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.
Whereas there are many things. which evidently open the Adversaries mistrust in the cause, yet nothing so much, as the majesty of Gods books, by them most filthily* corrupted. For they, who after that they have rejected the voices and testimonies of all other witnesses, and are nevertheless, ⟨p. 18⟩driven to so narrow shifts, that they cannot defend their cause to be good, except they lay violent hands upon the holy Scriptures also, assuredly show themselves to be in great distress, and all other helps failing and fainting, must now try the last and uttermost shift. What cause had the Manichees to cancela S. Matthew's Gospel, and the Acts of the Apostles? Desperation: for they were tormented with these books, both because they had denied Christ to beb borne of a Virgin, and also had falsely affirmed, that then the holyc Ghost came first down from heaven amongst Christians, when theird Paraclete, that most wicked Persian leapt out. What made thee Ebionites to abandon all S. Pauls Epistles? Desperation: for so long as these kept their authority, Circumcision is abolished, which they had brought back again. What enforcedf Luther that most wicked Apostate, to call the Epistle of S. James, *
Oracles they be expressly convinced, as often as they dispute against the defence of Angels, as often as they dispute against Free-will, as often as they dispute against praying for the dead, as often as they dispute against praying to Saints. Is it so indeed? Is there such frowardness, is there such presumption amongst men? when they had trodden under foot the authority of the Churches, Councils * Seas, Fathers, Martyrs, Emperors, People, Laws, Universities, Histories, all Monuments of Antiquity & holiness; & had openly proclaimed, that they would have all controversies decided by the written word of God only;
WHereas there are many things. which euidently open the Aduersaries mistrust in the cause, yet nothing so much, as the maiestie of Gods bookes, by them most filthilie* corrupted. For they, who after that they haue reiected the voyces and testimonies of all other witnesses, and are neuerthelesse, ⟨p. 18⟩driuen to so narrow shifts, that they cannot defend their cause to be good, except they lay violent hands vpon the holy Scriptures also, assuredly shew themselues to be in great distresse, and all other helps failing and fainting, must now trie the last and vttermost shift. What cause had the Manachies to cancela S. Matthewes Gospell, and the Acts of the Apostles? Desperation: for they were tormented with these bookes, both because they had denied Christ to beb borne of a Ʋirgin, and also had falsely affirmed, that then the holyc Ghost came first downe from heauen amongst Christians, when theird Paraclete, that most wicked Persian leapt out. What made thee Ebionits to abandon all S. Paules Epistles? De•peration: for so long as these kept their authoritie, Circumcision is abolished, which they had brought backe againe. What enforcedf Luther that most wicked Apostata, to call the Epistle of S. Iames, *contentious, proud, barren, rushy, and iudge it to be vnworthy an Apostolike spirit? Desperation:g For by this Epistle that miserable caitife affirming our iustification to be by faith* only, is vtterly confuted & cōfounded what incensedh Luthers whelpes, on a suddaine to put out of the* true Canon of Scripture, Tobias, Ecclesiasticus, & the two bookes of the Macchabees; & in despight of them many otheri bookes, vnto which they picked the like quarrell? Desperation: for by these heauenlyk Oracles they be expresly conuinced, as often as they dispute against the defence of Angels, as often as they dispute against Free-will, as often as they dispute against praying for the dead, as often as they dispute against praying to Saints. Is it so indeed? Is there such frowardnes, is there such presumption amongst mē? when they had trodden vnder foot the authority of the Churches, Coūcels * Seas, Fathers, Martyrs, Emperours, People, Lawes, Ʋniuersities, Histories, all Monuments of Antiquitie & holines; & had openly proclamed, that they would haue all controuersies decided by the written word of God only;
*It is false: for we have corrupted no part of the Bible.It is false: for we haue corrupted no part of the Bible.
aAug. lib. 28. contra Faust. cap. 2 & de utilit. cre. c. 3.Aug. lib. 28. contra Faust. cap. 2 & de vtilit. cre. c. 3.
fPraefat in Epist. Jac. vide etiam lib. de capt. Babyl. & centur. 2.Praefat in Epist. Iac. vide etiam lib. de capt. Babyl. & centur. 2.
*This is most false, for Luther greatly approveth of this Epistle, neither ever did he call it a contentious, swelling, barren, or strawne Epistle.This is most false, for Luther greatly approueth of this Epistle, neither euer did he call it a contentious, swelling, barren, or strawne Epistle.
gJaco. ca. 2.Iaco. ca. 2.
*This is false: for the place maketh nothing at all against Justification by faith only.This is false: for the place maketh nothing at all against Iustification by faith only.
hBibl. Geneu.
*It is false, th•se books were never accounted part of the true Canon.It is false, th•se bookes were neuer accounted part of the true Canon.
would they then have dismembered the ⟨p. 19⟩very same word, which only remained, by cutting out of the whole body, so many, so good, and so excellent parts thereof. For the Calvinists have cut out of the old Testamentl seven whole books, besides certain other small pieces, which I let pass unspoken of The Lutherans likewise have cut off S. James Epist & for spite of it,m five others, which some where else also were once called in question. To these also, do the late Genevans add the book of Esther, & a great part of the third chapter, & all the two last chapters of Daniel, which the Anabaptists their school-fellows had a little before condemned, & laughed to scorn; But how much more modest lie dealt S. Austin, who making a Catalogue of the books of holy Scriptures, took for his rule neither the Hebrew Alphabet, as the Jews do, nor yet his own private spirit, as Heretics use to do; but that spirit wherewith Christ quickeneth the whole body of his Church, which Church being not Lady (as Heretics do cavil) but only keeper of this gage, hath by old* ancient Councils, openly challenged this whole and entire treasure of the books of Scripture, which the late Council of Trent also hath embraced? The self-same S. Augustine, entreating particularly of one parcel of Scripture, could not persuade himself, that the book of Wisdom, should by any mans rashness, or secret false suggestion, be thrust out of the Canon of Scripture, which even in his time, by judgement of the Church, process of time, testimony of ancient writers, and instruction of faithful men, had kept his authority, as a sound and Canonical book; what would he say if he were now living upon the earth again, and should see the Lutherans and Calvinists to be Bible makers, who with their sine and smooth stile, have raced both the old and new Testament, and put out of the Canon of holy Scriptures, not only the book of Wisdom, but many books more also? so that, that which shall not be uttered out of their shops, must by their brain-sick decree be rejected as a thing most rude and loath some. They that are driven to this horrible and ⟨p. 20⟩detestable shift, though their Arms be blazed never so far abroad, by their own disciples, though they buy and sel• benefices, though in their Sermons, they cry out against Catholics, though they procure them the sword, rack.
would they then haue dismembred the ⟨p. 19⟩very same word, which only remained, by cutting out of the whole body, so many, so good, and so excellent partes therof. For the Caluinists haue cut out of the old Testamentl seauen whole bookes, besides certaine other small peeces, which I let passe vnspoken of The Lutherans likewise haue cut off S. Iames Epist & for spight of it,m fiue others, which some where els also were once called in questiō. To these also, do the late Geneuans adde the booke of Hester, & a great part of the third chapter, & al the two last chapters of Daniel, which the Anabaptists their school-fellowes had a little before cōdemned, & laughed to scorne; But how much more modest lie delt S. Austine, who making a Catologue of the books of holy Scriptures, tooke for his rule neither the Hebrew Alphabet, as the Iewes do, nor yet his owne priuate spirit, as Heretikes vse to do; but that spirit wherewith Christ quickneth the whole body of his Church, which Church being not Lady (as Heretickes do cauil) but only keeper of this gage, hath by old* auncient Councels, openly challenged this whole and entire treasure of the bookes of Scripture, which the late Coūcell of Trent also hath embraced? The self-same S. Augustine, intreating particularly of one parcell of Scripture, could not perswade himselfe, that the booke of Wisdome, should by any mans rashnes, or secret false suggestion, be thrust out of the Canon of Scripture, which euen in his time, by iudgement of the Church, processe of time, testimonie af auncient writers, and instruction of faithfull men, had kept his authoritie, as a sound and Canonicall booke; what would he say if he were now liuing vpon the earth againe, and should see the Lutherans and Caluinists to be Bible makers, who with their sine and smooth stile, haue raced both the old and new Testament, and put out of the Canon of holy Scriptures, not only the booke of Wisdome, but many bookes more also? so that, that which shall not be vttered out of their shops, must by their brain-sicke decree be reiected as a thing most rude and loath some. They that are driuen to this horrible and ⟨p. 20⟩detestable shift, though their Armes be blazed neuer so farre abroad, by their owne disciples, though they buy and sel• benefices, though in their Sermons, they cry out against Catholikes, though they procure them the sword, racke.
mEpistol. ad Hebr. Epist Jud. Epist. 2. Pet. Ep. 2 & 3. Johannis. it a censent Luth. in praefat. Mag. Cent. 1. lib. 2. cap 4. Kem. in exam. con. Tri. Ses. 4. De doct. chr. lib. 2. cap. 8. Ses. 4. vide Mel. Can. lib. 2. de Loc. Theol. cap. 9.10.11. de praedest. Sanct. cap. 14.Epistol. ad Hebr. Epist Jud. Epist. 2. Pet. Ep. 2 & 3. Iohannis. it a censent Luth. in praefat. Mag. Cent. 1. lib. 2. cap 4. Kem. in exam. con. Tri. Ses. 4. De doct. chr. lib. 2. cap. 8. Ses. 4. vide Mel. Can. lib. 2. de Loc. Theol. cap. 9.10.11. de praedest. Sanct. cap. 14.
*This is false, for the Laodicene Councel doth so number the books of the Scriptures as we do, and not as the Councell of Trent doth.This is false, for the Laodicene Councel doth so number the bookes of the Scriptures as we do, and not as the Councell of Trent doth.
and gallows, yet are they overcome, naught set by, horrible in mens sight, and quite overthrown. For as much as the taking upon them the authority of Censors and sitting as honourable Judges, do dash out at their pleasure such holy Scriptures, as they found would not serve their turn; is there any body though never so simple, which can fear these subtle sleights of the Adversaries, who, as soon as they should enter within your assembly that are learned men, and fly unto such their usual shifts, as it were unto their familiar spirit, should, though not with reproach full words, yet at the least with trampling of your feet be thrust out of your schools? I would demand of them, (for example sake) b• what authority they maim and rob the corps of the Bible? They answer they do not cut out any true Canonical Scriptures but cull out only such as are not Canonical, that have been foisted into the Bible, and are indeed but counterfeits. Who shall be judge? the* holy Ghost; for this very answer dotho Calvin give, thereby to escape the judgement of the Church, by whose authority all spirits are tried; why then do some of you cut off certain books, and others of your crew, allow the same, seeing you all vaunt of the self-same spirit? The Calvinists spirit alloweth of six Epistles, which the Lutheran spirit doth disallow, and yet both of you (as you say) have the holy spirit. Thep Anabaptists do call the history of Job a fable interlaced with tragical and Comical metres: how know they that? by the spirit that instructeth them.q Castalio, that lecherous varlet made no more account of that mystical book of Solomon, commonly called Cantica canticorum (which the Catholics do as highly esteem as a Paradise of the soul, as that heavenly food Manna, which was laid up and kept in the tabernacle, ⟨p. 21⟩and as delicate dainties in Christ) then he did of a* bawdy song, and ribald tab of a Courtly waiting maid with her lover; where had he this? of the spirit? In the Apocalypse ofr S. John, every little title whereof S. Hierome affirmeth to contain some high and notable mystery; yet nevertheless, theses severe Judges, Luther, Brentius and Kemnitius find I know not what lacking shooting all at this mark, that the book might be defaced, and be of no authority: whom did they ask? the spirit.*
and gallowes, yet are they ouercome, naught set by, horrible in mens sight, and quite ouerthrowne. For as much as the taking vpon them the authoritie of Censorors and sitting as honorable Iudges, do dash out at their pleasure such holy Scriptures, as they found would not serue their turne; is there any body though neuer so simple, which can feare these sub•tle sleights of the Aduersaries, who, assoone as they should enter within your assemiblie that are learned men, and flie vnto such their vsuall snifts, as it were vnto their familiar spirit, should, though not with reproach full words, yet at the least with trampling of your feet be thrust out of your schooles? I would demaund of them, (for example sake) b• what authoritie they mayme and robbe the corpes of the Bible? They answere they doe not cut out any true Canonicall Scriptures but cull out only such as are not Canonicall, that haue been forsted into the Bible, and are indeed but counterfeits. Who shall be iudge? the* holy Ghost; for this very answere dotho Caluin giue, thereby to escape the iudgement of the Church, by whose authoritie all spirits are tried; why then do some of you cut off certaine bookes, and others of your crew, allow the same, seeing you all vaunt of the self-same spirit? The Caeluinists spirit alloweth of six Epistles, which the Lutheran spirit doth d•sallow, and yet both of you (as you say) haue the holie spirit. Thep Anabaptists doe call the historie of Iob a fable interlaced with tragicall and Comicall meeters: how know they that? by the spirit that instructeth them.q Castalio, that lecherous varlet made no more account of that mysticall booke of Salomon, commonly called Cantica canticorum (which the Catholikes do as highly esteeme as a Paradise of the soul, as that heauenly food Manna, which was laid vp and kept in the tabernacle, ⟨p. 21⟩and as delicate dainties in Christ) then he did of a* baudie song, and ribaudous ta•be of a Courtly wayting mayd with her louer; where had he this? of the spirit? In the Apocalyps ofr
*Campian refuseth the holy Ghost as Judge.Campian refuseth the holy Ghost as Iudge.
o1. Lib. Inst. cap. 7.
pXistus Sen. lib. 7.
qPraefat. in Cant.
*This is falsoe for Castalio in his preface hath no such word.
rEpist. ad Paul.
sPraef. in Apoc.
*This is most false: read the answer to it.This is most false: reade the answere to it.
Luther upon a preposterous zeal casteth a bone amongst theg four Evangelists, and preferring S. Pauls Epistles far before the three former Gospels, in the end concludeth, that the one only Gospel of S. John is from henceforth to be taken, for the gay, for the true, and the principal Gospel; as one that as much as in him lay would gladly have made the Apostles also partakers of his brawling in religious matters: who was his Tutor? the spirit. Besides this, that peevishu Fryer was so malapert, as to endeavour to make* S. Lukes Gospel to be suspected to be written in a wanton style, because therein good works are often commended unto us: whom hath he consulted with? the spirit. Theodorus Beza was so bold as to reprehend that mystical word taken out of the 22. Chapterx of S. Luke, Hic est Calix novum Testamentum in sanguine meo, qui (calix) pro vobis fundetur: This is the Cup of the new Testament in my blood, which (Cup) shall be sh•dde for you: as very corrupt and evilly placed there; because this sentence cannot admit any interpretation, but of the* wine of the Cup changed into the very true blood of Christ: where learned he that? of the spirit. Finally, when every man committeth every thing to his private spirit, they belie the name of the holy Ghost most blasphemously. Do not these fellows which deal thus, bewray themselves, and show what they are? are they not easily confuted? are they not in the assembly of such men, as you of both the Universities be, quickly perceived, and soon repressed: Ought I to fear ⟨p. 22⟩disputations with these in defence of the Catholic faith, who with much falsehood have handled the very word not of man, but of God himself? Here I pass over such things, as they have depraved in their false translations, though there be intolerable matters wherewith I may well charge them. I am very loath to take away any part of the matter, either from my old College fellow Master Gregory Martin, a man of excellent great knowledge in the three tongues,y which will handle this matter far more learnedly and copiously then I can; or from some others, which (as I understand) have already undertaken this matter. The matter that I now write of, is far more heinous and horrible.
Luther vpon a prepostorous zeale casteth a bone amongst theg foure Euangelists, and preferring S. Paules Epistles farre before the three former Gospels, in the end concludeth, that the one only Gospell of S. Iohn is from henceforth to be taken, for the gay, for the true, and the principall Gospell; as one that asmuch as in him lay would gladly haue made the Apostles also partakers of his brawling in religious matters: who was his Tutor? the spirit. Besides this, that peeuishu Fryer was so malapert, as to endeuor to make* S. Lukes Gospell to be suspected to be written in a wanton style, because therein good workes are often commended vnto vs: whom hath he consulted with? the spirit. Theodorus Beza was so bold as to reprehend that mysticall word taken out of the 22. Chapterx of S. Luke, Hic est Calix nouum Testamentum in sanguine meo, qui (calix) pro vobis fundetur: This is the Cup of the new Testament in my blood, which (Cup) shall be sh•dde for you: as very corrupt and euilly placed there; because this sentence cannot admit any interpretation, but of the* wine of the Cup changed into the very true blood of Christ: where learned he that? of the spirit. Finally, when euery man committeth euery thing to his priuate spirit, they belie the name of the holy Ghost most blasphemously. Do not these fellowes which deale thus, bewray themselues, and shew what they are? are they not easily confuted? are they not in the assemblie of such men, as you of both the Vniuersities be, quickly perceiued, and soone represt: Ought I to feare ⟨p. 22⟩disputations with these in defence of the Catholike faith, who with much falshood haue handled the very word not of man, but of God himselfe? Here I passe ouer such things, as they haue depraued in their false translations, though there be intolerable matters wherewith I may well charge them. I am very loath to take away any part of the matter, either from my old Colledge fellow Master Gregory Martin, a man of excellent great knowledge in the three tongues,y which will handle this matter farre more learnedly and copiously then I can; or from some others, which (as I vnderstand) haue already vndertaken this matter. The matter that I now write of, is farre more heynous and horrible.
gPraefat. in novum Test.Praefat. in nouum Test.
uSer. de Pharis & Publican.
*This is false: for Luther never spake saucily of S. Luke.This is false: for Luther neuer spake saucily of S. Luke.
xLuc. C. 22. [Greek or Hebrew].Luc. C. 22. 〈non-Latin alphabet〉.
*This is false: for by no means can he endure thi• exposition.This is false: for by no meanes can he endure thi• exposition.
There were lately discovered certain petty Doctors, that upon a drunken pang laid violent hands upon the divine Scriptures, and have condemned them, as corrupted, as maimed, as falsified, as craftily foisted in, in sundry places; some parts thereof they have corrected, some they have raced, and some they have quite pulled out. And lastly they have changed, as the fortress of this authentical writing of Gods own hand, wherewith before it was fenced, unto certain Lutheran spirits, as though it were into vain bulwarks of their own imaginations, or into bare painted walls, least peradventure they should have bin mum for want of matter, when they should stumble at such places of Scripture, as are plain against their heresies. Of which nevertheless, they could no sooner shift their hands, then sup up hot coals or eat hard stones. Then this first reason seemed to me urgent and just, which when it had evidently laid before mine eyes, that the Adversaries side was but counterfeited and feeble, truly it encouraged me much, being both a Christian, and also somewhat beaten in this kind of study, in defence of the everlasting Kings Charter, to encounter with the remnants of these discomfited enemies.
There were lately discouered certaine pettie Doctors, that vpon a drunken pange laid violent hands vpon the diuine Scriptures, and haue condemned them, as corrupted, as maymed, as falsified, as craftily foisted in, in sundrie places; some parts thereof they haue corrected, some they haue raced, and some they haue quite pulled out. And lastly they haue changed, as the fortresse of this authenticall writing of Gods owne hand, wherewith before it was fenced, vnto certaine Lutherane spirits, as though it were into vaine bulwarkes of their owne imaginations, or into bare painted walles, least peraduenture they should haue bin mum for want of matter, when they should stumble at such places of Scripture, as are plaine against their heresies. Of which neuerthelesse, they could no sooner shift their hands, then suppe vp hot coales or eate hard stones. Then this first reason seemed to me vrgent and iust, which when it had euidently laid before mine eyes, that the Aduersaries side was but counterfeited and feeble, truely it incouraged me much, being both a Christian, and also somewhat beaten in this kind of studie, in defence of the euerlasting Kings Charter, to encounter with the remnaunts of these discomfited enemies.
That Campian, which made you most cheerful in the cause you have undertaken, and boulder then a Jesuit (being newly come out of your den or cabin where you have lurked these divers years) to proclaim war against us all, and challenge to the combat the most valiant of us; that, you say, was the evident apprehension of our distrust and diffidence in our cause. But what manhood is this for so valorous a man as you make show to be, to provoke and with sharp war to pursue so timorous adversaries, who are ready to betake themselves to their heels, not daring to stand to it, but distrusting their own strength? But tell us in what things our distrust hath bin so sensible. There are many things, say you, which evidently bewray the adversaries mistrust in the cause. Verily if boldness in oppugning and withstanding Religion were of as great force, as usually it is in making of war, and scaling the enemies walls, and racing his towns, we might well fear your furious and desperate attempts: for whatsoever could be compassed by rage, fury, and cruelty, that hath not in this combat and contention been wanting. But such weapons cannot dare religion and truth, neither can they displace it. Let it be granted, we have not been so cheerful and ready in the defence of a good cause as we ought, and as the cause it self well deserved, neither have we put to flight your forces ⟨p. 24⟩so soon as we ought to have vanquished them, yet we never gave ground, we never turned our backs upon you, neither ever sled out of the field.a For tell us Campian if you can, and remember the bypast times. Did we ever cunningly avoid any disputation? did we ever refuse any combat? did we ever shift off any of your offers and challenges? But how often have we publicly entered the combat with you? how often have we refuted your oft iterated Sophistications? what writing of yours is yet unanswered by us? or what course of disputation have we not yielded to? Are not all those disputations held at Wittenberg, Ratesbone, Augusta, Spire, Worms, Bearne, Possia, London, Cambridge, Oxford, most plentiful and pregnant witnesses, with what spirits, with what learning, with what truth we defended our Religion? what show or sign of fear, or diffidence found you amongst us? nay rather how true and singular confidence did there appear in us?
THat Campian, which made you most cheerefull in the cause you haue vndertaken, and boulder then a Iesuite (being newlie come out of your den or cabbine where you haue lurked these diuers yeeres) to proclame warre against vs all, and challenge to the combate the most valiant of vs; that, you saie, was the euident apprehension of our distrust and diffidence in our cause. But what manhood is this for so valourous a man as you make shew to be, to prouoke and with sharpe warre to pursue so timerous aduersaries, who are readie to betake themselues to their heeles, not daring to stand to it, but distrusting their owne strength? But tell vs in what things our distrust hath bin so sensible. There are many things, say you, which euidently bewray the aduersaries mistrust in the cause. Verelie if boldnes in oppugning and withstanding Religion were of as great force, as vsually it is in making of warre, and scaling the enemies walles, and racing his townes, we might well feare your furious and desperate attempts: for whatsoeuer could be compassed by rage, furie, and crueltie, that hath not in this combate and contention been wanting. But such weapons cannot dare religion and truth, neither can they displace it. Let it be graunted, we haue not been so cheerefull and readie in the defence of a good cause as we ought, and as the cause it selfe well deserued, neither haue we put to flight your forces ⟨p. 24⟩so soone as we ought to haue vanquished thē, yet we neuer gaue ground, we neuer turned our backs vpon you, neither euer sled out of the field.a For tell vs Campian if you can, and remember the bypast times. Did we euer cūningly auoid any disputation? did we euer refuse any combate? did we euer shift off any of your offers and challenges? But how often haue we publikely entred the combate with you? how often haue we refuted your oft iterated Sophistications? what writing of yours is yet vnanswered by vs? or what course of disputation haue we not yeelded to? Are not all those disputations held at Wittenberge, Ratesbone, Augusta, Spire, Wormes, Bearne, Possia, London, Cambridge, Oxford, most plentifull and pregnant witnesses, with what spirits, with what learning, with what truth we defended our Religion? what shew or signe of feare, or diffidence found you amongst vs? nay rather how true and singular confidence did there appeare in vs?
aDVR. You boats much of your valour. but whether think you is he valorous or fearful, who dare not otherwise buckle with his adversary, but upon condition he may forbid him what weapons he list, and choose for himself what he list? Now here is your valour, you forbid us the weapons of the Church, Councels, Fathers. You only leave us the weapons of the Scriptures? WH. Pag. 4. He that will overcome in this cause must only use those weapons, which are allowed in this kind of sight. For it is not lawful here, as in war, to take any weapon, by which you can wound your enemy. But weapons must be fetched out of the armoury of the Scriptures, and the spirit of God, or else there vvill be no foiling of an adversary. And this is that which the Scriptures do warrant; and Constantine commanded the Fathers of the Nicene Councel to use against the Arians, and to end controversies; the books of the Evangelists and Apostles, and the oracles of the old Prophets. Theodoret. lib. 2. cap. 6. And the like teacheth Hillarie de Trinit. lib. 7. August. Epist. 3. and contr. litre. Petil. Donat. lib. 3. cap. 6. and in divers other places. Why do you then repove this thing in us? Tell me, whose cause think you is best? whether ours, who are content with the Scriptures alone, and being armed with them can defend our own, and refel others; or yours, which in no case can be safe, if the cause must be tried by the Scripture only. Therefore at the fi•st you are forced to confess that you must come into the field unarmed and naked, if no weapons vvill be afforded you besides the Scriptures.DVR. You boats much of your valour. but vvhether thinke you is he valorous or fearefull, vvho dare not othervvise buckle vvith his aduersarie, but vpon condition he may forbid him what weapons he list, and choose for himselfe vvhat he list? Now here is your valour, you forbid vs the vveapons of the Church, Councels, Fathers. You only leaue vs the weapons of the Scriptures? WH. Pag. 4. He that will ouercome in this cause must onely vse those weapons, which are allowed in this kind of sight. For it is not lawfull heere, as in warre, to take any weapon, by which you can wound your enemie. But weapons must be fetched out of the armorie of the Scriptures, and the spirit of God, or else there vvill be no foyling of an aduersary. And this is that which the Scriptures doe warrant; and Constantine commanded the Fathers of the Nicene Councel to vse against the Arrians, and to end controuersies; the bookes of the Euangelists and Apostles, and the oracles of the old Prophets. Theodoret. lib. 2. cap. 6. And the like teacheth Hillarie de Trinit. lib. 7. August. Epist. 3. and contr. liter. Petil. Donat. lib. 3. cap. 6. and in diuers other places. Why doe you then repoue this thing in vs? Tell me, vvhose cause thinke you is best? vvhether ours, vvho are content vvith the S•riptures alone, and being armed vvith them can defend our ovvne, and refel others; or yours, vvhich in no case can be safe, if the cause must be tried by the Scripture only. Therefore at the fist you are forced to confesse that you must come into the field vnarmed and naked, if no vveapons vvill be afforded you besides the Scriptures.
you it is, and not we, when it comes to a trial indeed that begins to sweat, change countenance, tremble every joint of you, and bewray your deep distrust and the naughtiness of your cause. Wherefore, Campian, take it from me, ⟨p. 25⟩if you think our distrustfulness will help you any thing, you much deceive your self, for if we have with courage stood against your predecessors so far surpassing you, we will not yield a hair to you? nor fear your manner of conflict, being so childish in the judgement of all men. But this diffidence, you so cast in our dish, tell us what it is, and how it appears so clearly, Forsooth we distrust our hold in the Scriptures, and the majesty of Gods books we have most filthily corrupted. This indeed is a very great crimination you object to us, and an undoubted proof of our distrust: for they who are not able to maintain the Religion they profess, unless they lay violent hands upon the Scriptures, and impeach the sacred authority of those heavenly books, the cause on their side must be very naught and desperate indeed. Therefore I grant unto you, that it was very fearful desperation, which made the Manichees renounce the old Testament wholly, and cancel part of the new: the same also made Ebion reject all Pauls Epistles, and other heretics to do so too: for there was nothing fitter for them to uphold those their monstrous opinions, then by denying those books of holy Scripture.
you it is, and not we, when it comes to a trial indeed that begins to sweat, chaunge countenance, tremble euery ioynt of you, and bewray your deepe distrust and the naughtines of your cause. Wherefore, Campian, take it from me, ⟨p. 25⟩if you thinke our distrustfulnes will helpe you any thing, you much deceiue your selfe, for if we haue with courage stood against your predecessors so far surpassing you, we will not yeeld a haire to you? nor feare your manner of conflict, being so childish in the iudgement of all men. But this diffidence, you so cast in our dish, tell vs what it is, and how it appeares so clearely, Forsooth we distrust our hold in the Scriptures, and the maiestie of Gods bookes we haue most filthilie corrupted. This indeed is a very great crimination you obiect to vs, and an vndoubted proofe of our distrust: for they who are not able to maintaine the Religion they professe, vnlesse they lay violent hands vpon the Scriptures, and impeach the sacred authoritie of those heauenly bookes, the cause on their side must be very naught and desperate indeed. Therfore I graunt vnto you, that it was very fearefull desperation, which made the Manachies renounce the old Testament wholy, and cancell part of the new: the same also made Ebion reiect all Paules Epistles, and other heretikes to do so too: for there was nothing fitter for them to vphold those their monstrous opinions, then by denying those bookes of holy Scripture.
But I pray you Campian, let us see how these things make for your purpose: or what it is wherein we are so like those forenamed Heretics. Me thinks it little beseemeth your learning and eloquence, to slander us, and to pin upon our sleeves such odious crimes of ancient heretics so undeservedly. If we have shaken hands with the Manichees, if with the Ebionites, tell us wherein? But if we are culpable of no such thing, the Lord shall judge your outrageous and bold slanders, and maintain our uprightness and innocency. For who ever thought and spoke more honourably, reverently and with more due regard of ⟨p. 26⟩the Scriptures then we? who have received and embraced all Scripture given by inspiration, as the very voice of God himself; holding it for the only mystery of our faith and religion, and so resting in it, as that we desire no other help as necessary to salvation? which if we had not with more diligence and devotion defended, then you ever did, long ere this the glory of it had perished, and it had bin counted as a dead letter: For what have we done for these many years with more endeavour and diligence, then maintain the majesty and excellency of the Scriptures, which you have so unworthily violated? And yet you blush not to match us with the Manichees and Ebionites, who have violently laid most impure and villainous hands upon those sacred books. But, say you, Luther that most wicked Apostate, called the Epistle of S. James a contentious, swelling, barren and strawen Epistle, and judged it unworthy the spirit of an Apostle: still the fat would be in the fire, Campian, if you had not one fit of railing at Luther, for this is to show your self a right Jesuit, as indeed you are, shamelessly and audaciously to break out into railing, and specially to tear Luther with most bitter reproaches. This is your faculty and profession, this you have undertaken to do, whatsoever you• leave undone: surely he is an happy man, whom the Lord thus honoureth with the enmity and hatred of such wicked men: for he cannot choose but be an excellent man, whom wicked men do so deadly pursue. But you object against Luther his Apostasy: look to your self Campian, if you may not be more justly accused of this crime: for doubtless you are either an Apostate, or you were a cunning hypocrite. But if it be Apostasy to forsake Apostates, then was Luther such an Apostate.
But I pray you Campian, let vs see how these things make for your purpose: or what it is wherein we are so like those forenamed Heretikes. Me thinkes it little beseemeth your learning and eloquence, to slaunder vs, and to pinne vpon our sleeues such odious crimes of auncient heretikes so vndeseruedly. If we haue shaken hands with the Manachees, if with the Ebionits, tell vs wherein? But if we are culpable of no such thing, the Lord shall iudge your outragious and bold slaunders, and maintaine our vprightnes and innocency. For who euer thought and spoke more honorably, reuerently and with more due regard of ⟨p. 26⟩the Scriptures then we? who haue receiued and imbraced all Scripture giuen by inspiration, as the very voice of God himself; holding it for the only mysterie of our faith and religion, and so resting in it, as that we desire no other helpe as necessary to saluation? which if we had not with more diligence and deuotion defended, then you euer did, long ere this the glorie of it had perished, and it had bin counted as a dead letter: For what haue we done for these many yeeres with more endeuour and diligence, then maintaine the maiesty and excellencie of the Scriptures, which you haue so vnworthily violated? And yet you blush not to match vs with the Manachees and Ebionits, who haue violently laid most impure and villanous hands vpon those sacred bookes. But, say you, Luther that most wicked Apostata, called the Epistle of S. Iames a contentious, swelling, barren and strawen Epistle, and iudged it vnworthy the spirit of an Apostle: still the fatte would be in the fire, Campian, if you had not one fit of rayling at Luther, for this is to shew your selfe a right Iesuite, as indeed you are, shamelessely and audaciously to breake out into rayling, and specially to teare Luther with most bitter reproches. This is your facultie and profession, this you haue vndertaken to do, whatsoeuer you• leaue vndone: surely he is an happy man, whom the Lord thus honoreth with the enmitie and hatred of such wicked men: for he cannot chuse but be an excellent man, whom wicked men do so deadly pursue. But you obiect against Luther his Apostasie: look to your selfe Campian, if you may not bee more iustly accused of this crime: for doubtlesse you are either an Apostata, or you were a cunning hypocrite. But if it be Apostasie to forsake Apostataes, then was Luther such an Apostata.
For he abandoned thieves, heretics, Apostates, and separated himself ⟨p. 27⟩from that Church, in which that daily Apostasy from religion,1 which the Apostle did foretell, was now come to the height: they then who would not be Apostates must fly from the Apostasy of your Church.
For hee abandoned theeues, heretikes, Apostataes, and separated himselfe ⟨p. 27⟩from that Curch, in which that daily Apostasie from religion,1 which the Apostle did foretell, was now come to the height: they then who would not be Apostataes must flie from the Apostasie of your Church.
But say you, Luther spake not so reverently of the Epistle of S. James as was fitting: It is well all you can challenge him with, is touching this Epistle only: he never did by any one word impeach the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, neither the Epistles of Saint Paul, or Saint Peter; only a little he taxed the Epistle of Saint James. Is Luther alone in this crime? hath all Antiquity received this Epistle of S. James, & Luther only rejected it? undoubtedly, no: neither was Luther ignorant what censure the ancient Church gave of this Epistle:* Eusebius adventured to write expressly of this Epistle thus.b Be it known to all men that this Epistle which is fathered on Saint James, is counterfeit: what can be written more plainly? it may be you will except against Eusebius. But tell us why? therefore not to stand with you,3 will you hear what Hierome saith, who as you well know was an Elder of the Church of Rome? The Epistle of James is held to have been published under his name by some other. The one saith it is counterfeit, the other writeth, that it was thought to be published not by the Apostle, but by some other. Why then ⟨p. 28⟩are you angry with Luther, whom you see not unadvisedly and rashly to doubt of the authority of that Epistle, but therein followeth the judgement and censure of the ancient Church? for from hence it is very clear,c that the first age of the Church doubted somewhat of the credit and authority of this Epistle. But you will say, it was afterwards received, and Hierome witnesseth as much. I inquire not how justly that might be received in a succeeding age, which once was rejected, that the credit and authority it had not in the beginning, it might gain in time by mens calmness in judging: neither will I contend about the authority of this Epistle. Let it be as great as ever any book had; we verily receive it, and put it in the Canon of the Scriptures; for whatsoever Luther or any other may conclude touching this Epistle, or lessen the credit of it any way; yet all our Churches willingly embrace it, and judge it written by the Apostle, or some Apostolic man; and in it do undoubtedly acknowledge the doctrine and spirit of an Apostle.* I, saith Calvin, willingly and without controversy receive this Epistle, because I see no just cause to reject it.
But say you, Luther spake not so reuerently of the Epistle of S. Iames as was fitting: It is well all you can challenge him with, is touching this Epistle only: he neuer did by any one word impeach the Gospels of Matthew, Marke, Luke, and Iohn, neither the Epistles of Saint Paul, or Saint Peter; only a little he taxed the Epistle of Saint Iames. Is Luther alone in this crime? hath all Antiquitie receiued this Epistle of S. Iames, & Luther only reiected it? vndoubtedly, no: neither was Luther ignorant what censure the auncient Church gaue of this Epistle:* Eusebius aduētured to write expresly of this Epistle thus.b Be it knowne to all men that this Epistle which is fathered on Saint Iames, is counterfeit: what can be written more plainely? it may be you will except against Eusebius. But tell vs why? therefore not to stand with you,3 will you heare what Hierome saith, who as you well know was an Elder of the Church of Rome? The Epistle of Iames is held to haue been published vnder his name by some other. The one saith it is counterfeit, the other writeth, that it was thought to be published not by the Apostle, but by some other. Why then ⟨p. 28⟩are you angrie with Luther, whom you see not vnaduisedly and rashly to doubt of the authoritie of that Epistle, but therein followeth the iudgement and censure of the auncient Church? for from hence it is very cleare,c that the first age of the Church doubted somewhat of the credit and authoritie of this Epistle. But you will say, it was afterwards receiued, and Hierome witnesseth as much. I inquire not how iustly that might be receiued in a succeeding age, which once was reiected, that the credit and authoritie it had not in the beginning, it might gaine in time by mens calmnesse in iudging: neither will I contend about the authority of this Epistle. Let it be as great as euer any booke had; we verily receiue it, and put it in the Canon of the Scriptures; for whatsoeuer Luther or any other may conclude touching this Epistle, or lessen the credit of it any way; yet all our Churches willingly imbrace it, and iudge it written by the Apostle, or some Apostolike man; and in it do vndoubtedly acknowledge the doctrine and spirit of an Apostle.* I, saith Caluin, willingly and without controuersie receiue this Epistle, because I see no iust cause to reiect it.
*Lib. 2. c. pa 23.
bDVR. But Eusebius only saith, that this Epistle was thought of divers, not to be written by S. James; and denies not the canonical authority of it. For after he saith: It was received of many Churches. WHIT. Pag. 12. You wrest both the words and sense of Eusebius: for he allegeth not other mens opinions, but his own direct judgement. But if we admit that you say, it must the rather be counterfeit; for if Saint James did not write it, and yet he calleth himself James the servant of God, and of our Lord Jesus Christ: must it not be forced? •ave the pen-men of the Scripture used to take other mens names unto them? If you deny it to be written by Saint James, you must needs confess it to be Apocrypha: and so after your sense, Eusebius hath rejected this Epistle; which thing to him that readeth Eusebius will manifestly appear. And that he saith many Churches receive it, and not all; must needs prove that he thought it was not Canonical.DVR. But Eusebius onely saith, that this Epistle vvas thought of diuers, not to be vvritten by S. Iames; and denies not the canonicall authoritie of it. For after hee saith: It was receiued of many Churches. WHIT. Pag. 12. You wrest both the words and sence of Eusebius: for he alleageth not other mens opinions, but his owne direct iudgement. But if wee admit that you say, it must the rather bee counterfeit; for if Saint Iames did not write it, and yet hee calleth himselfe James the seruant of God, and of our Lord Iesus Christ: must it not bee forced? •aue the pen-men of the Scripture vsed to take other mens names vnto them? If you deny it to bee written by Saint James, you must needes confesse it to be Apocrypha: and so after your sense, Eusebius hath reiected this Epistle; which thing to him that readeth Eusebius will manifestly appeare. And that hee saith many Churches receiue it, and not all; must needs proue that he thought it was not Canonicall.
3Hieronym. in Catalogo.
cDVR. Doth he therefore doubt of the authority of this book; what shall we then say to Calvin, who hath plainly denied that the Epistle to the Hebrews was written by Saint Paul? and if you had not been a deceiver, you would have alleged Hierome wholly: for it followeth. Though by little and little in succeeding ages it obtained authority. WHIT. Pag. 16 He that saith, It is thus held, and neither dislikes nor refures such a suspicion, showeth he not himself also doubtful of it? Calvin had some reason, because that Epistle was not published in the name of Saint Paul, as this was of Saint James. What comparison is there in these two? the Epistle of Saint James hath his name in the beginning of it, as the author of it; so hath not the other the name of Saint Paul: so that he that denies that to be written by Saint James, must needs make it counterfeit. But no such thing here. Therefore may this be held to be canonical, though it be denied to be written by Saint Paul. If you had read but a few lines more, you should find that I used no deceit, neither had you caus to be so bitter. And these words of Hierome prove directly, that the authority of this Epistle was sometimes doubted of.
Therefore object no longer unto us other mens sharp censures and hard speeches, whereof we are no ways guilty: for what is it to us, what other men think of this Epistle, who dispraise no part of it, neither detract any thing from the authority ⟨p. 29⟩thereof? But where I pray you writ Luther any such thing, which you make mention of? let us see the place, that we may perceive how faithfully you deal. You tell us of a Preface he writ upon the Epistle of S. James, such as I think few men know: for it is no where to be found amongest Luther's works: yet by accident I light upon that preface, and read it from the beginning to the ending, in which not any of those things is to be seen which you mention: so that we may easily conjecture what we are like to find of you in the sequel, when in the beginning you are not ashamed to lye so palpably. For Luther begins his preface thus. The Epistle of S. James though rejected of Antiquity, I much commend & hold very fitting & profitable. And in this book of the Babylonish captivity, he thus writeth of this Epistle. I pass over that which many probably affirm, that this was not the Epistle of S. James the Apostle, nor agreeing with the spirit of an Apostle. These things very gravely and modestly hath Luther written concerning this Epistle of S. James; d& never culled it as you affirm, a contentious, barren, swelling, or a strawen Epistle: though I deny not but Luther was of that opinion, that he greatly called in question the Author and Argument of this Epistle. And it had been your part, who condemn his opinion, to have confuted his reasons. Erasmus evidently writeth, that this Epistle hath no taste of Apostolic authority; so that Luther judged more tolerably of this Epistle, then Erasmus. But howsoever the case stand, Luther in his judgment is not without the consent of thee first and purest Churches. And yet to let Luther pass, we have no ⟨p. 30⟩other opinion of this Epistle, then your selves have, and honour it as much, as you think it deserves. And let me promise and avow this for us all; whatsoever in this combat, which you have undertaken, you prove out of this Epistle, we will most willingly embrace, and not shift it off, as you suspect we will. All the sentences of this Epistle, we allow of, and reject not any one.
Therefore obiect no longer vnto vs other mens sharpe censures and hard speeches, whereof we are no wayes guilty: for what is it to vs, what other men thinke of this Epistle, who dispraise no part of it, neither detract any thing from the authority ⟨p. 29⟩thereof? But where I pray you writ Luther any such thing, which you make mention of? let vs see the place, that we may perceiue how faithfully you deale. You tell vs of a Preface he writ vpon the Epistle of S. Iames, such as I thinke few men know: for it is no where to be found amongest Luthers workes: yet by accident I light vpon that preface, and read it from the beginning to the ending, in which not any of those things is to be seene which you mention: so that we may easily coniecture what we are like to find of you in the sequell, when in the beginning you are not ashamed to lye so palpablie. For Luther begins his preface thus. The Epistle of S. Iames though reiected of Antiquitie, I much commēd & hold very fitting & profitable. And in this booke of the Babylonish captiuity, he thus writeth of this Epistle. I passe ouer that which many probablie affirme, that this was not the Epistle of S. Iames the Apostle, nor agreeing with the spirit of an Apostle. These things very grauely and modestly hath Luther written concerning this Epistle of S. Iames; d& neuer culled it as you affirme, a contentious, barren, swelling, or a strawen Epistle: though I deny not but Luther was of that opinion, that he greatly called in question the Author and Argument of this Epistle. And it had been your part, who condemne his opinion, to haue confuted his reasons. Erasmus euidently writeth, that this Epistle hath no tast of Apostolike authoritie; so that Luther iudged more tolerably of this Epistle, then Erasmus. But howsoeuer the case stand, Luther in his iudgment is not without the consent of thee first and purest Churches. And yet to let Luther passe, we haue no ⟨p. 30⟩other opinion of this Epistle, then your selues haue, and honor it as much, as you thinke it deserues. And let me promise and anow this for vs all; whatsoeuer in this combate, which you haue vndertaken, you proue out of this Epistle, we will most willingly imbrace, and not shift it off, as you suspect we will. All the sentences of this Epistle, we allow of, and reiect not any one.
dDVR. Jf you had seen the copy printed at Jena you should see that Luther thus speaketh of this Epistle. WHIT. p. 22. I acknowledge that Luther in a most ancient preface published by himself at Wittenberg 1525. called it a strawen Epistle in comparison of the Epistles of Saint Peter and Saint Paul, but find not that, you affirm any where.DVR. Jf you had seene the copie printed at Jena you should see that Luther thus speaketh of this Epistle. WHIT. p. 22. I acknowledge that Luther in a most auncient preface published by himselfe at Wittenberge 1525. called it a strawen Epistle in comparison of the Epistles of Saint Peter and Saint Paul, but finde not that, you affirme any where.
eDVR. Jf he agreed with the first and purest Churches: you differing from him, do dissent from them. WHIT. I call them the purest Churches, not for their sincere judgement of this Epistle, but for that they flourished in the best and purest times.DVR. Jf he agreed with the first and purest Churches: you differing from him, doe dissent from them. WHIT. I call them the purest Churches, not for their sincere iudgement of this Epistle, but for that they flourished in the best and purest times.
For as for that instance, which you give of sole faith, it is but a silly and lame trick of your sophistry; our doctrine of justification by faith only is most true & holy; which S. Paul also clearly teacheth, though he do notf expressly use these words,2 Faith alone. And the ancient do so expound and interpret S. Paul. Ambrose saith;g They are justified only by faith, it is the gift of God. hBasil saith; They are justified by faith alone in Christ. iNazianzene saith; Righteousness consisteth in faith only. Why should I recite any other sayings of other of the Fathers of the Church? This doctrine is both Evangelical and Apostolical; contrary to this, if James or an Angel from heaven should preach, let him be held as impious, wicked, and accursed. But you will say S. James ⟨p. 31⟩denies justification by faith only, yea affirms that we are justified by works. We answer, that the Apostle speaketh of ak feigned dead, idle, and counterfeit faith, which many boasted of, and falsely persuaded themselves they were just by it. This faith, which we may more truly call a carcass of faith, Saint James denieth to be sufficient for salvation to any, and he that is justified he teacheth must be justified by works, that is, must be proved, and declared to be just: for it must needs be, that faith be living, fruitful and accompanied with good works, that all may clearly perceive and discern, you are endued with true faith. And so doth S. James very fitly accord with S. Paul, while he disputes from the effects; when as S. Paul argueth from the cause. The principal & immediate cause of our justification, S. Paul makes faith; S. James writeth that a man is justified by works, that is, every man by his works as by most pregnant testimonies isl known and acknowledged just, while his invisible faith is witnessed and declared by his visible works. Therefore you see there is no reason why for this cause Luther should either find fault with, or fear the Epistle of S. James. And thus Augustine hath reconciled these two Apostles James ⟨p. 32⟩and Paul, that you may see that we are not broachers of any Novelty. Wherefore, saithm Augustine; 9the judgements of the two Apostles, S. Paul, & S. James, are not contrary each to other, when the one saith a man is justified by faith without works; and the other saith, that it is a vain faith which is without works; because S.
For as for that instance, which you giue of sole faith, it is but a sillie and lame tricke of your sophistry; our doctrine of iustification by faith only is most true & holy; which S. Paul also clearely teacheth, though he doe notf expressely vse these words,2 Faith alone. And the auncient do so expound and interpret S. Paul. Ambrose saith;g They are iustified only by faith, it is the gift of God. hBasil saith; They are iustified by faith alone in Christ. iNazianzene saith; Righteousnes consisteth in faith only. Why should I recite any other sayings of other of the Fathers of the Church? This doctrine is both Euangelicall and Apostolicall; contrary to this, if Iames or an Angell from heauen should preach, let him be held as impious, wicked, and accursed. But you will say S. Iames ⟨p. 31⟩denies iustification by faith only, yea affirmes that we are iustified by workes. We answere, that the Apostle speaketh of ak feigned dead, idle, and counterfeite faith, which many boasted of, and falsly perswaded themselues they were iust by it. This faith, which we may more truly call a carcase of faith, Saint Iames denieth to be sufficient for saluation to any, and he that is iustified he teacheth must be iustified by workes, that is, must be proued, and declared to be iust: for it must needs be, that faith be liuing, fruitfull and accompanied with good works, that all may clearely perceiue and discerne, you are indued with true faith. And so doth S. Iames very fitly accord with S. Paul, while he disputes from the effects; when as S. Paul argueth from the cause. The principall & immediate cause of our iustification, S. Paul makes faith; S. Iames writeth that a man is iustified by workes, that is, euery man by his workes as by most pregnant testimonies isl knowne and acknowledged iust, while his inuisible faith is witnessed and declared by his visible workes. Therefore you see there is no reason why for this cause Luther should either find fault with, or feare the Epistle of S. Iames. And thus Augustine hath reconciled these two Apostles Iames ⟨p. 32⟩
fDVR. Saint Paul never in plain words hath affirmed our justification by faith only. WHIT. pag. 27. When S. Paul saith we are justified by faith, it is as much as by faith alone, because faith respects only mercy, and withal excludeth works: Rom. 3.28 & cap. 4.5.6. & cap. 3.20. Gal. 2.16. and lastly he saith we are freely justified by grace: Eph. 2.7.8. Rom. 3.24. then he affirms that faith only doth justify.DVR. Saint Paul neuer in plaine words hath affirmed our iustification by faith onlie. WHIT. pag. 27. When S. Paul saith we are iustified by faith, it is as much as by faith alone, because faith respects onely mercy, and withall excludeth workes: Rom. 3.28 & cap. 4.5.6. & cap. 3.20. Gal. 2.16. and lastly he saith we are freely iustified by grace: Eph. 2.7.8. Rom. 3.24. then he affirmes that faith only doth iustifie.
gDVR. Ambrose by his sole faith excludeth only the works of the ceremonial law, and so he speaketh in that place. WHIT. pag. 33. It is enough that he affirmeth that this is S. Pauls position: we are justified by faith only. And when he excludeth only the works of the ceremonial law, in that he is against the judgement of Augustine and Hierome and himself also, in lib. 2. cap. 2. de Jacob. & vita beata.DVR. Ambrose by his sole faith excludeth only the workes of the ceremoniall law, and so he speaketh in that place. WHIT. pag. 33. It is enough that he affirmeth that this is S. Paules position: we are iustified by faith only. And when he excludeth only the workes of the ceremoniall law, in that he is against the iudgement of Augustine and Hierome and himselfe also, in lib. 2. cap. 2. de Iacob. & vita beata.
hDVR. Basil excludes only those works which are wrought by the sole power of freewill. WHIT. pag. 38. Basil excludes not only the works wrought by the power of freewill, but even those which proceed from faith and grace; for he produced S. Paul, and Saint Peter whom he denies to have been justified by works, yet had they both faith and grace.
Paul speaketh of works which go before faith: Saint James of works which follow faith; at S. Paul himself showeth in many places. Therefore the Apostle S. James would not, neither ought to detract any thing from the doctrine of justification, which Luther learned from S. Paul. Yea all Papists and Jesuits shall sooner be torn asunder, then this judgement of Luther, touching faith alone, shall either quail or be overthrown.
Paul speak•th of workes which goe before faith: Saint Iames of workes which follow faith; at S. Paul himselfe sheweth in many places. Therefore the Apostle S. Iames would not, neither ought to detract any thing from the doctrine of iustification, which Luther learned from S. Paul. Yea all Papists and Iesuits shall sooner be torne asunder, then this iudgement of Luther, touching faith alone, shall either quaile or be ouerthrowne.
From Luther you turn the edge of your speech to the whelps of Luther: for so you, as an unclean dog, term men famous and flourishing with all good qualities. But why you should so call them, I well conceive not, unless it be, for that they never cease barking against your Bishops and Monks, and other Church robbers, like your self. But let us hear what heinous thing those whelps have committed. They have on a sudden put out of the true Canon of the Scripture, Tobias, Ecclesiasticus, the two books of the Maccabees, and many other books. Say you of a sudden, Campian? Is it true indeed that you are such a stranger in the writings of the ancient Fathers, that you know not that long ago these books were raced out of the Canon? Look I pray you into Hierome, and out of him call to mind what antiquity hath done. That we may know, saithn Hierome, 2Whatsoever ⟨p. 33⟩books are more then these, they are to be accounted among the Apocrypha. Therefore Wisdom, which commonly is called the Wisdom of Solomon, and the book of Jesus the son of Sirach, and Judith, and Tobias, and Pastor, are not in the Canon. Will you that are but a Friar put these books in the Canon, which Hierome following the judgement of the ancient Church, and the truth it self, denieth to be in the Canon? mark well his own words: They are not in the Canon. You say that we have dashed them out; and why should we not so do? For, saith Hierome, they are not in the Canon. Desire you any further testimonies? Epiphanius saith as much as Hierome, who after he had recited divers books, which you say we have put out of the Canon, he thus writeth; as Cornarius renders his words out of the Greek. These books verily are profitable and helpful, 3but they are not reckoned in the number of those which are received. Therefore they are not to be found in Aaron, neither in the ark of the Covenant. But see out of Hierome more manifest and pregnant things.4 As therefore the Church readeth the books of Judith, Tobias, and Maccabees, but accounteth them not Canonical Scripture: so also these two books (he meaneth Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus) it reads for edification of the common sort, not for confirmation of any doctrine of the Church.
From Luther you turne the edge of your speech to the whelpes of Luther: for so you, as an vncleane dogge, terme men famous and flourishing with all good qualities. But why you should so call them, I well conceiue not, vnlesse it be, for that they neuer cease barking against your Bishops and Monkes, and other Church robbers, like your selfe. But let vs heare what heynous thing those whelpes haue committed. They haue on a suddaine put out of the true Canon of the Scripture, Tobias, Ecclesiasticus, the two bookes of the Macchabees, and many other bookes. Say you of a suddaine, Campian? Is it true indeed that you are such a stranger in the writings of the auncient Fathers, that you know not that long agoe these bookes were raced out of the Canon? Looke I pray you into Hierome, and out of him call to mind what antiquitie hath done. That we may know, saithn Hierome, 2Whatsoeuer ⟨p. 33⟩bookes are more then these, they are to be accoūted among the Apochrypha. Therefore Wisdome, which commonly is called the Wisdome of Salomon, and the booke of Iesus the sonne of Syrach, and Iudith, and Tobias, and Pastor, are not in the Canon. Will you that are but a Frier put these bookes in the Canon, which Hierome following the iudgement of the auncient Church, and the truth it selfe, denieth to be in the Canon? marke well his owne words: They are not in the Canon. You say that we haue dashed them out; and why should we not so doe? For, saith Hierome, they are not in the Canon. Desire you any further testimonies? Epiphanius saith as much as Hierome, who after he had recited diuers bookes, which you say we haue put out of the Canon, he thus writeth; as Cornarius renders his words out of the Greeke. These bookes verily are profitable and helpefull, 3but they are not reckoned in the number of those which are receiued. Therefore they are not to be found in Aaron, neither in the arke of the Couenant. But see out of Hierome more manifest and pregnant things.4 As therfore the Church readeth the bookes of Iudith, Tobias, and Macchabees, but accounteth them not Canonicall Scripture: so also these two bookes (he meaneth Wisdome and Ecclesiasticus) it reades for edification of the common sort, not for confirmation of any doctrine of the Church.
nDVR Hierome saith that the former Churches did not receive these books for Canonical: but denies them not to be Canonical. WHIT. pag. 52. Hicrome affirmeth not only that these books were not received of the fore-going Churches for Canonical, but himself o•ten times denies them to be such, and plainly calls them Apocrypha books, which he would never have done if the Church then had taken them for Canonical; yea and as Duraeus confesseth, they were not so taken until •lmo•t 70• years after Christ.DVR Hierome saith that the former Churches did not receiue these bookes for Canonicall: but denies them not to be Canonicall. WHIT. pag. 52. Hicrome affirmeth not only that these bookes were not receiued of the fore-going Churches for Canonical, but himself o•ten times denies them to be such, and plainely cals them Apoch•ypha bookes, which he w•uld neuer haue done if the Church then had taken them for Canonicall; yea and as Duraeus confesseth, they were not so taken vntill •lmo•t 70• ye•res af•er Christ.
seuere Iudges, Luther, Brentius and Kemnitius find I know not what lacking shooting all at this marke, that the booke might be defaced, and be of no authoritie: whom did they aske? the spirit.
DVR. Doth hee therefore doubt of the authoritie of this booke; what shall vve then say to Caluin, vvho hath plainely denied that the Epistle to the Hebrues vvas vvritten by Saint Paul? and if you had not been a deceiuer, you vvould haue alleadged Hierome vvholy: for it follovveth. Though by little and little in succeeding ages it obtained authoritie. WHIT. Pag. 16 He that saith, It is thus held, and neither dislikes nor refures such a suspition, sheweth he not himself also doubtful of it? Caluin had some reason, because that Epistle was not published in the name of Saint Paul, as this was of Saint Iames. What comparison is there in these two? the Epistle of Saint Iames hath his name in the beginning of it, as the author of it; so hath not the other the name of Saint Paul: so that hee that denies that to bee written by Saint Iames, must needes make it counterfeit. But no such thing here. Therefore may this be held to be canonicall, though it be denied to be written by Saint Paul. If you had read but a few lines more, you should finde that I vsed no deceite, neither had you caus• to be so bitter. And these words of Hierome prooue directly, that the authoritie of this Epistle was sometimes doubted of.
*Calvin. in argument. in Epist. Jacob.Caluin. in argument. in Epist. Iacob.
and Paul, that you may see that we are not broachers of any Noueltie. Wherefore, saith
the iudgements of the two Apostles, S. Paul, & S. Iames, are not contrarie each to other, when the one saith a man is iustified by faith without workes; and the other saith, that it is a vaine faith which is without workes; because S.
DVR. Basil excludes only those workes which are wrought by the sole power of freewill. WHIT. pag. 38. Basil excludes not only the workes wrought by the power of freewill, but euen those which proceed from faith and grace; for he produced S. Paul, and Saint Peter whom he denies to haue been iustified by workes, yet had they both faith and grace.
iDVR. Nazianzene excludeth only that high knowledge of divine mysteries. WHIT. pag. 41. Nazianzene excludes not only that high knowledge of divine mysteries, but also by it all other works; for seeing it is the most excellent, and so excluding the greatest, he must needs exclude the less.DVR. Nazianzene excludeth only that high knowledge of diuine mysteries. WHIT. pag. 41. Nazianzene excludes not only that high knowledge of diuine mysteries, but also by it all other workes; for seeing it is the most excellent, and so excluding the greatest, he must needs exclude the lesse.
kDVR. Saint James speaketh not of a feigned faith: for how can be thē speak of Abrahams faith? how is it feigned to believe that God is? WHIT. pag. 42. S. James speaketh of a feigned faith, as is plain vers. 14. for it is in words only vers. 15.16. it giveth nothing, when relief is required. verse 17. it is without works and dead. vers. 18 only that is true faith, which can be showed by works, here no works vers. 19. It is only such a faith as the devils have: so a feigned and dead faith. pag. 44. And Augustine thus expoundeth it, De fide & oper. Cap. 14. & in Psal. 31. in Praefat. and pag 45. Though Abrahams faith was a true faith, because it showed it self by true fruits and true works: that proves not, but their faith is feigned who have no works. Of which Saint James speaketh. pag. 46. faith is not the less feigned and vain, because it believes that God is: seeing Saint James affirmeth the devils believe as much.DVR. Saint Iames speaketh not of a faigned faith: for how can be thē speake of Abrahams faith? how is it fayned to beleeue that God is? WHIT. pag. 42. S. Iames speak•th of a fayned faith, as is plaine vers. 14. for it is in words only vers. 15.16. it giueth nothing, when reliefe is required. verse 17. it is without workes and dead. vers. 18 only that is true faith, which can be shewed by workes, heere no workes vers. 19. It is only such a faith as the diuels haue: so a fayned and dead fa•th. pag. 44. And Augustine thus expoundeth it, De fide & oper. Cap. 14. & in Psal. 31. in Praefat. and pag 45. Though Abrahams faith was a true faith, because it shewed it selfe by true fruites and true workes: that proues not, but their faith is fayned who haue no workes. Of which Saint Iames speaketh. pag. 46. faith is not the lesse fayned and vaine, because it beleeues that God is: seeing Saint Iames affirmeth the di•els beleeue as much.
lDVR. It is ridiculous to think, that Saint James should teach men how to show themselves just, and speak nothing of true justice. WHIT. pag 47. We say not that Saint James teacheth only how a man may obtain the opinion of justice with men, but how he may show and declare himself by certain proofs and arguments to be endued with true justice. And that this place toucheth the declaration of true faith by works, and so the demonstration of our justification, not we, but your own men do so teach. Thomas Aquin. in Jacob. 2. Glossa-Ordin. in Jacob.DVR. It is ridiculous to thinke, that Saint Iames should teach men how to shew themselues iust, and speake nothing of true iustice. WHIT. pag 47. We say not that Saint Iames teacheth only how a man may obtaine the opinion of iustice with men, but how he may shew and declare himselfe by certaine proofes and arguments to be indued with true iustice. And that this place toucheth the declaration of true faith by workes, and so the demonstration of our iustification, not we, but your owne men do so teach. Thomas Aquin. in Iacob. 2. Glossa-Ordin. in Iacob.
mDVR. Augustine maketh nothing for you, but against you. WHIT. pag. 50. Augustine affirmeth directly that S. James speaketh of a vain and feigned faith, which is as much as we here produce him for.DVR. Augustine maketh nothing for you, but against you. WHIT. pag. 50. Augustin• affirm•th directly that S. Iames speaketh of a vaine and fayned faith, which is as much as we here produce him for.
