A15057:345
An answer to the Ten reasons of Edmund Campian the Jesuit in confidence whereof…An ansvvere to the Ten reasons of Edmund Campian the Iesuit in confidence wherof…
An answer to the Ten reasons of Edmund Campian the Jesuit in confidence whereof he offered disputation to the ministers of the Church of England, in the controversy of faith. Whereunto is added in brief marginal notes, the sum of the defence of those reasons by John Duræus the Scot, being a priest and a Jesuit, with a reply unto it. Written first in the Latin tongue by the reverend and faithful servant of Christ and his Church, William Whitakers, Doctor in Divinity, and the Kings Professor and public reader of Divinity in the University of Cambridge. And now faithfully translated for the benefit of the unlearned (at the appointment and desire of some in authority) into the English tongue; by Richard Stock, preacher in London. ...An ansvvere to the Ten reasons of Edmund Campian the Iesuit in confidence wherof he offered disputation to the ministers of the Church of England, in the controuersie of faith. Whereunto is added in briefe marginall notes, the summe of the defence of those reasons by Iohn Duræus the Scot, being a priest and a Iesuit, with a reply vnto it. Written first in the Latine tongue by the reuerend and faithfull seruant of Christ and his Church, William Whitakers, Doctor in Diuinitie, and the Kings Professor and publike reader of Diuinitie in the Vniuersitie of Cambridge. And now faithfully translated for the benefit of the vnlearned (at the appointment and desire of some in authoritie) into the English tongue; by Richard Stocke, preacher in London. ...
London: printed by Felix Kyngston for Cuthbert Burby and Edmund Weaver, 1606London: printed by Felix Kyngston for Cuthbert Burby and Edmund Weauer, 1606
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Now you come to Heretics, the lees, bellows, 1and fuel of hell fire. As long as there wants no Papists this fire will want no fuel. The first you meet with is Simon Magus. Indeed your Church is something more indebted to this Simon then the other: but what of him? He denied freewill unto man, and bragged of faith alone. Where find you that? tell us Campian, for this is not affirmed by Ireneus or Clemens in the places alleged; he thought that all things came to pass by destiny, and an inevitable necessity, whereby he utterly abolished mans freewill:x We hold no such opinion. Neither did he boast of sole faith (as you say:) but this was his opinion, that from the doctrine of Justification by grace and faith, he let loose the reins to all impiety & dishonesty: where do we defend any such things? Novatianus would himself be Bishop of Rome, and opposed himself to Cornelius the lawful Bishop, hoping by force to get the Bishopric. What is this to us? But he was an enemy to the two Sacraments of penance and extreme unction. yHe denied pardon and repentance to them ⟨p. 317⟩that fell in persecution. Herein he was an enemy of repentance. Our case in far different, which exclude no true penitent from hope of pardon. Manes wholly rejected baptism, as unprofitable and not necessary. Do we affirm any such thing? Wez deny (indeed) that baptism confers grace to the unbeliever by the work wrought: he denied it to be profitable at all: are we like him? Austen and Epiphanius account Aerius for an Heretic, so did few of the ancient Fathers besides these. And if to condemn prayers for the dead, 5and make equal a Priest with a Bishop be heretical, what shall be Catholic? Hierome was altogether of Aerius his mind, about equality of Priests; for he determines them to be equal with Bishops by Gods law. This was not that Aerius, 6whom they usually called Atheist, but an other, Aetius; the likeness of the names deceived you. To that you objected concerning Vigilantius and Jovinian, an answer is formerly given;