A15057:219
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. ...
London: printed by Felix Kyngston for Cuthbert Burby and Edmund Weaver, 1606London: printed by Felix Kyngston for Cuthbert Burby and Edmund Weauer, 1606
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.
You may not now be angry with us, if following Peters example, from henceforth we also call Rome Babylon.
You may not now bee angrie with vs, if following Peters example, from hencefoorth wee also call Rome Babylon.
Now I hope at length you will rest and be satisfied. Nay, but you proceed still unto the ages that succeeded: Then when Clemens governed the Church: then also, when the Heathen Emperors massacred the Bishops of Rome: Even then I confess, Rome was an excellent Church of Christ. Will this content you? Nay further you say; Then also when Damasus, Siricius, Anastasius, Innocentius executed the Apostolic function. This is not to descend by degrees, but to ⟨p. 181⟩leap; for you hasten too fast from the forenamed to these. But how will you persuade us to yield you thus much; Because Calvin (as you say) frankly confesseth, 1that as yet they had not digressed from the doctrine of the Gospel: Do not you, Campian, catch hold of that which no man will give you, nor be too confident of others liberality? Calvin doth not grant that which you take for granted: therefore you must redeliver it. Calvin in that place answereth to your overworn argument of succession, and she weth that the purpose of the Fathers, when they alleged the succession of Bishops, was not to prove those to be true Churches, where Bishops succeeded one another: but this first they assumed as most certain, that from the beginning of the Church unto the ages, whereof they speak, there was no alteration in religion; and thus they opposed to the new broached errors that doctrine which from the times of the Apostles was still preserved in the Church. Calvin then saith not that they hadk altered nothing in any point of faith, but that the Fathers used this argument of succession only in those cases, wherein it might appear they had innovated and altered nothing. Wherefore as we grant that the Church of Rome in the time of these Bishops was the true Church of Christ; but that they in nothing digressed from the doctrine of the Gospel, that Calvin never confessed, and we constantly deny. To say nothing of the rest. Thus