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.
IT is a goodly thing that Sophisters complain of fallacies, and that you, who your selves are altogether compact of fraud, lies, and impostures, do upbraid us with Sophistry. All your Divinity, which ought to be honest and sincere without deceit and fraud, hath of late ⟨p. 263⟩degenerated into a subtle sleight of disputing like School-boys and Sophisters: for after that you had abandoned true Divinity out of the Churches, and as it were exiled the light from mens eyes, then you began at last to put forth curious questions in the Schools; and so, as pore blind men, to be admired of those who saw nothing. Hence arose that innumerable army of Sophisters, who confounded themselves with their refined idle disputes, as with mutual wounds, in so much as who so could best skill of counterfeit and captious trifling conclusions, he should be reputed as some King or petty God over those blind and squint-eyed smatterers in Divinity. And this hope of domineering amongst so many blind ones hath egged on you Jesuits thus diligently to dwell upon this craft, and to put down all the ancient Sophisters for deceit and fraud, your selves being yet but upstarts: For if there were ever any kingdom of pore-blind men over the stark blind, questionless it is now wholly descended unto you, to whom the ancienter orders of Monks and Friars do willingly yield the garland, because they think▪ you see something. Play your prizes now you noble Sophisters, and execute with all diligence the Sophistical dominion which you have gotten, lest some hereafter happily sly dispossess you of this honour: for shortly some one or other new family and sect of Sophisters will gather strength, which (if you look not well about you) will at last shoulder and shuffle you violently out of place, and enter upon this sovereignty over the school of Sophistry, which now for some years you have possessed. For out of doubt, kingdoms themselves entitled upon petty sleights and deceitful conveyances of words, cannot long continue. Seeing therefore this your whole show of new learning consists in furbishing up of untruths, and refining the former ⟨p. 264⟩Sophistry, verily I make no question, but as it is of yesterdays building, so it will shortly fall to ruin.
IT is a goodly thing that Sophisters complaine of fallacies, and that you, who your selues are altogether compact of fraud, lies, and impostures, do vpbraid vs with Sophistrie. All your Diuinitie, which ought to be honest and sincere without deceipt and fraud, hath of late
degenerated into a subtle fleight of disputing like Schoole-boyes and Sophisters: for after that you had abandoned true Diuinitie out of the Churches, and as it were exiled the light from mens eyes, then you began at last to put forth curious questions in the Schooles; and so, as pore blind men, to be admired of those who saw nothing. Hence arose that innumerable army of Sophisters, who confounded themselues with their refined idle disputes, as with mutuall wounds, in so much as who so could best skill of counterfet and captious trifling conclusions, he should be reputed as some King or petie God ouer those blind and squint-eyed smatterers in Diuinitie. And this hope of domineering amongst so many blind ones hath egged on you Iesuites thus diligently to dwell vpon this craft, and to put downe all the ancient Sophisters for deceipt and fraude, your selues being yet but vpstarts: For if there were euer any kingdome of pore-blind men ouer the starck blind, questionlesse it is now wholly descended vnto you, to whom the ancienter orders of Monks and Friers do willingly yeeld the garland, because they thinke▪ you see something. Play your prizes now you noble Sophisters, and execute with all diligence the Sophisticall dominion which you haue gotten, lest some hereafter happily sleely dispossesse you of this honor: for shortly some one or other new family and sect of Sophisters will gather strength, which (if you looke not well about you) will at last shoulder and shuffle you violently out of place, and enter vpon this soueraigntie ouer the schoole of Sophistrie, which now for some yeares you haue possessed. For out of doubt, kingdomes themselues entitled vpon pety sleights and deceiptfull conueiances of words, cannot long continue. Seeing therefore this your whole shew of new learning consists in furbushing vp of vntruths, and refining the former
⟨p. 264⟩
Sophistrie, verily I make no question, but as it is of yesterdayes building, so it will shortly fall to ruine.
But for as much as you mention certain Sophisms as ours, and persuade your favourites that we use very much sophistry; before I answer to these your falsehoods which you lay to our charge, I will give the reader a taste of your own most notorious false-groundeda disputations, and deceitful Elenches; that so,2 whether you or we be more truly to be termed Sophisters, the School and University it self may determine betwixt us, where you desire rather these things should be discussed, then amongst the vulgar. I for my part do appeal unto this school of Philosophers, and University of Divines; and I earnestly beseech all men who have understanding in the principles either of Divinity or Logic, and as many as ever tasted of any School-learning, that they will heedfully observe how current these your conclusions be, and examine them by the rules of right and true disputation.
But for as much as you mention certain Sophismes as ours, and perswade your fauorites that we vse very much sophistrie; before I answere to these your falshoods which you lay to our charge, I will giue the reader a tast of your owne most notorious false-groundeda disputations, and deceiptfull Elenches; that so,2 whether you or we be more truly to be tearmed Sophisters, the Schoole and Vniuersitie it selfe may determine betwixt vs, where you desire rather these things should be discussed, then amongst the vulgar. I for my part do appeale vnto this schoole of Philosophers, and Vniuersitie of Diuines; and I earnestly beseech all men who haue vnderstanding in the principles either of Diuinitie or Logick, and as many as euer tasted of any Schoole-learning, that they will heedfully obserue how current these your conclusions be, and examine them by the rules of right and true disputation.
aDVR. Our Ancestors, otherwise most wise men, having not always to deal with wilful spirits, did not strictly stand upon exact form of teaching. WHIT. pag. 734. The cause is the more desperate when such wise men could find no better arguments to maintain it, but such as even your self confess to be but weak: and both their hearers were then too credulous to believe, and you are now ridiculous to defend such loose arguments.DVR. Our Auncestors, otherwise most wise men, hauing not alvvaies to deale with wilfull spirits, did not strictly stand vpon exact forme of teaching. WHIT. pag. 734. The cause is the more desperate whē such wise mē could find no better arguments to maintaine it, but such as euen your self confesse to be but weake: and both their hearers were then too credulous to beleeue, and you are now ridiculous to defend such loose arguments.
And indeed to choose, I will there begin, where you your self have made an entrance. We maintain, that it is lawful for Ministers of the Gospel, and for Deacons, to be married. You scorn the arguments whereby we make it good. Wherefore let us consider what goodly stuff is brought on your side for the contrary.
And indeed to chuse, I will there begin, where you your selfe haue made an entrance. We mainteine, that it is lawfull for Ministers of the Gospell, and for Deacons, to be maried. You skorne the arguments whereby we make it good. Wherefore let vs consider what goodly stuffe is brought on your side for the contrarie.
Pope Innocent, the second of that name,1 thus concludeth (you must suppose) by divine inspiration against these marriages: They which are inb the flesh ⟨p. 265⟩cannot please God:3 Unto the pure, all things are pure, but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving, is nothing pure. Be ye holy, because I the Lord your God am holy. And because S. Paul permitteth married people (by consent) to sleep apart for a season, to the end they may more conveniently give themselves to fasting & prayer;4 here hence the Pope gathereth, that this is much morec to be done of Priests, whose office is to pray always, & to offer that daily sacrifice.6 Last of all, seeing they must be a temple of the Lord, and an oratory of the spirit,d they ought not to abase themselves with bed-pleasures & uncleannesses. Now out of all these he concludeth that which he propounded, that Deacons and Priests are flatly forbidden to marry.8 If these things be absurdly disputed, let us hear others. Several Pastors have rule over several flocks:c therefore the Pope ought to ⟨p. 266⟩have dominion over all Churches. Christ said to Peter feed my sheep;f therefore Peter is the chief & principal Pastor of the Church. The Lord made two great lights, the Sun,g & the Moon: therefore the Pope excelleth the Emperor in honour and greatness. Here are two swords; therefore theh Pope must ⟨p. 267⟩bear both swords. The servant is not above his master: thereforei it is lawful for no man to accuse or reprove the Pope. Christ prayed that Peters faith should not fail him:k therefore the Pope cannot err. The vulgar people cometh seldom and negligently to the Lords Supper:l therefore the Priest may celebrate private Mass. Christ admitted only his Apostles to Sup: therefore Priests alone mustm receive the Sacrament; the people ought to be contented only with one part. The title which Pilate fastened upon the Cross, was written in Hebrew, ⟨p. 268⟩Greek, & Latin: thereforen prayers must be read in the Churches in no language, but either Hebrew, or Greek, or Latin.18 That which is holy must not be given to dogs:o therefore the vulgar people must be forbidden to read the Scriptures. This is my body: therefore thep bread is turned into Christs body. Fall down before his footstool:q therefore the Sacrament must be worshipped. God is no respectre of persons:22rtherefore he chooseth no ⟨p. 269⟩man to life eternal, but with respect of merits. S.
Pope Innocent, the second of that name,1 thus concludeth (you must suppose) by diuine inspiration against these mariages: They which are inb the flesh ⟨p. 265⟩cannot please God:3 Vnto the pure, al things are pure, but vnto them that are defiled and vnbeleeuing, is nothing pure. Be yee holy, because I the Lord your God am holy. And because S. Paul permitteth married people (by consent) to sleepe apart for a season, to the end they may more conueniently giue themselues to fasting & praier;4 here hēce the Pope gathereth, that this is much morec to be done of Priests, whose office is to pray alwaies, & to offer that daily sacrifice.6 Last of al, seeing they must be a tēple of the Lord, and an oratory of the spirit,d they ought not to abase themselues with bed-pleasures & vncleannesses. Now out of all these he cōcludeth that which he propounded, that Deacons and Priests are flatlie forbidden to marry.8 If these things be absurdly disputed, let vs heare others. Seuerall Pastors haue rule ouer seuerall flockes:c therefore the Pope ought to ⟨p. 266⟩haue dominion ouer all Churches. Christ said to Peter feed my sheepe;f therefore Peter is the chiefe & principall Pastor of the Church. The Lord made two great lights, the Sunne,g & the Moone: therfore the Pope excelleth the Emperour in honour and greatnes. Heere are two swords; therfore theh
bDVR. Pope Innocent spake of Priests, who had vowed single life of their own accord, but afterward yielded to lust. WHIT. pag. 735. Nay he spake that of all Deacons and Priests, for he saith further (Distinct. 82. cap. proposuisti) It is not lawful to admit them to holy offices, which use carnal company •ith their wives, because it is written, ••e ye holy, for […] the Lord your God am holy: for then he esteemed marriage duty to be an unholy thing in it self; not in respect of their vow, of which he speaketh not a word.DVR. Pope Innocent spake of Priests, who had vowed single life of their ovvne accord, but aftervvard yeelded to lust. WHIT. pag. 735. Nay he spake that of all Deacons and Priests, for hee saith further (Distinct. 82. cap. proposuisti) It is not lawfull to admit them to holy offices, which vse carnall companie •ith their wiues, because it is written, ••e yee holy, for 〈…〉 the Lord your God am holy: for then hee esteemed marriage duty to bee an vnholie thing in it selfe; not in respect of their vow, of which he speaketh not a word.
cDVR. This argument is good and can have no show of error. For, above all men, a Priest must be chaste, saith Origen, Homil. 6 4. in Levit. Also Jerome and Ambrose, and Epiphanius taught the same WHIT. pag. 736. Yea you er•e and mistake S. Paul in theree things: 1. What he wrote to all Christians, you expound of Lay-men only. 2. He speaketh only of extraordinary fasts & prayer, but you apply it unto all sorts thereof. That the Apostle speaketh of extraordinary, appears, 1. Because he hath joined fasting with them, 1. Cor. 7.5.2. Because Christ and his Apostle have commanded all to pray continually, and so all ought to l•ue a single life. 3. From a short abstinence of Lay-men, you childishly would prove a perpetual single life to be necessary for Ministers. You abuse also Origens words, (& play the heretic) as if chastity were contrary to matrimony; whereas the Fathers of the Nicene Councell, consented to Paphnutius, who said openly, that society with a lawful wie, is chastity: Socrates lib. 1. cap. 11. Jerome indeed disputed too sophistically against matrimony, seeking victory more then verity, as himself confessed. Ambrse and Epiphanius dissuaded Ministers only from second marriages, allowing their fist.
James commandeth that sick persons should be anointed:s therefore we must now ever and anon anoint the sick. This is a great mystery:t therefore Matrimony is a Sacrament. Elijah and John Baptist lived in the wilderness:u therefore they invented the manner of life and discipline of Monks. There are seven deadly sins:x therefore there are just seven Sacraments. God made man after his image:y therefore images must be set up in Churches. The chiefest of these is charity:z therefore we are justified more by charity than by faith. I will go,7 saith the Lord, to my place, until they ponder ⟨p. 270⟩in their heart, and seek my face: (which indeed he spakea ironically, and after the manner of men) therefore men may be converted unto the Lord, by their own mere will and disposition. The Lord commandeth us to do many things:b therefore those things may be performed of us. Christ descended to the dead: therefore he deliveredc the Fathers out of Limbus. The Church discerneth the Scriptures:d therefore the authority of the Church is greater than the authority of the Scriptures. Saint Paul commandeth the Thessalonians,12 that they keep the ordinances which they had learned: ⟨p. 271⟩thereforee all things are not written which are necessary to salvation.14 He himself shall be safe, yet as it were through fire: ftherefore men pass through the fire of Purgatory to life eternal.
Iames commaundeth that sicke persons should be anointed:s therefore we must now euer and anon anoint the sicke. This is a great mysterie:t therefore Matrimonie is a Sacrament. Elias and Iohn Baptist liued in the wildernesse:u therefore they inuented the manner of life and discipline of Monkes. There are seuen deadly sinnes:x therefore there are iust seuen Sacraments. God made man after his image:y therefore images must be set vp in Churches. The chiefest of these is charitie:z therefore we are iustified more by charitie than by faith. I will goe,7 saith the Lord, to my place, vntill they ponder ⟨p. 270⟩in their heart, and seeke my face: (which indeede he spakea ironically, and after the manner of men) therefore men may be conuerted vnto the Lord, by their owne meere will and disposition. The Lord commaundeth vs to doe many things:b therefore those things may be performed of vs. Christ descended to the dead: therefore he deliueredc the Fathers out of Limbus. The Church discerneth the Scriptures:d therefore the authoritie of the Church is greater than the authoritie of the Scriptures. Saint Paul commaundeth the Thessalonians,12 that they keepe the ordinances which they had learned: ⟨p. 271⟩thereforee
sDVR. The sick want health now as well as then, and therefore must now have the same helping remedy. WHIT. pag. 763. Anointing was a sign of healing in those times of extraordinary gifts in the Church; your anointing healeth nothing that wanteth health; and so is frivolous.DVR. The sicke vvant health novv as vvell as then, and therefore must novv haue the same helping remedie. WHIT. pag. 763. Anointing was a signe of healing in those times of extraordinarie giftes in the Church; your anointing healeth nothing that wanteth health; and so is friuolous.
tDVR. The Apostle speaketh that properly of Matrimonte. WHIT. pag. 764. Nay, he himself expounds it of the mystical union between Christ and the Church.DVR. The Apostle speaketh that properly of Matrimonte. WHIT. pag. 764. Nay, he himselfe expoundes it of the mysticall vnion betweene Christ and the Church.
uDVR. These men left a famous example of Monkish life. WHIT. pag. 765. The Monks life is not proved by their examples: for Elijah was commanded to go into the desert during peril; they do that without both precept and peril: John Baptist indeed lived in the desert, but wherein men did dwell, to whom also he preached; and there were many cities and towns in that desert, Josh. 15.61. what is this to idle Monkish life?DVR. These men left a famous example of Monkish life. WHIT. pag. 765. The Monkes life is not proued by their examples: for Elias was commaunded to goe into the desert during perill; they doe that without both precept and perill: John Baptist indeede liued in the desert, but wherein men did dwell, to whom also he preached; and there were many cities and townes in that desert, Josh. 15.61. what is this to idle Monkish life?
xDVR. Name him that thus disputeth. WHIT. pag. 766. It is John L•d•wicke, in a book entitled. The golden work of true contrition, leaf 128. Where are abunuen sorts of men in the Church, &c.DVR. Name him that thus disputeth. WHIT. pag. 766. It is Iohn L•d•vvicke, in a booke intituled. The golden vvorke of true contrition, leafe 128. Where are abunuen sorts of men in the Church, &c.
To what purpose should I rehearse innumerable others your disputations like these? Now, Campian, let us hear a few of your own. Augustine wrote three books of free will: therefore Augustine approved that man hath free will. Christ was ignorant of some thing: therefore Christ was not without sin. The Fathers diligently searched the Scriptures: therefore it is never lawful to dissent from the Fathers.
To what purpose should I rehearse innumerable others your disputations like these? Now, Campian, let vs heare a few of your owne. Augustine wrote three bookes of free will: therefore Augustine approued that man hath free will. Christ was ignorant of some thing: therefore Christ was not without sinne. The Fathers diligently searched the Scriptures: therefore it is neuer lawfull to dissent from the Fathers.
These your argumentations I have thus briefly collected: which what goodly ones they be, our University ⟨p. 272⟩students easily perceive. Do you acknowledge them to be your own, Campian, so sophistical, so inconsequent, so full of deceit and falsehoods? You were in a great strait if you could not deny it; but if you confess it, you are quite overthrown: for all these are very unlearnedly concluded; either by mistaking words of double signification; or by wresting phrases figuratively spoken: or without any consequent; or from ignorance of the Elenche; or (to conclude) altogether trifling. It sufficeth that I have touched these but lightly: now I come to those which you object against us.
These your argumentations I haue thus briefely collected: which what goodly ones they be, our Vniuersitie ⟨p. 272⟩students easilie perceiue. Doe you acknowledge them to be your owne, Campian, so sophisticall, so inconsequent, so full of deceite and falsehoods? You were in a great straite if you could not denie it; but if you confesse it, you are quite ouerthrowne: for all these are very vnlearnedly concluded; either by mistaking words of double signification; or by wresting phrases figuratiuely spoken: or without any consequent; or from ignorance of the Elenche; or (to conclude) altogethe trifling. It sufficeth that I haue touched these but lightly: now I come to those which you obiect against vs.
There be four chief heads of deceitful disputing,1 wherein you say our sophistry chiefly consisteth: to wit, Sciamachia, a fighting with a shadow, Logomachia, a contention about words. Homonymia, a mistaking of the sense of words: and Circulatio, a going about the bush. Let us see how grossly we use to err in them. Sciamachia, or a fighting with ones shadow, you first define, then you produce examples (of our supposed practise.) I dislike not the definition, and hasten to those examples. Against those that have vowed single life (say you) they allege Scriptures which speak honourably of marriage; whom smite they with such weapons? Whom but your self, Campian, and those so worthy Prelates on your side, which first imposed the vow of perpetual virginity upon Ministers of the Gospel. For if the Scriptures do indeed speak honourably of wedlock, then Pope Syricius, and Innocent the second of that name, and such others your stout maintainers of single life, can by no means be defended, who, as is well known, have spoken many things basely,a despitefully, and wickedly ⟨p. 273⟩of matrimony. Consider well those speeches which even now I produced, taken out of your law: deny, if you can for shame, that they be dishonest in themselves, and egregiously injurious to wedlock. Certainly if these Scriptures do indeed wound (the ancient heretics) Saturninus, Severus, bTatianus, the Encratites, and the Archontici, needs must they also most sharply touch you to the quick, which commonly are wont to judge and speak no whit more honourably of wedlock than they have done. For show me, Campian, if you can, wherein those reproachful speeches may any whit more touch the marriage of Ministers, than of other men. Thus then both you your selves have apparently fled to the heretics holds; and also these Scriptures which do speak so honourably of wedlock, do disprove your heresy, and give you a very deadly wound. For thus I press our argument more effectually (than you:) If wedlock be honourable in every degree of men, and the bed undefiled; then in no degree ought they to be esteemed dishonest or impure: but the antecedent isc true; therefore the consequent is necessarily true also.5 What can you here disprove? or why hath it not the force of a necessary conclusion, out of which you shall never be able to wind your self?
There be foure chiefe heads of deceitfull disputing,1 wherein you say our sophistrie chiefely consisteth: to wit, Sciamachia, a fighting with a shadow, Logomachia, a contention about words. Homonymia, a mistaking of the sense of words: and Circulatio, a going about the bush. Let vs see how grossely wee vse to erre in them. Sciamachia, or a fighting with ones shadow, you first define, then you produce examples (of our supposed practise.) I dislike not the definition, and hasten to those examples. Against those that haue vowed single life (say you) they alleage Scriptures which speake honourably of mariage; whom smite they with such weapons? Whom but your selfe, Campian, and those so worthy Prelates on your side, which first imposed the vowe of perpetuall virginitie vpon Ministers of the Gospell. For if the Scriptures doe indeed speake honourably of wedlocke, then Pope Syricius, and Innocent the second of that name, and such others your stoute maintainers of single life, can by no meanes be defended, who, as is well knowne, haue spoken many things basely,a despitefully, and wickedly ⟨p. 273⟩of matrimonie. Consider well those speeches which euen now I produced, taken out of your law: deny, if you can for shame, that they be dishonest in themselues, and egregiouslie iniurious to wedlocke. Certainely if these Scriptures doe indeed wound (the auncient heretikes) Saturninus, Seuerus, bTatianus, the Encratites, and the Archontici, needs must they also most sharpely touch you to the quicke, which commonly are woont to iudge and speake no whit more honourably of wedlocke than they haue done. For shew me, Campian, if you can, wherein those reprochfull speeches may any whit more touch the marriage of Ministers, than of other men. Thus then both you your selues haue apparantly fled to the heretikes holdes; and also these Scriptures which doe speake so honourably of wedlocke, doe disproue your heresie, and giue you a very deadly wound. For thus I presse our argument more effectually (than you:) If wedlocke be honourable in euery degree of men, and the bed vndefiled; then in no degree ought they to be esteemed dishonest or impure: but the antecedent isc true; therefore the consequent is necessarily true also.5 What can you here disproue? or why hath it not the force of a necessarie conclusion, out of which you shall neuer be able to winde your selfe?
1Sciamachia.
aDVR. This is your impudency, for we say matrimony is so holy, that it is even a Sacrament, yet not equal with Virginity. WHIT. pag. 778. All men know what Syricius and Jnnocentius wrote of Matrimony. By the Scriptures it appeareth to be equally holy with virginity; if not, why bring you no testimony to the contrary? And it is very absurd, that you account virginity more holy, and yet will needs have matrimony to be a Sacrament: virginity should rather be a Sacrament, seeing (by your opinion) it is the more holy.DVR. This is your impudencie, for vve say matrimony is so holie, that it is euen a Sacrament, yet not equall vvith Virginitie. WHIT. pag. 778. All men know what Syricius and Jnnocentius wrote of Matrimony. By the Scriptures it appeareth to be equally holy with virginity; if not, why bring you no testimony to the contrarie? And it is very absurd, that you account virginity more holy, and yet wil needs haue matrimony to be a Sacrament: virginity should rather be a Sacrament, seeing (by your opinion) it is the more holy.
bDVR. What Catholic ever esteemed marriage to be no better than pollution, as those heretics did? WHIT. pag. 779. Pope Innocent in effect, in that he dissuaded Deacons from it, because they must be holy, and have nothing to do with pollutions, and bed-pleasures: than which Tatianus himself could say nothing against marriage more impious.DVR. VVhat Catholike euer esteemed marriage to be no better than pollution, as those heretikes did? WHIT. pag. 779. Pope Innocent in effect, in that he disswaded Deacons from it, because they must be holy, and haue nothing to do with pollutiōs, and bed-pleasures: than which Tatianus himselfe could say nothing against mariage more impious.
cDVR. By this argument, you may as well condemn Saint Paul: for marriage is honourable, even in those widows, who yet have damnation (saith he) because they will marry. WHIT. pag. 779. S. Paul disalloweth such widows, not because they would marry, but because they would reject their faith & Christian profession, by waxing wanton, & marrying with Infidels.DVR. By this argument, you may as well cōdemne Saint Paul: for marriage is honorable, euē in those widowes, who yet haue damnation (saith he) because they will marry. WHIT. pag. 779. S. Paul disalloweth such widowes, not because they vvould marry, but because they vvould reiect their faith & Christian professiō, by waxing wanton, & marrying with Infidels.
Against the merits of a Christian man, dipped in Christs blood (say you) they recite testimonies, which command us to put our affiance neither in nature, nor in the Law, but in the blood of Christ: whom do they confute with these testimonies? Those arguments ⟨p. 274⟩which are urged by our side against mens merits, do most clearly confute you and strike you dead. Mans nature is corrupt;1 and the Law showeth the disease, but doth not cure it: therefore all our hope of salvation consisteth in Christs blood. But you have devised us a kind of merit, forsooth, dipped in the blood of Christ, which may avail much to deserve salvation. For so you maintain, that salvation doth not wholly consist in the blood of Christ, but that it much what dependeth upon your own merits; yet so as that they be dipped with Christs blood; lest you might be thought down right Pelagians. To speak more plainly: this is that you teach, wherein the whole sum (first and last) of your righteousness consisteth: namely, That Christ hath merited for us by his blood, that we might dmerit salvation. This is that merit dipped with the blood of Christ, which you speak of, Confute now our arguments, if you can, which usually are alleged against it. Whatsoever is required as ae debt, that meriteth not: but whatsoever (good ⟨p. 275⟩thing) we do,4 is wholly a debt: therefore we have no merit at all of our own. And that you may understand, that we ought to put confidence in the blood of Christ only, and not in our own merits; I will thus reason from Saint Pauls doctrine.5 If righteousness be by the Law; then Christ died in vain: but if we be justified by ourf merits, we are justified by the Law: therefore if we be justified by our merits, Christ died in vain. What need I here mention innumerable other our arguments, not one whereof, but it is concluded demonstratively, and infallibly: whereas your own merits, alas, are very pitifully and shamelessly defended by you, against the blood of Christ.
Against the merits of a Christian man, dipped in Christs blood (say you) they recite testimonies, which commaunde vs to put our affiance neither in nature, nor in the Law, but in the blood of Christ: whom doe they confute with these testimonies? Those arguments ⟨p. 274⟩which are vrged by our side against mens merits, doe most clearely confute you and strike you dead. Mans nature is corrupt;1 and the Law sheweth the disease, but doth not cure it: therefore all our hope of saluation consisteth in Christs blood. But you haue deuised vs a kinde of merit, forsooth, dipped in the blood of Christ, which may auaile much to deserue saluation. For so you maintaine, that saluation doth not wholy consist in the blood of Christ, but that it much what dependeth vpon your owne merites; yet so as that they be dipped with Christs blood; lest you might bee thought downe right Pelagians. To speake more plainely: this is that you teach, wherein the whole summe (first and last) of your righteousnesse consisteth: namely, That Christ hath merited for vs by his blood, that we might dmerit saluation. This is that merit dipped with the blood of Christ, which you speake of, Confute now our arguments, if you can, which vsually are alleaged against it. Whatsoeuer is required as ae debte, that meriteth not: but whatsoeuer (good ⟨p. 275⟩thing) we doe,4 is wholy a debt: therefore we haue no merit at all of our owne. And that you may vnderstand, that we ought to put confidence in the blood of Christ onely, and not in our owne merits; I will thus reason from Saint Pauls doctrine.5 If righteousnesse be by the Law; then Christ died in vaine: but if we be iustified by ourf merits, we are iustified by the Law: therefore if we be iustified by our merits, Christ died in vaine. What neede I here mention innumerable other our arguments, not one whereof, but it is concluded demonstratiuely, and infallibly: whereas your owne merits, alas, are verie pittifully and shamelesly defended by you, against the blood of Christ.
dDVR. We teach plainly, that all the merits of our good works, have their force and effect only from Christs blood. WHIT. pag. 780. Thus you detract salvation from Christs merits, and ascribe it to ou• merits, dipped with his blood: which the Scriptures no where teach, but utterly condemn, proving that all our good works, are in something faulty, and so merit not eternal life. Again by your doctrine, every man should be redeemed by his own works, and so not by one only Mediator. 1. Tim. 2.5. Thirdly, Christ undertook to obtain for us remission of sins by his own death, which he performed not perfectly, if it be in part by our own works. Fourthly; so should we not trust in God only, but also in our works dipped in Christs blood, which were blasphemy. DVR. The Scripture saith, we are worthy the kingdom of God. WHIT. pag. 782. It saith we are worthy, not because of our own merits, but in that Christs merits are communicated unto us. DVR. Life eternal is often called a reward in Scriptures, and the Fathers. WHIT. pag. 78•. Reward doth not always argue merit, but is oftentimes freely given: and the Scriptures never mention any of our merits.DVR. VVee teach plainely, that all the merits of our good workes, haue their force and effect only from Christs blood. WHIT. pag. 780. Thus you detract saluation frō Christs merits, and ascribe it to ou• merits, dipped with his blood: vvhich the Scriptures no vvhere teach, but vtterly condemne, prouing that all our good vvorkes, are in something faulty, and so merit not eternall life. Againe by your doctrine, euery man should bee redeemed by his ovvne vvorkes, and so not by one only Mediator. 1. Tim. 2.5. Thirdly, Christ vndertooke to obtaine for vs remission of sinnes by his ovvne death, which he performed not perfectly, if it be in part by our owne workes. Fourthly; so should we not trust in God only, but also in our workes dipped in Christs blood, which were blasphemie. DVR. The Scripture saith, we are vvorthie the kingdome of God. WHIT. pag. 782. It saith we are worthie, not because of our owne merits, but in that Christs merits are communicated vnto vs. DVR. Life eternall is often called a revvard in Scriptures, and the Fathers. WHIT. pag. 78•. Reward doth not alwaies argue merit, but is oftentimes freely giuen: and the Scriptures neuer mention any of our merits.
You add to these a third example (saying) Against those which honour saints, as the most acceptable servants of Christ, there are vouched whole pages of Scriptures, which prohibit the worshipping of many gods: where are they now? Verily the Lord by his own authority reserveth unto himself,1 that we invocate him alone: wherefore who so worshippeth and inuocatethg Saints, he giveth to them the honour due to God: for he both presupposeth that they can perform any thing whatsoever, and also that they ⟨p. 276⟩beh present every where, both which are the peculiar properties of God only. So that whatsoever is (truly) alleged against many gods, that is altogether effectual against your Saints in heaven, whom both you worship more zealously than God himself, and rob him of his due honour to adorn them.4 There is (indeed) one mediator of God and men, the man Jesus Christ; he for ever maketh intercession for us; therefore they which bring in new intercessors, and mediators, arei injurious unto Christ. Tell me, Campian, have you any face to defend these your sentences following?k Command him by thy motherly authority; and those which are often chanted in the rude rime of the Mass of the virgin Mary's conception, thus:
You adde to these a third example (saying) Against those which honour saints, as the most acceptable seruants of Christ, there are vouched whole pages of Scriptures, which prohibit the worshipping of many gods: where are they now? Verily the Lord by his owne authoritie reserueth vnto himselfe,1 that we inuocate him alone: wherefore who so worshippeth and inuocatethg Saints, hee giueth to them the honour due to God: for he both presupposeth that they can performe any thing whatsoeuer, and also that they ⟨p. 276⟩beh present euery where, both which are the peculiar properties of God onely. So that whatsoeuer is (truly) alleaged against many gods, that is altogether effectuall against your Saints in heauen, whom both you worship more zealously than God himselfe, and robbe him of his due honour to adorne them.4 There is (indeed) one mediator of God and men, the man Iesus Christ; he for euer maketh intercession for vs; therefore they which bring in new intercessors, and mediators, arei iniurious vnto Christ. Tell me, Campian, haue you any face to defend these your sentences following?k Commaunde him by thy motherly authoritie; and those which are often chaunted in the rude ryme of the Masse of the virgin Maries conception, thus:
gDVR. We worship not Saints as Gods, but as the friends and servants of God; and Saint Paul himself desired to be helped by the prayers of sundry Christian Churches: so that you cavil with us, as the heathen and heretics did of old against the Fathers. WHIT. pag. 787. The honour of invocation may not be given to any of Gods friends; for we must pray to none, but whom we may call, Father, Luk. 11.2. and in whom we may believe, Rom. 10.14. therefore not to Saints at all. As for Saint Paul, he craved the prayers of Saints for him, whilst they lived▪ but he never either prayed to them living, or dead. Nor did the Catholic Fathers worship, adore, or invocate Saints departed, as you do: For Augustine Epist. 44. saith to Maximus the Heathen, know you that no Catholic Christian doth worship any of the dead, & Jerome to Vigilantius, saith, who is so mad, as to worship any of the Martyrs?DVR. VVe worship not Saints as Gods, but as the friends and seruants of God; and Saint Paul himselfe desired to be helped by the prayers of sundrie Christian Churches: so that you cauill with vs, as the heathen and heretikes did of old against the Fathers. WHIT. pag. 787. The honor of inuocation may not be giuen to any of Gods friends; for we must pray to none, but whom we may call, Father, Luk. 11.2. and in whom we may beleeue, Rom. 10.14. therefore not to Saints at all. As for Saint Paul, he craued the prayers of Saints for him, vvhilest they liued▪ but he neuer either prayed to them liuing, or dead. Nor did the Catholike Fathers vvorship, adore, or inuocate Saints departed, as you doe: For Augustine Epist. 44. saith to Maximus the Heathen, know you that no Catholike Christian doth worship any of the dead, & Ierome to Vigilantius, saith, who is so madde, as to vvorship any of the Martyrs?
hDVR. The Saints hear our prayers, though they be absent. WHIT. pag. 790. Every one that prayeth to Saints supposeth thē to be present, & to know even his thoughts, and so (in effect) maketh them Gods: as Basil proveth the holy Ghost to be God, because he heareth godly mens prayers wheresoever. DVR. The Saints are in many far distant places at once, though not every where. WHIT pag. 791. Duraeus doteth to say so: for as well they might be in all, as in many places at once: But Damascene, lib. 2. cap. 3. and Anas, quaest. 52. art. 2 say of the very Angels, that when they be in heaven, they are not in earth.
That is to say, Thou (blessed Virgin Mary) art the infallible lhope of such as are in misery, the true mother of Orphans; Thou art the consolation of such as ⟨p. 277⟩be oppressed, the medicine of such as be diseased, Thou art all min all to all men (or) in all necessities; and other such like abominable speeches, and full of strange blasphemy? If happily you think our reproving of these things, be but some fighting with a shadow, then do you no more respect the glory of God, than the shadow of an Ass.
That is to say, Thou (blessed Virgin Marie) art the infallible lhope of such as are in miserie, the true mother of Orphanes; Thou art the consolation of such as ⟨p. 277⟩be oppressed, the medicine of such as bee diseased, Thou art all min all to all men (or) in all necessities; and other such like abominable speeches, and full of strange blasphemie? If happily you thinke our reproouing of these things, be but some fighting with a shadow, then doe you no more respect the glorie of God, than the shadow of an Asse.
lDVR. Saint Paul calleth the Thessalonians his hope, 1. Thess. 2.19. WHIT. pag. 796. But he never put his trust in, nor called upon them, as you do the Virgin Mary: he called them his hope, because he received great hope and joy by his labours in their conversion. You make the Virgin an instrument of our salvation, and therefore you trust in her, but the Scriptures teach every where to trust in God and Christ only. As Psal. 71.3. Jer. 17.5.7. 1. Tim. 1.1. and 1. Pet. 1.21.DVR. Saint Paul calleth the Thessalonians his hope, 1. Thess. 2.19. WHIT. pag. 796. But hee neuer put his trust in, nor called vpon them, as you doe the Virgin Marie: hee called them his hope, because he receiued great hope and ioy by his labours in their conuersion. You make the Virgin an instrument of our saluation, and therefore you trust in her, but the Scriptures teach euery where to trust in God and Christ only. As Psal. 71.3. Ier. 17.5.7. 1. Tim. 1.1. and 1. Pet. 1.21.
mDVR. The sentence of the Catholic Church, hath no where alloved this; but if it had, it might be conveniently defended. WHIT pag. 797. Duraeus can conveniently expound that, which most absurdly taketh the office of redemption from Christ and giveth it to the Virgin Mary.DVR. The sentence of the Catholike Church, hath no vvhere alloued this; but if it had, it might be conueniently defended. WHIT pag. 797. Duraeus can conueniently expound that, which most absurdly taketh the office of re•ēption frō Christ and giueth it to the Virgin Mary.
The second error in disputation wherewith you charge us,1 is, that we often use Logomachia, which is when the sense is neglected, and men contend about the word. I understand it well: but which be those our faults committed in this kind? Can you find us (say they) the Mass, or Purgatory in the Scriptures. And is not this our demand reasonable? For where should these be found rather than in the Scriptures? There was nothing wont to be accounted more holy than the Mass, and there could nothing be invented more gainful than Purgatory: that neither of these now at last should be found in the Scriptures, certainly it may well seem a very strange and unreasonable thing. Belike then (say you) Trinitas, the Trinity; Homousios, coessential; Persona, a person, are no where in the Bible, because these very terms are not to be found there. Neither say we so, Campian, nor will it follow at all hereupon; and these things be altogether unequally compared. For albeit these very terms are not in Scriptures,2 yet the matter it self, and the sense, as Epiphanius writeth, cometh to hand in all places, and is easily every where to be found. But yourn Mass and Purgatory, are not in ⟨p. 278⟩this manner in the Scriptures, seeing neither the names nor the things themselves any where do appear: yea they are plainly against the Scriptures. For what else is either the Mass, than as* an empty sepulchre where is only the title of the Lords Supper? or what is Purgatory more than a shameless merchandise of souls, and an intolerable contempt against the blood of Christ? Wherefore this is not a trifling contention about words, but a most weighty one about matters of moment; except peradventure you make account of the Mass and Purgatory, not to be matters of moment, but words of Art only. As for the nameo Presbyter, and Sacrament, it is appropriated from the common signification, to some certain and particular things, as likewise many other names are; (to wit) Ecclesia the Church, Episcopus a Bishop, Apostolus an Apostle, Dia•onus a Deacon: and these names we willingly use, but so that we carefully shun their impertinent ⟨p. 279⟩significations. Neither was that indeed sufficient cause, why you should register Matrimony in the catalogue of Sacraments, because S. Paul wrote (thus) Sacramentum hoc magnum, 6This is a great mystery.
The second error in disputation wherewith you charge vs,1 is, that wee often vse Logomachia, which is when the sense is neglected, and men contend about the word. I vnderstand it well: but which bee those our faults committed in this kinde? Can you finde vs (say they) the Masse, or Purgatorie in the Scriptures. And is not this our demaund reasonable? For where should these be found rather than in the Scriptures? There was nothing wont to be accounted more holy than the Masse, and there could nothing be inuented more gainfull than Purgatorie: that neither of these now at last should be found in the Scriptures, certainly it may well seeme a very strange and vnreasonable thing. Belike then (say you) Trinitas, the Trinitie; Homousios, coessentiall; Persona, a person, are no where in the Bible, because these very termes are not to be found there. Neither say we so, Campian, nor will it follow at all hereupon; and these things be altogether vnequally compared. For albeit these very termes are not in Scriptures,2 yet the matter it selfe, and the sense, as Epiphanius writeth, commeth to hand in all places, and is easily euery where to bee found. But yourn Masse and Purgatorie, are not in ⟨p. 278⟩this manner in the Scriptures, seeing neither the names nor the things themselues any where do appeare: yea they are plainly against the Scriptures. For what else is either the Masse, than as* an empty sepulchre where is onely the title of the Lords Supper? or what is Purgatorie more than a shamelesse merchandise of soules, and an intolerable contempt against the blood of Christ? Wherefore this is not a trisling contention about words, but a most waightie one about matters of moment; except peraduenture you make account of the Masse and Purgatorie, not to bee matters of moment, but words of Arte only. As for the nameo Presbyter, and Sacrament, it is appropriated from the common signification, to some certaine and particular things, as likewise many other names are; (to wit) Ecclesia the Church, Episcopus a Bishop, Apostolus an Apostle, Dia•onus a Deacon: and these names wee willingly vse, but so that wee carefully shunne their impertinent ⟨p. 279⟩
1Logomachia
2Epiphan. contra Semiarian. l. 3 [Greek or Hebrew].Epiphan. contra Semiarian. l. 3 〈non-Latin alphabet〉.
nDVR. Did you never read these words of Christ in his last Supper: this is my body? WHIT. pag. 799. Yea; but Christ ordained then a Sacrament, not a sacrifice: he offered himself a sacrifice only once upon the Cross, Heb 9 10. not in his last Supper, except you will say, he died then also, which he must have done to make it a sacrifice; but he was then alive, & it were most absurd to say he was alive and dead at one time, which he needs must be, both then and in all your Masses, if there be any sacrifice in the Mass at all. Again, external sacrifices, as you say your Mass is, are subject to the sight & outward senses, but no man ever saw Christ to be sacrificed, either in the Supper or in the Mass. Therefore there is none, neither in the one nor in the other. DVR. Jt was a sacrifice, for Christ was really contained under those former of bread and wine: and so the Mass is now an unbloody sacrifice. WHIT. pag. 801. You cannot prove him to be so present there as you teach, by no Scripture; and if he were, yet that was not therefore a sacrifice, except you will have his real being in the Virgins womb also to be a sacrifice, in which he was contained. As for your unbloody propitiatory sacrifice: first, it is absurd, for to sacrifice killeth a body, but your Transubstantiation maketh a body: secondly, it hath no word of God for it: thirdly, it is needless, Christs sacrifice being perfect: fourthly, Christ ordained that supper in memory of his sacrifice, not to be it self a sacrifice: WHIT. pag. •03. DVR. Many of the Fathers call the Eucharist by the name of sacrifice. WHIT. pag 805. Not because it is that same which Christ offered (as you teach) but because it is a memorial and Sacrament of it. DVR. Purgatory is most plainly proved by the fact of Judas Machabaeus, in the second book and 12. chapter. WHIT. pag. 806. Those books are not Canonical Scripture, neither doth that act prove a Purgatory by your own doctrine, who say those that die in deadly sin, (as those did there mentioned) go to hell, and not to Purgatory.DVR. Did you neuer reade these vvords of Christ in his last Supper: this is my body? WHIT. pag. 799. Yea; but Christ ordeined then a Sacramēt, not a sacrifice: he offered himselfe a sacrifice only once vpon the Crosse, Heb 9 10
For in that place, Sacramentum, is used in a large signification for any mystery, not for that ceremony which may properly be called a Sacrament. As for that counsel of Thomas Aquinas, we do very well approve it.
For in that place, Sacramentum, is vsed in a large signification for any mysterie, not for that ceremony which may properly be called a Sacrament. As for that counsell of Thomas Aquinas, we doe very well approue it.
The third head,1 or kind of deceitful disputation which you say we usually err in, is Homonymia, equivocation, or a mistaking the sense of words: whereof you propound two examples: For (say you) we both confound the order of Priests, because S. John hath termed us all Priests; and also abolish choice of meats, and prescribed observation of days, 2because the Prophet highly commendeth a spiritual fast. 3I will speak a few words both of the one and other, that I may clearly quit us of this crime of Homonymy. Saint John alone hath not named allp Christians Priests,5 but S. Peter also hath termed them a holy, and a royal Priesthood: and this name is in no place of the new Testamentq properly applied to the Ministers of the Gospel. For Christ being made an high Priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek, hath no copartners ⟨p. 280⟩of thisr Priesthood: therefore Christ hath left unto his (Churches) a Ministry, and not a new Priesthood. Neither doth there remain to uss any such sacrifice; for the administration whereof some special Priests must needs be authorised. For that sacrifice of praise, and doing good, 9which the Apostle mentioneth, and which now remaineth only; that (I say) appertaineth indifferently to all Christians. Notwithstanding we permit none to execute the administration of this ministry, which Christ would have to be perpetual in his Church, but them whom it concerneth, and who are by due ordert called thereunto. Albeit then Christ have made us all both Kings, that we might be able to subdue our sins; and Priests, that we might offer him spiritual sacrifices: ⟨p. 281⟩notwithstanding as it is not lawful for every man to dream of a kingdom, so it is a thing detestable for any man to enter upon the holy Ministry, who hath not that function committed unto him by divine authority. Wherefore I see not at all why you should charge us with any such Homonymy (or falsehood from ambiguous signification) in this word. As for your manner of fasting, that indeed is wholly in show, and hath nothing in it of a Christian fast, but the very name. For to make choice of meats, as a thing more religious, and to prescribe certain, and perpetual set days, wherein we must necessarily fast, theu one is witless, the other superstitious.
The third head,1 or kinde of deceitfull disputation which you say we vsually erre in, is Homonymia, equiuocation, or a mistaking the sense of words: whereof you propound two examples: For (say you) we both confound the order of Priests, because S. Iohn hath tearmed vs all Priests; and also abolish choice of meates, and prescribed obseruation of daies, 2because the Prophet highly commendeth a spirituall fast. 3I wil speake a few words both of the one and other, that I may cleerly quit vs of this crime of Homonymie. Saint Iohn alone hath not named allp Christians Priests,5 but S. Peter also hath tearmed them a holy, and a royall Priesthood: and this name is in no place of the new Testamentq properly applied to the Ministers of the Gospell. For Christ being made an high Priest for euer after the order of Melchisedech, hath no copartners ⟨p. 280⟩of thisr Priesthood: therefore Christ hath left vnto his (Churches) a Ministerie, and not a new Priesthood. Neither doth there remaine to vss any such sacrifice; for the administration whereof some speciall Priests must needs be authorised. For that sacrifice of praise, and doing good, 9which the Apostle mentioneth, and which now remaineth onely; that (I say) appertaineth indifferently to all Christians. Notwithstanding we permit none to execute the administration of this ministery, which Christ would haue to be perpetuall in his Church, but them whom it concerneth, and who are by due ordert called thereunto. Albeit then Christ haue made vs all both Kings, that we might be able to subdue our sinnes; and Priests, that we might offer him spirituall sacrifices: ⟨p. 281⟩
pDVR. By this argument you may as well prove the Jews had no Priests; properly so called. WHIT. pag. 809. Not so, for the Lord ordained such a Priesthood amongst them, which he hath not amongst Christians.DVR. By this argument you may as well proue the Iewes had no Priests; properly so called. WHIT. pag. 809. Not so, for the Lord ordained such a Priesthood amongst them, which he hath not amongst Christians.
qDVR. So the name, Sacrament, is never given to Baptism, nor to the Eucharist in the New testament. WHIT. pag. 810. But the substance of it, agreeth to them both, and is there, whereas the name, Sacerdos, a Priest, is not in the new Testament, nor doth the thing it self properly belong to any but Christ, since his death. DVR. Yea Christ instituted a sacrifice in his Supper, and where a sacrifice is, there is a Priest also. WHIT. pag. 810. Christ ordained thē no sacrifice, but only a Sacrament of a sacrifice. DVR. Isaiah calleth the Ministers of the Gospel, Priests, cap. 6•.6. & 66.21. WHIT. Isaiah in the first place speaketh of all Christians; and in the second, of Ministers in the phrase of that time; whence also you may as well say Deacons are Levites, which you vvill not say they are properly. DVR Ministers are needless, except they be Priects, and as mediators betwixt God and men unto salvation: and your Ministers are but Lay-men. WHIT. pag. 810. •15. They must preach the Word, and administer the Sacraments, but not offer sacrifice of mediation betwixt God and men, as you say, you do in the Mass: to do these we have a calling ordained of Christ; for your sacrifice you have none. DVR. The Apostles name them not Priests, because they are not of the order of Aaron; but the Fathers call them Priests, who knew the Apostles m•a•ing: and you call them Priests in English. WHIT pag. 812. Christ only is a Priest, after the order of Melchizedek:
man to life eternall, but with respect of merits. S.
•
•
•
DVR. This argument is good and can haue no shew of error. For, aboue all men, a Priest must be chaste, saith Origen, Homil. 6 4. in Leuit. Also Ierome and Ambrose, and Epiphanius taught the same WHIT. pag. 736. Yea you er•e and mistake S. Paul in theree things: 1. What he wrote to all Christians, you expound of Lay-men only. 2. He speaketh only of extraordinarie fasts & prayer, but you applie it vnto all sorts thereof. That the Apostle speaketh of extraordinarie, appeares, 1. Because he hath ioyned fasting with them, 1. Cor. 7.5.2. Because Christ and his Apostle haue commanded all to pray continually, and so all ought to l•ue a single life. 3. From a short abstinence of Lay-men, you childishly would proue a perpetuall single life to be necessary for Ministers. You abuse also Origens words, (& play the heretike) as if chastitie were contrary to matrimony; whereas the Fathers of the Nicene Councell, consented to Paphnutius, who said openly, that society with a lavvfull wi•e, is chastitie: Socrates lib. 1. cap. 11. Jerome indeed disputed too sophistically against matrimony, seeking victory more then verity, as himself confessed. Ambr•se and Epiphanius disswaded Ministers only from second m••riages, allowing their fi•st.
6Distinct. 28 Decernimus
dDVR. Tertullian used this same argument against second marriage. WHIT. pag. 739. Tertullian therein erred with Montanus, (as all the learned know) condemning second marriages, of uncleanness, not only in Ministers, but in all Christians: yet he himself being a Priest, was married, and lived with his wife, continuing his Ministry: so that he neither judged marriage to be uncleanness, nor unlawful in Ministers, simply; but only second marriages.DVR. Tertullian vsed this same argument against second marriage. WHIT. pag. 739. Tertullian therein erred with Montanus, (as all the learned know) condemning second marriages, of vncleannes, not only in Ministers, but in all Christians: yet he himselfe being a Priest, was married, and liued with his wife, continuing his Ministery: so that he neither iudged marriage to be vncleanenes, nor vnlavvfull in Ministers, simplie; but only second marriages.
8Harding and Dorman and others.
cDVR. The Pope challengeth no Lordship over the Churches, but professeth himself the severuant of Gods servants. WHIT. pag. 740. But his dee•s bewray his tyranny: for he prescribeth, commandeth, threateneth, punisheth, and doth whatsoever any Lord can do. DVR. You can disprove this consequent by no argument. WHIT. pag. 741. It is an absurd argument, like these; Every several man hath one head; therefore all men must have one head: Every several flock hath his shepherd; therefore all flocks must have one to rule them. Again: no one man can possibly teach and feed the whole Church with the Word and Sacrament as a faithful Pastor should, and may do in a particular Church Christ only can thus feed all particular Churches, which can never be made one visible body, and therefore can have none but Christ the general head and Pastor over them. DVR. Jerome, Cyprian, and Ireneus, have written the same we do. WHIT. pag 742. Not one of them. First, Jerome defendeth the superiority of one Pastor in the Church, not as a matter of accessitie, but of conveniency, to prevent schisms: and saith, that the Church is founded upon all the Apostles alike, and that every one equally hath received the keys of the kingdom of heaven; even in that place where you quote him: (against Jovinian, lib. 1.) Secondly, Cyprian concludeth only, that there should be but one Pastor in one Church and never thought upon the Popes primacy; but saith plainly, that every particular Bishop hath all whatsoever any one hath by right; in the same book which you allege, of the Churches unity. Lastly, Ireneus called the Roman, the chief Church, not for any superiority, but because she excelled all others in constancy, largeness, fame, and soundness of faith.DVR. The Pope challengeth no Lordship ouer the Churches, but professeth himselfe the seueruant of Gods seruants. WHIT. pag. 740. But his dee•s bewray his tyranny: for he prescribeth, commandeth, threatneth, punisheth, and doth whatsoeuer any Lord can do. DVR. You can dispro•e this consequent by no argument. WHIT. pag. 741. It is an absurd argument, like these; Euery seuerall man hath one head; therefore all men must haue one head: Euery seuerall flocke hath his shepheard; therefore all flockes must haue one to rule them. Againe: no one man can possiblie teach and feed the whole Church with the Word and Sacrament as a faithfull Pastor should, and may doe in a particular Church Christ only can thus feed al particular Churches, which can neuer be made one visible body, and therefore can haue none but Christ the generall head and Pastor ouer them. DVR. Ierome, Cyprian, and Ireneus, haue written the same we doe. WHIT. pag 742. Not one of them. First, Ierome defendeth the superiority of one Pastor in the Church, not as a matter of accessitie, but of conueniency, to preuent schismes: and saith, that the Church is founded vpon all the Apostles alike, and that euery one equally hath receiued the keies of the kingdome of heauen; euen in that place where you quote him: (against Iouinian, lib. 1.) Secondly, Cyprian cōcludeth only, that there should be but one Pastor in one Church and neuer thought vpon the Popes primacie; but saith plainly, that euery particular Bishop hath all whatsoeuer any one hath by right; in the same booke which you alleadge, of the Churches vnity. Lastly, Ireneus called the Romane, the chiefe Church, not for any superiority, but because she excelled all others in constancie, largenes, fame, and soundnes of faith.
fDVR. Jt is manifest by this place, that Christ gave greater authority of feeding to Peter, than to the other Apostles, and so made him head of all his Church. WHIT. p. 744. It will not follow upon this place, that Peter had greater authority to feed, or that he only must feed all: for he said to them all alike, Matth. 28.19. Go ye, teach all nations: and Job. 20 21. As the Father sent me, so I send you: Therefore he spake so often then to Peter, to confirm him after his grievous fall, that he might not doubt of his Apostolical calling, as saith Augustines treatise on John 123. so that it no whit concerneth the Pope.DVR. Jt is manifest by this place, that Christ gaue greater authoritie of feeding to Peter, than to the other Apostles, and so made him head of all his Church. WHIT. p. 744. It will not follow vpon this place, that Peter had greater authority to feed, or that he only must feede all: for he said to them all alike, Matth. 28.19. Goe yee, teach all nations: and Iob. 20 21. As the Father sent me, so I send you: Therefore he spake so often then to Peter, to confirme him after his grieuous fall, that he might not doubt of his Apostolicall calling, as saith Augustines treatise on Iohn 123. so that it no whit concerneth the Pope.
gDVR. The Pope useth this as a similitude to amplify, not as an argument to prove by authority. WHIT. pag. 746. This is an idle shift; a similitude is an argument, and Johannes Andraeas would prove hereby, that the Pope excelleth the Emperor in dignity, seventy times seven degrees.DVR. The Pope vseth this as a similitude to amplifie, not as an argument to prooue by authoritie. WHIT. pag. 746. This is an idle shift; a similitude is an argument, and Johannes Andraeas would prooue hereby, that the Pope excelleth the Emperor in dignitie, seuentie times seuen degrees.
hDVR. We gather nothing hence, but what Bernard did: saying, This sword (of temporal power) is thine also, happily at thy command, though not to be drawn with thy hand: speaking to the Pope. WHIT. pag. 747. Duraeus is ashamed of this sophism, bu• yet he fathereth it upon Bernard, which also Johannes a Capistrano (of the Pope and Councels, p 77.) and others of them have handled▪ and Pope Boniniface girt himself with a sword in sign hereof: but this place speaketh nothing at all for any such power.DVR. VVe gather nothing hence, but vvhat Bernard did: saying, This sword (of temporall povver) is thine also, happily at thy commaund, though not to be drawne with thy hand: speaking to the Pope. WHIT. pag. 747. Duraeus is ashamed of this sophisme, bu• yet he fathereth it vpon Bernard, which also Iohannes a Capistrano (of the Pope and Councels, p 77.) and others of them haue handled▪ and Pope Boniniface girt himselfe with a sword in signe hereof: but this place speaketh nothing at all for any such power.
iDVR. What Catholic ever taught, or wrote thus? howbeit the Fathers of the Sinuessan Councell said. The chief seat is judged of no man. WHIT. pag. 749. Thus you will make the Pope no Catholic who saith (Dist. 40. si P•pa) The Pope may be reproved of no mortal man, though he lead with him innumerable people unto hell. And who knoweth not these two pillars of Popery; the Church of Rome cannot err, whatsoever it teacheth: and the Pope may not be accused whatsoever •e doth? The Bishops of the Sinuessan Synod spake to Marcellinus the Pope, who had denied Christ, and committed Idolatry, and might be accused by the Popes own laws, so that in citing that authority, you contradict both your self and your laws.DVR. What Catholike euer taught, or wrote thus? howbeit the Fathers of the Sinuessan Councell said. The chiefe seate is iudged of no man. WHIT. pag. 749. Thus you will make the Pope no Catholike who saith (Dist. 40. si P•pa) The Pope may bee reproued of no mortall man, though he leade with him innumerable people vnto hell. And who knoweth not these two pillers of Popery; the Church of Rome cannot erre, whatsoeuer it teacheth: and the Pope may not be accused whatsoeuer •e doth? The Bishops of the Sinuessan Synode spake to Marcellinus the Pope, who had denied Christ, and committed Idolatrie, and might bee accused by the Popes owne lawes, so that in citing that authoritie, you contradict both your selfe and your lawes.
kDVR. Christ made Peter his Vicar on earth, and by his prayer obtained that his Vicars faith might not fail; by force whereof the Pope cannot err: as Augustine and Cyprian also perceived. WHIT pag. 750. It is not true that Christ made Peter his Vicar, nor doth it follow; Peters faith failed not, therefore no Popes faith hath failed, who are his successors: for Popes have done, and may fall into heresies, as you will confess; and may err in faith, saith Pope Boniface (D•st 40. Papa:) which he could not do it this argument of yours were true. Further Christ prayed for all his Apostles, and the whole Church: shall we say Christs prayer was less effectual for the rest then for Peter? If it be not, then none of their successors could err no more then Peters: which I suppose you will not affirm. And Augustine, and Cyprian never reasoned as you do; you abuse their names.DVR. Christ made Peter his Vicar on earth, and by his prayer obtained that his Vicars faith might not faile; by force vvherof the Pope cannot erre: as Augustine and Cyprian also perceiued. WHIT pag. 750. It is not true that Christ made Peter his Vicar, nor doth it follow; Peters faith failed not, therefore no Popes faith hath failed, who are his successors: for Popes haue done, and may fall into heresies, as you will confesse; and may erre in faith, saith Pope Boniface (D•st 40. Papa:) which he could not do it this argument of yours vvere true. Further Christ prayed for all his Apostles, and the whole Church: shal we say Christs prayer was lesse effectuall for the rest then for Peter? If it be not, then none of their successors could erre no more then Peters: which I suppose you will not affirme. And Augustine, and Cyprian neuer reasoned as you do; you abuse their names.
lDVR. If you believed the Prophet Malachi, or the Mass, you would confess this argument to be good. WHIT pag. 753. You can never prove your Mass by the Prophet Malachi, who speaketh of the prayers of the godly, as Tertullian, Eusebius, and Jerome expound him: and if the Mass were a sacrifice indeed, (as you call it) the peoples negligence, is no sufficient cause to make it private, and yet to profit the people, yea though they be absent: you may aswell abuse the Word it self so; and say it is enough, when it is in public, it the Priest handle it and hear it, and believe it alone, yet the people being absent and not dreaming of any such thing, may be saved by it.DVR. If you beleeued the Prophet Malachie, or the Masse, you vvould confesse this argument to be good. WHIT pag. 753. You can neuer proue your Masse by the Prophet Malachie, who speaketh of the prayers of the godly, as Tertullian, Eusebius, and Jerome expound him: and if the Masse were a sacrifice indeed, (as you call it) the peoples negligence, is no sufficient cause to make it priuate, and yet to profit the people, yea though they be absent: you may aswel abuse the Word it selfe so; and say it is inough, when it is in publike, it the Priest handle it and heare it, and beleeue it alone, yet the people being absent and not dreaming of any such thing, may be saued by it.
mDVR. The people also receive the whole Sacrament, under one kind. WHIT pag. 754. It is childish dotage to say so; as though one part of a thing, were the whole; or, as if Christ appointing both bread and wine, ordained more then a whole Sacrament: that Pope was wiser, which said of certain heretics that refrained from the Cup, as you do•, (De concil. dist. 2. cap. Comperimus:) Let them either receive the whole Sacrament, or refuse all. DVR. Christs words, Drink ye all of this, prove n•t that all Christians must do so. WHIT. pag. 755. They do prove it, as those words, take eat, do prove that all must eat: and you may as well keep both the elements from the people, as one, contrary to S. Paul, 1. Cor. 11.23. DVR. The Passover might be eaten without wine. WHIT. pag. 756. It might, because God had not commanded wine, but Christ himself commandeth it in his Supper, 1. Cor. 11.45. DVR. The common people are a•t bound to drink of the Cap: for S. Paul saith, As oft as ye drink it, to signify they were not commanded so to do. WHIT. So he saith of the bread also, As of, as ye eat, 1. Cor. 11.26. so that, by your argument, neither is the bread commanded them.DVR. The people also receiue the vvhole Sacrament, vnder one kind. WHIT pag. 754. It is childish dotage to say so; as though one part of a thing, were the vvhole; or, as if Christ appointing both bread and wine, ordained more then a whole Sacrament: that Pope was wiser, vvhich said of certaine heretikes that refrained from the Cup, as you do•, (De concil. dist. 2. cap. Comperimus:) Let them either receiue the vvhole Sacrament, or refuse all. DVR. Christs vvords, Drinke yee all of this, proue n•t that all Christians must doe so. WHIT. pag. 755. They doe proue it, as those vvords, take eate, doe proue that all must eate: and you may as vvell keepe both the elements from the people, as one, contrarie to S. Paul, 1. Cor. 11.23. DVR. The Passeouer might be eaten vvithout vvine. WHIT. pag. 756. It might, because God had not commaunded vvine, but Christ himselfe commaundeth it in his Supper, 1. Cor. 11.45. DVR. The common people are a•t bound to drinke of the Cap: for S. Paul saith, As oft as ye drinke it, to signifie they were not commanded so to doe. WHIT. So he saith of the bread also, As of, as yee eate, 1. Cor. 11.26. so that, by your argument, neither is the bread commanded them.
nDVR. No Catholic doth so reason; we say, that title had in it a mystery: and Augustine proveth by it, that the word, coessential, [Greek or Hebrew], may be used in the Creed. WHIT. pag. 757. Papists often reason thus, as all men know which read their writings, though you be ashamed of it. Tell us what mystery you mean, if it be worth the labour; as for Augustine, he speaks no word that makes here for your cause, yet you blush not to quote him.DVR. No Catholike doth so reason; we say, that title had in it a mysterie: and Augustine proueth by it, that the vvord, coessent•all, 〈non-Latin alphabet〉, may be vsed in the Creede. WHIT. pag. 757. Papists often reason thus, as all men knovve which read their writings, though you bee ashamed of it. Tell vs what mysterie you meane, if it bee worth the labour; as for Augustine, hee speakes no word that makes here for your cause, yet you blush not to quote him.
18Harding.
oDVR. We say not, that all, but that some of the people may not have the Scriptures committed to them. WHIT. pag. 758. Who doubteth but that wisdom is to be used in teaching the people; and that they which show themselves dogs, and hogs, must be barred from the Scriptures: but this is nothing to the present question; whether this reason be good, which Papists sometimes use: and which here you should have spoken to, and not thus wander.DVR. VVe say not, that all, but that some of the people may not haue the Scriptures committed to them. WHIT. pag. 758. Who doubteth but that vvisedome is to be vsed in teaching the people; and that they vvhich shevv themselues dogges, and hogges, must be barred from the Scriptures: but this is nothing to the present question; vvhether this reason be good, vvhich Papists sometimes vse: and vvhich here you should haue spoken to, and not thus vvander.
pDVR. Christ said it way his body. WHIT. pag. 759. Christ by an usual phrase of Scripture, called the thing signifying by the name of the thing signified, because of the sacramental joint receiving of both, to wit, of the bread with the mouth, and of his body by faith. Again, if that which was in Christs hands were his real body, when he said so, then was transubstantiation before (which you deny) and then he had two bodies: but if it were bread, then is there a metonymy in his words, as we truly say.DVR. Christ said it vvay his bodie. WHIT. pag. 759. Christ by an vsuall phrase of Scripture, called the thing signifying by the name of the thing signified, because of the sacramentall ioint receiuing of both, to vvit, of the bread vvith the mouth, and of his bodie by faith. Againe, if that vvhich vvas in Christs hands vvere his reall body, vvhen he said so, then vvas transubstantiation before (vvhich you deny) and then he had tvvo bodies: but if it vvere bread, then is there a metonymie in his vvords, as vvee truly say.
qDVR. Ambrose and Augustine reasoned so from this Scripture. WHIT p. 761. That is false: they teach only, that we must worship Christ in the mysteries and Sacrament; not the mysteries and Sacrament themselves.DVR. Ambrose and Augustine reasoned so from this Scripture. WHIT p. 761. That is false: they teach onely, that vve must vvorship Christ in the mysteries and Sacrament; not the my•teries and Sacrament themselues.
22Pighius.
rDVR. That was Pighius his error: but the judgement of Catholic Universities is, that foreseeing of merits is no cause of Predestination. WHIT. pag. 762. Thus you fall from your champion Pighius in words, but indeed many of your Schools defend him: saying, the kingdom of heaven is prepared for them which have merited it by their good works.DVR. That vvas Pighius his error: but the iudgement of Catholike Vniuersities is, that foreseeing of merits is no cause of Predestination. WHIT. pag. 762. Thus you fall from your champion Pighius in vvords, but indeed many of your Schooles defend him: saying, the kingdome of heauen is prepared for them vvhich haue merited it by their good works.
all things are not written which are necessarie to saluation.
therefore men passe thorow the fire of Purgatorie to life eternall.
yDVR. Pope Adrian proveth not the use of images by this place, but saith it was signified by it. WHIT. pag. 767. Then you confess he allegeth that Scripture to prove the use of images was signified by it, and who but a superstitious doctor, would have done so?DVR. Pope Adrian proueth not the vse of images by this place, but saith it vvas signified by it. WHIT. pag. 767. Then you confesse he alleageth that Scripture to proue the vse of images was signified by it, and who but a superstitious doctor, would haue done so?
zDVR. The chiefest gift must come from the chiefest virtue. WHIT. pag. 768. S. Paul 1. Cor. 13. doth not in all things prefer charity before faith, but only because it endureth in the life to come, when we shall not need faith, as Chrysostom expounds it: now faith only apprehends Christ our righteousness, and therein excelleth charity. Lastly, you err grossly in effect, ascribing our justification to the merit of virtue in us; which only is merited by Jesus Christ.DVR. The chiefest gift must come from the chiefest vertue. WHIT. pag. 768. S. Paul 1. Cor. 13. doth not in all things preferre charitie before faith, but onely because it indureth in the life to come, when wee shall not neede faith, as Chrysostome expoundes it: now faith onely apprehends Christ our righteousnesse, and therein excelleth charitie. Lastly, you erre grossely in effect, ascribing our iust•fication to the merit of vertue in vs; vvhich onely is merited by Iesus Christ.
aDVR. Do you think that God calleth men to repentance ironically. WHIT. pag. 799. No; but when men will not seek God, being called thereto by his bounty; no marvel though he withdraw it from them, and (as it were) laugh at their madness: of which ironies there be many examples in Scriptures.DVR. Do you thinke that God calleth men to repentace ironically. WHIT. pag. 799. No; but when men will not se•k God, being called thereto by his bountie; no maruaile though hee withdraw it from them, and (as it were) laugh at their madnes: of which ironies there be many examples in Scriptures.
bDVR. Augustine denieth that God hath commanded impossible thin•s. WHIT. pag. 770. He expoundeth his own meaning, that Adam before his fall could, and that we in heaven shall be able to keep all Gods commandments; but he often saith, that no man in this life can fulfil the Law of God. DVR. Men use not to make laws impossible to be kept. WHIT. We must not measure Gods doing by mans: Again, when these laws were first given, man could perform them, and we must not look that God should alter them to fit our corruption. DVR▪ God could not justly punish lawbreakers, if they could not keep it. WHIT. pag. 771. Answer then Eusebius, (Evangelical demonst. lib. 1) who saith, that Moses Law was impossible to be kept of any man: And Thomas Aquinas, upon Gal. 3. sect. 4. saying: Moses commanded many things, which no man could fulfil.DVR. Augustine denieth that God hath commanded impossible thin•s. WHIT. pag. 770. Hee expoundeth his owne meaning, that Adam before his fall could, and that we in heauen shal be able to keepe all Gods commandements; but he often saith, that no man in this life can fulfill the Law of God. DVR. Men vse not to make lavves impossible to be kept. WHIT. We must not measure Gods doing by mans: Againe, when these lawes were first giuen, man could performe them, and vvee must not looke that God should alter them to fit our corruption. DVR▪ God could not iustly punish lavvbreakers, if they could not keepe it. WHIT. pag. 771. Answere then Eusebius, (Euangelicall demonst. lib. 1) who saith, that Moses Lavv vvas impossible to be kept of any man: And Thomas Aquinas, vpon Gal. 3. sect. 4. saying: Moses commaunded many things, vvhich no man could fulfill.
cDVR Tell me for what other cause Christ went into bel, but to deliver the Fathers from Limbus? WHIT. pag. 772. Nay, first prove you that he did go so to hell, as you think; for my part I believe it not, but that his soul went presently to heaven. Again, you beg the question, saying, he went to hell to deliver the Fathers. DVR. I prove it by these Scriptures: Zac. 9.11. Psal 68.18. Heb. 9.8. WHIT. Zachary speaketh only of the Jews delivery from the captivity of Babylon. David speaketh of Christs ascending into heaven, and triumph over his enemies; and you childishly infer hereupon, therefore he descended to hell to deliver the Patriarchs from Limbus: but most ridiculously you abuse that place to the Hebrews, the true sense whereof is; that we are not reconciled to God, by the Jewish sacrifices, but by Christ; therefore you infer, that none of the Patriarchs went to heaven, until Christ came out of hell, and opened heaven by his bodily ascension.DVR Tell me for what other cause Christ went into bel, but to deliuer the Fathers from Limbus? WHIT. pag. 772. Nay, first proue you that he did go so to hel, as you thinke; for my part I beleeue it not, but that his soule went presently to heauen. Againe, you begge the question, saying, he went to hell to deliuer the Fathers. DVR. I proue it by these Scriptures: Zac. 9.11. Psal 68.18. Heb. 9.8. WHIT. •acharie speaketh only of the Iewes deliuery from the captiuitie of Babylon. Dauid speaketh of Christs ascending into heauen, and triumph ouer his enemies; and you childishly inferre hereupon, therefore he descended to hell to deliuer the Patriarkes from Limbus: but most ridiculously you abuse that place to the Hebrewes, the true sense whereof is; that we are not reconciled to God, by the Iewish sacrifices, but by Christ; therefore you inferre, that none of the Patriarkes vvent to heauen, vntill Christ came out of hell, and opened heauen by his bodilie ascension.
dDVR. Catholics say not so. WHIT. pag. 773 But your false Church doth so; for it interpreteth Scriptures as it listeth: and constraineth all Christians to rest therein, be it never so false, and contrary to the Scriptures; else it doth condemn him for an heretic.DVR. Catholikes say not so. WHIT. pag. 773 But your false Church doth so; for it interpreteth Scriptures as it listeth: and constraineth all Christians to rest therein, bee it neuer so false, and contrarie to the Scriptures; else it doth condemne him for an heretike.
eDVR. What error find you in this argument? WHIT. pag. 774. I find in it a threefold false consequent: first you cannot prove hence; that the things which S. Paul spake by word, were not the same in effect which he wrote to them: secondly, if he wrote not all to them which he had taught thē, it followeth not that he taught something which is not written in the Scriptures: thirdly; admit many things were left unwritten, yet it followeth not, that all things necessary to salvation be not written: nor do the ancient Fathers say so.DVR. What error find you in this argument? WHIT. pag. 774. I find in it a threefold false consequent: first you cannot proue hence; that the things which S. Paul spake by word, were not the same in effect which hee wrote to thē: secondly, if he wrote not all to thē which he had taught thē, it followeth not that hee taught something which is not written in the Scriptures: thirdly; admit many things were left vnwritten, yet it followeth not, that all things necessary to saluatiō be not written: nor do the ancient Fathers say so.
fDVR. Sundry Fathers expound this place of Purgatory fire. WHIT. pag. 776. But the place it self showeth that it cannot be meant of any such fire: for 1. S. Paul speaketh of the purging away that which is a fault: but in your Purgatory faults are not consumed, but (you say) punishments are suffered for f•u••s. 2. S. Paul saith every mans work, be it gold or wood, shall be tried; but you cast nothing but wood, hay, and stubble into your feigned Purgatory. 3. S. Paul saith every mans work shall be manifest by this fire; but your Purgatory fire is obscure, and never showeth such light. 4. The word fire, is used by S. Paul Metaphorically, as also are gold, silver, hay, wood &c. but you say your Purgatory fire, is true fire. The fire which S. Paul here meaneth, is the holy Ghost, who proveth all doctrines, and severeth the false from the true. Ambrose on Psal. 118. saith, This fire is the word of Christ: Angustine indeed spake doubtfully of Purgatory, saying, (Enchiridion, cap. 69.) it may be that there is some such thing, but whether yea or no, it is a question; and in his book of the City of God; he saith, perhaps it is true: many others of the Fathers thought this purging should be at Christs coming to judgement; which much differeth from your Purgatory. Chrysostom in his Preface on Isaiah, saith; God at one instant abolisheth sin, freeth from punishment, and giveth righteousness; Tertullian in his book of Baptism, saith: Guilt and punishment are taken away together. Hierome saith, upon the 31. Psalm; the sin which is covered is not seen; that which is not seen is not imputed; that which is not imputed shall not be punished: so that nothing is left for your Purgatory, by these mens judgements.DVR. Sundry Fathers expound this place of Purgatory fire. WHIT. pag. 776. But the place it selfe sheweth that it cannot bee meant of any such fire: for 1. S. Paul speaketh of the purging away that which is a fault: but in your Purga•orie faults are not consumed, but (you say) punishments are s•ffred for f•u••s. 2. S. Paul saith euery mans worke, be it gold or wood, shall be tried; but you cast nothing but wood, hay, and stubble into your fained Purgatory. 3. S. Paul saith euery mans worke shall be manifest by this fire; but your Purgatory fire is obscure, and neuer sheweth such light. 4. The word fire, is vsed by S. Paul Metaphorically, as also are gold, siluer, hay, wood &c. but you say your Purgatory fire, is true fire. The fire which S. Paul heer• meaneth, is the holy Ghost, who proueth all doctrines, and seuereth the false from the true. Ambrose on Psal. 118. saith, This fire is the vvord of Christ: Angustine indeed spake doubtfully of Purgatory, saying, (Enchiridion, cap. 69.) it may be that there is some such thing, but whether yea or no, it is a question; and in his booke of the Citie of God; he saith, perhaps it is true: many others of the Fathers thought this purging should bee at Christs comming to iudgement; vvhich much differeth from your Purgatorie. Chrysostome in his Preface on Esay, saith; God at one instant abolisheth sin, freeth from punishment, and giueth righteousnes; Tertullian in his booke of Baptisme, saith: Guilt and punishment are taken away togither. Hierome saith, vpon the 31. Psalme; the sin which is couered is not seene; that vvhich is not seene is not imputed; that which is not imputed shall not be punished: so that nothing is left for your Purgatorie, by these mens iudgements.
Hebr. 13.4
.
eDVR. The Angels have merited, & our first parents might have merited blessedness before their fall, yet all that they could do, was a due debt unto God. WHIT. pag. 785. If Christ say truly, that they are unprofitable servants which do all that is commanded, & no more; then neither may the Angels, nor might those out first parents ascribe any thing to their own merits, but to Gods free mercy, seeing they could do no more good then they ought, and was commanded them.DVR. The Angels haue merited, & our first parents might haue merited blessednes before their fall, yet all that they could doe, was a due debt vnto God. WHIT. pag. 785. If Christ say truly, that they are vnprofitable seruants which do all that is commanded, & no more; then neither may the Angels, nor might those out first parents ascribe any thing to their ovvne merits, but to Gods free mercy, seeing they could do no more good then they ought, and vvas commanded them.
fDVR. W•e are justified by the merits of our works, not done by our own power, and help of the Law only, but by grace in Christ. WHIT. pag. 786. Thus might the Galatians have answered S. Paul, whose faith was all one with yours in this point; when be reproved them for joining the works of the Law with grace to justification: but S. Paul showed them, that the inheritance is of promise only, and so merely of grace; and no whit of works; which are ever of the Law, whether before or after faith.DVR. VV•e are iustified by the merits of our workes, not done by our owne power, and helpe of the Law only, but by grace in Christ. WHIT. pag. 786. Thus might the Galathians haue answered S. Paul, whose faith was all one vvith yours in this point; vvhen be reproued them for ioyning the workes of the Law vvith grace to iustification: but S. Paul shevved them, that the inheritance is of promise only, and so meerely of grace; and no vvhit of works; which are euer of the Law, whether before or after faith.
•••
DVR. The Saints heare our prayers, though they be absent. WHIT. pag. 790. Euery one that prayeth to Saints supposeth thē to be present, & to know euē his thoughts, and so (in effect) maketh them Gods: as Basil proueth the holie Ghost to be God, because hee heareth godly mens prayers whersoeuer. DVR. The Saints are in many far distant places at once, though not euery where. WHIT pag. 791. Duraeus doteth to say so: for as well they might be in all, as in many places at once: But Damascene, lib. 2. cap. 3. and A•••nas, quaest. 52. art. 2 say of the very Angels, that when they be in heauen, they are not in earth.
iDVR. Christ is the only Mediator of Redemption; and Saints may be Mediators of Intercession, without injury to him. WHIT. pag. 793. Christ alone is Mediator of both, as these Scriptures prove plainly: and Christ himself saith, no man cometh to the Father but by me, Job. 14.6. and, he will give you all things in my name, Joh. 16.23. and 1 Joh. 2.2. so that it is sacrilege against Christs Priesthood, to make Saints mediators to commend us to God.DVR. Christ is the only Mediator of Redemption; and Saints may be Mediators of Intercession, without iniurie to him. WHIT. pag. 793. Christ alone is Mediator of both, as these Scriptures proue plainly: and Christ himselfe saith, no man commeth to the Father but by me, Iob. 14.6. and, hee will giue you all things in my name, Ioh. 16.23. and 1 Ioh. 2.2. so that it is sacrilege against Christs Priesthood, to make Saints mediators to commend vs to God.
kDuraeus excuseth this, persuading himself the writer meant no ill in it; though it be indeed intolerable, as are many other such their usual speeches of the blessed Virgin: see Whit. pag. 794.Duraeus excuseth this, perswading himself the writer meant no ill in it; though it be indeed intolerable, as are many other such their vsuall speeches of the blessed Virgin: see VVhit. pag. 794.
significations. Neither was that indeede sufficient cause, why you should register Matrimonie in the catalogue of Sacraments, because S. Paul wrote (thus) Sacramentum hoc magnum,
. not in his last Supper, except you will say, he died then also, vvhich he must haue done to make it a sacrifice; but he was then aliue, & it were most absurd to say he was aliue and dead at one time, which he needs must be, both then and in al your Masses, if there be any sacrifice in the Masse at all. Againe, externall sacrifices, as you say your Masse is, are subiect to the sight & outward senses, but no man euer saw Christ to be sacrificed, either in the Supper or in the Masse. Therefore there is none, neither in the one nor in the other. DVR. Jt vvas a sacrifice, for Christ vvas really conteined vnder those former of bread and vvine: and so the Masse is novv an vnbloodie sacrifice. WHIT. pag. 801. You cannot prooue him to be so present there as you teach, by no Scripture; and if he were, yet that was not therefore a sacrifice, except you will haue his reall being in the Virgins wombe also to be a sacrifice, in which he was conteined. As for your vnbloody propitiatorie sacrifice: first, it is absurd, for to sacrifice killeth a bodie, but your Transubstantiation maketh a bodie: secondly, it hath no word of God for it: thirdly, it is needlesse, Christs sacrifice being perfect: fourthly, Christ ordained that supper in memorie of his sacrifice, not to be it selfe a sacrifice: WHIT. pag. •03. DVR. Many of the Fathers call the Eucharist by the name of sacrifice. WHIT. pag 805. Not because it is that same which Christ offered (as you teach) but because it is a memoriall and Sacrament of it. DVR. Purgatorie is most plainely prooued by the fact of Iudas Machabaeus, in the second booke and 12. chapter. WHIT. pag. 806. Those bookes are not Canonicall Scripture, neither doth that act prooue a Purgatorie by your owne doctrine, who say those that die in deadly sinne, (as those did there mentioned) goe to hell, and not to Purgatorie.
*Bustum coenae Dominica.
oDVR. The office of a Presbyter, or Elder, in the Gospel is the same that the Priests office was in the Law. WHIT. pag. 807. It is not so: for if the office did remain; why should the name be changed, for Elders are never called Priests in the new Testament. And there be ruling Elders in the Church, which labour not in the Ministry of the word and Sacraments, as the Priests did.DVR. The office of a Presbyter, or Elder, in the Gospell is the same that the Priests office vvas in the Lavve. WHIT. pag. 807. It is not so: for if the office did remaine; why should the name be changed, for Elders are neuer called Priests in the new Testament. And there be ruling Elders in the Church, which labour not in the Ministerie of the word and Sacraments, as the Priests did.
notwithstanding as it is not lawfull for euery man to dreame of a kingdome, so it is a thing detestable for any man to enter vpon the holy Ministery, who hath not that function committed vnto him by diuine authoritie. Wherefore I see not at all why you should charge vs with any such Homonymy (or falshood from ambiguous signification) in this word. As for your maner of fasting, that indeed is wholly in shew, and hath nothing in it of a Christian fast, but the very name. For to make choyce of meates, as a thing more religious, and to prescribe certaine, and perpetuall set dayes, wherein we must necessarily fast, the
. so then there be no Priests at all, you confess: the Fathers call them so by custom, but not properly & the Apostles of purpose abstaining from the name of Priests, might teach us hereafter better wisdom to do so also.
DVR. So the name, Sacrament, is neuer giuen to Baptisme, nor to the Eucharist in the New testament. WHIT. pag. 810. But the substance of it, agreeth to them both, and is there, whereas the name, Sacerdos, a Priest, is not in the nevv Testament, nor doth the thing it selfe properly belong to any but Christ, since his death. DVR. Yea Christ instituted a sacrifice in his Supper, and where a sacrifice is, there is a Priest also. WHIT. pag. 810. Christ ordeined thē no sacrifice, but only a Sacrament of a sacrifice. DVR. Esay calleth the M•nisters of the Gospell, Priests, cap. 6•.6. & 66.21. WHIT. Esay in the first place speaketh of all Christians; and in the second, of Ministers in the phrase of that time; vvhence also you may as well say Deacons are Leuites, vvhich you vvill not say they are prope•ly. DVR Ministers are needlesse, except they be Priects, and as mediators betwixt God and men vnto saluation: and your Ministers are but Lay-men. WHIT. pag. 810. •15. They must preach the Word, and administer the Sacraments, but not offer sacrifice of mediation betwixt God and men, as you say, you do in the Masse: to do these we haue a calling ordeined of Christ; for your sacrifice you haue none. DVR. The Apostles name them not Priests, because they are not of the order of Aaron; but the Fathers call them Priests, who knevv the Apostles m•a•ing: and you call them Priests in English. WHIT pag. 812. Christ only is a Priest, after the order of Melchisedecke: Heb. 7.3. so then there be no Priests at all, you confesse: the Fathers call them so by custome, but not properly & the Apostles of purpose abstaining frō the name of Priests, might teach vs hereafter better vvisdome to do so also.
rDVR. True, for it is Christ that presenteth himself in the sacrifice, we only are as ministers. WHIT. p. 814. If you be Ministers only, then are you not properly Priests; & why then will you be so called? DVR. Yet we as truly sacrifice, as baptise. WHIT. Thus you will be Ministers only, and no Priests, nor be copa•tners in Christs sacrifice; yet you will b• termed Priests, and truly sacrifice; these be contraries, and cannot stand together, yea, mere madness and dotages.DVR. True, for it is Christ that presenteth himselfe in the sacrifi•e, vve onely are as ministers. WHIT. p. 814. If you be Ministers only, then are you not properly Priests; & why then will you be so called? DVR. Yet vve as truely sacrifice, as baptise. WHIT. Thus you will be Ministers only, and no Priests, nor be copa•tners in Christs sacrifice; yet you will b• tearmed Priests, and truly sacrifice; these be contraries, and cannot stand together, yea, meere madnes and dotages.
sDVR. Thus you strip the Gospel of all sacrifice and religion. WHIT. pag. 816. 817. All your religion by this your doctrine, is in your Mass, which we willingly have not; but notwithstanding we have the sacrifice of Christ, which is perpetual and inchangeable, Heb. 7 2•.28. and 10.14. your invisible sacrifice the Scripture knoweth not.DVR. Thus you strippe the Gospell of all sacrifice and •eligion. WHIT. pag. 816. 817. All your religion by this your doctrine, is in your Masse, which we willingly haue not; but notwithstanding we haue the sacrifice of Christ, which is perpetuall and inchangeable, Heb. 7 2•.28. and 10.14. your inuisible sacrifice the Scripture knoweth not.
tDVR. Who called Luther, Calvin, Beza, &c. your Ministers? WHIT. pag. 820. Luther, Zuinglius, Bucer, &c. were Priests of your own, and so had a calling (except your order of Priesthood be no calling) and might call others by your law. Again, God is not tied so to order, but that he may for the good of the Church, call Ministers extraordinarily. And the Churches have lawful power to choose Ministers (so that we need not to call any from you that service) as saith Cyprian. Epist. 68. Thus were Calvin and Beza chosen.DVR. VVho called Luther, Caluin, Beza, &c. your Ministers? WHIT. pag. 820. Luther, Zuinglius, Bucer, &c. were Priests of your owne, and so had a calling (except your order of Priesthood be no calling) and might call others by your law. Againe, God is not tied so to order, but that he may for the good of the Church, call Ministers extraordinarily. And the Churches haue lavvfull povver to chuse Ministers (so that we need not to call any from you that seruice) as saith Cyprian. Epist. 68. Thus were Calui• and Beza chosen.
uDVR. This savoureth of Luthers spirit: but Pope Leo saith, that the holy Ghost taught the Apostles, the discipline of fasting, for one of the chief Sacraments of heavenly doctrine. WHIT. pag. 8•1. &c. We allow Christian fasting; but what spirit taught Leo to say so of your solemn superstitious fasts? the Scriptures speak no such thing, which we preferie before all mens judgements.DVR. This sauoureth of Luthers spirit: but Pope Leo saith, that the holy Ghost taught the Apostles, the discipl•ne of fasting, for one of the chiefe Sacraments of heauenly doctrine. WHIT. pag. 8•1. &c. Wee allow Christian fasting; but vvhat spirit taught Leo to say so of your solemne superstitious fasts? the Scriptures speake no such thing, which wee preferie before all mens iudgements.
