him. God is so Sovereign and jealous a Lord, that he will not dwell in the same house with Dagon. 
1. Re● ●●  either we must cast out Dagon, or he will cast us of. we must not halt (as the zealous prophet Elias warneth us) Between God and Baal; but either wholly follow God, 
3. Reg 18, 22.  or else assure ourselves that he will wholly reject us. For as the Apostle argueth, what society is there between light and darkness? 
● Cor. 6. 1●.  what agreement between Christ and Belial? none at all. For our Saviour himself hath defined: 
Math. 12. 3●.  He that is not with me, is against me. Luke warm fellows (that be part of the one, and part of the other) he will vomit out of his mouth, as raw and undigested humours that his stomach cannot abide. Because (saith he) thou art Lukewarm, 
Apocal. 3.16.  and neither hot nor cold, I will begin to vomit thee out of my mouth. The foundation of this is drawn out of this maxim of moral philosophy and divinity recorded by S. Dennis the Areopagite, 
c 4. diuin●. 1. 2. 18 4.  and seconded by S. Thomas of Aquine: Bonum ex integra causa, Malum ex quolibet defectu. This is the difference between good and evil: that to make a thing good, there must concur all things requisite, both for substance and necessary circumstance: but if one thing requisite be wanting, it maketh the whole action evil. One bad herb marreth a whole pot of pottage: and one spoonful of gall, a butt of Maulmesey: even so if there be one known error in matter of faith, it corrupteth the whole substance of faith, as if there reign one sinful vice in a man, it destroyeth the whole frame of virtue, and doth absolutely make him vicious, and casteth him clean out of God's favour, so long as he continueth therein: according to this sentence of the kingly prophet, Odisti omnes qui operantur iniquitatem, 
Psal. 5.  & pordes omnes qui loquuntur mendacium. Thou O god hatest all (and every one without exception) that work iniquity, and wilt destroy all them that speak lies. mark attentively how our sovereign lord doth hate, and will destroy as all them that work wickedly, so all them that defend lies: which all they do who uphold any falsehood in matter of faith against God's truth. finally this position that every Christian may be saved in his own religion is very pernicious and damnable, were it for nothing else, then for the manifold mischievous sequels thereof. for it cannot but breed in men a wretched carelessness of what religion they be of. which draweth after it a number of sins, and is the very root of Atheism. For if a man may be saved in any religion, it maketh no matter of what religion he be; whereof it will ensue, that most men following the bad inclination of our corrupt nature, will prefer before all other the worst & losest religion that may be, because that hath most ease, liberty, and carnal pleasure in it. which wicked persuasion having once seized the heart, farewell all painful endeavour to perform virtuous actions: and welcome sloth, case, and fleshly liberty; which cannot but in short space engender a loathsomeness and contempt of all religion, and pave a fair broad high way unto Atheism. wherefore this opinion is utterly misliked, even of many of the more discreet, and better minded Protestants. And in very truth if we would but lift up our minds a little towards heaven, and consider attentively either the infinite majesty of Almighty God, or his inestimable bounty towards us; how can a Christian let any such sinful thought sink into our heart, as though we need not greatly care how we serve God, whether we believe in him fully yea or no? O very evil advised and base minded creature, yea unworthy the name of any of God's Creatures, that sets so little by so sovereign a Lord and Creator! Have we not at his bountiful hands received freely our souls and bodies, our health, wealth or whatsoever else in this world we either have or be? And is there any hope without his favour and grace to attain eternal bliss, and all that our heart can desire in the kingdom of heaven? yet so unkind and ungrateful unto such a divine benefactor be too too many, so dull and senseless in matter of their own eternal either weal or woe; that they seem to stand at habberdupoise whether they should serve God or no; or at most, they willbe sure not to overshoot themselves in his service, but to hold back and afford him as little as possible may be. Be not these animales homines earthly minded men degenerated from the noble condition of reasonable creatures, and made like unto pecora campi, cattle of the field? who persuade themselves that it doth not belong to men of their calling, to converse with spiritual persons, or to spend much time in reading of spiritual books, and learning their duty to the Almighty, but leaving those melancholy meditations to monks, do esteem men of their quality rather borne and bred some to keep dogs, and to follow hawks and hounds, others to graze beasts, and to overlook their shepherds & pastures. I speak not this to condemn the moderate exercise or pleasure that such worldly men may lawfully take in their worldly business, and much less in reprehension of good husbandry, but I desire to leave some impression in the hearts of all Christians of tendering, and attending with all, the service of God; and would gladly persuade all sorts of men, women and children, that incomparably much more care, diligence, labour and study is to be bestowed in procuring the salvation of their souls, then in all other affairs whatsoever. And that they are wonderfully overseen, & exceedingly much to blame, that make so small account to know their bounden duty unto the most glorious and blessed Trinity. And because such men like not to be troubled with much musing upon long lessons, I would counsel them and all others to read often over & over this one text of holy scripture, & to give diligent ear unto it being indicted by the holy ghost for our perpetual profit.  
Harkon O Israel, thou shalt love thy Lord God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, 
Deut. 6.5  & with all thy strength; And these words which I command thee this day shallbe in thy heart, and thou shalt teach them to thy children, & thou shalt talk of them, when thou sittest in thy house, & when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. where is much more to the same effect. If Almighty God required of every poor Israëlite, a complete knowledge of his law and commandments, and a most careful diligence both to observe them himself, and to teach them also to his children and family: will he require less of us Christians whom he hath called to greater perfection, and to whom he hath also made greater promises? specially considering that he gave us his only begotten son our blessed Lord and saviour to be our master and instructor, who refused no pains day nor night, to walk up and down on foot in a rugged hilly country for thirty three years, to teach us those heavenly mysteries and to make us partakers of his inestimable graces. what shame then shall they be put to. what punishment do they deserve, that will not vouch fafe to hearken after those heavenly lessons, nor yet so much as receive them willingly of his servants, when they be (as it were) put into their mouths? are they not sure to be (with the slothful & unprofitable servant) cast into utter darkness, where shallbe continual lamentation, weeping, and gnashing of teeth? This by the way to awake those drowsy sleepers, and to strike a due reverent fear into the hearts of such negligent and careless creatures, that make so small reckoning of learning their duty unto Almighty God. Now I come to close up my former principal question, with some of the ancient fathers & most learned doctors sentences, who with full consent do teach that they shall not be saved, that do hold obstinately any one error in matter of faith. Nay that every good Christian ought rather to lose his life, then suffer one word or syllable of his faith to be blotted out, perverted, or betrayed. I will begin with that of S. Athanasius in his creed, 
Athanasius creed.  because it is solemnly read in the church service as most sound and approved doctrine: whosoever willbe saved, it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. which unless he do observe wholly and inviolably, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. 
Greg. Naz. de fide.  S. Gregory Nazianzen teacheth, that nothing is more dangerous than those heretics, who holding all the rest sound, do in one word (as it were with one drop of poison) infect that true and approved faith of our Lord, which the Apostles delivered unto us. see how one error in one word of faith, 
Apud Theodoret. lib 4. bist. ecclesia ca 17.  doth poison all the rest. S. Basil his best beloved and holy companion was of the same mind when he said; that they who be skilful in holy scriptures, will not endure so much as one syllable of the divine decrees to be betrayed; but rather in defence thereof, if need be, will not refuse any kind of death. 
Ambros. de filii divinitater. 1.  S. Ambrose consorts with them, forewarning all Christians to stand upon their guard most vigilantly, and in no case to suffer such pestiferous, and venomous errors to be poured into their souls, one drop whereof is sufficient to infect and poison the pure doctrine of Christ. S. Hierom declareth, 
Hieron. co. Ruffian Apolog. ● ultra med  that for one word or two, that were contrary to faith, many heretics have been accursed, and cast out of the church: S. Augustine more particularly & fully then any of the rest. 
August. de here.  He that believeth any one heresy, that either hath been or shallbe devised, cannot be a Catholic Christian. Again, They that in the church do savour of any thing that is attainted and ill, if admonished to taste of that which is sound and right, they do resist obstinately, they become heretics, 
Idem de civit. l. 18 c. 51.  and going forth are to be reckoned for enemies. thus much of the second question.  
Now I come to that third part which I promised to touch in a word or two, before I finished this chapter. because it is not sufficient for a good Christian to believe all that is to be believed, and to have a full resolute purpose to keep all God's commandments, unless he do also carry a willing mind to make open profession of his faith, when time & place do require it, what soever loss of goods, liberty or life, he is thereby like to incur. I do not say, that every virtuous soul is bound to lay himself open at all times, and to all sorts of men, (though he may not at any time deny any article of faith, or make profession of any false religion) but when either the honour of God, or the edification of our neighbour do exact the same at our hands, than not to profess our faith openly, is both shameful before men, and in the sight of God damnable. The fundamental reason hereof may be gathered out of this; that as it hath pleased the sovereign divine majesty to reveal many high mysteries unto us silly mortal creatures, to our exceeding great comfort and instruction; so it is his blessed will and pleasure, that the same be divulged and proclaimed all the world over; that all sorts of men may (if they look well to it) reap the manifold rich benefits that do ensue thereof. And contrariwise that they who will not give care and credit thereunto, and make the right use of such a precious and inestimable offer, tendered unto them from the Almighty maker of heaven and earth their most loving Lord and master, may for that their most sottish ingratitude be worthily for ever rejected and cast of. whereupon it hath pleased our divine saviour to testify of himself, that one of the principal causes for which he was made man, was to publish and declare those heavenly verities unto mankind: 
joan. 18.37.  for this (saith he) was I borne, and for this came I into the world, that I may give testimony to the truth: and for the same purpose, as he was sent himself from his heavenly father, so did he send his Apostles and disciples into all coasts of the earth, that they might announce and preach the same divine doctrine unto all nations. 
Math 24 14.  This Gospel of the kingdom shallbe preached to the whole world, in testimonium omnibus gentibus: for a testimony to men of all countries. And as it hath pleased God to make choice of some certain persons, to be principal preachers to the same his divine word; so his will and ordinance is, that none of his servants shall be ashamed to make profession of any part thereof, when it shall concern either the honour of God, or the good of his neighbour. The first reason thereof may be collected out of that which went before, thus: if our blessed Lord and redeemer Christ jesus was borne to give testimony to the truth, every good Christian (that is a lively member of his mystical body) must needs take himself also to be borne anew to the same end and purpose, and therefore when time and place do require it, they must either testify the truth publicly, or show themselves bastards and cowards, much unworthy the name of Christians. The chosen vessel of grace S. Paul speaketh learnedly and nobly when be saith: cord creditur ad justitiam; ore autem fit confessio ad salutem. By har● we believe to justification, but by mouth confession is made to salvation. Like as there must be a pious and devout inclination of the soul, to bow it to the obedience of faith, whereby, as by the prime means we attain to justification: even so to arrive happily unto the haven of salvation, we must by word of mouth make open profession thereof. For if one should be convented before the magistrate and questioned about his faith, if he than do not stand to the profession of it, he first, deprives Almighty God of that due honour which we all do owe unto his divine Majesty; for we show ourselves to fear men, more than him: and do beside betray his truth, and make it contemptible in the estimation of the beholders. For how should other men be induced to value God's testimonies at that high rate at which king David (who was a most cunning spiritual jeweller) set them when he said, They are to be desired much above Gold and the rich precious stone, If they see them that are accounted Gods servants & wisemen to set so light by them, that they are even ashamed to make profession of them? Is it not a great dishonour to God's cause to see his followers when it comes to the trial, to turn the shoulder and shrink away from it? The ungodly do assemble together to out-countenance the truth of God, to revile and vilify his servants, to terrify all the beholders from the embracing of his truth: And Gods unworthy and faint-hearted soldiers called thither to uphold his honour, and to testify the verity thereof to all the assembly, be dumb and dare not speak one word in defence of it. Shall not such men in upright judgement be convinced to have forsaken God when he stood in most need of their service, and to have betrayed his cause by not defending of it at all, when they were called forth to have ●●oken in defence of it? yes verily. for their indictment is already drawn and registered by that great clerk S. john the Evangelist under the name of certain principal persons among the jews in these words. 
joah. 12.42.  Of the Princes also many believed in Christ, but for the Pharisees they did not confess, that they might not be cast out of the Synagogue, for they loved the glory of men, more than the glory of God. Those Princes partly to keep their credit with that state, and partly for fear● of being cast out of the Synagogue, durst not confess Christ though they believed in him. Is not this the very case of them that believe our faith and religion to be the true Catholic faith and religion, yet to keep their credit in the world, or to avoid those discommodities which by professing of the Catholic faith they should incur, dare not come to that noble act of confessing it? they must needs therefore yield themselves guilty of that which followeth in the same text; that they love the glory of men, more than the glory of God. They had rather please & be well thought of by poor mortal creatures, for condescending to do what they would have them to do, then to be highly esteemed of their most dreadful lord and Creator, as his trusty & faithful servants. They do over and beside wonderfully scandalize their poor brethren that be of the same religion: whereof the weaker sort are by their ill example shaken and induced to forsake their faith. And the stronger cannot but greatly grieve to see God's cause so wretchedly betrayed, and their infirm brethren scandalised. To say nothing of the glory and triumph which they leave unto God's enemies as conquerors over his feeble servants, and the occasion they give them to harden their hearts in their errors. wherefore as principally for the honour of God and his holy cause, so also that we give no offence unto his faithful servants, or occasion of joy to his adversaries, we must pluck up our spirits, when we be called to answer in matters of religion: And not regard either the shame of the world, or any temporal loss that thereby may betide us, but lift our hearts to heaven, and consider how honourable it willbe in the sight of Angels, how grateful to God, and acceptable to our glorious blessed Saviour to acknowledge him before men, not to fear or be abashed to give testimony to his truth in the presence of his enemies. which we shall the sooner and more willingly perform, if we then call to mind these his most comfortable words: 
Math. 10 22.  Every one therefore that shall confess● me before men, I will confess him before my father which is in heaven. Behold what esteem and great reckoning Christ maketh of this out ward confession of his truth, though he shall get to himself little or nothing thereby, yet we shall gain exceeding much, in that we shall purchase his extraordinary favour against the day of our last reckoning, & be therefore most graciously welcomed of him, and by himself be presented to his heavenly father, in the presence of that most glittering and noble company of heaven, as very faithful and stout servants that stood valiantly for the defence of his cause in the face of the enemy; we shall then hear these most comfortable and joyful words, Euge serve bone & fidelis. 
Math 25 21.  well far thy heart good and faithful servant, because thou hast been faithful to me in time of trial & temptation, I will be as faithful to keep promise with thee in this day of just retribution. Thou was put to shame and confusion before men, thou shalt now have honour and glory in the presence of Angels: thou was content for my sake to lose the good countenance of thy Prince: but thereby thou hast purchased the favour of my father, king of heaven & Earth: they, for thy noble confession have thrust thee out of thy lands and livings, enter therefore into possession of the most Ample rich and glorious kingdom of heaven, supra multa te constituam. I will place thee over many things, and give the a recompense that shall a hundredth fold surmont thy losses: for the short and light pains that thou didst then suffer for me, receive from this time forth for evermore, no less than the very self same joy (though not in the same degree) of thy said Sovereign Lord and Master. Intra in gaudium domini tui: Enter into the joy of thy Lord. which are so great, so delicious, so precious and perpetual that neither eye hath seen, nor care heard, nor heart of man is able to conceive.  
wh●t good Christian had not liefer to incur the danger of an open confession of his faith here on earth, then to forego so high and inestimable a recompense thereof here after; specially if he lay there unto the other part of our Saviour's sentence. 
Math. 10.33. Luc 9.20  He that shall deny me before men, I will deny him before my father which is in heaven. Or as S. Luke relateth. He that shallbe ashamed of me or of my words, him the son of man shallbe ashamed of, when he shall come in his majesty. Observe that it is all one to be ashamed of Christ's word, that is, of his faith and religion, as to be ashamed of his own person: and that he who shall not (for fear of the world) make open confession of them in time and place, Christ at the last day when he comes to judge the quick and the dead, willbe ashamed of that person, that is, look heavily upon him, reject him, and condemn him for ever and ever. This is so evident and plain out of Christ's own mouth, that it requireth not any confirmation or testimony of man. And if need were I could show that it was in the primitive church holden for an accursed heresy, and condemned in the name of the Helcesaites, to think it lawful for them that in heart believe in Christ, to deny him with their mouths, when they stand in danger of losing their goods therefore. See Eusebius in the 31. chapter of the 6. book of his Ecclesiastical history.  
To close up this chapter, every good Christian must take for most assured that it is not sufficient to salvation to believe in Christ, and to hold the fundamental points only of our Christian Religion; but rest persuaded that the wilful refusal of believing any one Article of faith (declared by the Catholic church to be such, and to us well notified) willbe at the last day evidence enough to cast any Christian: otherwise many of the old reproved heretics were in the state of salvation, and very unjustly by the most holy and learned Prelates of God's church excommunicated and condemned, which once to imagine cannot be but great impiety. And if any subject how great and noble so ever he be, for one fact of treason or felony doth justly deserve death by the censure of all lawmakers; and a man making the law of Moses frustrate, 
Hebr. 10.28.  without any mercy died, as the Apostle witnesseth: how much more worthy is he to die the death, that shallbe convinced not to believe the fountain of all truth Almighty God himself in some thing, not to give perfect credit to his chosen messengers and infallible witnesses, and to disobey them whom he hath appointed to be our spiritual pastors and governors. And when our blessed Saviour (who loved the eternal salvation of our souls so dearly, that to make a full purchase thereof for us, was content to give his most precious blood) when he (I say) to whom we are so exceedingly much beholding and bound, hath out of his incomprehensible wisdom provided the best and most assured means that may be, to hold all Christians in unity of faith and religion, by tying them to believe and obey his one holy Catholic church: those libertines will not hold themselves to his assigned ordinance, but out of their own presumption believe whom, and what they list, and so by little and little grow at length to believe nothing at all. wherefore to avoid all these most dangerous inconveniences; and to escape Gods just indignation, let us submit our understanding wholly unto his divine revelations, and be most vigilant and careful to learn out what his blessed will and pleasure is that we should believe, and be as forward and ready to believe it without any resistance or staggering. for the sovereign Lord of heaven and earth is a jealous God, and will not part stakes with any, or be served to the halves.  
His high and inviolable decree is, that we both love him with all our heart, and also believe in him fully and wholly. yea over and beside when we be called to it, he will have us not be abashed to confess his holy name, but to stand valiantly to the public profession of his sacred faith and religion, whatsoever it cost us. and then will he without all doubt in time most convenient call us to the possession of his heavenvly and everlasting kingdom, to live for ever and ever in all joy, honour, and glory with his most holy Angels and all blessed Saints. To which most h●ppy resting place Almighty God of his infinite mercy, through the inestimable merits of our most glorious Redeemer, bring us all in the end.  
AMEN.   

I desire thee (courteous reader) to bear with the faults in printing, which be very many through the composers ignorance in our language: the grosser are to be amended thus.  
For, page read. woe, 10. who. Pselues 31. themsel: There est, 64. the rest. wr 69. warning. wr, ibid. writ. boo 70. book. desirer, 75. desire. wn, 76. own. thee, 77. the. Gods it 76. good sir. 851. 78. 85. donasti, 88 donatist. chook, 92. choking. construct, 118. consumat. de, 119. fide 51. 123. 1. hom: 1. ibid. 9 disco, 132. dioscorus. And 138. to be put out. mice 144. 155. ipse. cap 99 158. 9 flock, 164. flock. Alhi, ibid. Alchemist. tossed and 172. to stand. courto 171. court. lest 172. lost. ditous, 173. ditious. others 180, other. dipro, ibid. dispr. boo, ibid. both these, ibid. the. Innocentin, 16. tius. justly 189. justly. nous, ibid. house. or 214. of. one , 226. any one. no 250. yea. yea ibid. no. byth' 241. both. pope's the 273. the pope's. both in, 284. in both. in 287. l. 2. to be put out. ferneut, ibid. fervent. suto, 288. into. biet his ibid. buy this word 300. world. seetes, 301. sects. have, 307. hanc. qui 328. to be put out. qua ibid. quae do 336. doth. do 342. do not. church a, 350. a church. wholly 367. hot. ofo 308. of. dat, 320. orat. cem 225. catum. ibidem (in his successors) to be put out.