An answer to the Ten reasons of Edmund Campian the Jesuit in confidence whereof…An ansvvere to the Ten reasons of Edmund Campian the Iesuit in confidence wherof…
An answer to the Ten reasons of Edmund Campian the Jesuit in confidence whereof he offered disputation to the ministers of the Church of England, in the controversy of faith. Whereunto is added in brief marginal notes, the sum of the defence of those reasons by John Duræus the Scot, being a priest and a Jesuit, with a reply unto it. Written first in the Latin tongue by the reverend and faithful servant of Christ and his Church, William Whitakers, Doctor in Divinity, and the Kings Professor and public reader of Divinity in the University of Cambridge. And now faithfully translated for the benefit of the unlearned (at the appointment and desire of some in authority) into the English tongue; by Richard Stock, preacher in London. ...An ansvvere to the Ten reasons of Edmund Campian the Iesuit in confidence wherof he offered disputation to the ministers of the Church of England, in the controuersie of faith. Whereunto is added in briefe marginall notes, the summe of the defence of those reasons by Iohn Duræus the Scot, being a priest and a Iesuit, with a reply vnto it. Written first in the Latine tongue by the reuerend and faithfull seruant of Christ and his Church, William Whitakers, Doctor in Diuinitie, and the Kings Professor and publike reader of Diuinitie in the Vniuersitie of Cambridge. And now faithfully translated for the benefit of the vnlearned (at the appointment and desire of some in authoritie) into the English tongue; by Richard Stocke, preacher in London. ...
William Whitaker 1548–1595London: printed by Felix Kyngston for Cuthbert Burby and Edmund Weaver, 1606London: printed by Felix Kyngston for Cuthbert Burby and Edmund Weauer, 1606
[40], 326 p. · 97k words · STC 25360 · ESTC S119870
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
But how shall we find out the meaning of this saying? Let us try out this, say you, by the words thereto adjoining. Nothing can be spoken more truly, nothing more fitly, nor more ingenuously. And verily I could wish you would always do, as you pretend in this place to do, sift out the meaning of the scripture by the circumstances of the words. But what are the words adjoining? My body which is given for you, my blood which is shed for you. Campian, you are too sparing and scant in the point: repeat, and say, that which goeth before. As they did eat, Christ took bread, he blessed it, he brake it, and gave it to his disciples, and said, Take, eat, this is my body, and he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gau• it to them saying, Drink ye all of this, for this is my blood &c. So now, Campian, I will deal with you from the words which are now adjoining. What was it Christ took? you will say ⟨p. 65⟩bread: what brake he? bread: what gave he to his disciples? bread: wh•• did he bid them take and eat? bread: what said he was his body? was it any other thing, •hen the very same bread which he took into his hands, brake andl gave to his disciples. Therefore that when Christ saith. This is my body: this is my blood; is as much as if he said: This bread is my body, and this cup is my blood. But the bread and the body of Christ, the cup and the blood of Christ, are they not differing, and well-nigh contrary? Then tell us, how they can affirm, or be spoken one of another, unless you will admit a Tropical speech. Yet, Campian, to use your own words, the matter goeth hard on your side, and maketh very plainly and manifestly for us. For Christ saith plainly that the bread is his body, which cannot be true without a figure, that bread made to eat, should be properly Christs body. And this is that figure which we find so often in the Scriptures, specially when any Sacrament is spoken of. So in Genesis cap. 17. the Lord saith of Circumcisionm This is the covenant betwixt me and ⟨p. 66⟩
you. Yet Circumcision was not the covenant, but the sign of the covenant. Now tell us I pray you, what difference betwixt these two: This is my covenant & this is my body? The former you cannot deny, but must be understood by a Metonymy: and can any man make doubt, but that the latter likewise is to be so expounded. The like we read of the Lamb.
But how shal we find out the meaning of this saying? Let vs trie out this, say you, by the words thereto adioyning. Nothing can be spoken more truly, nothing more fitly, nor more ingenuously. And verely I could wish you would alwaies doe, as you pretend in this place to doe, sist out the meaning of the scripture by the circumstances of the words. But what are the words adioyning? My body which is giuen for you, my blood which is shed for you. Campian, you are too sparing and scant in the point: repeate, and say, that which goeth before. As they did eate, Christ tooke bread, he blessed it, he brake it, and gaue it to his disciples, and said, Take, eate, this is my body, and he tooke the cup, and gaue thankes, and gau• it to them saying, Drinke yee all of this, for this is my blood &c. So now, Campian, I will deale with you from the words which are now adioyning. What was it Christ tooke? you will say ⟨p. 65⟩bread: what brake he? bread: what gaue he to his disciples? bread: wh•• did he bid them take and eate? bread: what said he was his bodie? was it any other thing, •hen the very same bread which he tooke into his hands, brake andl gaue to his disciples. Therfore that when Christ saith. This is my body: this is my blood; is as much as if he said: This bread is my body, and this cup is my blood. But the bread and the body of Christ, the cup and the blood of Christ, are they not differing, and wel-nigh contrary? Then tell vs, how they can affirme, or be spoken one of another, vnlesse you will admit a Tropicall speech. Yet, Campian, to vse your owne words, the matter gocth hard on your side, and maketh very plainly and manifestly for vs. For Christ saith plainly that the bread is his body, which cannot be true without a figure, that bread made to eate, should be properly Christs body. And this is that figure which we find so often in the Scriptures, specially when any Sacram•nt is spoken of. So in Genesis cap. 17. the Lord saith of Circumcisionm This is the couenant betwixt me and ⟨p. 66⟩3you. Yet Circumcision was not the couenant, but the signe of the couenant. Now tell vs I pray you, what difference betwixt these two: This is my couenant & this is my body? The former you cannot deny, but must be vnderstood by a Metonymy: and can any man make doubt, but that the latter likewise is to be so expounded. The like we reade of the Lambe.4n〈…〉 is the Lords Passeouer.
lDVR. He took bread, but he gave not bread to his disciples, but his body. WHIT. pag. 183. Then one body of Christ is made two, one sitting among them, another delivered unto them; yea as many bodies as there were Communicants. And the disciples did receive, chaw, and eat him, whom they saw s•ting with them: but when was the change made? for before he had spoken these operative words, This is my body, he brake it & gave it •o his disciples: either these words make not the change, or he ga•e to his disciples, bread unchanged. DVR. •f there was no change, then the blessing wa• without profit. WHIT. pag. 185. As if all blessings were without profit if they change not the nature of things: God blessed our first parents, Gen. 1.28. Noah and his Sons, Gen. 9.1 Christ his disciples at his departure, Luk. 24.51. was their blessing without profit, because they changed not their natures and substance? Besides to bless is nothing else but to give thanks, as Luke hath it, which was done by words before, not by those, This is my body.DVR. He tooke bread, but he gaue not bread to his disciples, but his bodie. WHIT. pag. 183. Then one body of Christ is made two, one sitting among them, another deliuered vnto them; yea as many bodies as there were Communicants. And the disciples did receiue, chaw, and eate him, whom they saw s•ting with them: but whē was the chāge made? for before he had spoken these operatiue words, This is my bodie, he brake it & gaue it •o his disciples: either these words make not the change, or he ga•e to his disciples, bread vnchanged. DVR. •f there was no change, then the blessing wa• without profit. WHIT. pag. 185. As if all blessings were without profit if they change not the nature of things: God blessed our first parents, Gen. 1.28. Noah and his Sonnes, Gen. 9.1 Christ his disciples at his departure, Luk. 24.51. was their blessing without profit, because they changed not their natures and substance? Besides to blesse is nothing else but to giue thankes, as Luke hath it, which was done by words before, not by those, This is my body.
mDV•. This is neither here, nor any where else to be found in the Scriptures. WHIT. pag. 173. Ma•ke well. This is my covenant which you shall keep, that every manchild be circumcised: what I pray you is, This, but that every manchild be circumcised, and •o you have it in this place directly: but see, Gen. 17.13. My covenant shall be in your flesh, what is this but circumcision? read Act. 7.8. DVR. This, signifieth not circumcision, but agreement or covenant betwixt God a•d Abraham touching circumcision. WHIT. That agreement, was it the covenant or not? •f it was, then see what a goodly sentence you have made, This my covenant is my covenant. But if it was not: thē you must needs acknowledge a Metonymy; that is, that the name of th• thing is given to the sign, howsoever then it must be understood by a figure.DV•. This is neither heere, nor any where else to be found in the Scriptures. WHIT. pag. 173. Ma•ke well. This is my couenant which you shall keepe, that euery manchild be circumcised: what I pray you is, This, but that euery manchild be circumcised, and •o you haue it in this place directly: but see, Gen. 17.13. My couenant shall be in your flesh, what is this but circumcision? reade Act. 7.8. DVR. This, signifieth not circumcision, but agreement or couenant betwixt God a•d Abraham touching circumcision. WHIT. That agreemen•, was it the couenant or not? •f it was, then see what a goodly sentence you haue made, This my couenant is my couenant. But if it was not: thē you must needs acknowledge a Me••nymy; that is, that the name of th• thing is giuen to the signe, howsoeuer then it must be vnderstood by a figure.
nDVR. These words are not to be found there. WHIT. pag. 174. Observe the words. Thus shall you eat it, for it is the Lords Passover. That which was to be eaten is called the Lords Passover. Now they we•e commanded to eat the Lamb, read Exod 12. verse 27.DVR. These words are not to be found there. WHIT. pag. 174. Obserue the words. Thus shall you eate it, for it is the Lords Passouer. That which was to be eaten is called the Lords Passeouer. Now they we•e cōmanded to eate the Lambe, reade Exod 12. ve•se 27.
And yet the Lamb was not the Passover, but a memorial of it: like to this is that of S. Paul. oThe rock was Christ. 2Now as the rock was Christ, so is this mystical bread the body of Christ. Thus as yet you see the matter is never the better on your side; have you any thing else? The Gospel, say you, makes for us, S. Paul accordeth also. Nay S. Paul utterly overthroweth your opinion:3 for when he speaketh of this Sacrament in one continued speech, he useth the wordp bread, four several times, and that after Consecration; so that it appeareth▪•earely to have the proper nature of bread, though it be said to be the body of Christ. But yet you add: The words, the sentences, the whole convection of Scripture, do often most reverently repeat the bread, the wine, a notable miracle, heavenly food, his flesh▪ his body, his blood. In good earnest you discourse of these things with great reverence and shamefastness. For you would prove that in this Sacrament, there remaineth neither bread nor wine, but certain qualities of these things, hanging in the air, and void• of the things themselves. And for any notable miracle, I acknowledge none, but answer you with Austen. They may be honoured as religious things, 5but they ⟨p. 67⟩cannot be wondered at as qmiracles. No man ever denied, but that in the Sacrament heavenly food is both prepared, and offered to all the godly. But those heavenly and holy banquets, whereby our souls are nourished up to eternal life, you make profane and common, when you imagine, that Christ may be received and eaten like other meats, aswell of ther wicked, as of the most devout men in the world; which is an horrible opinion, senseless and unsound. For that you add of flesh, body, and blood, I confess: for being the Sacraments of these things, they have their names given unto them: for signs of things (saith Augustine) are said to be the things of which they are signs. But, say you, here is nothing figurative, nothing obscure by doubtful speeches. True it is there is never a riddle in the words, no obscurity. For the obscurity that is, is not in the words, but in your interpretation of them, which ten Apollos cannot so unfold and open, that things might agree and answer fitly one to another.
And yet the Lamb was not the Passeouer, but a memoriall of it: like to this is that of S. Paul. oThe rocke was Christ. 2Now as the rocke was Christ, so is this mysticall bread the body of Christ. Thus as yet you see the matter is neuer the better on your side; haue you any thing else? The Gospell, say you, makes for vs, S. Paul accordeth also. Nay S. Paul vtterly ouerthroweth your opinion:3 for when he speaketh of this Sacrament in one continued speech, he vseth the wordp bread, foure seuerall times, and that after Consecration; so that it appeareth▪•earely to haue the proper nature of bread, though it be said to be the body of Christ. But yet you adde: The words, the sentences, the whole conuection of Scripture, doe often most reuerently repeate the bread, the wine, a notable miracle, heauenly food, his flesh▪ his bodie, his blood. In good earnest you discourse of these things with great reuerence and shamefastnes. For you would proue that in this Sacrament, there remaineth neither bread nor wine, but certeine qualities of these things, hanging in the ayre, and void• of the things themselues. And for any notable miracle, I acknowledge none, but answere you with Austen. They may be honoured as religious things, 5but they ⟨p. 67⟩cannot be wondred at as qminacles. No man euer denied, but that in the Sacrament heauenly food is both prepared, and offered to all the godly. But those heauenly and holy banquets, whereby our soules are nourished vp to eternall life, you make prophane and common, when you imagine, that Christ may be receiued and eaten like other meates, aswell of ther wicked, as of the most deuout men in the world; which is an horrible opinion, senselesse and vnsound. For that you adde of flesh, body, and blood, I confesse: for being the Sacraments of these things, they haue their names giuen vnto them: for signes of things (saith Augustine) are said to be the things of which they are signes. But, say you, heere is nothing figuratiue, nothing obscure by doubtfull speeches. True it is there is neuer a riddle in the words, no obscuritie. For the obscurity that is, is not in the words, but in your interpretation of them, which ten Apolloes cannot so vnfold and open, that things might agree and answere fitly one to another.
oDVR. There is no figure in the word Christ, but in rock; for the rock was the sign of Christ. WHIT. pag. 175. Then you acknowledge a Metonymy in the word•, because the rock was the Sacrament of Christ. And if here there be a Trope, then why not in these words of this Sacrament?DVR. There is no figure in the word Christ, but in rocke; for the rocke was the signe of Christ. WHIT. pag. 175. Then you acknowledge a Metonymy in the word•, because the rock was the Sac•amen• of Christ. And if heere there be a Trope, then why not in these words of this Sacramēt?
pDVR. S. Paul calleth it so because it was now Christ, who wa• the living bread. WHIT. pag. 188. many of your fellows interpret it far otherwise, yea your sh••t S. Paul overthroweth, 1. Cor. 10.16. The bread which we break, is it not the Communion of the body of Christ? Now not Christ was broken but the bread.DVR. S. Paul call•th it so because it vvas novv Christ, vvho vva• the liuing bread. WHIT. pag. 188. many of your fellowes interpret it far otherwise, yea your sh••t S. Paul ouerthroweth, 1. Cor. 10.16. The bread vvhich vve breake, is it not the Comunion of the body of Christ? Now not Christ was brokē but the bread.
5De Trinit. lib. 3. c. 10.
qDVR. Augustine speaketh of thes• miracles which are made of a bodily substance, and so are sensible: now no such thing is seen in the Eucharist. WHIT. pag. 191. But if there were a true miracle, it would be sensible, and have the witness of the senses, as all other miracles of the Scriptures have. For thing that are hid (saith Augustine) are not miracles. He writ three books of the miracles of the Scriptures, in which he hath not spoken one word of this miracle. Therefore he knew not the Popish Transubstantiation.
What resteth yet, is it not that at length we find out some certain and true sense of these words? I hope, say you, Antiquity may be heard. I verily in this controversy will reject no Antiquity, no Council, no ancient Father, neither will I refuse any monument of true Antiquity. For that same reverend hoary head of Fathers which you speak of, could never come to the knowledge of this new doctrine of Transubstantiation lately hatched. If those holy Fathers and reverend Elders did now live, they would never acknowledge this monster, nor endure the sight of it, but judge it worthy to be abandoned into the utmost parts of the world. Whereas then you say, They cannot away with that, They say then they are betrayed. ⟨p. 68⟩You trifle and say nothing to the purpose: for we can away well with this trial, and fear no treachery in it. But will call you very willingly to this reverend Antiquity, as to a bar of trial. Therefore if you please we will demand of those reverend Fathers, what they judge to be the meaning of those words, which you have produced for example sake. And seeing there is no necessity to collect all their sayings, some few of them shall speak, to give us a taste of the rest.s Tertullian saith,2 Christ professed his desire to eat the Passover, as his own, and having taken bread, and distributed it to his disciples, he made it his body, by saying▪ this is my body, that is, the figure or sign of my body. You acknowledge both Tertullians words and his meaning.t Augustine saith,4 Christ admitted Judas to that banquet, in which he commended to his disciples the figure of his body and blood. In another place also.u The Lord verily doubted not to speak thus. 6This is my body, when he gave the sign of his ⟨p. 69⟩body. And that you may understand, that this was Augustine's perpetual tenor in interpreting of these words, and that he determined far diverse to you touching the eating of Christs flesh: hear what he saith in his books of Christian Instruction, where he giveth divers precepts for the understanding of the phrase of the Scriptures. If, saith he, any sentence there seem to command any impious act, 7or to forbid any duty tending to the profit or good of others, it is a figurative speech; unless, saith Christ, you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you have no life in you: It seemeth to enjoin an *heinous act.
What resteth yet, is it not that at length wee find out some certeine and true sense of these words? I hope, say you, Antiquitie may be heard. I verily in this controuersie will reiect no Antiquitie, no Councell, no auncient Father, neither will I refuse any monument of true Antiquitie. For that same reuerend hoarie head of Fathers which you speake of, could neuer come to the knowledge of this new doctrine of Transubstantiation lately hatched. If those holy Fathers and reuerend Elders did now liue, they would neuer acknowledge this mōster, nor indure the sight of it, but iudge it worthy to be abandoned into the vtmost parts of the world. Whereas then you say, They cannot away with that, They say then they are betrayed. ⟨p. 68⟩You trifle and say nothing to the purpose: for we can away well with this triall, and feare no treachery in it. But will call you very willingly to this reuerend Antiquitie, as to a barre of triall. Therefore if you please we will demaund of those reuerend Fathers, what they iudge to be the meaning of those words, which you haue produced for example sake. And seeing there is no necessity to collect all their sayings, some few of them shall speake, to giue vs a tast of the rest.s Tertullian saith,2 Christ professed his desire to eate the Pass•ouer, as his owne, and hauing taken bread, and distributed it to his disciples, hee made it his bodie, by saying▪ this is my body, that is, the figure or signe of my body. You acknowledge both Tertullians words and his meaning.t Augustine saith,4 Christ admitted Iudas to that banquet, in which he commended to his disciples the figure of his body and blood. In another place also.u The Lord verily doubted not to speake thus. 6This is my body, when he gaue the signe of his ⟨p. 69⟩body. And that you may vnderstand, that this was Augustines perpetuall tenor in interpreting of these words, and that he determined farre diuerse to you touching the eating of Christs flesh: heare what he saith in his bookes of Christian Instruction, where he giueth diuers precepts for the vnderstanding of the phrase of the Scriptures. If, saith he, any sentence there seeme to cōmaund any impious act,
sDVR. Tertullian speaketh not of that bread, which Christ in his last supper made his body, but of another bread, which was the figure of his body under the law. WHIT. pag. 2•0. The pla•e showeth very plainly that he speaketh of no other bread, then of tha• which Christ had said, this is my body: and which, in the night he was betrayed, he took, brake, and gave to his disciples. Tell us where under the law Christ ever said thus, or did thus with any bread? DVR. Bread & wine in the old Testament were Figures of Christs body & blood: therefore in the new Testament of the bread must the true body of Christ be made, & of the v•ine his blood. WHIT. pag. 202. It will well follow from this, that Christ must have in the new Testament a true body & true blood: but it cannot be enforced hereupon, that it must be made of bread & wine. As if because their Sacraments were figures, therefore ours must be transubstantiated into the things themselves. Then will it follow, that because the flood, the •edsea, & the cloud were types of our Baptism, therefore it should not be a figure or a sign, but be turned into th• very blood of Christ.DVR. Tertullian speaketh not of that bread, vvhich Christ in his last supper made his body, but of another bread, vvhich vvas the figure of his body vnd•r the lavv. WHIT. pag. 2•0. The pla•e sheweth very plainly that he speaketh of no other bread, then of tha• which Christ had said, this is my body: and which, in the night he vvas betrayed, he tooke, brake, and gaue to his disciples. Tell vs where vnder the law Christ euer said thus, or did thus with any bread? DVR. Bread & wine in the old Testament vvere Figures of Christs body & blood: therfore in the nevv Testament of the bread must the true body of Christ be made, & of the v•ine his blood. WHIT. pag. 202. It will well follow frō this, that Christ must haue in the new Testament a true body & true blood: but it cannot be inforced hereupō, that it must be made of bread & wine. As if because their Sacramen•s were figures, the•fore ours must be trāsubstantiated into the things themselues. Then will it follow, that because the flood, the •edsea, & the cloud were types of our Bapisme, therefore it should not be a figure or a signe, but be turned into th very blood of Christ.
It is therefore a figurative speech, commanding us to communicate in the Passion of the Lord. Do you think this reverend old man dotes, or hath he not given a judicious interpretation, well agreeing unto the judgement of the ancient? I think matters yet go worse on your side, then they did before: but perhaps you will say, these are too ancient to serve your turn, hear then some of latter times.1 Theodoret a Grecian and a learned man writeth thus in his Dialogue•xMystical signs do not lose their proper nature. This very speech quite overthroweth your Transubstantiation, for if their proper nature remain, without doubt nothing can be Transubstantiated or changed. Now the bread keepeth his proper and old nature, therefore there can be no Transubstantiation: but I will ⟨p. 70⟩join to Theodoret Marcarius; whose homilies Morelius had out of the Kings Library, and hath published them in Greek: and I suppose that you being a Friar, will not reject the testimony of so ancient a Monk: he writeth thus. In the Church, saith he,3 is offered bread and wine, yantitypes or resemblances of his body and blood. What, saith he, bread and wine? but bread is already turned into flesh, and wine into blood. Ought a Monk to speak after this manner? give you them so slender a name, as similitudes? Pardon me, Campian, this Monk was never used to speak after your manner, neither was your Transubstantiation as yet come abroad? what say you now? are you pleased with this reverend hoar head of the Fathers? If you rest not here, it shall be free for you to appeal to any one of the whole reverend company of the holy Fathers; not one of them, no not any one of them, do I except against. For I make no doubt, but if they may be judges, you shall ever have the worst. From henceforth therefore do not cast any such calumni••ions upon us, and boast your self of the bare names of the Fathers; for the Fathers both in this controversy and in many others are firm on our side. As for the Fathers of whom you name many, but I believe have read but a few, I thus answer you. We are not the servants of the Fathers, but the sons. When they prescribe us any thing out of the Law and divine authority, we obey them, as our parents. If they enjoin any thing against the voice of the heavenly truth, we have learned not to hearken to them, but to God.
It is therefore a figuratiue speech, commanding vs to communicate in the Passion of the Lord. Doe you thinke this reuerend old man dotes, or hath he not giuen a iudicious interpretation, wel agreeing vnto the iudgement of the auncient? I thinke matters yet goe worse on your side, then they did before: but perhaps you will say, these are too aunciēt to serue your turne, heare then some of latter times.1 Theodoret a Gretian and a learned man writeth thus in his Dialogue•xMysticall signes doe not lose their proper nature. This very speech quite ouerthroweth your Transubstantiation, for if their proper nature remaine, without doubt nothing can be Transubstantiated or changed. Now the bread keepeth his proper and old nature, therefore there can be no Transubstantiation: but I will ⟨p. 70⟩ioyne to Theodoret Marcarius; whose homilies Morelius had out of the Kings Librarie, and hath published them in Greeke: and I suppose that you being a Frier, will not reiect the testimony of so auncient a Monke: he writeth thus. In the Church, saith he,3 is offered bread and wine, yantitypes or resemblances of his body and blood. What, saith he, bread and wine? but bread is already turned into flesh, and wine into blood. Ought a Monke to speake after this manner? giue you them so slender a name, as similitudes? Pardon mee, Campian, this Monke was neuer vsed to speake after your manner, neither was your Transubstantiation as yet come abroad? what say you now? are you pleased with this reuerend hoare head of the Fathers? If you rest not heere, it shall be free for you to appeale to any one of the whole reuerend company of the holy Fathers; not one of them, no not any one of them, do I except against. For I make no doubt, but if they may be iudges, you shall euer haue the worst. From henceforth therefore do not cast any such calumni••ions vpon vs, and boast your selfe of the bare names of the Fathers; for the Fathers both in this controuersie and in many others are firme on our side. As for the Fathers of whom you name many, but I beleeue haue read but a few, I thus answere you. We are not the seruants of the Fathers, but the sonnes. When they prescribe vs any thing out of the Law and diuine authoritie, we obey them, as our parents. If they inioyne any thing against the voyce of the heauenly truth, we haue learned not to harken to them, but to God.
1Theod.
xDVR Theodorets meaning is, that the signs have not lost their natural properties, though their nature be changed. WHIT. pag. 214. If the natural properties remain, then certainly their natures must, for essential properties can never be separated from •heir natures: yea in the words follow ng in this very place, Theodoret affirmeth, that the nature remaineth. The mystical bread, saith he, remaineth in the nature it first had, in the figure, and in the form.DVR Theodorets meaning is, that the signes haue not lost their naturall properties, though their nature be changed. WHIT. pag. 214. If the naturall properties remaine, then certeinly their natures must, for esse•t•all properties can neuer be separated from •heir natures: yea in the words follow ng in this very place, Theodoret affirmeth, that the nature remaineth. The mysticall bread, saith he, remaineth in the nature it first had, in the figure, and in the forme.
3Marcar. homil.
yDVR. An antitype or resemblance of the type is not the type or figure, but the substance signified by that type or figure. WHIT. pag. 217. An antitype is never properly the substance of the type, though sometime it be another type answering to it, and both of them are but similitudes & figures of the substance. And sometimes a type and an antitype are both one and the same: as Heb. 9.24. The Tabernacle is called an antitype of heaven, being the substance signified by the Tabernacle and no answering type to the Tabernacle. And in this sense do divers of the Fathers use the word Antitype: as Basil, Nazianzen, Theodoret, Chrysost.DVR. An antitype or resemblance of the type is not the type or figure, but the substance signified by that type or figure. WHIT. pag. 217. An antitype is neuer properly the substance of the type, though sometime it be another type answering to it, and both of them are but similitudes & figures of the substance. And sometimes a type and an antitype are both one and the same: as Heb. 9.24. The Tabernacle is called an antitype of heauē, being the substance signified by the Tabernacle and no answering type to the Tabernacle. And in this sense doe diuers of the Fathers vse the word Antitype: as Basil, Nazianzen, Theodoret, Chrysost.
You as Vassals and base servants receive whatsoever the Fathers say, without judgement or reason, being afraid, as I think, either of the whip, or the halter, if every thing they speak be not Gospel with you.
You as Vassals and base seruants receiue whatsoeuer the Fathers saie, without iudgement or reason, being affraid, as I think, either of the whippe, or the halter, if euery thing they speake be not Gospell with you.
In few words, say you, this is their drift, unless thou wilt stand to their own judgement, that are guilty, there is no judgement to be had. Verily this fits you a great deal better then us, for you will receive no judgement but the judgement of the Pope, and Church of Rome; which Church and Pope we have proved long ago to be guilty of most heinous crimes, and there hath been a perpetual variance betwixt him and us. Is there any equity then in your demands that we should stand to his judgement, who […] both a person guilty, and an adversary to us? And well should we deserve to lose the cause, if we would be so witless contenders. Much truer speaketh Augustine, Let one matter encounter with another, 1one cause with another, one reason with another, by the authority of the holy Scriptures, which are not proper to either side, but common zwitnesses for both. And to their judgements would we have you to stand, not ours. As for other things you speak of, I pass them over, for you will reserve them for us till another place; and whereas you say, you have cited many and worthy places of Scripture, we have weighed those places in their balances, and have found them to light to prove what you proposed. And it is your use indeed, rather to take them by number, then by weight. But you charged us with scorning at this and shifting them off, we did nothing less; all we did was to free them from your cavils. We have, say you, alleged the interpretations ⟨p. 72⟩of the Greek and Latin Churches. I confess it, but we have wrung all those weapons from you, and have by them battered all your holds. But say you, what say they then? marry that M. Doctor Martin Luther, or M. Philip Melanchthon, or certainly M. Zuinglius, or without doubt M. Calvin, and M. Beza, have faithfully entreated upon those matters. Tell us, Friar, what should hinder, why every one of these you have nominated, may not as faithfully entreat of th•se things, as those who have lived before them in ages past? what wanted they, which the other had? what skill of art, what knowledge of the tongues, what other helps? there is not any one of these, but hath far surpassed in learning, and all deserved commendation, the whole society of Jesuits.
In few words, say you, this is their drift, vnlesse thou wilt stand to their owne iudgement, that are guilty, there is no iudgement to be had. Verily this fits you a great deale better then vs, for you will receiue no iudgement but the iudgement of the Pope, and Church of Rome; which Church and Pope wee haue proued long agoe to be guilty of most heynous crimes, and there hath been a perpetuall variance betwixt him and vs. Is there any equity then in your demaunds that we should stand to his iudgement, who 〈…〉 both a person guilty, and an aduersarie to vs? And well should we deserue to lose the cause, if we would be so witlesse contenders. Much truer speaketh Augustine, Let one matter encounter with another, 1one cause with another, one reason with another, by the authoritie of the holy Scriptures, which are not proper to either side, but common zwitnesses for both. And to their iudgements would we haue you to stand, not ours. As for other things you speake of, I passe them ouer, for you will reserue them for vs till another place; and wheras you say, you haue cited many and worthy places of Scripture, we haue weighed those places in their ballances, and haue found them to light to proue what you proposed. And it is your vse indeed, rather to take them by number, then by weight. But you charged vs with scorning at this and shifting them off, we did nothing lesse; all we did was to free them from your cauils. We haue, say you, alledged the interpretations ⟨p. 72⟩of the Greeke and Latin Churches. I confesse it, but we haue wrung all those weapons from you, and haue by them battered all your holds. But say you, what say they then? marry that M. Doctor Martin Luther, or M. Philip Melangthon, or certeinly M. Zuinglius, or without doubt M. Caluin, and M. Beza, haue faithfully intreated vpon those matters. Tell vs, Frier, what should hinder, why euery one of these you haue nominated, may not as faithfully intreate of th•se things, as those who haue liued before them in ages past? what wanted they, which the other had? what skill of art, what knowledge of the tōgues, what other helpes? there is not any one of these, but hath far surpassed in learning, and all deserued commendation, the whole society of Iesuits.
1Contra Maxim. lib. 3. c. 14.
zDVR. How foolishly do you allege Augustine, who maketh the Scripture a witness of the truth, not a judge, as you would have it. WHIT. pag. 243. If the Scripture be the witness, where shall we find a judge answerable to this witness? Is it the Church? Then must it be of more authority then the Scripture, which here you affirm not, neither may it be gram ted; for the Scripture is the word of God, therefore he that is the judge of it, must be the judge of God himself. To deny the Scriptures then the preeminence in judging, is to thrust God out of his throne Therefore as God, so the Scripture the word of God, hath the authority both of a witness and a judge. DVR. Augustine ever thought, that the Popes judgement was the highest tribunal upon earth, where all controversies must be decided. WHIT. pag. 244. Augustine never thought so, but writ the contrary De civitat Dei lib. 15. •ap. 3. The Lord, saith he, hath penned the Scripture, which is called Canonical, because it is of highest authority, yea he never once pressed the Arians, either with the authority of the Pope, or of the Councell, which undoubtedly he would have done, neither could he have done better, if the highest judgement had been in the Church.DVR. How foolishly do you alledge Augustine, who maketh the Scripture a witnes of the truth, not a iudge, as you would haue it. WHIT. pag. 243. If the Scripture be the witnes, where shall we find a iudge answerable to this witnes? Is it the Church? Then must it be of more authority then the Scripture, which heere you affirme not, neither may it be grā ted; for the Scripture is the word of God, therefore he that is the iudge of it, must be the iudge of God himselfe. To deny the Scriptures then the preheminence in iudging, is to thrust God out of his throne Therefore as God, so the Scripture the word of God, hath the authoritie both of a witnesse and a iudge. DVR. Augustine euer thought, that the Popes iudgement was the highest tribunall •pon earth, where all controuersies must be decided. WHIT. pag. 244. Augustine neuer thought so, but writ the contrary De ciuitat Dei lib. 15. •ap. 3. The Lord, saith he, hath penned the Scripture, which is call•d Canonicall, because it is of highest authoritie, yea hee neuer once pressed the Arrians, either with the authoritie of the Pope, or of the Councell, which vndoubtedly he would haue done, neither could he haue done better, if the highest iudgement had been in the Church.
But why do I compare these burning lights, bright stars of piety and religion, with the base scum of your Doctors? and this now is another of your reasons, why you were so desirous to have audience in the University Schools. If you be, Campian, so desirous, as you would make the world believe, I marvel why you are so long a coming: for our schools were ever open for you, but you could never find the way into them. If you hereafter come, you shall find many in our schools, that will encounter with you in all kind of learning. And here you end your discourse of the right sense of the Scriptures.
But why doe I compare these burning lights, bright starres of piety and religion, with the base scumme of your Doctors? and this now is another of your reasons, why you were so desirous to haue audience in the Vniuersity Schooles. If you be, Campian, sodesirous, as you would make the world beleeue, I maruell why you are so long a comming: for our schooles were euer open for you, but you could neuer find the way into them. If you hereafter come, you shall find many in our schooles, that will encounter with you in all kind of learning. And heere you end your discourse of the right sense of the Scriptures.
SO soon as the Adversary heard the Church named, he waxed wan: yet notwithstanding he hath devised one thing, which I would wish you to note well; that thereby you may perceive, the ruin and hard shifts of falsehood. The enemy perceived that both in thea old and newb Testament, there is every where* honourable mention made of the Church, and that it is called a holy city, a fruitful vineyard, an high hill, a direct path, the only dove, the kingdom of heaven, the spouse and body of Christ, the pillar of truth, the multitude unto which the holy Ghost being promised, poureth all things needful to salvation. The congregation, against all which the gates of hell shall never so prevail, that they shall utterly extinguish the same. The congregation, which who so repugneth, though he confess Christ with his mouth, yet hath he no more to do with Christ, then hath a Publican and heathen man. He durst not say any thing against this openly, neither would he seem to gain-say that Church, whereof the Scriptures so often make mention. He kept craftily still, the name of the Church, but the thing it self by describing it, he* took quite away. For he hath portrayed the Church with such properties as do altogether hide it and make it, as if it were Plato his Idea;c unapt to be seen with the senses, but subject to the privy insight and speculation of a very few men, such only as by special inspiration, might in their imagination comprehend this airy body, and could likewise with a sharp eye discern ⟨p. 74⟩such as are members of this chosen society, what is become of truth? where is plain dealing? what Scriptures? what just judgments, what Fathers describe the Church in this sort?* There are Epistles in the Apocalypse of S. John written byd Christ himself to the seven Churches which were in Asia. There are also diverse Epistles written by S. Peter, S. Paul, S. John. and by others unto sundry Churches. In the Acts of the Apostles, we find mention made of many Churches begun and enlarged: what were those? were they known to God only, and to his Saints, or also to all sorts of Christians? But truly necessity is a deadly dart; pardon them:
SO soone as the Aduersarie heard the Church named, hee waxed wanne: yet notwithstanding hee hath deuised one thing, which I would wish you to note well; that thereby you may perceiue, the ruine and hard shifts of falsehood. The enemie perceiued that both in thea old and newb Testament, there is euery where* honorable mention made of the Church, and that it is called a holy citie, a fruitfull vineyard, an high hill, a direct path, the only doue, the kingdome of heauen, the spouse and bodie of Christ, the pillar of truth, the multitude vnto which the holy Ghost being promised, powreth all things needfull to saluatiō. The congregation, against all which the gates of hell shall neuer so preuaile, that they shall vtterlie extinguish the same. The congregation, which who so repugneth, though he confesse Christ with his mouth, yet hath he no more to doe with Christ, then hath a Publican and heathen man. He durst not say any thing against this openly, neither would hee seeme to gain-say that Church, whereof the Scriptures so often make mention. He kept craftily still, the name of the Church, but the thing it self by describing it, he* took quite away. For he hath portraied the Church with such properties as doe altogether hide it and make it, as if it were Plato his Idea;c vnapt to be seene with the senses, but subiect to the priuy insight and speculation of a very few men, such onely as by speciall inspiration, might in their imagination comprehend this arrie bodie, and could likewise with a sharpe eye discerne ⟨p. 74⟩such as are members of this chosen societie, what is become of truth? where is plaine dealing? what Scriptures? what iust iudgmentes, what Fathers describe the Church in this sorte?* There are Epistles in the Apocalyppes of S. Iohn written byd Christ himselfe to the seauen Churches which were in Asia. There are also diuerse Epistles written by S. Peter, S. Paul, S. Iohn. and by others vnto sundry Churches. In the Actes of the Apostles, we finde mention made of many Churches begun and enlarged: what were those? were they knowne to God onelie, and to his Saintes, or also to all sortes of Christians? But truly necessitie is a deadly dart; pardon them:
*The scripture maketh honourable mention of the Church, therefore the Roman Church is that true Church of Christ, of which the Scripture speaketh so •• ten.The scripture maketh honorable mention of the Church, therefore the Romane Church is that true Church of Christ, of which the Scripture speaketh so •• ten.
*This is false, for your definition maketh a true Church
for they that all these* 1500 years cannot spy out so much, as one time, one village, one house embrued with their doctrine, until that unhappye Monk by his incestuous marriage had deflowered a Nun, dedicated to God by former solemn vow: or until that quarrelling Switzerf had conspired against his country: or until that infamous runagateg had undertaken an usurped authority in Geneva. If they will have any Church at all, they must needs fetch the same out of blind corners, and challenge those for their ancestors, whom they neither knew themselves, neither any mortal man hath seen, except they brag of such forefathers, who were manifest heretics, as Aerius, Jovinianus, 5Heluidius, Vigillantius, the Image breakers, Berengarius, Waldensis, Lothardus, Wycliffe, Huss, of all which they have begged some pieces of their devilish doctrine. Marvel not though I have not feared these smothers, which if I shall once come to the clear light, I shall easily expel. For this is our speech together. Tell me, dost thou believe as the Church doth, which flourished these many hundred years past? Yea verily: let us therefore discourse of our countries and times; what Church dost thou believe? The congregation of the faithful, whose names are unknown, but it is apparent that many such have been: Is it apparent that ⟨p. 75⟩many such have been. To whom it is apparent? To God; who saith so? we that have received our doctrine from God himself. This is a loud lie, how may I believe it? If thou were fervent in faith, thou should know this as assuredly, as thou dost that thou art alive: Can you refrain laughing when you hear such foolish answers? All Christian people are commanded to cleave fast unto the Church, they are warned to take heed, lest they be slain with the spiritual sword: they are bid keep peace in the house of God: to commit their souls in trust unto this pillar of truth, there to make all their complaints to take for heathen all such as are cast out of this Church: and yet all that, have so many men, so many hundred years, been ignorant, where that Church is, or who belong unto it; will they in darkness still stand upon that point? that where or in what place soever the Church is, there are contained therein, only saints, and such as are predestinate to go to heaven:
for they that all these* 1500 yeeres cannot spie out so much, as one time, one village, one house embrued with their doctrine, vntill that vnhappiee Moncke by his incestuous marriage had destoured a Nunne, dedicated to God by former solemne vowe: or vntill that quarrelling Swizerf had conspired against his countrie: or vntill that infamous runagateg had vndertaken an vsurped authoritie in Geneua. If they will haue any Church at all, they must needes fetch the same out of blind corners, and challenge those for their ancestors, whom they neither knew themselues, neither any mortall man hath seene, except they brage of such forefathers, who were manifest heretiques, as Aerius, Iouinianus, 5Heluidius, Vigillantius, the Image breakers, Berengarius, Waldensis, Lothardus, Wyclife, Husse, of all which they haue begged some peices of their diuelish doctrine. Maruaile not though I haue not feared these smoders, which if I shall once come to the cleare light, I shall easily expell. For this is our speech together. Tell me, dost thou beleeue as the Church doth, which flourished these many hundred yeeres past? Yea verilie: let vs therefore discourse of our countries and times; what Church dost thou beleeue? The congregation of the faithfull, whosenames are vnknowne, but it is apparant that many such haue been: Is it apparant that ⟨p. 75⟩manie such haue been. To whom it is apparant? To God; who saith so? we that haue receiued our doctrine from God himselfe. This is a loude lie, how may I beleeue it? If thou were feruent in faith, thou should know this as assuredlie, as thou dost that thou art aliue: Can you refraine laughing when you heare such foolish answers? All Christian people are commannded to cleaue fast vnto the Church, they are warned to take heed, lest they be slaine with the spirituall sword: they are bid keepe peace in the house of God: to commit their soules in trust vnto this pillar of truth, there to make all their complaints to take for heathen all such as are cast out of this Church: and yet all that, haue so many men, so manie hundred yeeres, been ignorant, where that Church is, or who belong vnto it; will they in darkenesse still stand vpon that point? that where or in what place soeuer the Church is, there are contained therein, onely saints, and such as are predestinate to goe to heauen:
*This is false, our doctrine hath been derived from Christ himself unto us, by the faithful of all ages.This is false, our doctrine hath been deriued from Christ himselfe vnto vs, by the faithfull of all ages.
whereby it falleth out that if any man will refuse to obey his prelate, he may think himself to be blameless in so doing: if he persuade himself that his said prelate hath committed any great offence, & by that means is excommunicated out of the Church. When I perceived that my adversaries invented such devises, and that they would not associate themselves to any Church, that heretofore hath been: and that when they were quite deprived of the thing it self, they would needs (though with much ado) keep still the bare name in possession, I solaced my self, with the hope I conceived of your ripe judgements, yea and I nothing doubted, but that as soon as you should find out even by their own confessions, these their juggling tricks, you would straightways, like plain honest and wise men cut off such foolish snares, framed of set purpose to work your overthrow.
whereby it falleth out that if any man will refuse to obey his prelate, he may thinke himselfe to be blamelesse in so doing: if hee perswade himselfe that his said prelate hath committed any great offence, & by that meanes is excommunicated out of the Church. When I perceiued that my aduersaries inuented such deuises, and that they would not associate themselues to any Church, that heretofore hath been: and that when they were quite depriued of the thing it selfe, they would needes (though with much adoe) keepe still the bare name in possession, I solaced my selfe, with the hope I conceiued of your ripe iudgements, yea and I nothing doubted, but that assoone as you should find out euen by their owne confessions, these their iugling trickes, you would straightwaies, like plaine honest and wise men cut off such foolish snares, framed of set purpose to worke your ouerthrow.
What is it, Campian, you further bring unto us? you propound unto us the nature of the Church, wherein you bring nothing besides your accustomed manner of vain and childish oratory, neither worthy the hearing of our University men, or answerable to the opinion that is held of you. As touching the Church there are many questions and great controversies, and at this day almost all disputations about religion are reduced to this head. For youra Catholics being tossed with the boisterous storms of other disputations, have been willing to takeb harbour in this haven of the Church. Here they dwell, here they place all their hopes of safety and victory, here they hide themselves, whensoever they are beaten out of the field. Therefore they fortify this sconce with all the skill they can, and strengthen it with munition on all sides; for which cause I marvel so much the more to find you, from whom so great things are expected, in this controversy to be so sleight and shallow; for you neither teach, nor conclude, nor yet propound any thing for your Church against ours, which hath in it either forcible reason or proof. But it may be ⟨p. 77⟩this is but your first skirmish, you will haply afterwards deal with us hand to hand; yet I will trace you out in your own steps, that I may lay hold of you, if haply I may find you any where certain.
WHat is it, Campian, you further bring vnto vs? you propound vnto vs the nature of the Church, wherein you bring nothing besides your accustomed manner of vaine and childish oratorie, neither worthy the hearing of our Vniuersitie men, or answerable to the opinion that is held of you. As touching the Church there are many questions and great controuersies, and at this day almost all disputations about religion are reduced to this head. For youra Catholikes being tossed with the boysterous stormes of other disputations, haue been willing to takeb harbor in this hauen of the Church. Here they dwell, here they place all their hopes of safety and victorie, heere they hide themselues, whensoeuer they are beaten out of the field. Therefore they fortifie this sconce with all the skill they can, and strengthen it with munition on all sides; for which cause I maruell so much the more to find you, from whom so great things are expected, in this controuersie to be so sleight and shallow; for you neither teach, nor conclude, nor yet propound any thing for your Church against ours, which hath in it either forceable reason or proofe. But it may be ⟨p. 77⟩this is but your first skirmish, you will happely afterwards deale with vs hand to hand; yet I wil trace you out in your owne steps, that I may lay hold of you, if happely I may find you any where certeine.
aDVR. Jt is well, that once you will acknowledge us to be Catholics. WHIT. pag. 247. Triumph not much for the name, my meaning is to give it you no otherwise, thē usually the name of man is given to a dead and dry corps, where nothing is but skin and bone. He is a Catholic, not who followeth the popish Apostasy, but that professeth the doctrine of Christ.DVR. Jt is well, that once you will acknowledge vs to be Catholiks. WHIT. pag. 247. Triumph not much for the name, my meaning is to giue it you no otherwise, thē vsually the name of man is giuen to a dead and dry corpes, where nothing is but skinne and bone. He is a Catholike, not who followeth the popish Apostasie, but that professeth the doctrine of Christ.
bDVR. Is it so great a fault to fly into the haven of the Church? WHIT. pag. That is not the fault we tax you for, but that you cover all your errors by pretending the name of the Church. And if we by manifest arguments out of the Scripture, reprove and refel your heresies, you cry out you are the Church, and by that thinks to defend all things, though they be never so absurd.DVR. Is it so great a fault to flie into the hauen of the Church? WHIT. pag. That is not the fault we taxe you for, but that you couer all your errors by pretending the name of the Church. And if we by manifest arguments out of the Scripture, reproue and refell your heresies, you cry out you are the Church, and by that thinks to defend all things, though they be neuer so absurde.
So soon, say you, as the adversary heard the Church but named, he waxed wan: yea Campian, it made him blush, when he perceived so chaste & holy a matron, so impiously & insolently to be abused by you. The Church doth ever expel you, and deny all commerce with you. Yet you as very audacious & importunate wooers give not over your suite to compass her. Sure there was no cause why your adversary should wax so wan, unless he feared some evil measure from such cutthroats as you are. Yet notwithstanding, say you, he hath devised one thing, which I would wish you to note well. You will sure acquaint us with some great and unheard of matter; verily I much desire to know what is this one thing: yet I fear it will prove stark nothing; and for all your throes, you will bring forth but a mouse. As for the honourable praises of the Church, you mention, we both acknowledge those, and speak far greater things of it: but verily they agree not to your Church at all; for it is the Babylonish whore, a branch cut off from the true Vine, a den of thieves, a broad way leading to destruction, the kingdom of hell, the body of Antichrist, a sink of errors, a great mother of fornications, the Church of the wicked, out of which every Christian ought to depart, which Christ shall one day fearfully destroy, and give her the just recompense of all her sins. In vain then do you reckon up the praises of the Church, unless you can demonstrate that they are proper to your Church, which you shall never be able to do, so long as Rome standeth. He would not, say you, seem to gain-say the Church, he kept craftily still the name of the Church, but the thing it self by his definition he took quite away. We verily, Campian, creverence and honour the Church, as our ⟨p. 78⟩mother, and in our definition we both retain the name, and clearly set out the nature of the thing it self. But you having lost the Church long since, do yet challenge the name and the vain title of the church. Our definition of the Church doth nothing like you; why I pray you? because we describe the Church by those properties which do altogether darken and hide it. We ascribe those properties to the Church which comprise the true nature of the Church, whose presence make a Church, and their absence mar or destroy a Church. But what are those properties which you affirm to darken and hide the Church?
So soone, say you, as the aduersarie heard the Church but named, he waxed wanne: yea Campian, it made him blush, when he perceiued so chast & holy a matron, so impiously & insolently to be abused by you. The Church doth euer expell you, and deny al commerce with you. Yet you as very audacious & importunate wooers giue not ouer your suite to compasse her. Sure there was no cause why your aduersary should wax so wanne, vnlesse he feared some euill measure from such cutthroats as you are. Yet notwithstanding, say you, he hath deuised one thing, which I would wish you to note well. You will sure acquaint vs with some great and vnheard of matter; verily I much desire to know what is this one thing: yet I feare it will proue starke nothing; and for all your throes, you wil bring forth but a mouse. As for the honorable praises of the Church, you mention, we both acknowledge those, and speake far greater things of it: but verily they agree not to your Church at all; for it is the Babylonish whoore, a branch cut off from the true Vine, a denne of theeues, a broad way leading to destruction, the kingdome of hell, the body of Antichrist, a sinke of errors, a great mother of fornications, the Church of the wicked, out of which euery Christian ought to depart, which Christ shal one day fearefully destroy, and giue her the iust recompence of all her sinnes. In vaine then do you reckon vp the praises of the Church, vnlesse you can demonstrate that they are proper to your Church, which you shall neuer be able to doe, so long as Rome standeth. He would not, say you, seeme to gain-say the Church, hee kept craftily still the name of the Church, but the thing it selfe by his definition he tooke quite away. We verily, Campian, creuerence and honor the Church, as our ⟨p. 78⟩mother, and in our definition wee both retaine the name, and cleerely set out the nature of the thing it selfe. But you hauing lost the Church long since, do yet challenge the name and the vaine title of the church. Our definition of the Church doth nothing like you; why I pray you? because we describe the Church by those properties which doe altogether darken and hide it. Wee ascribe those properties to the Church which comprise the true nature of the Church, whose presence make a Church, and their absence marre or destroy a Church. But what are those properties which you affirme to darken and hide the Church?
cDVR. Why do you not then defend her authority, but diminish and lessen it, yea and horribly blaspheme, affirming that the spouse of Christ may err and be deceived? WHIT. pag. 248. It is you that blaspheme, making the Church equal to God, to whom it is only peculiar not to err, not be deceived. For the Church may err though she be his Spouse, but not persist in any deadly error: as the Church of the Apostles did, when she thought her husbands kingdom was of this world, yea and after showed her ignorance of the calling of the Gentiles.DVR. Why do you not then defend her authoritie, but diminish and lessen it, yea and horriblie blaspheme, affirming that the spouse of Christ may erre and be deceiued? WHIT. pag. 248. It is you that blaspheme, making the Church equall to God, to whom it is only peculiar not to erre, not be deceiued. For the Church may erre though she be his Spouse, but not persist in any deadly error: as the Church of the Apostles did, when shee thought her husbands kingdome was of this world, yea and after shewed her ignorance of the calling of the Gentiles.
we verily judge this to be proper to the true Church, tod hear the word of Christ, and keep it, to use wholly and purely those Sacraments, which Christ, when he departed from his Church, left her, as a pledge of his love to her, and as a proof of her loyalty to him. These we maintain as the most true and substantial properties of the ⟨p. 79⟩Church, and this definition, made of the natural and inbred principles and grounds of the thing, which we define, you shall never be able to overthrow. I pray you what is there here that hideth the Church? doth the word of God; do the Sacraments hide the Church? yea these are they that make thec Church appear as clear as any thing at noon day, these give unto the Church strength, health and beauty: abolish these, there will remain nothing but the carcass of the Church. What drowsy dream then is this, you tell us of an airy body? as if we denied that the Church could be found on the earth; we never doubted but the Church ever hath been, and ever shall be upon the earth: though we also grant that the sight of it being sometime so clear that it may be seen of all: at another time is so obscured & ever shadowed, that one can hardly know it. But no Church pleaseth you, save that which is continually flourishing, and which is visible to all mens eyes, which hath a continual succession of Bishops to be fetched from the beginning, and which is subject to the Pope. Now Campian, as for you, you come to late to tell us of these frantic popish dreams; we have heard, discussed, and dissolved them, above a thousand times. Do you think you are able to make us believe, that the state of the Church is such, that it cannot be hid, that treachery should prevail nothing against it, an open enemy nothing, Antichrist himself nothing? These can never quite overthrow the Church, they may drive it to straits and thrust it into corners.3 Augustine compareth the Church to the Moon, which sometime while it is enlightened by the Sun-beams, shineth out, a• another time it is deprived of the greatest part of the light, and sometime shineth not at all. So the Church sometime shineth most brightly, sometime is more obscured, sometime hardly appeareth, and her whole course is ⟨p. 80⟩continually gaining and losing of light.
we verily iudge this to be proper to the true Church, tod heare the word of Christ, and keepe it, to vse wholly and purely those Sacraments, which Christ, when hee departed from his Church, left her, as a pledge of his loue to her, and as a proofe of her loyalty to him. These we maintaine as the most true and substantiall properties of the ⟨p. 79⟩Church, and this definition, made of the naturall and inbred principles and grounds of the thing, which we define, you shall neuer bee able to ouerthrow. I pray you what is there heere that hideth the Church? doth the word of God; do the Sacraments hide the Church? yea these are they that make thec Church appeare as cleere as any thing at noone day, these giue vnto the Church strength, health and beauty: abolish these, there will remaine nothing but the carkase of the Church. What drowsie dreame then is this, you tell vs of an airy body? as if we denied that the Church could be found on the earth; wee neuer doubted but the Church euer hath been, and euer shal be vpon the earth: though we also grant that the sight of it being sometime so cleere that it may be seen of all: at another time is so obscured & euer shadowed, that one can hardly know it. But no Church pleaseth you, saue that which is continually flourishing, and which is visible to all mens eies, which hath a continuall succession of Bishops to be fetched from the beginning, and which is subiect to the Pope. Now Campian, as for you, you come to late to tell vs of these frantike popish dreames; wee haue heard, discussed, and distolued them, aboue a thousand times. Doe you thinke you are able to make vs beleeue, that the state of the Church is such, that it cannot be hid, that treachery should preuaile nothing against it, an open enemy nothing, Antichrist himselfe nothing? These can neuer quite ouerthrow the Church, they may driue it to straits and thrust it into corners.3 Augustine compareth the Church to the Moone, which sometime while it is inlightned by the Sunne-beames, shineth out, a• another time it is depriued of the greatest part of the light, and sometime shineth not at all. So the Church sometime shineth most brightly, sometime is more obscured, sometime hardly appeareth, and her whole course is ⟨p. 80⟩continually gayning and losing of light.
dDVR. The Church is not to be sought for by these, as by notes, but they are to be learned from the Church. WHIT. pag. 252. Will it therefore follow because the word is no where else truly preached, but in the Church, nor the Sacraments purely administered, that the Church is not to be known and found out by then? Yea the contrary followeth, because they are not elsewhere but in the Church: therefore by these notes the true Church is to be known and demonstrated. For if only Peripatetians profess the Philosophy of Aristotle, then that kind of learning pointeth out the Peripatetians, and distinguisheth them from all other sects of Philosophers. DVR. Thus to search out the Church, is but to seek out one unknown thing by another, which is more unknown. WHIT. pag. 254. As if the Scripture were more hidden and unknown then the Church, and the Scripture could better be known by the Church, then it by the Scripture: undoubtedly no. 1. Because the Scripture begeteth and maketh a Church; and then is a ting hknowne, when the cause is known. 2. I here are many and divers Churches, but there is but one constant Scripture always like it self. 3. If at any time there was ever doubt made of the Scripture; yet there have been many moe questions and doubts concerning the Church. Lastly the Scripture is called a Canon, a rule; now the rule as it is straighter, so is it more certain then the thing that is squared by it. DVR. The notes of the Church ought to be such, as are agreed upon among all, as are proper to it, neither can be challenged probably by any other Church. WHIT. pag. 356. I conf•sse as much, and such are our notes in all things; whereas yours, are nothing lest. DVR. But every sect layeth claim to your notes. WHIT. pag. 256. What then, what if you lay claim to the things I possess, are they therefore not mine own? Be it that heretics do lay claim to the Scriptures, yet they do it without all show of reason, and out of the Scriptures only can they be confuted.DVR. The Church is not to be sought for by these, as by notes, but they are to be learned from the Church. WHIT. pag. 252. Will it therefore follow because the word is no where else truly preached, but in the Church, nor the Sacramēts purely administred, that the Church is not to be knowne and found out by then? Yea the contrary followeth, because they are not elsewhere but in the Church: therefore by these notes the true Church is to be knovvne and demonstrated. For if only Peripatetians professe the Philosophy of Aristotle, then that kind of learning pointeth out the Peripatetians, and distinguisheth them frō all other sects of Philosophers. DVR. Thus to search out the Church, is but to secke out one vnknowne thing by another, which is more vnknowne. WHIT. pag. 254. As if the Scripture vvere more hidden and vnknovvne then the Church, and the Scripture could better bee knovvne by the Church, then it by the Scripture: vndoubtedly no. 1. Because the Scripture begeteth and maketh a Church; and then is a ting hknovvne, vvhen the cause is knovvne. 2. I here are many and diuers Churches, but there is but one constant Scripture alvvaies like it selfe. 3. If at any time there vvas euer doubt made of the Scripture; yet there haue been many moe questions and doubts concerning the Church. Lastly the Scripture is called a Canon, a rule; novv the rule as it is straighter, so is it more certeine then the thing that is squared by it. DVR. The notes of the Church ought to be such, as are agreed vpon among all, as are proper to it, neither can be challengd probablie by any other Church. WHIT. pag. 356. I confsse as much, and such are our notes in all things; vvhereas yours, are nothing leste. DVR. But euery sect layeth claime to your notes. WHIT. pag. 256. What then, vvhat if you lay claime to the things I possesse, are they therfore not mine ovvne? Be it that heretikes do lay claime to the Scriptures, yet they doe it vvithout all shevv of reason, and out of the Scriptures only can they be confuted.
Will you that I manifest it to you by examples? while David and Solomon reigned, the Church flourished in Israel; but when Ahab reigned, the face of the Church was so far obscured, that the most divine Prophetf Elijah complained that there was not one remaining save himself. If there could be such a havoc made of the Church,2 that of all that great number of the godly, there was scarce one to be seen, (though there was a good sum remaining of them.) it need be no wonder that in the kingdom of Antichrist, who surpasseth all Ahabs and Jezebels in all barbarous cruelty, that the Church should be so wasted, that there should appear a marvellous scarcity of faithful men. And yet could Antichrist in that great havoc of religion and the Church, never so far prevail, but there was a remnant of many thousand thousands of Saints, who never bowed their knees to the beast, neither ever received the mark of the beast. Let us pass along to those times when Christ lived upon the earth, and consider the state of the Church of Jerusalem. For no Church can be more like to the Church of Rome, then that, as the state of it was, when Christ did perform the work of our salvation. They had the Scripture, they were a people zealous of the law, they had the Temple, they had Levites, Priests, yea a high Priest; what was wanting here to make a perfect Church? Christ at length showeth himself openly, and bringeth that happy message of salvation; this very Church hated, persecuted, cursed, and in the end killed this Christ, the Son of God, the legate of his Father, the teacher of celestial doctrine; the author of our salvation. This Church then, Campian, was it a true Church or no, what think you? If it was, then the true Church hated Christ, and judged him worthy of death. If it was not, then where and what is the true Church? for ⟨p. 81⟩Christ at the first had a very small number, that if you answerg Christ and his company was the Church, then you fall into that crime, which you reprove us for. If then this might befall theh Church of Jerusalem, that though it had, and by continued succession enjoyed the name of the Church, yet in very truth it was nothing else but a cave and den of thieves:
Will you that I manifest it to you by examples? while Dauid and Salomon raigned, the Church flourished in Israell; but when Ahab raigned, the face of the Church was so far obscured, that the most diuine Prophetf Eliah complained that there was not one remaining saue himselfe. If there could be such a hauocke made of the Church,2 that of all that great number of the godly, there was scarce one to be seene, (though there was a good summe remaining of them.) it need be no wonder that in the kingdome of Antichrist, who surpasseth all Ahabs and Iezabels in all brabarous cruelty, that the Church should be so wasted, that there should appeare a maruellous scarcity of faithfull men. And yet could Antichrist in that great hauocke of religion and the Church, neuer so far preuaile, but there was a remanant of many thousand thousands of Saints, who neuer bowed their knees to the beast, neither euer receiued the marke of the beast. Let vs passe along to those times when Christ liued vpon the earth, and consider the state of the Church of Ierusalem. For no Church can be more like to the Church of Rome, then that, as the state of it was, when Christ did performe the worke of our saluation. They had the Scripture, they were a people zealous of the law, they had the Temple, they had Leuits, Priests, yea a high Priest; what was wanting here to make a perfect Church? Christ at length sheweth himselfe openly, and bringeth that happie message of saluation; this very Church hated, persecuted, cursed, and in the end killed this Christ, the Son of God, the lagat of his Father, the teacher of celestiall doctrine; the author of our saluation. This Church then, Campian, was it a true Church or no, what think you? If it was, then the true Church hated Christ, and iudged him worthy of death. If it was not, then where and what is the true Church? for ⟨p. 81⟩Christ at the first had a very smale number, that if you answereg Christ and his company was the Church, then you fall into that crime, which you reproue vs for. If then this might befall theh Church of Hierusalem, that though it had, and by continued succession inioyed the name of the Church, yet in very truth it was nothing else but a caue and denne of theeues:
fDVR. Elijah spake not of the whole Church, but of the kingdom of Israel, wherein he lived. WHIT. pag. 261. He lived at that time, not in the kingdom of Israel, but in the mountain of God, Mount Horeb. 1. King. 19.8. But grant he spake of Israel only: it is no less for our purpose. For that which happened there, that no good men appeared, though many lay hid, so it may fall out in other churches, and at other times, that none or few of the faithful appear; yet God may have a multitude of unknown believers.DVR. Elias spake not of the whole Church, but of the kingdome of Israell, wherein he liued. WHIT. pag. 261. He liued at that time, not in the kingdome of Israell, but in the moūtaine of God, Moūt Horeb. 1. King. 19.8. But grāt he spake of Israell only: it is no lesse for our purpose. For that which hapned there, that no good men appeared, though many lay hid, so it may fall out in other churches, and at other times, that none or few of the faithfull appeare; yet God may haue a multitude of vnknowne beleeuers.
gDVR. The Church undoubtenly was in Christ and his Apostles. WHIT. pag. 262. See then what followeth for our advantage; it it so fell out that the true Church was not amongst them who had a lawful succession ordained of the Lord; who also had the place, the name, the dignity, and magnificent ornaments of the Church; but it was in a few, who after a sort were cut off from the Church, it is a thing without question, that the Church is not always to be sought for in a visible multitude, and an outward succession of men: but often times in obscure places, and amongst a very few.DVR. The Church vndoubtenly was in Christ and his Apostes. WHIT. pag. 262. See then what followeth for our aduantage; it it so fell out that the true Church was not amongst them who had a lawfull succession ordeined of the Lord; who also had the place, the name, the dignity, and magnificent ornaments of the Church; but it was in a few, who after a sort were cut off from the Church, it is a thing without question, that the Church is not alwaies to bee sought for in a visible multitude, and an outward succession of men: but often times in obscure places, and amongst a very few.
hDVR. That which befell the Synagogue of Hierusal•••, cannot befall to the Church of Christ, whieth the Prophets have plainly foretold should never perish.
DVR. Augustine speaketh of thes• miracles which are made of a bodily substanc•, and so are sensible: novv no such thing is seene in the Eucharist. WHIT. pag. 191. But if there were a true miracle, it would be sensible, and haue the witnesse of the senses, as all oth•r miracles of the Scriptures haue. For thing• that are hid (saith Augustine) are not miracles. He writ three bookes of the miracles of the Scriptures, in which he hath not spoken one word of this miracle. Therefore he knew not the Popish Transubstantiation.
rDVR. Not we, but the Scripture, the Fathers, and reason it self doth affirm it, but specially S. Paul. 1. Cor. 11.27. Whosoever eateth this bread. WHIT. pag▪ 195. None of these affirm it, and least of all S. Paul; for he saith not, whosoever eateth the body of Christ, but whosoever eateth this bread.DVR. Not vve, but the Scripture, the Fathers, and reason it selfe doth affirme it, but speciallie S. Paul. 1. Cor. 11.27. Whosoeuer eateth this bread. WHIT. pag▪ 195. None of these affirme it, and least of all S. Paul; for he saith not, vvhosoeuer eateth the body of Christ, but vvhosoeuer eateth this bread.
or to forbid any duty tending to the profit or good of others, it is a figuratiue speech; vnlesse, saith Christ, you eate the flesh of the Son of man, and drinke his blood, you haue no life in you: It seemeth to inioyne an
tDVR Augustine signifieth the Sacrament by the name of figure. WHIT pag 204. It is true, Christ gave the Sacrament to his disciples▪ but Augustine useth not the word Sacrament, but figure: to show that as no figure or sign is the thing whereof it is a fi u•e: so the bread is not properly the body, nor the w•ne the blood of Christ.DVR Augustine signifieth the Sacramēt by the name of figure. WHIT pag 204. It is true, Christ gaue the Sacramēt to his di•ci•les▪ but Augustine vseth not the word Sacrament, but figure: to shew that as no figu•e or signe is the thing wherof it is a fi u•e: so the bread is not properly the body, nor the w•ne the blood of Christ.
uDVR Augustine disputeth in this p•ace against the Manichees, carping at Moses words. The blood is the soul of the beast. And saith, it is so spoke, as the Sacrament of the body of Christ is called his body, the blood is called the soul, because it is as the sign of the soul, which lieth hid in the blood, as the Sacramet is the sign of the body of Christ, which is contained in it WH T pag. 206. Nay I infer the contrary as the soul is not the blood, when it is o•• of the veins, & may be eaten; so Christ is not in the Sacrament. And as the blood is the sign of the soul, which is not in it: so is the Sacrament of the body which is not contained in it.DVR Augustine disputeth in this p•ace against the Ma••chees, carp•ng at Moses vvords. The blood is the soule of the beast. And saith, it is so spoke, as the Sacramēt of the body of Christ is called his body, the blood is called the soule, because it is as the signe of the soule, which lieth hid in the blood, as the Sacramet is the signe of the body of Christ, vvhich is conteined in it WH T pag. 206. Nay I infer the cōtrary as the soule is not the blood, whē it is o•• of the vaines, & may be eaten; so Christ is not in the Sacrament. And as the blood is the signe of the soule, which is not in it: so is the Sacrament of the bodie which is not conteined in it.
6Contra. Adimant. cap. 12.
7De doctr. Christ. lib. 3. cap. 16.
*DVR Augustine did not think that it was an heinous thing, to eat the flesh of Christ, but to cate […] (as the Capernites thought) that is, torn and rent in pieces. WHIT. pag. 209. You answer somewhat as touching the fact, but nothing for the figure. But Augustine saith there is a figure, which cannot be, if the flesh of Christ be either eaten, as you say, whole, or chopped in pieces, as the Capernites affirm. And if it be an horrible fact to eat the small parts of Christs bo•ie, is it not a more beastly & bloody thing to devour the whole body of Christ at one mor•el•? DVR. It is no more heinous for a Christian to eat the flesh of Christ whole, then it was for the blessed Virgin to conceive & to nourish it in her womb. WHIT. pag. 211. What is this, but as if you had said, It is no heinous thing to conceive and bring forth an Infant: Therefore it is none to devour it after it is borne.DVR Augustine did not thinke that it vvas an heynous thing, to eate the flesh of Christ, but to cate 〈…〉 (as the Capernites thought) that is, torne and rent in peeces. WHIT. pag. 209. You answere somewhat as touching the fact, but nothing for the figure. But Augustine saith there is a figure, which cannot be, if the flesh of Christ be either eaten, as you say, whole, or chopt in peeces, as the Capernites affirme. And if it be an horrible fact to eate the smale parts of Christs bo•ie, is it not a more beastly & bloody thing to deuoure the whole body of Christ at one mor•el•? DVR. It is no more heynous for a Christian to eate the flesh of Christ whole, then it was for the blessed Virgin to conceiue & to nourish it in her wombe. WHIT. pag. 211. What is this, but as if you had said, It is no heynous thing to conceiue and bring forth an Infant: Therfore it is none to deuoure it after it is borne.
*
Particular Churches are visible: therefore the Catholic Church is visible.Particular Churches are visible: therefore the Catholik Church is visible.
cDVR. Why say you then that your Church lay hid for so many years together? WHIT. pag. 260. Our Church did never lie so hid, but it was discerned by your Pope, unless for so many years he persecuted shadows.DVR. Why say you then that your Church lay hid for so many yeares together? WHIT. pag. 260. Our Church did neuer lie so hid, but it vvas discerned by your Pope, vnlesse for so many yeares he persecuted shadovves.
. Icrem. 31.31. Eze•. 37.26. WHIT. pag. 264. As if the Church of Jerusalem was not the Church of Christ? what then happened unto it, which may not befall my others? And for the Prophesies you recier, they belong to the company of the elect, and not to your popish Church to which the Lord never promised any such thing. Christ verily will never endure that his Church should be abolished or perish: but it is one thing for it to perish, and another to lye hid for a time, and not to be seen; he hath promised it shall ever be preserved, not that it shall ever be visible and glorious. DVR Christ hath promised to be with his Church to the end of the world. WHIT. pag. 265. Will it therefore follow that his Church shall never be hid, nor shut up in a few? nothing less: for he hath promised that wheresoever two or three are gathered together in his name, he will be in the middest of them.
DVR. That which befell the Synagogue of Hierusal•••, cannot befall to the Church of Christ, whieth the Prophets haue plainly foretold should neuer perish. Isay. 19.21. Icrem. 31.31. Eze•. 37.26. WHIT. pag. 264. As if the Church of Hierusalem was not the Church of Christ? what then happened vnto it, which may not befall my others? And for the Prophesies you recier, they belong to the company of the elect, and not to your popish Church to which the Lord neuer promised any such thing. Christ verily will neuer endure that his Church should be abolished or perish: but it is one thing for it to perish, and another to lye hid for a time, and not to bee seene; he hath promised it shall euer be preserued, not that it shall euer be visible and glorious. DVR Christ hath promised to be with his Church to the end of the world. WHIT. pag. 265. Will it therefore follow that his Church shall neuer be hid, nor shut vp in a few? nothing lesse: for hee hath promised that wheresoeuer two or three are gathered together in his name, he will be in the middest of them.
