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.
Further you say, That also i•••r own country, by our Parliaments, the same Councils retain their ancient right. It is true indeed, that in these and all other things, which they propound, if they be consonant to the holy Scriptures, they do still retain their ancient right and dignity. But lest you should suppose that we did ever attribute thus much to these Councils, that we judge all that to be necessarily embraced, whatsoever they have decreed; hear you now what our Church hath thought and ordained of these general Councils. Councils, not only may err, but also sometimes have erred, 1and that in these things, which belong to the rule of piety, and therefore whatsoever by them is decreed as necessary to salvation, hath no virtues nor authority, unless it may be showed that it is taken ou• of the holy Scriptures. Cite you now these words, and then contest (as you call it) your sweet country. And in like manner, this your most dear country in which you were borne, brought up and graced, doth contest, entreat, and beseech you, by all those things, which are unto you most swee•e and best esteemed, that you desist any more in this b•dde ⟨p. 99⟩cause to be troublesome unto her; that you will no• corrupt her children with an impious and strange religion; that you will make more precious account of her dignity, then of a foreign enemy: and that you would at length return thither, from whence you have stra•ed. And surely you would not contemn this speech of your country, if you could, even for a little space, lay aside, that prejudicate opinion which you have sucked from Rome, and brought with you hither into England.
Further you say, That also i•••r owne country, by our Parliaments, the same Councels retaine their auncient right. It is true indeed, that in these and all other things, which they propound, if they be consonant to the holy Scriptures, they doe still retaine their auncient right and dignity. But lest you should suppose that we did euer attribute thus much to these Councels, that we iudge all that to be necessarily embraced, whatsoeuer they haue decreed; heare you now what our Church hath thought and ordained of these generall Councels. Councels, not only may erre, but also sometimes haue erred,
and that in these things, which belong to the rule of piety, and therfore whatsoeuer by them is decreed as necessary to saluation, hath no vertus nor authority, vnlesse it may be shewed that it is taken ou• of the holy Scriptures. Cite you now these words, and then contest (as you call it) your sweet coūtry. And in like māner, this your most deare countrie in which you were borne, brought vp and graced, doth contest, intreat, and beseech you, by all those things, which are vnto you most swee•e and best esteemed, that you desist any more in this b•dde
⟨p. 99⟩
cause to be troublesome vnto her; that you will no• corrupt her children with an impious and strange religion; that you will make more preciou• account of her dignity, then of a forraine enemie: and that you would at length returne thither, from whence you haue stra•ed. And surely you would not contemne this speech of your country, if you could, euen for a litle space, lay aside, that preiudicate opinion which you haue sucked from Rome, and brought with you hither into England.
But let us hear, what is this your contestation? If, say you, you will re•erence these four• Councils, you will chiefly honour the Bishop of the chief• S••, that is Peter. And so do we ascribe great honour, unto Peter, and that worthily; neither do we contend with you about him; but this affirm, that those things which were proper unto Peter, cannot in any wise appertain to your Pope, who was never like either Peter or Paul. And in truth what madness is this, so insolently to brag of Peters great virtues, when in the mean time, you cannot prove that your Popes are endued with any such? Do you suppose that any man that is in his right wits, will think that Peters faith, piety, and all the rest of his virtues, have bin derived to your Pope by a lineal descent, from so many other Popes, of whom a great number, were not men, but monsters? This doubtless is a gross dotage, and fit to be taken away,1 with the mad mans purge, and as one saith, for those diseases, reprehension is the best ma•••r of cure. Should I entitle your Gregori• the 13. who now governeth at Rome, with the name of Peter? doth he teach? doth he feed Christs sheep? surely he cannot. Doth he perform the duty of an Apostle, or of a Bishop? nothing less. How therefore doth he demean himself? Sitting in the Vatican, he provoketh to war, moveth seditions, armeth subjects against their Princes, and filleth the whole world with upro••••▪ Did Peter thus behave himself? is ⟨p. 100⟩this to be Peter? can you deny that these things be true, and shall I then yield unto him the like honour, that is due to Peter, being so unlike him in conditions? But let us further examine your words; You will (say you) chiefly honour the Bishop of the chief Sea, that is Peter; but by what Council do you prove that necessary? you allege the Council of Nice Can. 6. In which there is not so much as any mention of the Bishop of the chief Sea, or of Peter; neither in truth could any thing be produced of greater force against your Bishop, then that decree of Nicene Synod: for it matcheth all Metropolitans and Patriarchs in an equal rank of honour with the Bishop of Rome; neither doth it attribute any more to him, then unto the Metropolitans of Antioch, Alexandria, and the rest of the other Provinces. If you please, you shall hear the words of the Council:2
But let vs heare, what is this your contestation? If, say you, you will re•erence these four• Councels, you will chiefely hon•r the Bishop of the chief• S••, that is Peter. And so do we ascribe great honour, vnto Peter, and that worthily; neither doe we contend with you about him; but this affirme, that those things which were proper vnto Peter, cannot in any wise appertaine to your Pope, who was neuer like either Peter or Paul. And in truth what madnes is this, so insolently to bragge of Peters great vertues, when in the meane time, you cannot proue that your Popes are indued with any such? Do you suppose that any man that is in his right wits, will thinke that Peters faith, piety, and all the rest of his vertues, haue bin deriued to your Pope by a lineall descent, from so many other Popes, of whom a great number, were not men, but monsters? This doubtlesse is a grosse dotage, and fit to be taken away,1 with the mad mans purge, and as one saith, for those diseases, reprehension is the best ma•••r of cure. Should I entitle your Gregori• the 13. who now gouerneth at Rome, with the name of Peter? doth he teach? doth he feed Christs sheepe? surely he cannot. Doth he performe the duty of an Apostle, or of a Bishop? nothing lesse. How therfore doth he demeane himselfe? Sitting in the Vatican, he prouoketh to warre, moueth seditions, armeth subiects against their Princes, and filleth the whole world with vpro••••▪ Did Peter thus behaue himselfe? is ⟨p. 100⟩this to be Peter? can you deny that these things be true, and shall I then yeeld vnto him the like honor, that is due to Peter, being so vnlike him in conditions? But let vs further examine your words; You will (say you) chiefely honor the Bishop of the chiefe Sea, that is Peter; but by what Councell doe you proue that necessary? you alleage the Councell of Nice Can. 6. In which there is not so much as any mention of the Bishop of the chiefe Sea, or of Peter; neither in truth could any thing be produced of greater force against your Bishop, then that decree of Nicene Synode: for it matcheth all Metropolitanes and Patriarkes in an equall ranke of honor with the Bishop of Rome; neither doth it attribute any more to him, then vnto ye Metropolitanes of Antioch, Alexandria, and the rest of the other Prouinces. If you please, you shall heare the words of the Councell:
dLet the ancient custom be in force, which was in Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis, that the Bishop of Alexandria have the chief dignity, over all these things: because also this was the custom of the Bishop of Rome: and in like manner at Antioch, and in the rest of the Provinces, let the Primacy and authority be received unto the Churches.
dLet the ancient custome be in force, which was in Aegypt, Libya, and Pentapolis, that the Bishop of Alexandria haue the chiefe dignity, ouer all these things: because also this was the custome of the Bishop of Rome: and in like manner at Antioch, and in the rest of the Prouinces, let the Primacy and authority be receiued vnto the Churches.
dDVR. This cause by you alleged maketh much for establishing the authority of the Roman Sea over all Churches. For when as the Fathers to prove the authority of the Bishop of Alexandria, allege the custom of the Church of Rome, they show hereby that Alexandria dependeth upon Rome; as the mother Church from which she hath all her authority. And that this was their mind appeareth by the words of Paschasmus the Popes Legate in the Councell of Chalcedon, & is also proved by the 39. Canon translated out of Arabic into Latin. The same Fathers likewise assembled at Sardis approved the Supremacy of the Roman Sea. WHIT. pag. 299. Nothing could be alleged more direct against the Romish Supremacy then this Canon, wherein their own proper limits of jurisdiction are assigned to every Metropolitan. For if the Pope should rule over the whole Church, it had bin absur'd to limit every one their own borders, wherein they should have supreme authority according to the custom of the Church of Rome. Neither doth this prove the supremacy of the Romish Church, because they allege her custom and example, as you ignorantly infer: seeing an example may be taken aswell from an equal or inferior, as from a superiors. It is no marvel if Paschasinus, being the Popes Legate, spake for the supremacy of the Roman Sea, neither is his testimony to be regarded, being a party. Your Arabic Canon is merely Arabic, and not Nicene; for of this Councel there were only 20. Canons written in Greek, and not in the Arabian tongue. The Canon of the Councell of Sardis helpeth you not, seeing the Councell of Africa testifieth that i• was counterfeit.DVR. This cause by you alleadged maketh much for establishing the authority of the Romane Sea ouer all Churches. For vvhen as the Fathers to proue the authority of the Bishop of Alexandria, alleage the custome of the Church of Rome, they shew hereby that Alexandria dependeth vpon Rome; as the mother Church frō which she hath all her authority. And that this was their mind appeareth by the words of Paschasmus the Popes Legat in the Councell of Chalcedon, & is also proued by the 39. Canon translated out of Arabicke into Latin. The same Fathers likevvise assembled at Sardis approued the Supremacy of the Romane Sea. WHIT. pag. 299. Nothing could be alleadged more direct against the Romish Supremacy then this Canon, wherin their own proper limits of iurisdiction are assigned to euery Metropolitane. For if the Pope should rule ouer the whole Church, it had bin absur'd to limit euery one their owne borders, wherein they should haue supreame authority according to the custome of the Church of Rome. Neither doth this proue the supremacy of the Romish Church, because they alleadge her custome and example, as you ignorantly inferre: seeing an example may be taken aswell from an equall or inferiour, as from a superious. It is no maruell if Paschasinus, being the Popes Legate, spake for the supremacy of the Romane Sea, neither is his testimony to be regarded, being a party. Your Arabicke Canon is meerely Arabicke, and not Nicene; for of this Councel there were only 20. Canons written in Greek, and not in the Arabian tongue. The Canon of the Councell of Sardis helpeth you not, seeing the Councell of Africke testifieth that i• was counterfeite.
You see (Campian) I suppose that no extraordinary prerogative hath been given to the Bishop of Rome: and that his Province and Jurisdiction hath been circumscribed within determined bounds and borders.1 And after this same manner doth Ruffinus, (if you do not credit us) interpret this Canon. This Ancient custom is observed at Alexandria, and in the city of Rome, that the Bishop of Alexandria take the charges of Egypt, and the Bishop of Rome of the Churches of the cities near adjoining. And therefore let the Bishop of Rome take care of the bordering Churches of the neighbour cities, with which the Nicene Synod hath enjoined him to rest satisfied; and hereafter let him not trouble himself, with the care of our Churches, which appertain not unto his charge. And so you see, that if you had been well advised, you would never have mentioned this Council.2 But you adjoin also unto this the Council ofe Chalcedon, that thereby you may prove that the ⟨p. 102⟩chief honour is to be ascribed unto the Bishop of the chief sea, that is unto Peter. I grant, Campian, that this sea in time past, was had in the chief place of honour, and I know very well that the chief dignity was attributed to the Bishop of this sea; the reason whereof you may easily perceive out of the self same Council. For this was not done by any commandment of Christ, that the Church of Rome should excel in dignity, all other Churches of the world: but the Fathers testify, that the cause why that City was invested with greater privilege than others, was this, because it was the chief seat of the Empire. You may find the words themselves in the same act which you cite.4 But if (as you say) the Church of Rome ought to have the preeminence above all other Churches in the world, in divine authority, what then meant the Chalcedonian Fathers, to affirm that there were some prerogatives granted unto that Church, for this cause alone; in that Rome was the head of the Empire, and therefore they thought that the Bishop of that City, which was the Empress of the world, was worthy of some more honour than others? And this honour to speak of was only this; that the Bishop of Rome should have the preeminence of place in Councils, the priority of speech in delivering his opinion, and the precedence in rank and place.
You see (Campian) I suppose that no extraordinary prerogatiue hath been giuen to the Bishop of Rome: and that his Prouince and Iurisdiction hath been circumscribed within determined bounds and borders.1 And after this same manner doth Ruffinus, (if you do not credit vs) interpret this Canon. This Auncient custome is obserued at Alexandria, and in the citie of Rome, that the Bishop of Alexandria take the charges of Aegypt, and the Bishop of Rome of the Churches of the cities neire adioyning. And therefore let the Bishop of Rome take care of the bordering Churches of the neighbour cities, with which the Nicene Synode hath enioyned him to rest satisfied; and hereafter let him not trouble himselfe, with the care of our Churches, which appertaine not vnto his charge. And so you see, that if you had been well aduised, you would neuer haue mentioned this Councell.2 But you adioyne also vnto this the Councell ofe Chalcedon, that thereby you may proue that the ⟨p. 102⟩chiefe honour is to be ascribed vnto the Bishop of the chiefe sea, that is vnto Peter. I graunt, Campian, that this sea in time past, was had in the chiefe place of honour, and I know very well that the chiefe dignitie was attributed to the Bishop of this sea; the reason whereof you may easilie perceiue out of the selfe same Councell. For this was not done by any commaundement of Christ, that the Church of Rome should excell in dignitie, all other Churches of the world: but the Fathers testifie, that the cause why that Citie was inuested with greater priuiledge than others, was this, because it was the chiefe seate of the Empire. You may finde the words themselues in the same acte which you cite.4 But if (as you say) the Church of Rome ought to haue the preheminence aboue all other Churches in the world, in diuine authoritie, what then ment the Chalcedonian Fathers, to affirme that there were some prerogatiues graunted vnto that Church, for this cause alone; in that Rome was the head of the Empire, and therefore they thought that the Bishop of that Citie, which was the Empresse of the world, was worthie of some more honour than others? And this honour to speake of was onely this; that the Bishop of Rome should haue the preheminence of place in Councels, the prioritie of speech in deliuering his opinion, and the precedence in rancke and place.
eDVR. The Councell of Chalcedon standeth so directly for the supremacy of the Roman Sea, that you ca with no shifts avoid it. For therein Dioscorus, as for diver, other faults, so especially for excommunstating the Pope, was deprived of Episcopal authority, Act. 3. Besides they writ thus to Pope Leo. He extē death his madness against him, unto whom the custody of the vineyard is committed by our Saviour, and against thee who labourest to unite the body of the Church. Again, they desire that their decrees should be confirmed of the same Pope. And Paschasinus saith that the Pope of Rome, whichus head of all the Churches, deprived him; because as Lucentius addeth, he presumed to call a Councell without the authority of the Apostolic Sea. WHIT. pag. 302. This councell is so far from confirming the Popes supremacy, that it plainly overthroweth it: for though Pope Leo with all earnestness opposed against the honour and dignity of the Bishop of Constantinople, yet he obtein•• of the Councell that degree of honour which he desired, which he could not have done if the Councell had acknowledged the Popes supremacy. Concerning Dioscorus, he was deprived for many notable crimes, as murder, blasphemy against the Trinity burglary, adultery and excommunicating the Pope; and you make this last a special cause of his deprivation, as though it were a more heinous crime then murder, adultery and blasphemy. Therein advancing your Pope, as your manner is, above the blessed Trinity. The committing of the vineyard to Peter, maketh nothing for your Pope, who is not Peter, nor any thing like him. Prove that it was committed to the Pope and you say something. The confirmation of the decrees was not a thing proper to the Pope, but also appertained to the other Patriarchs and Metropolitans; yea to the Emperors. Paschasinus and Lucentius accusing Dioscorus, say not a word of the Popes supremacy, although they were the Popes Legates. And whereas he calleth Rome the head of all the Churches, his meaning was, that it was the first, greatest, and most famous Church.DVR. The Councell of Chalcedon standeth so directly for the supremacy of the Romane Sea, that you ca with no shifts auoid it. For therein Dioscorus, as for diuer, other faults, so especially for excommunstating the Pope, vvas depriued of Episcopall authority, Act. 3. Besides they writ thus to Pope Leo. He extē deth his madnes against him, vnto whom the custody of the vineyard is committed by our Sauiour, and against thee who labourest to vnite the body of the Church. Againe, they desire that their decrees should be confirmed of the same Pope. And Paschasinus saith that the Pope of Rome, vvhichus head of all the Churches, depriued him; because as Lucentius addeth, hee presumed to call a Councell vvithout the authority of the Apostolike Sea. WHIT. pag. 302. This councell is so far from confirming the Popes supremacy, that it plainly ouerthroweth it: for though Pope Leo with all earnestnes opposed against the honor and dignity of the Bishop of Constantinople, yet he obtein of the Councell that degree of honor which he desired, which he could not haue done if the Councell had acknovvledged the Popes supremacy. Concerning Dioscorus, he was depriued for many notable crimes, as murther, blasphemy against the Trinity burglary, adultery and excommunicating the Pope; and you make this last a speciall cause of his depriuation, as though it were a more heinous crime then murther, adultery and blasphemy. Therein aduauncing your Pope, as your manner is, aboue the blessed Trinity. The committing of the vineyard to Peter, maketh nothing for your Pope, who is not Peter, nor any thing like him. Proue that it was committed to the Pope and you say something. The confirmation of the decrees was not a thing proper to the Pope, but also appertained to the other Patriarckes and Metropolitanes; yea to the Emperors. Paschasinus and Lucentius accusing Dioscorus, say not a word of the Popes supremacy, although they were the Popes Legates. And whereas he calleth Rome the head of all the Churches, his meaning was, that it was the first, greatest, and most famous Church.
And thus neither do we our selves, now much envy this honour to the Roman Bishop, but that if so it please him, he may enjoy it; so that he do not (because he hath the chief place) imperiously tyrannize over his brethren, as he hath done for many ages, and persuadeth himself that he may do it lawfully. But seeing it pleaseth you to object unto us, the Council of Chalcedon, that you may challenge the chief honour, as due to your Bishop of the chief Sea, before I proceed further, I would gladly you ⟨p. 103⟩should resolve me in this question, why thef Fathers of this Council, made the Sea of Constantinople, equal to the Sea of Rome? for so they decree, and definitively determine: that seeing great privileges were granted to the Church of Rome, in respect of the Empire of the city, they thought it a matter of great equity, that the new Rome that was now graced with the Empire and Senate, should enjoy the same privileges which old Rome had done. And although the Bishop of Rome did most earnestly contend and labour, that the Bishop of Constantinople might not be made his equal, yet he could not by his best means effect his desire, but that the decree of the Council prevailed, which had equalised the Bishop of Constantinople, with the Bishop of Rome. And therefore me thinks you have but ill defended the honour and dignity of your Bishop, when you allege the decree of that Council. Moreover, the Council ofg Constantinople which you also cite,3 decreed no other thing for the Roman Sea, then that the Bishop of Constantinople should have the prerogative of honour next to the Bishop of Rome. And this we also confess, that in times past the Provinces were so distributed, that Rome had the chief, Constantinople ⟨p. 104⟩the next, and so every one in their own order. But what maketh that to this cause, which we have now in hand? For this is not the honour which the Bishop of Rome challengeth unto himself: this not the height of power and majesty which he so often arrogateth.4 The Council also ofh Ephesus is alleged by you with as little reason, seeing it ascribeth nothing to the Bishop of Rome, which did not also agree to other Bishops: for if you take hold on this, that Celestinus the Bishop of Rome, was called the holy president, & most reverend Father, because he threatened to excommunicate Nestorius, unless he abjured his heresy;
And thus neither doe we our selues, now much enuie this honour to the Romane Bishop, but that if so it please him, he may enioy it; so that he doe not (because he hath the chiefe place) imperiouslie tyranize ouer his brethren, as he hath done for many ages, and perswadeth himselfe that he may doe it lawfully. But seeing it pleaseth you to obiect vnto vs, the Coūcel of Chalcedon, that you may challenge the chiefe honor, as due to your Bishop of the chiefe Sea, before I proceed further, I would gladly you ⟨p. 103⟩should resolue me in this question, why thef Fathers of this Councell, made the Sea of Constantinople, equall to the Sea of Rome? for so they decree, and diffinitiuely determine: that seeing great priuiledges were graunted to the Church of Rome, in respect of the Empire of the citie, they thought it a matter of great equity, that the new Rome that was now graced with the Empire and Senate, should enioy the same priuiledges which old Rome had done. And although the Bishop of Rome did most earnestly contend and labour, that the Bishop of Constantinople might not be made his equall, yet he could not by his best meanes effect his desire, but that the decree of the Councell preuailed, which had equalised the Bishop of Constantinople, with the Bishop of Rome. And therefore me thinkes you haue but ill defended the honor and dignity of your Bishop, when you alleadge the decree of that Councell. Moreouer, the Councell ofg Constantinople which you also cite,3 decreed no other thing for the Romane Sea, then that the Bishop of Constantinople should haue the prerogatiue of honor next to the Bishop of Rome. And this we also confesse, that in times past the Prouinces were so distributed, that Rome had the chiefe, Constantinople ⟨p. 104⟩the next, and so euery one in their owne order. But what maketh that to this cause, which we haue now in hand? For this is not the honor which the Bishop of Rome challengeth vnto himselfe: this not the height of power and maiestie which he so often arrogateth.4 The Councell also ofh Ephesus is alleadged by you with as litle reason, seeing it ascribeth nothing to the Bishop of Rome, which did not also agree to other Bishops: for if you take hold on this, that Celestinus the Bishop of Rome, was called the holy president, & most reuerend Father, because he threatned to excommunicate Nestorius, vnlesse he abiuted his heresie;
fDVR. This was not the judgement of the whole Coū cell, but of certain men. Neither did the Constantinopolitanes require that their Sea should be of equal authority with the Sea of Rome, but that it should have the like sovereignty in Ecclesiastical matters, and obtain• the next place to it. WHIT. pag. 306. This was the judgment of the whole Councell, except the Popes own Legates Paschasinus, Bonefacius, and Lucentius, who in vain opposed: for the decree runneth thus. These things we all say, these things please us all. And contrary to your assertion, these Fathers decreed that the Bishop of Constantinople should be matched in equal privilege, with the Bishop of Rome; which equality of privileges, cannot stand with the unequality of authority. Neither did priority of place prove, that the Bishop of Rome had any priority of authority, s••ing this was only for orders sake: otherwise by the same reason the Bishop of Constantinople should have had the like authority over the Bishop of Alexandria, because he sate above him.DVR. This was not the iudgement of the whole Coū cell, but of certeine men. Neither did the Constantinopolitanes require that their Sea should be of equall authority with the Sea of Rome, but that it should haue the like soueraignty in Ecclesiasticall matters, and obtain• the next place to it. WHIT. pag. 306. This was the iudgment of the whole Councell, except the Popes owne Legates Paschasinus, Bonefacius, and Lucentius, who in vaine opposed: for the decree runneth thus. These things we all say, these things please vs all. And contrary to your assertion, these Fathers decreed that the Bishop of Constantinople should be matched in equall priuiledge, with the Bishop of Rome; which equality of priuiledges, cannot stand with the vnequality of authority. Neither did prioritie of place proue, that the Bishop of Rome had any priority of authoritie, s••ing this was only for orders sake: otherwise by the same reason the Bishop of Constātinople should haue had the like authority ouer the Bishop of Alexandri•, because he sate aboue him.
gDVR. The filth Canon of the Councell of Constantinople, ascribed greater honour to the Roman Sea, then to any other. WHIT. pag. 311. This honour was only of precedence and place, and not of authority; as plainly appeareth in the words of the Councell it self•. Chap. •8. and in that the like prerogative was granted in the next place to the Bishop of Constantinople, and therefore by the like reason he might rrog authority over the whole Church.
these things are common unto the Bishop of Rome with others: neither was he only entitled reverend, neither could he alone pronounce judgment against heretics. But if these would rather please you; This is the faith of the Catholic and Orthodoxall Church, unto which all the Orthodoxall Bishops give their assent; you interpret these words amiss. For in these words all the Orthodoxall Bishops are said not to assent to the Church, but to the faith: and that faith, which the Fathers in those their letters embraced, all Orthodoxall Bishops in every place have approved, and we also do defend.
these things are cōmon vnto the Bishop of Rome with others: neither was he only intitled reuerend, neither could hee alone pronounce iudgment against heretikes. But if these would rather please you; This is the faith of the Catholike and Orthodoxall Church, vnto which all the Orthodoxall Bishops giue their assent; you interpret these words amisse. For in these words all the Orthodoxall Bishops are said not to assent to the Church, but to the faith: and that faith, which the Fathers in those their letters embraced, all Orthodoxall Bishops in euery place haue approued, and we also do defend.
But what now followeth in your contestation? Thou wilt (say you) acknowledge the unbloody sacrifice of the body and blood of Christ on the Altar. And for this you cite the 14. Canon of the Nicene Coū cell, in which there is not so much as any mention made neither of unbloody, nor ofi sacrifice, nor of ⟨p. 105⟩Altar. But Deacons are there prohibited to arrogate so much unto themselves, that Bishops or Priests being present, they should take upon them to administer the Sacrament of the Lords supper, because it was not lawful for Deacons to deliver the Lords body unto Priests. Now it is an usual thing to call bread the Lords body, because it is a Sacrament of the Lords body; neither in the mean time do I deny that the supper of the Lord is called by many of thek ancient Fathers, an unbloody sacrifice: both because we retain the mysteries of Christs death without any blood, & also offer up praises & thanksgiving as it were for sacrifices unto God; and therefore Cyril joineth in the supper, these together, unbloody sacrifices and praises. 3And Eusebius writeth, that we build an Altar to the Lord, of unbloody and reasonable sacrifices, according to the new mysteries. Now if you ask what manner of unbloody sacrifice this is, let Eusebius himself answer you in his own words. He hath delivered unto us, a lmemorial of his death, which we offer unto him in place of a Sacrifice. Again, you propound the eleventh act of the Council of Chalcedon, which containeth nothing at all, which appertaineth to this matter in hand, neither that place of Socrates which you quote.5 You might have dealt better and more simply, if you would have cited the ⟨p. 106⟩words themselves, and not only quoted uncertain and confused notes in the margin: but you feared lest you might have bin too easily discovered, unless you had masked your self under the visor of deceit.
But what now followeth in your contestation? Thou wilt (say you) acknowledge the vnbloody sacrifice of the body and blood of Christ on the Altar. And for this you cite the 14. Canon of the Nicence Coū cell, in which there is not so much as any mention made neither of vnbloody, nor ofi sacrifice, nor of ⟨p. 105⟩Altar. But Deacons are there prohibited to arrogate so much vnto themselues, that Bishops or Priests being present, they should take vpon them to administer the Sacrament of the Lords supper, because it was not lawfull for Deacons to deliuer the Lords body vnto Priests. Now it is an vsuall thing to call bread the Lords body, because it is a Sacrament of the Lords body; neither in the meane time do I deny that the supper of the Lord is called by many of thek auncient Fathers, an vnbloody sacrifice: both because wee retaine the mysteries of Christs death without any blood, & also offer vp praises & thanksgiuing as it were for sacrifices vnto God; and therefore Cyrill ioyneth in the supper, these together, vnbloody sacrifices and praises. 3And Eusebius writeth, that we build an Altar to the Lord, of vnbloody and reasonable sacrifices, according to the new mysteries. Now if you aske what manner of vnbloody sacrifice this is, let Eusebius himself answer you in his own words. He hath deliuered vnto vs, a lmemoriall of his death, which we offer vnto him in place of a Sacrifice. Again, you propound the eleuenth act of the Councell of Chalcedon, which conteineth nothing at all, which appertaineth to this matter in hand, neither that place of Socrates which you quote.5 You might haue dealt better and more simply, if you would haue cited the ⟨p. 106⟩words themselues, and not only quoted vncertaine and confused notes in ye margent: but you feared lest you might haue bin too easily discouered, vnles you had masked your selfe vnder the vizard of deceite.
iDVR. The word Sacrifice is in the 14. Canon of the Nicene Councell. And in the institutions of this Councell, it is said that the Lamb of God is on the holy table, which is offered of the Priests without blood, &c. WHIT pag. 316. It is not to be found in the words of the Councell in the Greek, but they are your words of the Translator. And concerning the institutions, their authority was always doubtful in the Church, neither do they make for you, seeing we grant that in the right use of the Sacrament we receive the Lamb of God, Sacramentally.DVR. The word Sacrifice is in the 14. Canon of the Nicene Councell. And in the institutions of this Councell, it is said that the Lambe of God is on the holy table, which is offered of the Priests without blood, &c. WHIT pag. 316. It is not to be found in the words of the Councell in the Greeke, but they are your words of the Trāslator. And cōcerning the institutiōs, their authority was alwaies doubtfull in the Church, neither do they make for you, seeing we grant that in the right vse of the Sacrament we receiue the Lambe of God, Sacramentally.
kDVR. The testimonies of the Fathers which you allege, wherein the Sacrament is called an unbloody sacrifice, make nothing for you: seeing that with them is called unbloody, not that is without blood but without effusion of blood. WHIT pag. 318. The word [Greek or Hebrew], unbloody, used by them, signifieth such a thing as hath no blood in it. If therefore this be [Greek or Hebrew], an unbloody sacrifice, as the Fathers call it, then it is a Sacrifice without blood, and not only without shedding of blood. Again if it be a sacrifice wherein no blood is spilt, then is it not the sacrifice of Christ; for in this blood was shed: nor any true sacrifice, for there is no sacrifice that hath blood without the shedding thereof. Heb. 9.22.DVR. The testimonies of the Fathers which you alleadge, vvherein the Sacrament is called an vnbloody sacrifice, make nothing for you: seeing that vvith them is called vnbloody, not that is vvithout blood but vvithout effusion of blood. WHIT pag. 318. The word 〈non-Latin alphabet〉, vnbloody, vsed by them, signifieth such a thing as hath no blood in it. If therefore this be 〈non-Latin alphabet〉, an vnbloody sacrifice, as the Fathers call it, then it is a Sacrifice without blood, and not only without shedding of blood. Againe if it be a sacrifice wherin no blood is spilt, then is it not the sacrifice of Christ; for in this blood was shed: nor any true sacrifice, for there is no sacrifice that hath blood without the shedding therof.
But let us examine the remainder of your contestation: Thou wilt pray (say you) unto the Martyrs and all the Saints, that they would mediate for thee unto Christ. Thou wilt restrain effeminate Apostates from wicked copulation. Whether the Martyrs and heavenly Saints pray unto Christ for us or no,m we know not: but certain it is, that they aren ignorant of those things we do. And therefore we rather go untoo Christ, and pray unto him alone, who ⟨p. 107⟩both knoweth our wants, and also will and can grant unto us such things as we desire. You if you please may seek after the purling streams, but we will draw out of the fountain it self, neither do we regard the inveterate custom of praying unto saints (for though this custom is ancient; nevertheless, it hath flowed from the well-head of humane superstition, and not from divine authority:) and whereas you adjoin your conceit concerning the restraining effeminate Apostates from wicked copulation; and for this purpose allege some Canons of the Council of Chalcedon:4 in this you follow your old wont: for there is only one Canon to be found against ministering widows, which after they had taken upon them the office of ministration, married again: but how unjust this law is, it may easily appear.5 For when as Saint Paul would have these widows to bep sixty years old at least; this Canon doth admit of those who are but forty: and yet notwithstanding permitteth them not to marry. But you will say they have vowed single life: First, prove that they ought to make any such vow, and then, that if they shall perceive, they can by no means ⟨p. 108⟩perform their vow, that they have done otherwise then they should when they married.q To make a vow in things indifferent, which you cannot possibly perform, is to mock God, and to commit the crime of impious temerity: but to persist in this wicked vow is a double sin. And therefore that which the law prescribeth is to be embraced: The best course in evil promises made, is not to observe them; and we are so to behave our selves, as Bernard counselleth his sister. In evil promises keep not touch. 8rIn a dishonest vow change thy purpose. Do not perform that which thou hast vowed unadvisedly; for that promise is impious which is wickedly performed.
But let vs examine the remainder of your contestation: Thou wilt pray (say you) vnto the Martyrs and all the Saints, that they would mediate for thee vnto Christ. Thou wilt restraine effeminate Apostataes from wicked copulation. Whether the Martyrs and heauenly Saints pray vnto Christ for vs or no,m we know not: but certaine it is, that they aren ignorant of those things we doe. And therefore we rather goe vntoo Christ, and pray vnto him alone, who ⟨p. 107⟩both knoweth our wants, and also will and can grant vnto vs such things as we desire. You if you please may seeke after the pirling streames, but wee will draw out of the fountaine it selfe, neither doe we regard the inueterate custome of praying vnto saints (for though this custome is auncient; neuerthelesse, it hath flowed from the well-head of humane superstition, and not from diuine authoritie:) and whereas you adioyne your conceit concerning the restraining offeminate Apostataes from wicked copulation; and for this purpose alleadge some Canons of the Councell of Chalcedon:4 in this you follow your olde wont: for there is only one Canon to be found against ministring widowes, which after they had taken vpon them the office of ministration, married againe: but how vniust this law is, it may easilie appeare.5 For when as Saint Paul would haue these widowes to bep sixtie yeares old at least; this Canon doth admit of those who are but fortie: and yet notwithstanding permitteth them not to marrie. But you will say they haue vowed single life: First, proue that they ought to make any such vowe, and then, that if they shall perceiue, they can by no meanes ⟨p. 108⟩performe their vowe, that they haue done otherwise then they should when they married.q To make a vow in things indifferent, which you cannot possibly performe, is to mocke God, and to commit the crime of impious temeritie: but to persist in this wicked vowe is a double sinne. And therefore that which the law prescribeth is to be embraced: The best course in euill promises made, is not to obserue them; and we are so to behaue our selues, as Bernard counselleth his sister. In euill promises keepe not touch.
mDVR. You can not be ignorant of this, that the Saints pray for us, if in the doctrine of faith you insist in the steps of the Fathers. WHIT. p. 328. We are ignorant thereof because there is no such thing contained in the Canonical Scriptures, which should not have bin omitted if the spirit of God had thought this knowledge necessary. Neither is it con••oversed what the Fathers thought of it; not doth it follow because they have care of us, they pray for us; neither if they do pray, therefore we should pray unto them.DVR. You cā not be ignorant of this, that the Saints pray for vs, if in the doctrine of faith you insist in the steps of the Fathers. WHIT. p. 328. We are ignorāt therof because there is no such thing cōteined in the Canonical Scriptures, which should not haue bin omitted if the spirit of God had thought this knowledge necessary. Neither is it con••ouersed what the Fathers thought of it; not doth it follow because they haue care of vs, they pray for vs; neither if they do pray, therefore we should pray vnto them.
nDVR. We know the blessedness of the Saints in heaven, and therefore they are not ignorant of our misery in earth. Again, Christ hath revealed unto the Saints living on the earth, divine and heavenly things, and therefore he revealeth to the Saints in heaven, what is done in earth. WHIT. pag 330. Although we generally know that the Saints in heaven are blessed, yet we know not their particular state, their actions, the manner & degree of their happiness: and therefore if your argument be good, it confuteth your self; seeing therefore it followeth, that they likewise are ignorant of our particular state & actions. Moreover Christ revealed to the Saints on earth, heavenly things, but not what was done in heaven, only he made those divine mysteries know unto them, which were necessary to salvation; whereof it followeth not that he revealeth to the Saints in heaven, what is particularly done on earth, unless you can prove that there is the like necessity of this knowledge.DVR. We knovv the blessednes of the Saints in heauen, and therefore they are not ignorant of our misery in earth. Againe, Christ hath reueiled vnto the Saints liuing on the earth, diuine and heauenly things, and therefore he reueileth to the Saints in heauen, vvhat is done in earth. WHIT. pag 330. Although we generally know that the Saints in heauen are blessed, yet we know not their particular state, their actions, the manner & degree of their happines: and therefore if your argument be good, it confuteth your self; seeing therfore it followeth, that they likwise are ignorant of our particular state & actions. Moreouer Christ reueiled to the Saints on earth, heauenly things, but not what was done in heauen, only he made those diuine mysteries knowe vnto them, which were necessary to saluation; whereof it followeth not that he reuealeth to the Saints in heauen, what is particularly done on earth, vnles you can proue that there is the like necessity of this knowledge.
Now what can be more wicked and odious in the sight of God, then to be inwardly inflamed with the fire of lust, and to refuse that lawful mean•• whereby it might be quenched? But you are always harping upon this string; that they are bound by the laws ⟨p. 109⟩of a vow:1 therefore let Cyprian make you answer.s If they have by their vow, consecrated themselves to Christ,3 let them persevere honestly and chastely without any feigned devises. But if they will not or cannot persevere, their best course is to marry. And would Cyprian, think you Campian, have given this counsel to Virgins, if he had judged such marriages wicked, or no better than public incest, as you in your intemperate stile term it? And indeed how much more honest course were it for you Monks and Friars, to avoid your too too public and notoriously wicked fornication, by embracing chaste marriage? for so it might come to pass,4 as your old Pope Pius was wont to say: That many of you might be saved in marriage, which are now damned in single life: But he that is filthy, let him go forward in his filthiness unto his old age; and let him that is holy, •lie uncleanness, and prefer sanctimony of life, before vice and wickedness. And these are the main matters which you have delivered unto us, in that your grave contestation, and have laboured to persuade by interposing the authority of Councils. But you might have considered (Campian) that the counterfeit names of Councils, ought to be of far less authority with us, then the most undoubted truth of Gods word. And whereas you further affirm, that The Synods of other times, and namely that of Trent, are of equal authority and credit with those first Councils: I must tell you, I believe you not, although you promise and take upon you to prove it, when need requires. You promise indeed much, but perform nothing. But here I entreat the godly Reader, and beseech all Christians, that they would attentively mark, what Campian here avoucheth, to wit, that all Synods, and namely that of Trent, are equal to the four ⟨p. 110⟩general Councils: which four Councils, are byt Gregory, whom Campian citeth, marched in equal authority with the four Gospels: from whence it necessarily followeth, that all Councils of other times are of the same authority and credit with the four Evangelists.
Now what can be more wicked and odious in the sight of God, then to be inwardly inflamed with the fire of lust, and to refuse that lawfull mean•• whereby it might be quenched? But you are alwaies harping vpon this string; that they are bound by the lawes ⟨p. 109⟩of a vowe:1 therefore let Cyprian make you answere.s If they haue by their vowe, consecrated themselues to Christ,3 let them perseuere honestly and chastely without any feined deuises. But if they will not or cannot perse•ere, their best course is to marrie. And would Cyprian, thinke you Campian, haue giuen this counsell to Virgins, if he had iudged such marriages wicked, or no better than publike incest, as you in your intemperate stile tearme it? And indeed how much more honest course were it for you Monkes and Friers, to auoid your too too publike and notoriously wicked fornication, by imbracing chaste marriage? for so it might come to passe,4 as your olde Pope Pius was wont to say: That many of you might be saued in marriage, which are now damned in single life: But he that is filthie, let him goe forward in his filthines vnto his olde age; and let him that is holy, •lie vncleanenesse, and prefer sanctimonie of life, before vice and wickednes. And these are the maine matters which you haue deliuered vnto vs, in that your graue contestation, and haue laboured to perswade by interposing the authoritie of Councels. But you might haue considered (Campian) that the counterfeit names of Councels, ought to be of farre lesse authoritie with vs, then the most vndoubted truth of Gods word. And whereas you further affirme, that The Synods of other times, and namely that of Trent, are of equall authoritie and credit with those first Councels: I must tell you, I beleeue you not, although you promise and take vpon you to proue it, when need requires. You promise indeed much, but performe nothing. But here I intreate the godly Reader, and beseech all Christians, that they would attentiuely marke, what Campian here auoucheth, to wit, that all Synodes, and namely that of Trent, are equall to the foure ⟨p. 110⟩generall Councels: which foure Councels, are by
sDVR. The words of Cyprian are not to be understood of Virgins already consecrated unto God, but he willeth those who will not persevere in virginity, that they do not consecrate themselves to Christ, but rather marry, WHIT. pag. 343. Cyprian speaketh plainly of such Virgins as were already consecrated, for he reprehendeth such as having consecrated themselves to Christ, did live incontinently, and willeth them, if they vvill not persevere in chastity, to marry. lib. 1. Epistol. 11. And Erasmus thought thus as appeareth by a marginal note of his. Here marriages are permitted to holy Virgins.DVR. The words of Cyprian are not to be vnderstood of Virgins already consecrated vnto God, but he willeth those who will not perseuere in virginitie, that they doe not consecrate themselues to Christ, but rather marry, WHIT. pag. 343. Cyprian speaketh plainly of such Virgins as vvere alreadie consecrated, for hee reprehendeth such as hauing consecrated themselues to Christ, did liue incontinently, and vvilleth them, if they vvill not perseuere in chastitie, to marrie. lib. 1. Epistol. 11. And Erasmus thought thus as appeareth by a marginall note of his. Here marriages are permitted to holy Virgins.
tDVR. Gregory doth not match the four Councels in equal authority with the four Gospels; but only saith, that as he doth undoubtedly and certainly believe the scriptures, so also the four Councels. WHIT. pag. 348. Gregory saith, that he doth embrace and reverence the four Councels as the four books of the Gospel, Epist. libr. 1. Epist. 24. And what is this, but to make them equal? For if there be any inequality, wo cannot embrace and reverence them both alike.DVR. Gregorie doth not match the foure Councels in equall authoritie vvith the foure Gospels; but onely saith, that as hee doth vndoubtedly and certainely beleeue the scriptures, so also the foure Councels. WHIT. pag. 348. Gregorie saith, that he doth imbrace and reuerence the foure Councels as the foure bookes of the Gospell, Epist. libr. 1. Epist. 24. And what is this, but to make them equall? For if there bee any inequalitie, wo cannot imbrace and reuerence them both alike.
I will not urge this point further, neither will I now shake you up, as you usually do Master Luther, but rather leave you to be beaten with the rod of mens silent judgements. After this you being shadowed with this impenetrable shield of Councils, enter the lists, and observe whether your adversary conveyeth himself; for so great a warrior you are, such a skilful Champion, and so fierce in fight, that as soon as you but show your self, forthwith all your enemies betake them to their heels; and eftsoons you declare how you mean to behave your self in this fight, and what a great slaughter you intend to make. But take heed, Campian, least that may worthily be applied to you, which is spoken in the Proverbs: He that is rashly confident, before the conflict, is commonly a coward in the combat.
I will not vrge this poynt further, neither will I now shake you vp, as you vsually doe Master Luther, but rather leaue you to bee beaten with the rod of mens silent iudgements. After this you being shadowed with this impenitrable shield of Councels, enter the lists, and obserue whether your aduersarie conuaieth himselfe; for so great a warrier you are, such a skilfull Champion, and so fierce in fight, that assoone as you but shew your selfe, forthwith all your enemies betake them to their heeles; and eftsoones you declare how you meane to behaue your selfe in this fight, and what a great slaughter you intend to make. But take heede, Campian, least that may worthilie be applied to you, which is spoken in the Prouerbes: He that is rashly confident, before the conflict, is commonly a coward in the combate.
You speak much of the dignity of Councils, which we also acknowledge to be very great, but nevertheless, the holy Ghost is not bound to multitudes of men, to stately preparations, nor to sumptuous pomp. And we may often observe that in Councils there is much contending amongst contrary factions, and sometimes the greater part prevaileth against the better. You say that Luther durst presume to affirm, that he preferred the judgement and suffrages of two good and learned men, before the Councils. And in truth why might he not prefer them; and who could justly find fault with that speech? Seeing Gerson the Moderator of the Council of Constance, doubted not to prefer the judgement of one man, before the whole Council. ⟨p. 111⟩uWe are, saith he, to give more credit unto a man learned in the holy Scriptures alleging catholic authority, then to a general Council: 2which also Pa•ormitan hath confirmed, writing in this manner: We ought (saith he) rather to believe a simple lay man, alleging the Scripture, than the whole Council together. You say further, That Kemnisius dared to peise the Council of Trent in the balance of his own giddy brain. But Kemnisius did not examine that Council by his own square, but by the rule of Gods holy word: And what gained he? (say you) and answering your self in your own question, you say, nothing but infamy: If Kemnisius have not your good word, it is no great wonder; for he hath achieved that by his learning, virtue and industry, that he may seem worthy of envy and hatred from such as you are. But if true and deserved praise be due to good deeds, he hath obtained an honourable reward; even the everlasting glory of a good name. Yea (say you) if he take not heed, he shall be buried with Arrius. But it behooved you, Campian, to trouble your head, rather about your own, then Kemnisius his funerals: and take you heed, least for your evil deeds, there be a sepulchre provided for you amongst the damned.
You speake much of the dignitie of Councels, which we also acknowledge to be very great, but neuerthelesse, the holy Ghost is not bound to multitudes of men, to stately preparations, nor to sumptuous pompe. And we may often obserue that in Councels there is much contending amongst contrarie factions, and sometimes the greater part preuaileth against the better. You say that Luther durst presume to affirme, that hee preferred the iudgement and suffrages of two good and learned men, before the Councels. And in truth why might he not preferre them; and who could iustly finde fault with that speech? Seeing Gerson the Moderator of the Councell of Constance, doubted not to preferre the iudgement of one man, before the whole Councell. ⟨p. 111⟩uWe are, saith he, to giue more credit vnto a man learned in the holy Scriptures alleaging catholike authority, then to a generall Councell: 2which also Pa•ormitan hath confirmed, writing in this manner: We ought (saith he) rather to beleeue a simple lay man, alleaging the Scripture, than the whole Councell together. You say further, That Kemnisius dared to peise the Councell of Trent in the ballance of his owne giddie braine. But Kemnisius did not examine that Councell by his owne square, but by the rule of Gods holy word: And what gained he? (say you) and answering your selfe in your owne question, you say, nothing but infamie: If Kemnisius haue not your good word, it is no great wonder; for he hath atchieued that by his learning, vertue and industrie, that he may seeme worthie of enuie and hatred from such as you are. But if true and deserued praise be due to good deeds, he hath obtained an honourable reward; euen the euerlasting glorie of a good name. Yea (say you) if he take not heede, he shall be buried with Arrius. But it behooued you, Campian, to trouble your head, rather about your owne, then Kemnisius his funerals: and take you heede, least for your euill deedes, there be a sepulchre prouided for you amongst the damned.
uDVR. Gerson did never prefer the judgement of one man before a whole Councell. WHIT. pag. 349. It is untrue, for he thus writeth. We ought rather to b• leeve in a point of doctrine a simple man not authorised, but yet excellently learned in the scriptures, thē the Pope. Again a man thus learned, ought to oppose himself against a general Councell, if he perceive that the greater part incline to that which is contrary to the Gospel, either through malice or ignorance, Gers. de exam. doctr. 1. par. Considerat. 5.DVR. Gerson did neuer preferre the iudgement of one man before a vvhole Councell. WHIT. pag. 349. It is vntrue, for he thus writeth. We ought rather to b• leeue in a point of •octrine a simple man not authorised, but yet excellently learned in the scriptures, thē the Pope. Againe a man thus learned, ought to oppose himselfe against a generall Councell, if he perceiue that the greater part incline to that which is contrary to the Gospel, either through malice or ignorance, Gers. de exam. doctr. 1. par. Considerat. 5.
Now here again you begin more highly to extol the Council of Trent; as though we knew not the notable carriage and behaviour of that famous and goodly Synod. But for my part I easily allow you to be so far in love with it, neither in truth will I become your rival.1 Others have spoken of it those things that are most true: both how it was called, how handled, and how it was dismissed; and therefore I will not go about to refute your affections. Let it enjoy, for me, that credit and estimation which it can. Although every one knoweth thus much, that it was not to be esteemed a Council of the whole Christian state,2 but rather a Conventicle of a ⟨p. 112⟩few men running together into the same place. There was there present a sort of sill•e Friars which did sustain the greatest part of the burden, by disputing, writing and playing the Orators. For as for the Bishops and chief Cardinals, they busied their heads about other matters, for which they were specially assembled. But as I said, let it be such as it was, for I am not offended at your commendations. And let the Bishops make their glorious brags, that they long abode in that school; out of which as yet, as far as I know, not many, either learned divines or good Pastors have come. You also usher in Antony of Prague greatly congratulating with himself; for you would needs show him some kindness, because he made you a Priest. Well; Campian was created Priest by Antony Archbishop of Prague; surely I fear lest you travelled too far to buy such base wares. But now you may celebrate your Masses, seeing you are shaven and anointed, and made a Priest.
Now here againe you begin more highly to extoll the Councell of Trent; as though we knew not the notable carriage and behauiour of that famous and goodly Synode. But for my part I easilie allow you to be so farre in loue with it, neither in truth will I become your riuall.1 Others haue spoken of it those things that are most true: both how it was called, how handled, and how it was dismissed; and therefore I will not goe about to refute your affections. Let it enioy, for me, that credit and estimation which it can. Although euery one knoweth thus much, that it was not to bee esteemed a Councell of the whole Christian state,2 but rather a Conuenticle of a ⟨p. 112⟩few men running together into the same place. There was there present a sort of sill•e Friers which did susteine the greatest part of the burthen, by disputing, writing and playing the Orators. For as for the Bishops and chiefe Cardinals, they busied their heads about other matters, for which they were speciallie assembled. But as I said, let it be such as it was, for I am not offended at your commendations. And let the Bishops make their glorious bragges, that they long abode in that schoole; out of which as yet, as farre as I know, not many, either learned diuines or good Pastors haue come. You also vsher in Antonie of Prage greatly congratulating with himselfe; for you would needs shew him some kindnes, because he made you a Priest. Well; Campian was created Priest by Antony Archbishop of Prage; surely I feare lest you trauelled too far to buy such base wares. But now you may celebrate your Masses, seeing you are shauen and annointed, and made a Priest.
Moreover you demand & exceedingly triumph, why your Adversaries called hither, and secured by the caution of public promise, did not make all hast to come unto it? In which you are sufficiently answered in the Apology of our Church. For what should we do there? or to what end should we undertake so long a journey, either that being mocked and abused, we might return home again, or being burned in the Council, we should pay for our rashness? For what place of disputation was left amongst those, who had every man plighted their faith to the Bishop of Rome, & had religiously bound themselves by oath, that they would never either do or say any thing against his dignity and pleasure? what therefore might be hoped for from these, which might draw any to the disputation? besides the* calamity of John Huss ⟨p. 113⟩of Bohemia, and Hierome of Prague, whom the Fathers burned in the Council of Constance, brought just cause of fear. And yet Huss came to the Council, trusting in the protection of a public promise. Yea but (say you) the Constantine Fathers made no promise, and therefore did not break any. But Sigismund the Emperor gave his public warrant, unto whom it was fit that he should give credit. Notwithstanding, coming to the Council, he was presently apprehended and cast into prison, and pleading his cause before the Council he was condemned and burned, although Sigismond stormed at it. Neither did he fly, as you falsely report, neither in truth could he escape: but thus this holy and innocent man was devoured like a sheep by furious wolves. And what I pray you, did the Emperors authority, commandment, or public warrantize profit him? The Emperor (say you) signed it, but the state of Christendom, greater than the Emperors, did repeal it. And who then can be safe, if the Emperors bear no sway in the Council? Neither doth the horrible murder of John Huss, contrary to a public warrant of protection, so much discourage us from coming to your Councils, as that decree published by the Council it self, That promise is not to be kept with Heretics. Should I then believe you, who I know will keep no promise? If I do, surely I am worthy to perish after the same manner. Hierome of Prague likewise came to the Council of his own accord, and making public profession of his faith, was burned.
Moreouer you demaund & exceedingly triumph, why your Aduersaries called hither, and secured by the caution of publike promise, did not make all hast to come vnto it? In which you are sufficiently answered in the Apoligie of our Church. For what should wee doe there? or to what end should we vndertake so long a iourney, either that being mocked and abused, we might returne home againe, or being burned in the Councell, we should pay for our rashnes? For what place of disputation was left amongst those, who had euery man plighted their faith to the Bishop of Rome, & had religiously bound themselues by oath, that they would neuer either doe or say any thing againg his dignity and pleasure? what therfore might be hoped for from these, which might draw any to the disputation? besides the* calamity of Iohn Husse ⟨p. 113⟩of Bohemia, and Hierome of Prage, whom the Fathers burned in the Councell of Constance, brought iust cause of feare. And yet Husse came to the Councell, trusting in the protection of a publike promise. Yea but (say you) the Constantine Fathers made no promise, and therefore did not breake any. But Sigismonde the Emperor gaue his publike warrant, vnto whom it was fit that he should giue credit. Notwithstanding, comming to the Councell, he was presently apprehended and cast into prison, and pleading his cause before the Councell he was condemned and burned, although Sigismond stormed at it. Neither did hee flie, as you falsely report, neither in truth could hee escape: but thus this holy and innocent man was deuoured like a sheepe by furious wolues. And what I pray you, did the Emperors authoritie, commandement, or publike warrantize profit him? The Emperor (say you) signed it, but the state of Christendome, greater than the Emperors, did repeale it. And who then can be safe, if the Emperors beare no sway in the Councell? Neither doth the horrible murther of Iohn Husse, contrarie to a publike warrant of protection, so much discourage vs from comming to your Councels, as that decree published by the Councell it selfe, That promise is not to be kept with Heretikes. Should I then beleeue you, who I know will keepe no promise? If I doe, surely I am worthy to perish after the same manner. Hierome of Prage likewise came to the Councell of his owne accord, and making publike profession of his faith, was burned.
*DVR. John Huss was not called by the Councell of Constance, neither received from it any public promise. And whereas you say that it was decreed in this Councell, that faith is not to be kept with heretics, it is false. WHIT. pag. 352. The Emperor Sigismund gave him his public warrant, which the Councel most dishonourably infringed. And after they had put Huss to death contrary to public promise, they enacted a law that a promise made unto heretics by the Emperor or by any King or secular Prince, should not hinder any Ecclesiastical Judges from proceeding against them according to law. Concil. Constant. Sess. 19.DVR. Iohn Husse was not called by the Councell of Constance, neither receiued from it any publike promise. And whereas you say that it was decreed in this Councell, that faith is not to be kept with heretikes, it is false. WHIT. pag. 352. The Emperour Sigismund gaue him his publike warrant, which the Councel most dishonorably infringed. And after they had put Husse to death contrary to publike promise, they enacted a law that a promise made vnto heretikes by the Emperour or by any King or secular Prince, should not hinder any Ecclesiasticall Iudges from proceeding against them according to law. Concil. Constant. Sess. 19.
So that the case of these two, (than the which all Christendom at that time had not any more holy or learned) shall remain as a perpetual monument of your treachery and most horrible cruelty; and as a notable caveat unto all the godly, to beware of you for the time to come. Concerning Luther, whom you, cursed Friar, call the hatred of ⟨p. 114⟩God and men, the hand and power of God himself so defended him, that you could never hurt him. For will was not wanting to you for the destruction of Luther, but opportunity. But he was safe (say you) upon the Emperors word: neither in truth durst the Pope attempt Luther's death, after the Emperor had promised him safety. For would Charles the fifth, think you, have endured it? It was not behoofefull for the Pope to have attempted any thing, whereby the Emperors faith might appear falsified: for Charles would never so easily have put up such an indignity as Sigismond had done in time past.
So that the case of these two, (than the which all Christendome at that time had not any more holy or learned) shall remaine as a perpetuall monument of your treacherie and most horrible crueltie; and as a notable caueat vnto all the godly, to beware of you for the time to come. Concerning Luther, whom you, cursed Frier, call the hatred of ⟨p. 114⟩God and men, the hand and power of God himselfe so defended him, that you could neuer hurt him. For will was not wanting to you for the destruction of Luther, but opportunitie. But he was safe (say you) vpon the Emperors word: neither in truth durst the Pope attempt Luthers death, after the Emperor had promised him safetie. For would Charles the fifth, thinke you, haue endured it? It was not behoofefull for the Pope to haue attempted any thing, whereby the Emperors faith might appeare falsified: for Charles would neuer so easilie haue put vp such an indignitie as Sigismond had done in time past.
But (say you) they do too much brag in corners, in which when they have but sounded three Greek words, they would seem to be very wise. They might perhaps seem wise to you, who scarcely (as I suppose) can sound three Greek words. They cannot (as you say) endure the light, which would bring a Scholar into account, and would recall him into some place of reckoning: and is this it, Campian, which you hunt after, a name, same, places of account, to be pointed at with the finger, and to be thus spoken of, This is the man advanced to greatest grace, excelling in worth, and worthy place? Doth this grieve you that you are not highly esteemed of, and do not sit in high place? Well man, proceed in your virtuous courses, and go forward in the way, into the which you are entered to your great praise, and there is good hope you may ascend unto such an high place as you are worthy of.
But (say you) they doe too much brag in corners, in which when they haue but sounded three Greeke words, they would seeme to be very wise. They might perhaps seeme wise to you, who scarcely (as I suppose) can sound three Greeke words. They cannot (as you say) indure the light, which would bring a Scholler into account, and would recall him into some place of reckening: and is this it, Campian, which you hunt after, a name, same, places of account, to be poynted at with the finger, and to be thus spoken of, This is the man aduanced to greatest grace, excelling in worth, and worthy place? Doth this grieue you that you are not highly esteemed of, and doe not sit in high place? Well man, proceede in your vertuous courses, and goe forward in the way, into the which you are entred to your great praise, and there is good hope you may ascend vnto such an high place as you are worthie of.
But whereas you desire, That the English Catholics may obtain a Patent of impunity, if they love the salvation of their souls, surely you require a thing unjust & unequal. For what likeness is there in this, that learned men should assemble from all parts, unto a public Council, and that Runagates should be permitted to return unto their country? We will (say you) with ⟨p. 115⟩winged speed hast unto the Court, relying our selves upon the Princes word. And so indeed you safely may: for if she give her word, you may promise unto your selves assured security. And I the more easily believe you speak the truth, seeing some of you already, have hasted into the Gourt, having no promise from the Prince to rest upon. But Campian, fly you rather to the Indians, that you may take a survey of your Popes new Province: for our most wise Prince desires no such guests, but banisheth you as far as she can from her.
But wheras you desire, That the English Catholikes may obtaine a Patent of impunity, if they loue the saluation of their soules, surely you require a thing vniust & vnequal. For what liknes is there in this, that learned men should assemble from all parts, vnto a publike Councell, and that Runnagates should be permitted to returne vnto their countrie? We will (say you) with ⟨p. 115⟩winged speed hast vnto the Court, relying our selues vpon the Princes word. And so indeed you safely may: for if shee giue her word, you may promise vnto your selues assured securitie. And I the more easilie beleeue you speake the truth, seeing some of you already, haue hasted into the Gourt, hauing no promise from the Prince to rest vpon. But Campian, flie you rather to the Indians, that you may take a suruey of your Popes new Prouince: for our most wise Prince desires no such guests, but banisheth you as farre as she can from her.
DVR. The filth Canon of the Councell of Constantinople, ascribed greater honor to the Romane Sea, then to any other. WHIT. pag. 311. This honor was only of precedence and place, and not of authority; as plainly appeareth in the words of the Councell it self•. Chap. •8. and in that the like prerogatiue was graunted in the next place to the Bishop of Constantinople, and therefore by the like reason he might •rrog••• authority ouer the whole Church.
3Canon. 5.
4Ephes. Conc. in Epist. ad Nestor.
hDVR. In the Councell of Ephesus divers things are contained, which approve the supremacy of the Sea of Rome, &c. WHIT. pag. 313. Campian cited the Epistle of the Councell to Nestorius, wherein there is nothing which any way favoureth the Popes supremacy; the which you perceiving, do rake together other fragments concerning things which are not in controversy, and leave out those points which make against you.DVR. In the Councell of Ephesus diuers things are conteined, vvhich approue the supremacy of the Sea of Rome, &c. WHIT. pag. 313. Campian cited the Epistle of the Councell to Nestorius, wherein there is nothing which any way fauoureth the Popes supremacy; the which you perceiuing, do rake together other fragments concerning things which are not in controuersie, and leaue out those points which make against you.
lDVR. Eusebius doth not call it a sacrifice, because it is a sole & bare memorial of the new Testament, as you suppose: but because we offer an unbloody socrifice, for a memorial of a bloody sacrifice. WHIT. pag. 323. Neither do I affirm it, for this is not a bare memorial, seeing the thing it self, thereby signified, is therein contained in the right use of it. But withal I deny that this memorial is the same sacrifice which Christ offered, as you would have it; for how can a sacrifice be ye self same with it of which it is a memorial? If therefore this be an unbloody sacrifice, thē it is not the Sacrifice which Christ offered, which was bloody, & the memorial of no other sacrifice. See Eus. de Demon. l. 1.DVR. Eusebius doth not call it a sacrifice, because it is a sole & bare memoriall of the new Testament, as you suppose: but because vvee offer an vnbloody socrifice, for a memoriall of a bloody sacrifice. WHIT. pag. 323. Neither doe I affirme it, for this is not a bare memoriall, seeing the thing it selfe, thereby signified, is therin cōteined in the right vse of it. But withall I deny that this memoriall is the same sacrifice which Christ offered, as you would haue it; for how can a sacrifice be ye self same with it of which it is a memorial? If therfore this be an vnbloody sacrifice, thē it is not the Sacrifice which Christ offered, which was bloody, & the memorial of no other sacrifice. See Eus. de Demon. l. 1.
In a dishonest vowe change thy purpose. Doe not performe that which thou hast vowed vnaduisedly; for that promise is impious which is wickedly performed.
oDVR. S. Paul desireth the Romans and Corinthians to pray for him, and therefore we may desire the same of the Saints in heaven. We know that we obtain all in the name of Christ, but seeing all are not in like grace with God, the Fathers and we have made choice of those who are most gracious. WHIT. pag. 336. The first part of your answer confuteth the latter, unless you will say that Paul was less gracious with God, then the Romans and Corinthians; and both are weak & of no value: for first Paul prayeth not to them as you do to Saints, but only desireth them to perform a mutual Christian duty, which the Saints living, who are acquainted with one anothers estate and wants, ought not to neglect: if he had made the likesuite to a Prophet departed, John Baptist, or James slain by Herod, you had somewhat to say. Lastly if those are to be made choice of for mediators, who are in greatest grace with God, to whom should we go but unto Christ his dearly beloved Sonne, in whom God is well pleased and we reconciled? Eph. 16. Matth. 3.17. Joh. 14.6. 1. Tim. 2.5.DVR. S. Paul desireth the Romans and Corinthians to pray for him, and therfore vve may desire the same of the Saints in heauen. We knovv that vve obtaine all in the name of Christ, but seeing all are not in like grace vvith God, the Fathers and vve haue made choise of those vvho are most gratious. WHIT. pag. 336. The first part of your answere confuteth the latter, vnles you will say that Paul was lesse gratious with God, then the Romans and Corinthians; and both are weake & of no value: for first Paul praieth not to them as you do to Saints, but only desireth them to performe a mutual Christian duty, which the Saints liuing, who are acquainted with one anothers estate and wants, ought not to neglect: if he had made the likesuite to a Prophet departed, Iohn Baptist, or Iames slaine by Herode, you had somewhat to say. Lastly if those are to be made choise of for mediators, who are in greatest grace with God, to whom should we goe but vnto Christ his dearely beloued Sonne, in whom God is well pleased and we reconciled? Eph. 16. Matth. 3.17. Ioh. 14.6. 1. Tim. 2.5.
pDVR. There is nothing determined in the Scriptures concerning the age of widows. That which S. Paul writeth, was profitable for the insancie of the Church; but when the Gospel had taken deeper •oot in mens harts, they began to prefer contivency before marriage. WHIT. pag. 337. Your impudency is to be admired, seeing S. Paul hath plainly determined that they should be fixtie years of age at the least, 1. Tim. 5.9. neither were such Apostolical constitutions to endure only for a time, but until the coming of Christ, as appeareth. 1. Tim. 6.14. And whereas you say the Gospel after the Apostles times, took deeper root in mens minds, it is merely false; it was indeed further propagated, but the Church was never in after ages endued with the like measure of grace, and extraordinary gifts, as it was in the Apostles times, when they received the first fruits of the spirit. And I would pray the Reader to consider that Duraeus doth confess, that in the first age of the Church single life was not so much desired of most, and in later times they only beg•n to prefer continency before matriage. But how much better it had been to have kept the Apostolic institutions, and to have changed compelled continency for lawful and holy marriage, the lamentable event hath sufficiently proved.DVR. There is nothing determined in the Scriptures concerning the age of vviddovves. That vvhich S. Paul vvriteth, vvas profitable for the insancie of the Church; but vvhen the Gospell had taken deeper •oot in mens harts, they began to preferre cōtiuency before marriage. WHIT. pag. 337. Your impudency is to be admired, seeing S. Paul hath plainly determined that they should bee fixtie yeares of age at the least, 1. Tim. 5.9. neither were such Apostolicall constitutions to indure only for a time, but vntill the comming of Christ, as appeareth. 1. Tim. 6.14. And whereas you say the Gospell after the Apostles times, tooke deeper roote in mens minds, it is meerely false; it was indeed further propagated, but the Church was neuer in after ages indued with the like measure of grace, and extraordinarie giftes, as it was in the Apostles times, when they receiued the first fruits of the spirit. And I would pray the Reader to consider that Duraeus doth confesse, that in the first age of the Church single life was not so much desired of most, and in later times they onely beg•n to preferre continency before matriage. But how much better it had been to haue kept the Apostolike institutions, and to haue chaunged compelled continency for lawfull and holy marriage, the lamentable euent hath sufficiently proued.
qDVR. You say, to vow that which we cannot perform, is to mock God; but this we may perform, seeing God bestoweth the virtue of continency upon those, who seek it by fasting and prayer: and seeing the vestal Nuns and Egyptian Priests attained unto it, and wines also, when their husbands are long absent upon necessary occasion. WHIT. pag. 340. God granteth not all things we pray for, but those things which he hath promised, as appeareth in the example of S. Paul 2. Cor. 12.8. But we have no promise of the gift of continency; yea contrariwise Christ hath taught us, that all are not capable of it, but those only to whom it is given Matth. 19.11. & the Apostle saith that it is a gift proper to some only. 1. Cor. 7.7. and therefore we have no ground absolutely to pray for it with assurance of being heard. The vestal Nuns & Egyptian Priests are fit examples for your imitation, who lived single, but not chaste: and yet the Vestals might marry when they were past thirty years old; and some Egyptian Priests, as appeareth, Gen. 41.45. Concerning the chastity of wives in their husbands necessary absence, the reason is not alike; for it is one thing to impose upon our selves a voluntary necessity, and another to undergo it when it is imposed by God. God will keep us in our ways, Psal. 90.14. but not when we rashly thrust our selves into needless difficulties.DVR. You say, to vovv that vvhich vve cannot performe, is to mocke God; but this vve may performe, seeing God bestovveth the vertue of continencie vpon those, vvho seeke it by fasting and prayer: and seeing the vestall Nuns and Aegyptian Priests atteined vnto it, and vvines also, vvhen their husbands are longe absent vpon necessary occasion. WHIT. pag. 340. God granteth not all things wee pray for, but those things which hee hath promised, as appeareth in the example of S. Paul 2. Cor. 12.8. But we haue no promise of the gift of continency; yea cōtrariwise Christ hath taught vs, that all are not capable of it, but those only to whō it is giuen Matth. 19.11. & the Apostle saith that it is a gift proper to some onely. 1. Cor. 7.7. and therefore wee haue no ground absolutely to pray for it with assurance of being heard. The vestall Nuns & Aegyptian Priests are fit examples for your imitation, who liued single, but not chast: and yet the Vestals might marrie when they were past thirtie yeares old; and some Aegyptian Priests, as appeareth, Gen. 41.45. Concerning the chastitie of wiues in their husbands necessary absence, the reason is not alike; for it is one thing to impose vpon our selues a voluntary necessitie, and another to vndergoe it when it is imposed by God. God will keepe vs in our waies, Psal. 90.14. but not when wee rashly thrust our selues into needlesse difficulties.
8Bernard. ad Soror. de modo bene vivendi Serm. 62.Bernard. ad Soror. de modo bene viuendi Serm. 62.
rDVR. Bernard writeth not against the vow of virginity, but only willeth us to break a dishonest vow, neither is this book, you know, thought to be his. WHIT. pag. 342. It is not much material who was the author, but his judgement is to be embraced: seeing then that is a dishonest vow, the performance whereof is joined with dishonesty, it followeth that the vow of single life is such, when as it causeth men to burn in the flame of lust, and therefore is rather to be broken then observed.DVR. Bernard vvriteth not against the vovv of virginity, but only vvilleth vs to breake a dishonest vovv, neither is this booke, you knovv, thought to be his. WHIT. pag. 342. It is not much materiall who was the author, but his iudgement is to be embraced: seeing then that is a dishonest vow, the performance whereof is ioyned vvith dishonestie, it follovveth that the vovv of single life is such, vvhen as it causeth men to burne in the flame of lust, and therefore is rather to be broken then obserued.
Gregory, whom Campian citeth, marched in equall authoritie with the foure Gospels: from whence it necessarily followeth, that all Councels of other times are of the same authoritie and credit with the foure Euangelists.
