with error therein and also for that it is in deede a matter of the chiefest controuersie betweene vs. And first for that you doe in your booke vntruely charge Luther and vs by him with the cutting away of Saint Iames epistle for that the wretche as you saie of Luther was by this epistle vanquished and ouerthrowen and for that that epistle doth so manifestly conuince his and our error in this matter of iustification as you do write we do protest that we will neither refuse nor make any exception to that epistle of Saint Iames nor to any other part of the newe Testament which you vntruely haue charged vs to haue cut off from the bodie of the holy scriptures It is well said they that you doe receaue this Epistle of Saint Iames. We haue euer receiued it saide we Howe much the more vntruely haue you charged vs with the contrarie And so entering into the matter we said Whereas you doe charge Luther with him vs all for teaching a newe and false doctrine yea heresie also in that we saie and write that we are iustified by faith onely we say for our defence against this your slaunder that the same doctrine is taught both in many places of the holy scriptures most effectually and is also expressely affirmed and pronounced by the ancient holy fathers and doctors of Christes Church both Greekes and Latines in the verie same wordes that wee do vse Let vs heare your scriptures and doctors sayd they Thē for that we came purposed to examine y◠vntruthes of Campions booke rather then to dispute we did very briefly as our memorie did then serue vs note rather then thorowly alleage many places out of the holy scriptures for the proofe of our iustification by faith and consequently by faith onely to this effect Our sauiour Christ saide we as it is in sundrie places of the Euangelistes recorded saith often Thy faith hath saued thee Onely beleeue beleeue onely They shall receaue remission of their sinnes and inheritance among them that are sanctified by faith in me As many as beleeue in me to them hath God giuen power to become the sonnes of God Whosoeuer beleeueth in me shall not be condemned shall not perish but haue euerlasting life Thus saith our sauiour Christ c. And Saint Paul saith Beleeue in the Lord Iesus Christ and thou shalt be saued God doeth iustifie thorowe faith Wee are saued by grace thorowe faith We are blessed by faith We are the children of Abraham yea we are the children of God by faith The righteousnes of God by the faith of Iesus Christ vnto all and vpon vs all that beleeue If thou confesse with the mouth the Lorde Iesus and shalt beleeue in thine heart that God raised him vp from the dead thou shalt be saued For with the heart man beleeueth vnto righteousnes and with the mouth man confesseth vnto saluation We are freely iustified by his grace thorowe faith Then said they we knowe right well that the scriptures doe conteine great commendations of faith but in all these there is not this worde faith onely which is your doctrine But the ancient holy fathers said wee vpon these groundes of the scriptures by vs alleaged doe gather and plainly pronounce that onely faith iustifieth as you shall heare anone And howe many thinges saide we doe you your selfe teach vs as necessarie articles of religion not hauing for you one plaine worde therefore but doe affirme that in effect they are conteined in the holy scriptures And you haue heard that iustification and righteousnes yea saluation and the kingdom of heauen are attributed to faith and that without any addition of any other thing And you haue heard the wordes of our Sauiour beleeue onely only beleeue And of Saint Paul you are freely iustified by faith which are in effect as much as faith onely and to more effect exceedingly then are your proofes of a great many of the principal pointes of your Popish religion And where as we meane none other by faith onely but faith without the workes of the Lawe and without our good workes if the former place can not satisfie you heare what Saint Paul sayeth further Know ye that a man is not iustified by the workes of the Lawe but by the faith of Iesus Christ. The righteousnes of God is made manifest without the Lawe by the faith of Iesus Christ vnto all and vpon all that beleeue We holde that a man is iustified by faith without the deedes of the Lawe It is one God that iustifieth circumcision by faith and vncircumcision through faith Euery one that beleeueth is absolued from all from the which they could not be absolued by the Lawe of Moses Thus saith Saint Paul and to the like effect in exceeding many places declaring that we are iustified by faith and not by the Law by faith and not by workes which is all one as to say by faith onely No it is not all one sayd they But the ancient doctors of the Church said we do vpon these very places of the holy scriptures by vs alleaged gather and in expresse wordes set downe as we doe that we are iustified by faith onely as ye shall see Saint Hillary quoth we sayeth thus reading his wordes out of the booke it selfe Mouit scribas remissum ab homine peccatum hominem enim tantum in Iesu Christo contuebantur remissum ab eo quod lex laxare non poterat fides en◅m sola iustificat That is to say It moued the scribes that sinne was remitted by man for they behelde man onely in Iesus Christ and that was remitted by him the which the Lawe can not release for faith onely doeth iustifie Thus farre Saint Hilary who as you doe see of this doctrine of Saint Paul by vs alleadged for iustification by faith without the Lawe gathereth and setteth downe the same doctrine in the same wordes that we doe teach that faith onely doeth iustifie But he saith not so in the same sense that you doe saith Master Campion We shall see of the sense anon saide we but we pray you heare the other doctors also who doe agree with vs in the same wordes Saint Ambrose also vpon the place by vs alleaged out of the third to the Romanes among many other sentences hath this Non iustificari hominem apud Deum nisi per fidem That a man is not iustified before God but by faith And shortly after Saint Ambrose saith Tam Gentiles quam Iudeos non aliter quam credentes iustificauit Quia enim vnus Deus est vna ratione omnes iustificauit That is both the Gentiles and the Iewes God hath iustified none other wayes but beleeuing For because there is one God he hath iustified all by one meanes And most plainely vpon the wordes by vs before alleaged he sayeth Iustificati gratis per gratiam ipsius Iustificati sunt gratis quia nihil operantes neque
Church though you call it a small matter and yet you wil not teach the people that it is a smal matter Fulk I said that inuocation of Saints as it was held by some of the latter sort of auncient fathers was but a small error in comparison of such grosse heresies which the Popish Church doeth now holde and in comparison of such inuocation of Saints as is now mainteined and practised by the Papistes but your accusatioÌ„ of my booke was written therefore you can not alter it Camp Lend me your booke that I may charge you The booke being deliuered after a litle turning he sayde This is not the booke that I meant Fulke This is the booke that you named Camp I meant your answere vnto Doctor Allens articles because Bristow hath confuted it Fulk This is a poore shift wheÌ„ you haue slandered my booke and named one to flie to another so would you do with that booke you name now For I am sure that neither in that nor any other that euer I wrote your slander can be founde Goad There is an other thing ye were desirous to see touching the Councill of Constantinople and the Councill of Nice one of them being alleaged to be coÌ„trary to the other about setting vp of Images in the Church the Councill of Constantinople disalowing Images and the second Councill of Nice allowing theÌ„ and condemning the other Councill as erroneous Camp That of Constantinople was not a generall nor lawfull Councill but a certaine Iconomachy and may rather be called a conuenticle then a generall Councill and therefore no contrarietie hereby proued betweene generall Councils Goade It appeareth it was generall and solemnely gathered in the chiefe citie heare the wordes in the title of the Councill Sancta magna uniuersalis Synodus quae iuxtagratiaÌ„ Dei per pium deuotorum orthodoxorum nostrorum Imperatorum ConstaÌ„tini Leonis decretum in hac diuinormâ—… studiosa regia ciuitate congregata est c. The holy great and vniuersall Synode which by the grace of God and the godly decree of our godly Emperours Constantine and Leo is gathered in this holy and royall citie This Councill did confute by the Scriptures the setting vp of Images in the Church out of Deut. 20. Thou shalt not make to thy selfe any Image nor likenes of any thing c. and Deut. 4. For which cause saith this Counsaile you heard the voyce of wordes in the middest of the fire but you sawe no image Contrary to this the Councill of Nice doth accurse those that will not worship images in these words Qui venerandas imagines non veneraÌ„tur Anathema Accursed be they that worship not holy images So it appeareth that these two Councils were contrary and therefore one of them did erre But I will proceede to the next place You doubted also whether it were to be founde in Saint Augustine that there is no Miracle in the Sacrament Now you may heare his owne wordes To. 3. De Trinitate lib. 3. cap. 10. Sicut panis ad hoc factus in accipiendo Sacramento consumitur Sed quia haec hominibus nota sunt quia per homines fiunt honorem tanquam religiosa possunt habere stuporem tanquam mira non possunt As the bread ordained for this purpose is consumed in receauing the Sacrament But because these things are knowen vnto men are done by men they may haue honour or reuerence as holy things but they can not be wondered at as things strange and miraculous Here you haue Augustines wordes against miracle in the Sacrament Camp In deede there is no such euident miracle visibly appearing as when Christ cured yâ— lame the blinde c. but yet there is a great miracle which our faith doeth acknowledge Goade Augustine speaketh simply against miracle so that whether it be visible or inuisible both is excluded Beside it is perpetuall in all miracles that there must bee some outward sensible signe Further you doubted of Inhaerens iustitia righteousnes inherent in our selues which I auouched to bee erroneous doctrine set forth in the late Council of Trent The wordes are these Concil Trident. cap. 7. Verè iusti nominamur sumus iustitiam in nobis recipientes vnusquisque suam secundum mensuram quam spiritus sanctus partitur singulis prout vult secundum propriam cuiusque dispositionem cooperationem Et cap. 16. Quae quum iustitia nostra dicitur quia per eam nobis inhaerenteÌ„ iustificamur illa eadem Dei est quia a Deo nobis infunditur per Christi meritum We are called and in deede are truely righteous receiuing in our selues euery man his own righteousnes according to the measure which the holy Ghost doth deuide to euery one euen as he will according to euery mans own proper disposition cooperation For that righteousnes which is called ours because we are iustified by it inherent in our selues the selfe same is the righteousnes of God because it is powred into vs from God by the merit of Christ. Camp I did not doubt of inherent righteousnes in our selues whether it were in the Council of Trent for I defend mainteine it as the Councill teacheth it you saye it is by imputation of Christes righteousnes being without vs whereby wee are iustified and I say wee are iustified by that righteousnesse which is within vs though it be not of vs. Goade The place which I vrged against you the other day beside many other in the scripture is direcly against this doctrine 2. Cor. 5. 21. He hath made him to be fin for vs which knewe no sinne that we should be made the righteousnes of God in him Fulke Well nowe we are to come to the question You holde that the natural body blood of Christ is contained in the Sacrament of the Lordes supper Your wordes are Christ is present in the Sacrament substaÌ„tially very God man in his natural body Camp I say there is really present in the Sacrament the naturall body and blood of Christ vnder that bread and cup. Fulke What meane you by these wordes vnder the bread and cup that we may agree of termes Campion You knowe in the bread is whitenes c. that is not in his body make your argument Fulke So I will The cup is not the naturall blood of Christ Ergo the other parte is not his naturall body Campion There is present in the cup the naturall blood of Christ. Go to my wordes Fulke Well The naturall blood of Christ is not present in the cup Ergo the naturall body is not present in the other part Campion The naturall blood of Christ is present in the cup. Fulke Thus I disproue it The wordes of Christes institution be these This cup is the new testament in my blood But the naturall blood of Christ is not the newe testament in his blood Ergo the naturall blood of Christ is not in the cup. Camp The ward Is is neither in the
when he wrote The other is the continuall contestation of the Churches succeeding To this effect writeth S. Augustine and so be all latter Churches barred from authoritie to make any writings canonicall scripture specially those that haue of olde bene doubted of They may testifie what the olde Churches before them haue done as we nowe doe Hereunto they saide againe that it was blasphemie after those Councils to call those bookes Apocrypha or to doubt of the authoritie of them It is rather most horrible blasphemie said we to make humane writings equall with the Canonicall scriptures as of late your Tridentine Councill hath done and as your Pope being but one man hath made his Decretal epistles then with S. Hierome Eusebius and other ancient godly fathers to call those bookes Apocrypha which they do so call And we said that notwithstanding those Councils Caietanus their Popes Cardinall thought it no blasphemie who in the ende of his expositions vpon the olde testament in very plaine wordes maketh the same difference of the bookes of the scriptures doeth not onely alowe the iudgement of Hierome but addeth further that all writitings yea of bishops of Rome them selues of whome he nameth some must be brought to S. Hieroms rule They vtterly reiected Cardinall Caietanus because as they said he was but one man against all the Church We said you of your side will not be charged with the wordes of others though they be the Popes Cardinals and yet you doe thinke it reason that we should be charged with euery worde that hath slipped from Luther Nay you charge him and vs by him with that which you can neuer proue that he did write or speake Hart said further that Caietanus was a good scholemā and traueled in that course with commendation but when hee began to become an expositor of the scriptures said he then he lost his grace and credit We answered if they thought it reason to charge vs with all the sayings of Luther or of any other we might by good and great reason charge them with the sayings of so great learned a Cardinall of Rome as Caietanus was Last of all wee came to the place of S. Augustine in his second booke De doctrina Christiana Which Campion and his fellowes gladly receiued because they said it made for them and not for vs. For saide they S. Augustine rehearseth those bookes for Canonicall scriptures which you call Apocrypha To this wee answered that they shoulde rather charge Saint Hierome and Eusebius and other auncient fathers who doe call them Apocrypha And S. Augustine in that place rehearsing the order of the bookes of scriptures though said we he differ somwhat from Eusebius and S. Hierome in shewe of wordes yet hee doeth in deede agree with them For where they deuide the bookes of the scriptures into three sorts that is Canonicall Apocrypha and feigned or vntrue Augustine deuideth them into Canonicall and Apocrypha onely and then he deuideth the Canonicall bookes into two sortes that is those that be certainely true which we with S. Hierome and Eusebius do call properly Canonicall and those that haue bene doubted of which Eusebius and S. Hierome do call Apocrypha And S. Augustine nameth those that be vtterly vntrue Apocrypha which Eusebius calleth doubtfull feigned and forged And this may be gathered out of Augustine him selfe in diuers places whereof we haue noted some And albeit Augustine calleth those bookes Canonicall yet he giueth not the like authoritie to them as namely to the Maccabees and to the other of that sort as he doeth to those that be Christes the Lords witnesses as he nameth them which be these that are named properly Canonicall Here would they not admit in any wise that the worde Canonicall was aequiuocum or of diuers significations in diuers places but that wheresoeuer that worde was founde it brought all bookes so called vnder one kinde Much time was spent here about and the matter was much argued on Master Campion and his fellowes part At the last Master Campion was desired by vs to reade the chapter in that Canon law beginning In Canonicis which Gratian takes out of this place of Augustine and first that hee would reade the rubrick which he seemed both to do And Pound one of his companions sitting by who with his importunitie impertinent speaches had often interrupted the course of the conference saide Father Campion let them reade their places them selues Yet at the length Master Campion read it and it is thus Inter Canonicas scripturas Decretales Epistolae connumerantur which after much desiring he englished also The decretall Epistles are numbred together among the Canonicall Scriptures Whereupon one of vs saide you charge vs with blasphemie for naming those bookes Apocrypha which Saint Hierome Eusebius and other ancient holy fathers doe so name but here may you see most horrible blasphemie in deede in the Canonical lawe of your Pope which matcheth his Decretall Epistles that is meere fables with the Maiestie of the Canonicall Scriptures as he doeth in this distinction and sundry other places whereby you may see to what point this boldnesse of making mens writings Canonicall Scriptures is come Then saide we to M. Campion do you hold that Popes decrees for Canonical scriptures as you do the bookes of Moyses and the Prophets He answered no and graunted then that the worde Canonicall was aequinocum or of diuers significations which before they all did so constantly denie Whereupon we sayde that we had some good hope of Master Campion for that he blushed And we sayde further that Cardinall Caietanus in the place before alleadged sayeth expressely that S. Augustine placed those books in the Canon of maners but not in the Canon of doctrine whereby he plainely declareth that the word Canonicall is aequiuocum After this he was desired to reade the text of that Chapter and there he founde and could not denie but that the place of Augustine was vntruely reported by Gratian and by manifest corruption drawē altogether from the meaning of Augustine For where S. Augustine saith that those Scriptures are to be taken for Canonicall which the most or greatest part of Christian Churches so take among the which those Churches be which deserued to haue Apostolique Seas and to receiue Epistles from the Apostles these wordes of S. Augustine are chaunged and in the place of the Apostolique Seas is put the Apostolique Sea meaning the Church of Rome and those Churches which deserued to receaue Epistles from the said Church of Rome which is cleane contrary to S. Augustines wordes and meaning Both often before and here specially Master Campion and his fellowes seemed to be desirous to dispute vpon some pointes of religion rather then to continue in this examination of his booke which we said we woulde not at afternoone refuse but the forenoone qd we is so farre spēt that we must at this time make
an ende And then turning vs to the auditorie we said You haue heard howe Master Campion in his printed booke hath charged vs as rasers manglers and spoylers of the holy Scriptures of meere desperation and distrust in our cause as he saith You haue heard how he would proue vs so to be by certeine places by him in his said printed booke noted as being the wordes of Luther and others in their bookes You haue heard and seene proued by the bookes them selues that there is no such thing to be founde in those places of their bookes as he hath set downe but onely that S. Hierome and Eusebius aboue a thousande yeere sithen doubted of the authoritie of those Epistles bookes And you haue heard and it is vniuersally knowen that S. Hieroms Prologue and Epistle wherein he noteth those bookes to be Apocrypha haue bene ioyned with all Bibles that haue bene written and printed euer since S. Hieromes time by the space of a xi hundred yeeres and more vntill now of late sithen the Tridētine Councill some Popish Printers haue left them out And you haue heard that not onely now of late the Councill Tridentine hath made the Apocrypha of equal authoritie with the vndoubted Canonical scriptures but also that it is set down in the B. of Romes Canon law that his Decretal epistles are to be numbred together among the Canonical scriptures so finally you see what iniurie these men do thēselues to the holy scriptures what blasphemy they haue cōmitted in matching their fables with the Canonical scriptures who do most vniustly charge vs with those crimes Sherwin said but you should haue told withall what we haue answered to all those pointes We said your answere is to be looked for when you can bring foorth your copies which you speake of and promised for in any bookes by you named extant and to be had there is nothing of that which M. Campion hath set downe to be found And here the time being spent we made an end for that forenoones conferēce The after noones conference IN the fore noones conference both Master Campion himselfe others of his companions had oftentimes required vs that we woulde deale with them in some matter of doctrine and leaue that course that we began with in the examining of his booke Whereunto we answered that we were minded if the time would suffer vs to examine other partes of his booke and lay it open to the audience there howe that as he had most vntruly charged Luther and others with the mangling and spoyling of the bodie of the holy Scriptures in the beginning of his booke so had he likewise most vntruly and impudently in other places slaundered other worthie men and vpon the same his good groundes he had charged vs all as rasers and manglers of the holy Scriptures And surely our opinion was that if any thing at all that laying open before his face of his continuall vntrueths which he hath so braggingly aduouched in his booke might haue reclaimed him For vndoubtedly he could neuer haue endured the manifestation of those his lyes as they were in the confutation of his booke shortly after set out had they bene layde open before his eyes which might manifestly appeare to all that did marke his gentle and milde behauiour and speach in the After noones conference in comparison of his bragging and lewde wordes vsed in the forenoone Notwithstanding at our meeting at after noone we sayde vnto Master Campion seeing your desire is so much to dispute in some matter of doctrine we will not refuse But first we pray you let vs qd we peruse the Canon that foloweth that which we last dealt with in the fore noone concerning the Popes Canons and the Canonicall Scriptures for that the time would not then suffer vs to reade it The wordes of Pope Leo the fourth there translated worde for worde are these For this cause I feare not to pronounce more plainely and with a loude voyce that he that is conuinced not to receiue indifferently the statutes of the holy fathers which we haue spoken of before which with vs are intituled by the name of Canons whether he be a Bishop a Clarke or a laye man that he is proued neither to beleeue nor to holde profitably and effectually to his effect the Catholique and Apostolique faith nor the foure holy Gospels This saith Pope Leo. You may see quoth we whereunto this boldnesse of matching mens writings with the holy Canonical Scriptures is come Fore here Pope Leo with a loude voyce pronounceth that whosoeuer doeth not indifferently receiue the Canons is conuicted neither to reteine effectually nor beleeue the Catholique and Apostolique faith nor the foure holy Gospels whereby he matcheth the beleeuing receiuing or refusing of his Canons with the beleeuing or refusing of the foure holy Gospels for so we said that the proofe of that Canon and the worde indifferently did importe Master Campion indeuoured very much to quallifie this worde indifferentèr indifferently and so to mollifie the Popes blasphemie if he coulde and he confessed that there was difference betweene the Euangelistes and other writers for that the Euangelistes and writers of the Scriptures coulde not erre in memorie or any other circumstance but Councils might be deceiued in some such small matters of circumstance As for example sayeth he I am bounde vnder paine of damnation to beleeue that Tobias dogge had a tayle because it is written he wagged his tayle It was sayd by vs that it became him not to deale so triflingly in matters of such waight Why then saith he if this example like you not take another I must beleeue that Saint Paul had a cloake because hee willeth Timothie to bring his cloake We said these thinges were nothing to purpose vnlesse hee could proue that such a promise was made to the bishop of Rome and his Coūcils that whatsoeuer they should determine was sure to be true and certaine They alleaged Christes saying Hee that heareth not the Church let him be reputed as a publicane and heathen We answered that text serued them for all purposes But first they must proue them selues to be the true Church before that text would belong vnto them And where they alleaged out of the 15. of the Actes So it seemeth to the holy Ghost and vs. Wee answered wee knewe well enough that that Councill was gouerned by the holy Ghost wherein the Apostles were president But what maketh that to the wicked Councils of Popes And after much reasoning about the worde indifferenter we said were that word put out yet were it blasphemie to saye that he that beleeueth not the Popes Canōs which are with other there mentioned beleeueth not the foure holy Gospels After this wee began our disputation concerning iustification both for that it is first of all other mentioned in your booke quoth we to Master Campion and both Luther and we all are most grieuously charged by you
Church supposing alwayes a true Church I pray you of what Church are you Charke We talke of the true Church and therefore this question is needles Are we to obey any thing contrary to the worde of God You can imagine nothing left to the Church that is not manifestly conteyned in the scripture Camp Call you manifestly particularly Charke To what purpose is that question I must bring you to a Syllogisme lest you auoyde disputation by digressing into other matter If any thing be left obscure or not fully handled by the Apostles it was either because the Apostles could not or because they would not write manifestly and fully But it is a blasphemie to say they could not and it is false to say they would not Therefore they haue written all manifestly and fully Here Campion repeated the Argument and then sayd thus Camp I answere to the word manifestly either in generall or particular termes manifest and this the Apostles both could and would For this is manifest enough Beleeue the Church but it is not particular Charke While we dispute of the manifest and full contents of the scripture leaue to choppe in the needles terme Particular manifest generals include particulars And where I pray you are we commaunded to beleeue the Church in matters not contained in the written worde By this vncerteine rule you may warrant all former traditions and bring in any newe absurdities Camp That is not the question Charke But it is a necessary note for the confutation of your answeres and doctrine of vnwritten verities Therefore I thus proue against you To leaue a doore open to any chaungeable or doubtfull traditions is not to teache things manifest enough in the scriptures But to send vs to your Church prelates in matters not expressed in the written word is to leaue a dore open to chaungeable and doubtfull traditions Therefore to sende vs to your Church prelates in matters not expressed in the written worde is not to teach thinges manifest enough in the scriptures Camp To leaue a doore to traditions which the holy ghost may deliuer to the true Church is both manifest and seene as the baptisme of Infants the holy ghost proceeding from father and sonne and such other things mentioned which are deliuered by tradition Proue these directly by the scripture Charke Which proposition in the Syllogisme doe you deny Camp Proue the baptisme of children and the proceeding of the holy Ghost not to be traditions Charke I maruayle you thus auoyde the Syllogisme and what you meane to match doctrines contained in the word of God with vnwritten and vncerteyne traditions of men It is plaine that the baptisme of children is proued by the analogie of Circumcision with baptisme childrē being circumcised the eight day Also by that the Sacraments of the old Testament are the same with the Sacraments of the newe The proceeding of the holy ghost is euidently proued by this that our Sauiour promiseth to send the holy Ghost Camp Proue the proceeding of the holy ghost Ex parte filii That is on the sonnes part For that is the point Charke It is proued by my former words and where Christ breathed vpon his disciples and said Receiue the holy ghost Camp Well leaue that talke of baptisme which this company vnderstandeth better Suppose that I am an Anabaptiste And y◠Anabaptist denieth this argument because children should not be baptized till the eight day and the scripture willeth them to be baptised that beleeue so that first they must haue Faith or els they may not be baptized Charke I reply to you that Infidels of age to vnderstand and beleeue must beleeue before they be baptised and admitted to the Church but the children of beleeuers being the seede of the faithfull they may receiue the seale of the couenant of God made to the Fathers and to their seede according to that of the Apostle If the first fruites be holy the lumpe also If the roote be holy the branches also are holy But to the question Notwithstanding the scriptures be the only rule triall of all questions in religion and do fully proue the matter in hand yet because you wil not be cōtented without them answere a place or two out of the Doctors Eusebius lib. 3. cap 35. of his ecclesiasticall storie writeth that Ignatius being caried prisoner to Rome did exhort the Churches to cleaue vnseparably to the tradition that is to the deliuered doctrine of the Apostles which for safetie it was necessarie to put downe in writing that we might not depart frō it Which excludeth the generall bringing in of vnwritten verities vnder the colour of that text Obey your prelates Camp Reade the place Charke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In English thus He exhorted the Churches to cleaue vnseparablie to the traditition of the Apostles which he supposed and testified nowe for safeties sake necessarily to haue bene set downe euen in writing Camp What word doe you inferre Tradition I graunt is not alwayes taken for vnwritten veritie This place maketh for those traditions which were not then written Ignatius was S. Iohns scholler and he was Oculatus testis An eye witnesse of things that were not then written but went from hand to hande and therefore he thought it necessarie to leaue in writing such trueth as he had heard and was not written before For the Gospels were not then written Ignatius wrote no Gospell and the text noteth that the things whereof he spake were such as himselfe wrote Charke You mistake the meaning of the place For Ignatius spake not of your doubtfull and multiplied traditions but of the certayne Tradition that is of the deliuered and written doctrine of the Apostles to the which we must cleaue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is so stedfastly that no force no arte may cut vs off or withdrawe vs from it no not an Angell from heauen much lesse any mortall man howsoeuer magnified with the high titles of Popedome or Prelacie or Apostolicall authoritie Walker You haue graunted that all things are written in the worde and that such traditions as can not manifestly be gathered out of the Canonicall Scriptures are not to be receaued Thereupon I reason thus The same that the Apostles wrote the same they deliuered in tradition But they haue written and deliuered the same things that they read in the Canonicall scripture Ergo their writings and traditions be all one and the same Camp The same that is to say nothing contrarie Walker The same and no other is needefull to saluation Heare the Apostles wordes 1. Cor. 4. Hac de causamisi vobis Timotheum qui est filius meus dilectus fidelis in domino qui vobis in memoriā reducet vias meas quae sunt in Christo quemadmodum in omni ecclesia doceo Who is my beloued sonne and faithful in the Lord who will put you in minde of my wayes which are in the Lorde euen as
Charke I do not onely thinke but knowe of a certeintie that you are deceiued and will shewe you the booke Camp Note this obiection This is myne answere to it Hermogenes the Heretike did alleadge a bastard tradition and Tertullian doth call him to proue his opinion by true scriptures For Tertullians argument is not to say It is not written Therfore it is not true but to call him to proue the Scripture true which he alledged for him Charke And note this answere He that euen now knewe no such booke taketh presently vpon him to discourse of the argument thereof What great boldnes is this From what present reuelation doth it come Beside your boldnes your error is great in affirming that Hermogenes brought a bastard tradition For there is no such thing as may appeare to any man that for triall hereof wil reade the booke Hermogenes is cōfuted for saying as an Aristotelian Philosopher the God made al things of materia prima Againe of your answere I conclude that of necessitie the proofe of euery particular tradition must be by a true scripture And it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a generall position Tertullian would haue Hermogenes proue all that he helde by scripture Camp I say it is not to shewe a bastard writing for his tradition but that which is true scripture Charke And that is all I aske for what do I seeke more but to proue that euery tradition must be proued by true Scripture when therefore you Iesuites bring in vnwritten traditions concerning your Candles your vnholy graines your Agnus deis and such beggerly stuffe wherewith you abuse and pester the world Tertullian sayth you bring a Vae vpon your selues except you can proue the vse of them by Scriptures Camp Why I say it must needes be proued there or els it is not to be receaued Charke Remember what you graunt I aske no more To leaue Tertullian with you to aduise better of I alledge also a place of Basill out of his treatises called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 capite 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This place doth clearely establish the sufficiencie of scripture and banisheth all vnwritten and selfe will worshippings Consider the place for it is worthy of consideration as making against you in this question and charging you with pride and apostasie for bringing in things not written Camp Well let these your speaches passe Reade the place S. Basill is not against vs. Charke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. It is a manifest Apostasie or falling away from the faith and a fault of high pride eyther to dissalowe any thing written in the Scriptures or to bring in any thing not written seeing the Lorde hath sayde My sheepe heare my voyce with other arguments to that purpose Camp I will not trouble the auditorie with this place For Basill declareth that in some things we must be referred to tradition he speaketh onely for the alleadging of false scriptures and hath nothing against me Charke Then nothing can make against errour if this make not agaynst you But you abuse the auditorie and knowe not the drift of Basill in this place and that I will make euident to all the companie Take the booke and reade it if you can the place is easie Greeke and the sentence but short Camp I had rather reade it in Latine then in Greeke I vnderstande the Latine better I maruell you are so much in your Greeke Charke If I shoulde not haue brought it in Greeke but in Latine then you woulde haue taken exception against the interpreter I bring not the interpretour but Basill him selfe in the tongue wherein hee wrote Here Campion being long in turning the Latine booke coulde not finde the treatise but desired Master Charke to finde it who answered I haue it readie in Basill him selfe If you flee to the interpretour turne your owne booke Camp I haue answered you Saint Basills meaning is as it was then a common doctrine that it is a great fault to disalow true scriptures or to bring in false scriptures and to father a false writing vpon the Apostles Charke I protest that hauing perused the circumstaunces of the place I finde no such generall or particular drifte of the father as you misreport but a playne doctrine and sundrie argumentes to proue it that nothing is to be receiued or brought into the Church that is not written Camp Your protestation is no argument I am acquaynted with this dealing since the other day But the scope of Saint Basill is as I haue saide Charke My true protestation doeth ouerway your misconstruing as wel of Basill nowe as of Tertullian before and therein I referre my selfe to the examination of both places If you will or can read but twentie lines further your owne eyes shal see and giue sentence against your selfe Camp I haue giuen you the sense of the Doctours wordes and neede not reade the place Charke Reade first and then answere What Authour or what place can make against you if you will of your selfe frame an interpretation after your owne purpose without reading the wordes or making conscience what construction you giue Campion Saint Basill in other places is of a contrary iudgement and I am sure he is not contrary to him selfe The Apostles had fayth before they wrote and therefore it must needes be the scope Charke What kinde of answere is this Speake to the purpose or confesse your insufficiencie Basills owne woordes in this place doe euidently proue that hee is against you answere them or acknowledge your selfe not able to satisfie the Doctour Campion Was all written when the Apostles first taught Charke Is this any answere to Basill Propounde no newe questions but answere the former place so full against you Camp You see mine answere Charke I see and all men may see your vntrueth to shift off the matter Basills wordes are too strong against you To your newe question I answere that since the worde of God was first written that which hath bene written conteyned sufficient matter to saluation Campion Then what needed so many additions since of the Prophets and Apostles writings if we had sufficient before Charke The most honourable addition of the Prophetes and Apostles serued to a clearer manifestation of Christ of whome Moses had written before but added nothing to the substance In the after noone The Question Whether faith onely iustifieth M. Charkes prayer OUr helpe is in the name of the Lorde c. Almightie God merciful Father we acknowledge against our selues that we were conceiued and borne in sinne and corruption that wee remaine vnprofitable to any thing that is good and most prone and ready to that which is euill in thy fight Ignorance doeth possesse our mindes and dulnesse ruleth in our vnderstanding so that of our selues wee can not see into thy glorious and excellent trueth and in our selues wee finde no health nor hope of health Therefore according to thy riche mercie O Lord take
vicem reddentes sola fide iustificati sunt dono Dei That is they were iustified freely by his grace They were iustified freely for working nothing neither making any recompence they were iustified thorow only faith by the gift of God Thus farre Saint Ambrose who doeth very often in his expositions vpon that Epistle to the Romanes repeate That we are iustified by faith alone And Saint Basil most worthely named the great sayeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. That is perfect and sounde reioysing in God is this when a man doth not boast of his own righteousnes but knoweth that he wanteth him selfe true righteousnes and that he is iustified by only faith in Christ. And Saint Paul doeth glorie in the contempt of his owne righteousnesse Thus farre Saint Basill And Gregorie Nazianzen saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Confesse Iesus Christ and beleeue that he is risen from death and thou shalt be saued For to beleeue onely is righteousnesse Thus saith Nazianzen surnamed Theologus the deuine for his excellent learning in the scriptures And the same doctrine of iustification by faith alone do many other ancient godly and learned fathers and doctors set downe most plainely in their workes After that these sayings of these ancient doctors were read we said You see that this doctrine and the very words themselues which we doe vse we are iustified by faith onely or faith onely doeth iustifie are not any new inuention of ours but are set downe and pronounced by many ancient and holy fathers of the Church aboue a thousande yeere sithen and more and that being grounded euen vpon the same places of the holy scriptures that we do alleage for our iustification by faith onely Master Campion said but those Doctors and you doe not agree in sense as I said before It is well said we that you cannot denie but that they doe agree with vs in wordes and that they doe gather these wordes euen of the same scriptures which we alleaged for onely faith to iustifie and that therefore these wordes we are iustified freely thorow grace by faith faith without the law without the works of the lawe doeth iustifie which are the wordes of Saint Paul are all one with these words faith only doeth iustifie which was before by you denyed Master Campion said but the trueth of the matter resteth in the sense and meaning of the Doctors What sense is it that you doe speake of said we Master Campion answered We do graunt that it is true that onely Faith doeth iustifie in this sense that is that when we be first brought into the state of grace no good works do go before primam gratiam the first grace or iustification but that our first iustificatiō is by faith only without any works going before but the workes that followe the first grace and iustification said Master Campion doe both iustifie and merite also We alleaged Saint Augustines saying Opera non praecedunt iustificandum sed sequuntur iustificatum Workes doe not preceede a man to be iustified but doe follow him being iustified That is true said Master Campion as I said before of the first grace and iustification but good workes doe goe before the second iustification It is but a small matter said we to graunt y◠no good works doe go before the first grace or iustification when before the same grace there can be no good workes at all And concerning the seconde iustification we replyed to that that Saint Paul speaking of that iustification and alleaging the example and saying of king Dauid therefore sayeth expressely that to a man that doeth beleeue in him that doeth iustifie the wicked his faith is reputed to righteousnes according to the purpose of the grace of God Euen as Dauid setteth downe the blessednesse of a man vnto whome God reputeth righteousnesse without workes Blessed are they whose wickednesse is pardoned and whose sinnes are couered c. Thus sayeth Saint Paul thus sayeth the King and Prophet Dauid teaching plainely that our iustification is by Gods pardoning of our euill workes and not by the merites of our good workes for he saith expressely that iustice is without our workes And S. Paul and King Dauid were in the state of grace when they did thus write and yet doe shew that their iustification then as well as before was without workes Master Campion said a man being in the state of grace may write of the first grace and iustification why not and so did they in that place Yea quoth we but if he be set downe for an example himselfe after that he hath obteined the first grace and continued therein and yet sayth that God reputeth his iustification without any his workes though he haue done many good as Abraham first and then Dauid are here set out for example and as Saint Basill as was before alleaged setteth out Saint Paul himselfe for an example who doeth glorie in the contempt of his owne righteousnesse it is cuident that that iustification or righteousnesse which is before God is without any workes of ours at all and that all iustification of all persons and in all times is by the grace of God through faith onely without any merite of our workes Then they alleaged Saint Iames wordes Faith without charitie is dead making thereby charitie the soule and life of faith Hereunto we made answere that faith without charitie was in deede dead and altogether vaine and vnprofitable But Saint Iames meaning herein was not to make charitie the principall parte or the forme of faith but onely to shewe that by charitie faith is approued and declared to be a true and a liuely faith which we doe most willingly graunt And therewith we alleaged the saying of Thomas de Aquin. being a scholeman of their owne side who saith Deus iustificat effectiuè fides iustificat apprehensiuè opera iustificant declaratiuè That is God doeth iustifie effectually faith doeth iustifie apprehendingly workes doe iustifie declaringly Master Sherwin said it was Fides iustificat instrumentaliter Faith iustifieth instrumentally That worde quoth we doeth make no alteration in sense at all And here you may see howe Saint Paul teaching that we are iustified by faith without workes before God and Saint Iames teaching that we are iustified by workes that is doe declare our selues by our workes vnto men to be iustified do agree Master Campion said that he could yeelde and subscribe vnto that saying of Saint Thomas And we saide that we woulde doe the like for that it is the very true doctrine that we teache howbeit he held his penne from subscribing Then Master Sherwin alleaged these wordes of Saint Paul If I had all faith and haue not charitie I am nothing And he did very vehemently vrge the wordes all faith all faith without charitie is nothing worth Here saith one of the Pamphleters silence was the answere but howe truely let him selfe see for
purpose is not to deale by discourse but briefely by Logical arguments according to the order of schooles c. After he had inquired D. Fulkes name Campion also spake after this maner Campion The disputation that I desire is yet behinde for I desire it might bee in the Uniuersities This may bee called a conference but it is not the disputation which I require Besides these conferences are vnequall both in respect of the suddainnesse of them as also for want of such necessary helpes as were fitte and conuenient I see that you haue some appoynted to note as if it were made a solemne matter I shoulde haue the like so shoulde I haue come better furnished and all these might haue bene better profited Besides I haue bene yll dealt withall already things heretofore spoken by me haue bene mistaken and published in print otherwise then I euer meant D. Fulke For the suddennesse it is all alike with vs. Master Lieutenant sent you worde by my request to chuse the question your selfe on Saturday last at noone so that you had knowledge of the question as soone as we and also the choyse and appointing thereof As for the noting it is not made so solemne a matter that it can preiudice you but to preuent false reportes that may bee spread of the conference iniurious as well to you as to vs. As for the disputation you require it is not at our appoyntment It must be ordred by them that are to appoynt both you and vs. We come by commandement c. but let vs goe to the matter You slaunder vs and Master Caluine likewise in the thirde chapter of your booke for defining of the Catholike Church as we do You say we make it a Platonicall Idaea an ayrie thing that is no where c. But I will proue that it is against the nature of the Catholike Church at any time to be visible Campion Where do I slaunder you or Caluine Reade my booke I wil maintaine my booke and euery part of it And as for the Catholike Church I will mayntaine that from the time of Adam to Christ and from Christ vnto vs the Church hath bene visible But because you say I slaunder you and Caluine shewe my wordes D. Fulke These are your wordes Non est ausus contrauenire sonitu videri noluit Ecclesiae quam toties Scripturae commemorant refragari nomen callidè retinuit rem ipsam funditùs definiendo sustulit c. And ye quote Cal. Institut lib. 4. cap. 1. Sect. 2. 3. Here you plainely slaunder Caluine and vs for defining the Catholike Church comprehending all the elect of God that haue bene are or shal be to be inuisible Camp The Catholike Church is considered according to her parts triumphant in heauen and militant on earth generally particularly and I am ready to maintaine that alwayes the militant Church in earth is visible euery 〈◊〉 in his mayer knoweth this who in their prayers pray for the Church militant therefore this is the poynt whether this be alwayes visible Fulke Wel then it appeareth in the very beginning that you swarue from the title of your owne booke sclaundering vs without cause for the definition of the whole Catholike Church and Sophistically you goe from the whole to a parte from the Catholike Church to the Church militant which is but a part of it when as the whole Catholike Church comprehendeth all the elect and is the full body of Christ that filleth all in all things as the Apostle sayeth and as we confesse in the articles of our faith We beleeue the Catholike church We deny not that the church militant sometime is visible but we affirme that the whole Catholike Church whereof our definition is giuen is not visible And what cause haue you then to exclaime vpon Caluine and vs for defining the Catholike Church to be inuisible This we are here ready to prooue Camp I haue sayd that vpon earth the Church is alwayes visible But I pray you let vs speake of the Church militant I am sure these gentlemen would heare not of a Church of Saints in heauen but of a Church in earth wâ—…etd they may ioyne themselues what shoulde we talke of the Church in heauen They would rather knowe I am sure of what Church they are here Aske them Fulke Wel then you are found recreant in this paynt openly to sclaunder our definition to be such as should take away the nature of the Church in that we make it inuisible and now when it commeth to the tryall you will not deale with the Catholike Church whereof our definition is giuen but with a part of it to witte that which is vpon earth which wee neuer denyed in some sense to be alwayes visible because it consisteth of men vpoÌ„ earth although it be not alwayes seene because it is oftentimes hidden from the worlde and sometimes also from the true members thereof But this Church vpon earth you wil haue to be alwaies visible Seeing therefore you giue ouer yâ— defence of your slauÌ„der of our definition of the Catholike Church which we came prepared to maintaine we are ready also to reason of the church militaÌ„t Campion The state of the question is that the Church militant vpon earth can not be hidden but it is alwayes knowen so that a man may vnderstand of what Church he is c. Fulke The case may be such as a member can know no more but himselfe what meane you by visible Campion I meane to be visible is to knowe one another to meete at Sacraments when I can tell that I am of this church and you of that I a Catholike and you a Protestant as I certainely know there is a Church in Fraunce a church in Spaine and in Flaunders though I be farre from it and we may knowe one another a member can say This is my pastor these are my prelates and gouernours This is playne I would to God I had one also to write for me I pray you let me not be mistaken for I haue had great wrong that wayes and thinges haue bene put in print that I neuer spake or meant Fulke If we haue this discoursing we shal neuer haue done I would you would be briefe I will prooue from a place of scripture that the church militant vnderstanding visible as you say is not alwayes visible in earth Elias complaineth that he was left alone c. Ergo the Church was not then visible Campion I deny the Antecedent further declare the meaning of the place which maketh altogether for me For Elias setteth out the schismatical church of the Samaritanes In this schismaticall church a member being driuen out as sometime it falleth out to be the worlde turning and changing he might not know the rest but yet knew there were 7000. that neuer bowed their knees to Baal Agayne you must not bring a particular to ouerthrowe a generall There were none there therefore
saith that Christianitie which is the Church is to bee knowen only by the Scriptures He hath these wordes Tantummodoper scripturas nullo modo nulla probatio c. Wherfore thus I frame my argumēt out of Chrysostoms place The Church is to be knowen onely by the Scriptures But visibilitie is not the Scriptures Ergo the Church is not to be knowē by visibilitie Or thus The only note to know the Church by is y◠holy Scriptures Uisibilitie is not the holy Scripturs Ergo visibilitie is not a note to know the Church by Campion Yea out of the Scriptures the Church may bee knowen for the Scriptures appoint visiblenes to bee a marke of the Church But I deny the Minor Fulke Do you say then that visibilitie is the Scripture Campion I say visibilitie is conteined in the Scriptures Fulke My Minor is that visiblenes is not the Scripture so vpon my Maior which is Chrysostomes authoritie I conclude that visiblenes is no marke of the Church Campion I know Chrysostomes place hee denieth not visiblenes to be a note You may go to an other argument Fulke You would not heare Chrysostome by your will but he shal be read by your leaue Tunc cum videritis abominationem desolationis stantem in loco sancto id est cum videritis haeresim impiam quae est exercitus Antichristi stantem in locis sanctis Ecclesiae in illo tempore qui in Iudea sunt fugiant ad montes id est qui sunt in Christianitate conferant se ad scripturas Sicut enim verus Iudeus est Christianus dicente Apostolo non qui in manifesto sed qui in occulto sic vera Iudea Christianitas est cuius nomen intelligitur confessio Montes autem sunt scripturae Apostolorum aut Prophetarum de quibus dictum est Illuminas tu mirabiliter a montibus aeternis Et iterum de ecclesia dicit fundamenta eius in montibus sanctis Et quare iubet in hoc tempore omnes Christianos conferre se ad Scripturas Quia in tempore hoc ex quo obtinuit haeresis illas Ecclesias nulla probatio potest esse verae Christianitatis neque effugium potest esse Christianorum aliud volentium cognoscere fidei veritatem nisi Scripturae diuinae Antea enim multis modis ostendebatur quae esset Ecclesia Christi quae gentilitas nunc autem nullo modo cognoscitur volentibus cognoscere quae sit vera Ecclesia Christi nisi tantummodò per scripturas c. Then when you shall see the abomination of desolation standing in that holy place that is when you shall see an vngodly heresie which is the army of Antichrist standing in the holy places of the Church in that time they which are in Iury let them flie to the mountaines that is they that are in Christianitie let them get them to the Scriptures For as the true Iewe is a Christian as the Apostle sayeth not which is in open sight but which is in secrete so true Iurie whose name is vnderstood to be confession is Christianitie And the mountaines are the Scripture of the Apostles and Prophets of whome it is sayde Thou doest giue light marueilously from the euerlasting moūtaines And againe he sayeth of the Church Her foundations are in the holy hilles And wherefore doeth he commaunde all Christians in this time to get them to the Scriptures Because in this time since heresie hath obtained those Churches there can be no tryall of true Christianitie neyther can there be any other escape of Christians which woulde knowe the trueth of the faith but the Diuine Scriptures For before times it was shewed by many wayes which was the Church of Christ and which was gentilitie but nowe to them that woulde knowe which is the true Church of Christ it is knowen by none other meanes but onely by the Scriptures This is playne for the Antecedent And these particles are playne Nullo modo cognoscitur It is knowen by no meanes there is no other proofe but tantummodò per Scripturas onely by the Scriptures Campion Master Doctor you knowe the order I deny the consequent you proue the Antecedent Fulke You denied the Antecedent and therefore it was necessary for me to proue it But this place also doeth prooue the Consequence of mine argument which you denyed Let me see howe you can answere to the place All other markes in time of heresie or schisme by Chrysostomes iudgement are excluded but onely the Scriptures Therefore visibilitie also is excluded from being a marke of the Church Campion When the Church was first planted there was miracles by which it might be knowen but nowe they ceasing it is to be knowen sayeth Chrysostome onely by the Scriptures meaning that it is not to be knowen by miracles c. Fulke This answere is a senseles cauil which is easily auoyded For there is an Antithesis or opposition in Chrysostomes wordes howe it was knowen before that is multis modis by many wayes and howe it may be knowen nowe by one onely way tantummodo per Scripturas onely by the Scriptures For nowe that Antichrist is reuealed he excludeth all wayes except one sayeth it must be knowen onely by the Scriptures Therefore he excludeth visiblenesse as well as miracles from being an inseparable note of the Church Campion It excludeth miracles c. Fulke Well then your answere is that nullo modo nulla probatio tantummodò excludeth nothing but miracles Campion Yea and that appeareth by the wordes Ante tempus Antichristi For whereunto els should nunc and ante be referred except it had meant by ante before the primatiue Church and nunc nowe by the present and instant time Fulke You do but talke you cannot so put away Nulla probatio No proofe Nullo modo by no meane it is knowen but tantummodo per Scripturas onely by the Scriptures c. He speaketh of all times since heresies haue occupyed the Churches If you wil answere no otherwise I will rest vpon iudgement Campion I haue answered but I would to God I had a notarie well I commit all to God But I pray you note that I say that visibilitie is included in the Scriptures Goade I will examine this cause by a manifest place one of the strongest that is alleadged by those of your side to prooue the visibilitie of the Church namely that out of the 5. of Matthewe A citie that is buylded on a hill can not be hid whereupon they inferre therefore the Church must needes be alwayes visible Campion If it please you though it be commonly alleaged yet it is allegoricall There are many stronger places and you were best take a more pregnant place c. Goade It is alleadged by Hosius and others on your side to this purpose and therefore I chose it notwithstanding if you shunne it and would haue me to omitte it I will Campion No I say there are apter and stronger places neuerthelesse I shunne it not
Councils which are gathered of all the Christian world and that euen the general Councils themselues are often corrected the former by the latter when by any tryall of thinges that is opened which was shut vp and that is knowen which was hidden without any swelling of sacrilegious pride without any stiffe necke of arrogancie without any contention of malicious enuie with holy humilitie with Catholike peace with Christian charitie Here you haue a plaine place that only the Scripture cannot erre that all other writers may erre that all prouincial Councils may erre and last of all generall Councils themselues may be corrected the former by the latter therefore without question they may erre Campion I answered before you read that a general Councill may be declared and better explaned but not corrected Fulke It may be amended and therefore corrected There is no difference betweene amending and correcting Campion So farre forth it may be corrected as it may bee better explaned but not to set out thinges that are contrary For generall Councils are not one contrary to the other Fulke Saint Augustine sayeth The generall Council may be ignorant of some thing at the beginning that afterwardes by experience may be amended something may be close which afterwarde may be opened it may be hid to one Councill that may be knowen of another And the Antithesis in these wordes must needes stand that only the Scriptures cannot erre and therefore are not to be corrected As for Councils generall and prouinciall and Bishops writings of all sorts may be corrected and therefore they may erre Campion A generall Councill may erre in matter of fact as in condemning and absoluing some Bishops c. but it can not erre in matters of doctrine Fulke Doe you know whereof Augustine speaketh in this place c. Campion Yea as well as you Fulke Why then declare it before this company Campion He speaketh of a matter of fact Fulke Nowe you shewe your selfe altogether ignorant of the matter for he speaketh of the Councill of Carthage that was helde in Cyprians time wherein was concluded an error of faith For they had decreed that such were to be rebaptized as had bene baptized of heretikes With which decree and Cyprians authoritie who was President of the Councill when Saint Augustine was pressed he answereth that onely the Scripture coulde not erre but all other both Bishops writings and Councils might erre and therefore might be reformed c. Campion He speaketh not of a matter of faith as appeareth by the worde experiment For there can bee no experiment in a matter of faith heresie cannot be amended Fulke These are vaine shiftes Men may finde by experience they haue erred Campion The worde amending sheweth that it was in maners Fulke To be corrected and amended is all one and may bee as well in faith as in maners and the argument whereof he entreateth and the Antithesis he maketh betweene the Scriptures and all other authorities sheweth plainely that hee meaneth of errour of faith But seeing you haue nothing else to answere I will leaue it to the consideration of them that bee wise and learned and so long as you bring no matter I will not answere your wordes Goade Seeing you stande vpon Councils I will proceede that way General Councils haue erred ergo c. Campion I deny the Antecedent Goade They are contrary one to another c. Campion I deny it Goade The Councill of Constantinople and the Councill of Nice are contrary Campion They are not Goade They are contrary in the matter of Images namely the Councill of Constantinople condemning the setting vp of Images in the Church and the Councill of Nice afterwarde allowing Images Campion You can not shewe that they were contrary one to an other Goade It shal be shewed afterward I will come to another generall Council The Council of Constance hath erred in matter of faith ergo a general Council hath erred Campion I deny the Antecedent Goade The Councill of Constance erred in taking away the cuppe from the common people this was a matter of faith ergo that Council erred in matter of faith Campion Thus we shall runne into all questions and then we shal haue done this time twelue moneths This was no error in the Council for I say there is no commandement that the people should be partakers of the cuppe Goade By the same reason you may aswell exclude the people from the bread also but though you haue in this poynt denied the force of Christes institution yet the commaundement in the same is plaine Bibite ex hoc omnes Drinke ye all of this And Paul interpreteth it so 1. Cor. 11. deliuering aswell the cuppe as the breade to the whole Church euen as hee had receaued of the Lord. The Council of Constance decreeth against it ergo a manifest and foule errour in that Councill Campion Doeth Saint Paul make it a precept that the lay people should receiue the cuppe Goade Paul iudued with the spirit of God giueth a flat precept in the same chapter verse 28. Probet seipsum homo Let a mā try himselfe and so let him eate of that breade and drinke of that cuppe These are playne preceptes Let him eate Let him drinke and here is as great a commādement to the whole church for the one as for the other Campion The place is to be vnderstoode when he doeth receiue and vnder the obedience of the Church it may be done And this that you make so much a doe about I haue seene it done to many Catholikes my selfe but it is not so necessary that you should make such adoo about it Goade It is not left free but an expresse commaundement and therefore necessary It is the Imperatiue mode and therefore a commaundement I maruayle howe you can stande in this being so plaine Fulke Here are two thinges Probet Edat bibat Let him examine himselfe and let him eate and drinke and both be commaundementes First he must be prepared and then he must eate and not onely eate but he must drinke also For as the institution is of eating and drinking so is the commandement of the Apostle drawen from the institution And if there be no commandement then is no man bounde to receiue the Lordes supper Camp No it is a thing indifferent by the institutiō touching the common people sauing that only the authoritie of the Church hath layde it vpon vs here you may see the authoritie of the church in things not commanded Goade It is a commandement both in the institution and by the Apostle 1. Corinth 11. saying That which I receaued I deliuered grounding his commandement vpon the institution and therefore commanded in the institution Camp Yea he saith when he will or when he doeth receiue then let him examine him selfe Fulke These are your owne wordes there is no such worde here When he will and when he doeth he must proue him selfe and so he
sanctiss Patriarcha dixit Animaduertamus dictum patris quod illic Samaritae imagines Domini seruatoris nostri item intemeratae eius matris subuerterunt hic vero Gentiles Ostendit autem pater quod Angelos pingere oportet quando circumscribi possint vt homines apparuerint Sacra Synodus dixit Etiam domine Concerning Angels and Archangels and the powers of them vnto whome also I adioyne our soules the Catholike Church her selfe doeth so thinke that they are in deede intelligible but not altogether voyde of bodies and inuisible as you Gentiles do say but that they haue a thinne bodie either of ayre or of fyre as it is written Which maketh his Angels spirites and his ministers a burning fire And so we haue knowen that many of the holy fathers haue thought among whome is Basill surnamed the great and blessed Athanasius and Methodius and them that stande with them Onely God is without body and shape but the intelligible creatures are not altogether bodiles and they are such as may be portraicted in picture Wherefore they are in place also and haue a circumscription although they be not bodily as we are as of the foure elementes and that grosse matter Yet no man may say that Angels or deuils or soules are without bodies for they haue bene often seene in their proper bodies but of them to whome the Lord hath opened their eyes Therefore we do paint and worship them not as God but as intelligible creatures and the ministers of God but yet not as truely being without body But that they are painted in the shape of man the cause is that they haue bene seen in that shape if at any time they did execute the ministerie of God amōgst mē Tharasius the most holy Patriarch saide Let vs marke the saying of the father that there the Samaritans did ouerthrowe the images of our Lord and sauiour and also of his vndefiled mother but here the Gentiles The father also sheweth that wee ought to paint the Angels seeing they may be circumscribed and haue appeared as men The holy Synode said Yea my Lord. Campion You haue answered your selfe Fulke That is your common answere when you can coyne no better Camp I answered then and so do nowe Assumunt corpora They take bodies vpon them they haue none of their owne Fulke He saith they may be circumscribed Camp That is they may be painted Fulke Nay he saith plainely they are not Expertes corporis voyde of body and defineth of what bodily matter they consist namely of ayre or fire and for that he alleageth the scripture also he sayth they are not inuisible Campion Looke in what bodies they haue appeared in such they may be painted they did appeare as men they bee not men neither haue they bodies of their owne Fulke He saith expressely they haue bene seene in their owne proper body Campion The iudgemēt of the Councill is that the Angels may be painted that is all Fulke That is not all for it affirmeth that they are circumscriptible and visible as I said before Campion You haue proued no error of the Councill Fulke We might haue brought the Epitome of the Councils gathered by one Bartholemew Garanza a Spanish Fryer which noteth it for an error in that Councill contrary to the Lateran Councill vnder Innocentius the third who thought him selfe as well learned as you Campion It is no matter Fulke Yes it is a matter when Papistes agree not amongst them selues Campion You should haue brought it I woulde haue answered him also Fulke Well let them that bee wise and learned peruse the Councill at their leasure Further in reasoning of Peters reprehension you said his error was a matter of facte and not of faith for the Pope you say may so erre and bee reprehended of a poore Priest who may say vnto him Sir why do you so To this I replied that so to reprehend the Pope was against your owne Canon lawe which now I proue out of the decrees Parte 1. Distinct. 40. cap. Si Papa suae fraternae salutis negligēs deprehenditur inutilis remissus in suis operibus insuper a bono taciturnus quod magis officit sibi omnibus nihilominus innumerabiles populos cateruatim secum ducit primo mancipio gehennae cum ipso plagis multis in aeternū vapulaturos Huius culpas istic redarguere praesumit mortalium nullus qui cunctos ipse iudicaturus a nemine est iudicandus nisi deprehendatur à fide deuius Pro cuius perpetuo statu vniuersit as fidelium tanto instantius or at quanto suam salutem post Deum ex illius incolumitate animaduertit propensius pendere If the Pope be found negligent of his owne and his brethrens saluation vnprofitable and remisse in his workes and also holding his peace of goodnesse which doeth more hurt him and all men neuertheles he leadeth with him innumerable people by heapes to the chiefe slaue of hell with whome hee shal be beaten with many stripes for euer No mortall man doeth here presume to reproue his faultes because he him selfe being to iudge all men is to bee iudged of no man except he be founde erring from the faith for whose perpetuall state the vniuersitie of faithfull doeth pray so much the more earnestly by how much it perceaueth their saluation after God to hang more readily of his health Againe by the Extrauagant De concessione prebendae titulo 4. cap. 2. ad Apostolatus in the Glosse where hee sheweth that the Pope may doe that which to all others is forbidden Nec est qui audeat dicere Domine cur ita facis And in the marginall note Papae nullus audeat dicere Domine cur ita facis No man may be bolde to say to the Pope Syr why do you so Camp Reade the decree againe Fulke Si Papa c. Campion The meaning of the decree is that no man may iudicially reprehende him I say so Fulke Both the decree the Extrauagant speake generally that the Pope must not be reprehended of any man except he be an hereticke whereof it followeth that Gratians Decree and the Glosse thought not but that he might erre in faith Camp Mine answere is he may doe it soberly as a man may with humilitie reprehende his prince but not iudge him Fulke Let other men iudge I haue shewed as much as I promised out of the Canon Law You charged me to affirme in mine answere to Bristow that so a man holde the foundation of faith it is no matter what errors he holde beside Here is my booke shewe these wordes or any wordes to that sense as you promised Camp You say that the true Church may erre in matters of great weight so they retaine the foundation Fulke I say that so long as a man holdeth the foundation though he erre in small matters he may be saued Cam. You say the fathers erred in inuocation of Saints which is a great matter with Gods
accidents are not that he spake of Campion This is a booke and yet I see not the substance of a booke but whitenesse and other accidents Fulke Who would say that whitenes is the booke none but a madde man neither will any say that whitenesse is the body of Christ or called the body of Christ. Therefore by the word of heauenly bread and of the Sacrament he meaneth the whole sacrament I see you haue nothing but shamelesse shiftes against so cleare authoritie of your owne Canon law speaking against you Campion If you dare let me shewe Augustine and Chrysostome if you dare Fulke Whatsoeuer you can bring I haue answered already in writing against other of your side and yet if you thinke you can adde any thing put it in writing and I will answere it Campion Prouide me ynke and paper and I will write Fulke I am not to prouide you ynke and paper Campion I meane procure me that I may haue libertie to write Fulke I knowe not for what cause you are restrained of that libertie and therefore I will not take vpon me to procure it Campion Sue to the Queene that I may haue libertie to oppose I haue bene nowe thrise opposed it is reason I should oppose once Fulke I will not become a suter for you Camp Sue to the Queene for me it is but an easie suite you being in such credit with your Prince may if you dare procure this matter Catholikes of their prince can obtaine a greater matter and are not you Protestants in such credit with your Prince that you can obteine so small a matter Fulke We meane not to trie our credit in this matter But if you write any thing I will answere you in writing Campion Procure it Fulke It were to small purpose I haue answered already Heskins and Saunders which are like to bring as much as you Campion I am not worthy to cary their bookes after them And you your selfe Sir may be scholer to either of them Goade If Christ be present in his naturall body he must be present in his true body But Christ is not present in his true body Ergo not in his naturall body Camp I deny your minor He is present in his true body Goade A true body must haue the properties of a true body But this hath not the properties of a true body Ergo it is not a true body Camp I deny againe your minor It hath the properties of a true body Goade AmoÌ„gst the properties of a true body this is one special to be circuÌ„scribed in place not to be in many places at once But in your transubstantiation Christes body is made to be in many yea in infinite places at once Ergo it hath not the properties of a true body Campion It is in respect of a miracle not seene with eye but with our faith Goade Now you runne againe to miracle It hath bene before shewed you out of Augustine that there is no miracle in the Sacrament and your selfe sayd that miracles are now ceased Campion It is a great miracle to conuert a sinner yea greater then to make the worlde and this kinde of miracle is dayly Goade Now you would go from the matter this is not properly a miracle But to the purpose Answere the argument That which is in many places at once is not a true body But as you teach Christ in the Sacrament is bodily in many places at once Ergo not a true body Campion The propertie of the fire is to burne yet the three children in the fire 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—…ed Wiâ—… you therâ—…e 〈◊〉 that it was truely fire Goade That was in deede and properly a miracle whereof the Scripture testifieth which visibly was seene Campion So is this a miracle Goade Beside it is not sensible which must be in a miracle There is no ground of the worde for it And faith must be grounded on the worde of God Campion The word teacheth that God is omnipotent Goade You that wil reason from Gods omnipotencie must prooue also his will Omnia quae voluit fecit Hee hath done all things whatsoeuer he would Camp Nay you must proue it is not his will Goade I wil proue it out of Theodoret. Dialo 3. qui inscribitur impatibilis writing of the glorified body of Christ after his resurrection Non est mutatum in naturam diuinitatis sed post resurrectionem est quidem immortale ù corruptione interitu alienum diuina gloria plenum sed tamen corpus est quod habet propriam circumscriptionem The body of Christ is not changed into the nature of his diuinitie but after his resurrection it is in deede a body immortall free from corruption and ful of diuine glory but yet it is a body that hath a proper circumscription Campion When it pleaseth Christ to worke a miracle he is not bound to the natural properties he doth not alwayes practise all his properties His body ascending into heauen had the true properties of a body yet did not then practise them It is against the naturall propertie of a body to ascend vpward Goade This ascention of Christes body being an article of our faith is grounded vpon the worde that his body was taken vp neuerthelesse remayned a true body circumscribed in place Augustine sayth we must not take away the trueth of Christs body Epist. ad Dard. 57. Cauendum ne ita diuinitatem astruamus hominis vt veritatem corporis auferamus cui profecto immortalitatem dedit naturam non abstulit Wee must take heede that we doe not so maintayne the Godhead of Christ being man that we take away the trueth of his body whereunto hee gaue immortalitie but tooke not away the nature Campion You neede not bring these places I graunt that Christ hath a true body But you may as well deny the ascension of Christ being against the propertie of a true body to ascend vpwarde Goade I answered before that this is an article of our faith grounded vpon the expresse worde of God And because we do beleeue by the word that Christes body is ascended and sitteth at the right hand of God and from thence shal come to iudge therefore we cannot beleeue the coÌ„trary that Christ is yet present on earth So Augustine reasoneth in the same Epistle Christus Iesus vbique est per id quod Deus in coelo autem per id quod homo Spacia locorum tolle corporibus nusquam erunt quia nusquam erunt nec erunt Christ iesus is euery where as he is God but as he is man he is in heauen Take away space of places from bodies they shall be in no place and because in no place they shall haue no being at all Campion I thinke I haue answered sufficiently he is present not naturally but miraculously Goade Why then ye destroy the propertie of a true bodie and so consequently take away the trueth of a body Campion I grant the
and brought vp in this realme in schooles places where good learning hath bene taught so that he might haue bene a good instrument in this common wealth and Gods Church but contrary to his bringing vp his friendes expectation hope that this Church might haue conceaued of him like an vnnaturall man to his countrey degenerated from an English man an Apostata in religion a fugitiue from this realme vnloyal to his Prince hath not onely fled to the man of Rome an aduersarie to Christ and his doctrine but hath gotten a courage from that Romaniste with certaine other his sectaries to come into this realme againe to vndermine the Gospell of Christ to seduce Gods people and withdrawe her Maiesties lawfull subiectes to disobedience and sedition and hath bene disguised in Ruffians apparel in diuers places of this realme to plant secretely that blasphemous Masse and other Poperie whereunto it appeareth hee hath allured many vnstable fooles and in Yorkeshire where his Sectaries disciples are apprehended iustly imprisoned nowe they rage as I heare say and curse him that euer he came there So ye see what maner of mā we are to talke withal What good we shall do with him the Lord doeth knowe other maner of men then we are and of another calling were more meete to talke with him then we notwithstanding we will doe our best that we can God giue it good effect As for you Campion I heare say that you vse to scoffe and iest at such as come to conferre with you we come not for that purpose it is not our profession yet I giue you warning Si quam maledicendo coeperis voluptatem eam malè audiendo amittes Now to the question which is that the scriptures containe all things sufficient to saluation against the assertion of your booke For you say that the Lutherans haue cut off many bookes from the body of the new Testament and so diuided them from the Canonicall scripture which is not true Camp Yes that they haue and therein they haue done euill Walker Here Master Walker reade the words out of Campions challenge Campion Luther hath cut off the Epistle of Iames the second epistle of Iohn Iude and the seconde of Peter Luther hath found fault with these and improued them in his prefaces vpon those Epistles Walker Luther hath not doubted of them himselfe but shewed that others haue doubted of them Campion It is one thing to doubt an other thing to cut off Bring me the bookes and I will shewe that he hath cut them off Walker That can not bee shewed if the bookes were here For the Doctors doe not agree concerning these bookes that are of the Canon Some recite more some recite lesse as Origen Hierome and others and yet it were hard to say that they cut off any of the Canonicall bookes They doe as Luther may shewe what bookes were doubted of in their time and yet no whitte preiudice the bookes of the Canonicall Scripture Campion Well I say whatsoeuer they might doe then yet now seeing the Church hath otherwise determined it is blasphemie for any to doubt of them The Lutherans doe doubt of them bring me the bookes and I will shewe where Luther doubteth and therefore blasphemeth because the Church hath taken away the doubt videlicet the third Councill of Carthage and that of Laodicea Walker I do not professe my selfe a Lutheran but a Christian But if olde fathers and olde Councils haue not receiued these bookes for Canonical and bookes to ground our faith vpon then can not new men nor the Tridentine Council being ful of errors make thē Canonicall August de doct Christ. lib. 2. ca. 8. leaueth out Baruch the two last bookes of Esdras Hieronymus praes in li. Reg. Hūc prologū galeatū principiū vocat He saith Igitur Sapientia quae vulgo Salomonis inscribitur Iesu filij Syrach liber Iudith Tobias pastor nō sunt in Canone Macchabaeorū primū librū Hebraicū reperi secūdus Graecus est quod ex ipsa phrafi probari potest Eusebius also ecclesi hist. lib. 6. cap. 18. fol. 368. sequentibus omittit tertiū quartū Esdrae Tobiae Iudith Baruch Sapiētia Ecclesiastici Machabaeorum libros Paulo post De eo inquit qui est apud Hebraeos nonnulli dubitauerunt c. Sed ego dico ficut mihi à maioribus traditum est quia manifestissimè Pauli est Ibi de secunda Petri Epistola à nōnullis dubitatur De duabus vltimis Iohannis Epistolis apud quosdā dubia sententia He omitteth in the forenamed place the third fourth booke of Esdras the bookes of Tobie Iudith Baruch of Wisdome of Ecclesiasticus of the Macchabees A litle after Cōcerning that saith he which is written to the Hebrues many haue doubted but I say as hath bene deliuered vnto mee from mine Elders because it appeareth most manifestly to be of Paules There also concerning the second Epistle of Peter he sayth that it was doubted of many and so with some were the two last Epistles of Iohn The same Eusebius lib. 4. cap. 26. loquens de Melitone Episcopo Sardensis Ecclesiae qui recitans volumina veteris Testamenti omittit Esdras Tobi Hester Iudith Baruch Sapientiae Syrach Macchabaeorum c. Speaking of Melito the Bishop of the Church of Sardis who reckening vp the volumes of the olde Testament he omitteth Esdras Tobie Hester Iudith Baruch Wisedome Syrach the bookes of the Macchabees c. And the Laodicean Councill omitteth Lukes Gospel the Apocalyps You see therefore that these old fathers haue left these bookes out of the Canon and yet were they neyther called heretiques nor blasphemers Campion It is not lawfull to cut off the bookes of the olde Testament from the Canon which not onely as I haue sayd Luther hath done but also Caluine The one hath reiected those bookes I haue named and the other reiecteth the bookes of Tobie Ecclesiasticus the booke of Wisdome the bookes of Maccabees Baruch and the like which are de syncero Canone Walker What is this to that I haue saide I haue shewed that the olde Doctors haue refused them for Canonicall and therefore so many may we refuse and they them selues wil de no further admitted then they agree with the Canonicall Scriptures and these bookes which you name haue alwayes bene esteemed Apocrypha Augustine contra Maximinum Arrianorum Episcopum lib. 2. Cap. 14. Nec ego Nicenum nec tudebes Ariminense tanquam praeiudicaturus proferre Concilium nec ego huius authoritate nec tuistius debueris Scripturarum authoritatibus non quorumcumque proprijs sed vtrisque communibus testibus res cum re causa cum causa ratio cum ratione concertet c. August against Maximinus the Bishop of the Arrians Neither oughtest thou to bring the Council of Arimine nor I the Nicene as it were to preiudice the trueth neither should I be holden with the authoritie of this nor thou of
that but let it be tryed by the authority of the Scriptures not the proper witnesses of any but common to both let matter with matter cause with cause and reason with reason trye it c. And Hierome writing to Laeta de institutione filiae fol. 58. willeth not to reade some without doubting and other some warely but he sayth Caueat omnia Apocrypha Let her beware of all the Apocrypha which he nameth in Prologo Galeato Et si quando ea non ad dogmatum veritatem sed ad signorum reuerentiam legere voluerit sciat non eorum esse quorum titulis praenotantur multaquè ijs admixta vitiosa grandis esse prudentiae aurum in luto quaerere And if at any time she will reade them not for the trueth of opinions but for the reuerence of signes let her knowe that they are not theirs whose titles they beare but that many vitious thinges are mixt with them and that it is a point of great wisdome to seeke out golde in dirt Loe here you see that he biddes her to beware in the reading of them Camp The Scripture is principally to be admitted but I would we might haue an argument Walker Then thus I reason That which he biddeth to beware of is not to be holden authenticall But he biddeth to beware of the Apocrypha Ergo the Apocrypha is not to be holden authenticall Camp Apocrypha are taken two wayes First for those bookes which are doubted of and then for such bookes that are not allowed Such were the prophecie of Enoch Iacobs testament and such like which he calleth Somniolenta deliramenta vitiosa c. of those Hierome speaketh in this place and not of those others For what point is there in Ecclesiasticus the booke of Wisdome that is to be found fault with that is vitiosū not good Walker They are called Apocrypha that are not in the Canon receiued and allowed to haue proceeded vndoubtedly from the holy Ghost these Apocrypha are forbidden to be read And Hierome in praefat in lib. Reg. saith Hic prologus scripturarum c. Si quid extra hos est inter Apocrypha est ponendum c. They are not in the Canon therefore Apocrypha are onely to be read Camp Woulde Hierome forbid the gentlewoman to reade Ecclesiasticus where there are giuen so many morall precepts Non sunt in Canone Hebraeorum sed in Canone Christianorum They are not in the Canon of the Hebrewes but they are in the Canon of the Christians Walker They may be read for morall Lessons but not for matters of religion which must be proued by Canonicall scripture What say you to the second booke of Macchabees Thinke you that to be holden for Canonicall scripture Camp I thinke so What should let Walker What say you to that sentence 2. Macch. 12. thrust into the text Salubris est oratio pro defunctis and to that which followeth Et si quidem bene vt historiae competit hoc est vt ipse velim sin autem minus digne concedendum est mihi And if I haue done well and as is meete for a storie this also my selfe did wish c. Camp It is marueile that you should say that it is thrust in Walker It is noted so by other and the duetie of an historiographer is to reporte things done truely and plainely without arguing like a Logitian but he sayeth Ergo salubris est oratio pro defunctis Therefore prayer for the dead is healthfull which appeareth first to haue bene set in the margent But howe auoyde you the last Can such asking of pardon be of the holy Ghost wherein hath hee fayled or of whome shall hee be pardoned Camp The interpreter asketh pardon of his speach for his style and not for the doctrine The holy Ghost asketh no more pardon then Paul did when he saide Rudis sum sermone I am rude in speach when he spake in a base and lowe stile Charke Campion howsoeuer you labour to auoyde the direct course of disputation and haue obteined some change of the question I must call you home by and by Notwithstanding I minde a while to followe this your course and to finde you out in your owne trace where I maruaile howe you dare thus speake in this assemblie For what a blot is it to the holy Ghost to affirme he should aske pardon and to the Apostle Saint Paul to say his stile to the Corinthians is a base and lowe stile But to vse no further preface I will thus proue that the 2. booke of the Macchabees was not indited by the holy Ghost Whatsoeuer needeth pardon either for matter or maner was not indited by the holy Ghost But the story of the 2. booke of Macchabees needeth pardon either for matter or maner Therefore it was not indited by the holy Ghost Camp This man would be angrie with me if he knew why Charke If I woulde knowe I not why to be angrie with you a notable and vowed enemie of the trueth of God and a seditious man against the state But I come not to deale with your person but against your errors Answere the argument Camp I say the writer of the Macchabees asketh pardon of his speach neyther doeth Paul blotte the holy Ghost when he saide that he was rudis sermone that he spake not so eloquently nor so finely as sometimes he might Charke You answere not directly and beside you affirme an error For S. Paul craueth no pardon for his stile but setteth his plainesse against the set and curious speach of the false Apostles who did come in gay apparance and shewe of wordes as if they had had al the power of trueth that might be and yet in this plaine style the Apostle was of al others most mightie most eloquent As for the 2. booke of Macchabees which you make Canonicall seripture here I will make this challēge if you dare answere it to proue many lyes in it through 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that therefore it was written by a prophane spirite for the matter But to come to the Syllogisme and to disproue your distinction I reason thus The writers of holy Scriptures aske not any pardon at all either for the matter or for the manner Therefore they aske no pardon for their style Camp I deny your Antecedent Paul sayeth Rudis sum sermone Charke If Saint Paul saith Rudis sum sermone doeth he I pray you in those wordes craue pardon for his stile howe hang your wordes together I will proue my Antecedent by the place of Peter None that haue written as they were directed by the spirit of God craue pardon either for matter or for manner But all the holy men of God that wrote the Scriptures haue written as they were directed by the spirit of God Therefore none of the holy men of God that haue written the scriptures craue pardon either for matter or manner Camp This acknowledging
of the weakenesse of his stile is in the Apostle an humilitie comming from the holy Ghost Charke You answere not to the Argument therefore to auoyde the cauil consider the Syllogisme againe in this sort Whatsoeuer is the worde of God is full sound and perfect it doeth neither aske nor neede pardon in any respect But the second booke of Marchabees doth both neede aske pardon in some respect Therefore it is not the worde of God Norton If you will stay a while and speake leasurely you shall haue the Argument written and while it is writing if you will haue any thing added or changed it shall be done It will be more profitable for the hearers and greater ease for your selues Camp With a good will I answere In it selfe and for it selfe it neither needeth nor asketh pardon but for circumstance In respect of dainty eares it may aske pardon Charke Why Campion shall the holy Ghost begge pardon in respect of daintie eares Camp Syr Put this in also that I say it was in respect of the stile for the forme and the maner of it Norton Well I haue put it in so Charke Let him put in all his shiftes helpes clogging his answeres as much as he will we will cast the clogges vpon his owne heeles and thus I reason agaynst all your cauils Whatsoeuer is in the worde of God is all of the holy Ghost both for matter for stile and for circumstance and the holy Ghost asketh no pardon for any of these Therfore the 2. booke of the Machabees asking pardon is not of the holy Ghost nor canonical scripture Here Campion â—…eeing hastie before master Norton had written it through out master Norton willed him to stay a little Campion replied that it was losse of time To which Master Norton answered againe that it was a gaining of the time He desired that the word all might bee inferred in the Antecedent Charke I sayd all Norton So it is and rightly set downe Camp Then I answere thus This circumstance of asking pardon is of the holy Ghost for it is a speach of humilitie proceeding from the holy Ghost as is Saint Paules speach Rudis sum sermone I am rude in speach Et non in persuasibilibus verbis humanae sapientiae Not in the perswasible wordes of mans wisedome Charke Rudis sum sermone commeth oft and rudely in and yet the alledging of it hath bene disproued long ago Neuerthelesse seeing it pleaseth you so wel it shal be a weapoÌ„ of your owne giuing to vse against your selfe For the Apostle of purpose auoyding the wisdome of mans eloquence doth iustifie that which his aduersaries called rudenesse of speach as lawfull and good Neither doth he as you imagin confesse any want or craue pardon Therefore your example is false deceitfull and vnlearned It is a trim thing for you to abuse the multitude vnder opinion of great learning and to match those that are no scriptures with scriptures sometime affirming one thing and another time another sometime that the Apostles speach is rude and the stile base and needeth pardon in respect of daintie eares and now last that it needeth no pardon but is done for humilitie whereas the holy Ghost neuer asketh pardon of man for any thing he doth for that were to bring God vnder man and make the spirit of God subiect to the allowance or disallowance of sinfull flesh Camp I answere that neither this of the Macchabees nor Pauls speach hath need of pardon in it selfe Charke It is too too much absurd to accuse the holy ghost of waste and needles speach For if there needed no pardon it was not according to the holy Ghost to craue it Camp I haue said neither this nor the Apostles speach needed any pardon in it selfe and yet it was not waste and needlesse because it proceeded of humilitie Charke Will you charge the holy ghost with dissimulation speaketh he one thing and meaneth another Camp I say it was not waste because it proceeded of humilitie to craue pardon Charke Wel I proue my assertion against this your imagined humilitie of the holy Ghost to sinfull flesh Whatsoeuer is without cause is waste and needlesse But your self confesse it to be without cause for the holy ghost to craue pardon Therefore by your owne confession it is waste and needlesse Camp I denie the Minor For there is cause For in trueth the stile is simple Charke How often haue you granted the Minor saying he needed not to aske pardon now as forgetting your selfe you say there is cause of asking pardoÌ„ For say you in truth the stile is simple Your speaches are contradictory Set it downe that yâ— aduersarie is not at one with him selfe Besides he was driuen before to grant the stile is not base or simple Camp I haue set downe no contrarietie but in respect Char. In respect is a simple shift Are not these contradictorie propositions He needeth not pardon but asketh it in humilitie and He needeth pardon for in trueth the stile is simple Camp I pray you read the place of the Maccabees Charke Thus you retire and aske moreouer that which needeth not For the place is well knowen and was read before But I will read it againe Et si quidem bene vt historiae competit hoc ipse velim si autem minus dignè concedendum est mihi This I would haue all the companie marke and vnderstand whom you labor with indirect speaches to abuse draw from the truth that whether the authour of this booke excuse himself craue pardon in these wordes for his stile or for his storie neither can be of the holy ghost because as hath bene proued at large the holy ghost faileth nothing at all in any point of speach of matter or of circumstance Thus your distinctions and cause fall together Camp I haue answered you in what respect he craueth pardon and if that cannot satisfie you leaue it to God and this companie to iudge of Charke Sure your satisfaction is verie weake farre from satisfying God that hateth such fond distinctioÌ„s to darken his word or those of the companie that seeke to be edified But you giue me new occasion to prosecute this matter What thinke you therefore of the storie of Iudith touching the dressing and decking of her selfe with apparell and ornaments fittest to deceiue Holofernes eies and what say you to her lies and praier that he might be taken with the snare of his eies looking vpon her the speaches vntrue and the action vnchaste in outward apparance were they thinke you of the holy Ghost Camp I maruell not that you so speake of me when you so speake of a blessed woman to bring so holy an action into doubt Surely you greatly offend me in so doing Charke I speake of the words and storie as it is plainly written she prayeth saying Capiatur laqueo oculorum suorum in me Percuties eum ex
away our sinnes and heale all our diseases through the righteousnesse of Iesus Christ our onely saluation Open our eyes we beseech thee that wee may at this time beholde and so frame our hearts that we may gladly embrace thy most holy trueth as thou hast left it vnto vs by thy holy seruants the Prophets and Apostles Graunt this knowledge and loue of the trueth with dayly increase not onely to vs O Lorde who through thy grace alreadie make profession thereof but also vnto all those that yet set them selues against the same that they acknowledging the trueth of thy word may cleaue to it forsaking all superstitious vanities and seeing the all sufficient righteousnes sacrifice of thy only sonne may lay hold of it denying them selues renouncing their own merites falsly named righteousnes Graunt vs these things O heauenly Father for thine onely sonnes sake Iesus Christ our alone sauiour redeemer in whose name we aske the praying as he hath taught vs Our Father c. Walker We haue in the forenoone entreated of the Canonicall scriptures and of their sufficiencie Now we haue to entreate of fayth God graunt vs grace that we may see the trueth and hauing fayth may rest in it to our endelesse comfort Let vs before we enter into the matter declare somewhat concerning the state of the question We holde therefore that we are iustified by fayth onely and that freely no other woorkes concurring for that purpose And yet we set not downe a bare and naked fayth as our aduersaries charge vs. For we confesse that fayth hope and charitie are coupled and lincked together and that loue is the greatest But we affirme that fayth onely is that instrument whereby we lay holde vpon the loue of God which is the onely foundation of our saluation By that title therefore wee exclude all mens workes and vertues as meritorious and onely looke to the merits of Christ. Camp I will declare to you my meaning also Wee are agreed that God doeth iustifie and for Christs sake onely through his grace and through his mercie alone through his Sacraments and through baptisme Thus farre we agree but herein we disagree For we say that when God doth iustifie he doth giue vs of his grace three distinct giftes fayth hope and charitie and these are as three causes of iustification and charitie a principall cause which frameth the first act in vs. We say therefore that as grace is put in vs in iustification so also our righteousnesse is enlarged through good workes and is inherent in vs. Therefore it is not true that God doeth iustifie by fayth onely Charke Campion you are not to vse your old sleight in running from the matter and loading one thing vpon an other The question is whether we be iustified by faith onely that is now that which is in question to be decided 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and you are not to change the state of the question Walker Well let your declaration stande for defence although we agree not For there are sundry causes of iustification finall and middle But faith is the first thing in vs that receiueth iustification and yet it is not of vs. Camp I grant that there are mo causes then one Walker Well though I be an olde man and haue bene long from the vniuersitie I meane yet to examine you in the grounds of these things and to go with you from poynt to poynt and so we shall find out our disagreement best I pray you what is the Etymon of fayth Camp It is called fayth Quia fit quod dictum est Because it is performed that is spoken as I take it Walker That is true Dicitur a fiendo quia Dominus fidelis est Because the Lorde is faythfull standing to his worde and keeping his promise with vs. But in vs fayth is a certaintie or sure perswasion and therefore it is called by the Apostle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or elenchus foundation or argument It is therefore the ground and before all other things that come after it as the foundation is before the building Camp I grant it But what inferre you hereof Walker This I inferre Fayth is the grounde and before all things that come after it Ergo it is before hope and charitie Camp In nature it is before them but it doth not iustifie before they do come Walker Prius and posterius First and last bee taken diuers wayes It is not before Tempore but Dignitate ordine Not in time but in dignitie and order Camp That is contrarie to S. Paul For he sayth Charitas est maior Loue is greater Walker You must vnderstand what Paul meaneth therby It is Maior duplici respectu It is greater in a double respect In respect of God and in respect of men and so extendeth further Camp Uery well I like your causes well but it is simplie greater and more excellent Walker Let me proceede then It is greater in that it is more necessarie to the life of man and also in diuturnitie because it neuer dieth nor hath any ende Camp I grant you all this But what are those to the matter of iustification But let me adde a thirde also that it is digâ—…ior because faith and all good workes are nothing without loue But let vs heare your argument Walker The ground is before that which is grounded vpon it and in all good order we vse to set the most worthie first Thus therefore I reason Faith is the foundation ergo before the other Camp If you meane in dignitie it is not true It is before in order but not in dignitie For the roote is not more worthie then the tree though it be afore it Walker Paul sayth Fundati radicati in fide speaking of the assuraÌ„ce they had in their saluation And it was necessarie they should be thus grounded and rooted in the faith before they could bring forth the fruits of faith The fruits were good works which were not the cause of their iustification but the effects of men engraffed in Christ iustified already this root was before the fruit Camp I grant as before In order but not in worthinesse For the fruit is more worthie then the roote Walker Omnis causa efficiens est dignior effectu Euerie efficient cause is more worthie then the effect Camp I deny that faith is the efficient cause of good works It is a cause antecedent but not efficient But we are agreed vpon this Let vs go to another argument Walk Uerie well it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a sure argument of things that are not seene a thing vndoubted Camp Where is the place It is called the foundation of euerlasting life and an argument of things not seene because I knowe it is by no other argument but by fayth But what inferre you Walker You shall heare anon What is Subiectum fidei the subiect of fayth and what is Obiectum fidei the obiect of fayth In quo
a false and grosse interpretation and thus I proue it If your distinction be good then there is either a third couenant or the couenant of the lawe is mixed with the couenant of the Gospell But no man will say that there is a third couenant and the Apostle proueth that in the work of our iustificatiō the couenant of the law doth no way participate with the couenāt of fayth therefore your distinction saying as it is a burden is not good and your interpretation absurd and false Camp I answer to the Minor that the law is considered two maner of wayes The couenant of the lawe as it is of the lawe is no way mixed with the couenant of the Gospell but as it is the couenant of the lawe eternall of the lawe morall of the lawe of nature it is mixed with the new testament Christ hath renued it in the lawe of charitie Moses gaue it one way and Christ another Moses the lawe maker and Christ the law giuer Praeceptum nouum do vobis vt diligatis inuicem I giue you a newe commandement that ye loue one another Charke What absurde speaches are these to make a substantiall distinction of the lawe in regard of the minister or of the time The morall lawe and commandement of God is euermore the same in substance Camp I vnderstand not what you meane I say it is mixed but as it is mixed it is not called Moses law but y◠law of Christ who gaue it more perfectly c Charke Againe I say this is absurde for the lawe of God was alway the lawe of God and therefore the same and exacteth the same obedience which because no man can performe no man can liue thereby Camp You are still gathering absurdities Charke I must gather them where you scatter them For what materiall difference can there be made of one and the same thing The second couenant offereth life onely by faith in Christ the former onely by workes and these cannot be confounded as you confound and huddle them together Thus your answeres are from the arguments Camp My answeres are to the purpose What is it that you would haue more of me Charke Is your answere to the purpose that mixeth confoundeth the two couenants which are so opposite by the Apostles place alledged that he which cleaueth to the one can receiue nothing by the other For the couenant of the lawe can beare no transgression and to iustifie vs the couenant of fayth needeth no satisfaction or workes on our part Christ hauing most fully wrought and satisfied for vs. Therefore it is the pride of man to thinke and the errour of man to teach that the righteousnesse of Christ is not sufficient without addition of our righteousnesse Camp Well shewe me but that negatiue sola onely in all the Scriptures Charke This is a new matter I woulde haue the olde first satisfied Camp Shew it me can you not shew it Charke Seeing you would shift off the former argument by crauing a newe I am contented to proue that exclusiue tearme which you call negatiue Whatsoeuer excludeth all other causes in iustification that remayneth a sole cause Fayth excludeth all other causes in iustification Faith therefore remaineth a sole and onely cause Camp Proue your Minor Charke The absolute negatiues so often repeated in the Scripture Not of workes Without workes Not of the law Without the law do plainly exclude all other causes Camp Will you by this argument exclude al causes besides fayth Then with good workes you will also exclude the mercy of God What is your meaning Charke What a vanitie is there in this question Understande you not that I speake onely of causes in vs excluding no former causes as the eternall decree and loue of God the obedience and righteousnesse of Christ Camp Proue that Sola fides onely fayth is in the scripture Charke I haue proued it and why doe you not answere the argument Camp What argument would ye haue me answere Charke The last All other causes in vs are excluded by the worde of God where it is sayde so often Not of workes Not of the lawe therefore sola fides fayth onely remaineth by many testimonies of the Scriptures Campion This fides is Christian obedience and hath good workes Charke I graunt as the good tree hath good fruite necessarily so fayth hath good workes but these good workes though they be not separated from fayth are yet separated from being any cause of iustification with fayth As light though it bee not separated from fire yet it is separated from the force of burning for the heate burneth and not the light of fire Campion But where proue you that sola onely is in the Scripture Charke My argument hath fully and plainly proued it you neither will nor can answere it Therefore to proue it againe because the text Deut. 6. hath the negatiue Thou shalt serue no strange gods Christ Mat. 4. addeth the worde ONELY Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him ONELY shalt thou serue So we by the same warrant and worde do in this question of iustification take these words Not by works Not by the law to import as much as faith onely for al works whatsoeuer being excluded by these negatiue speaches faith alone remaineth Camp Why doth he say Thou shalt worship by fayth onely Char. I had hedged you in before that you should not leape ouer to run at large in your bie questions I sayd Christ Mat. 4. thus alledged against the tempter Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serue This negatiue ONLY is not in Moses yet added by Christ for interpretations sake to expound words importing it as I haue said before so do we in the matter of iustification finding all righteousnes by workes or by the lawe so oftentimes excluded doe conclud thereupon that fayth onely doth iustifie Camp The word adorabis doth of necessitie infer so much and therefore Christ doth well to expound it by onely But the worde iustifie doth not necessarily inferre the excluding of workes And therefore you do not well to inferre Faith only iustifieth Charke What do you not blush to bring this strange false distinction against a cleare truth of God Or wil you ouerthrow a maine pillar of Poperie for auoiding the force of one poore argument Doth the word adorabis exclude all other creatures and necessarily inforce that God alone must be worshipped Thē Cāpion condemneth al images all adoration of the crucifix all inuocation worshipping of saints For to adore or to worship sayth he importeth that adoration worship is due to God only so he excludeth all creatures frō worship euen the crucifix that they say must haue the adoration done to it which is due to Christ himself Camp What needeth all this it foloweth not which you say There is much differēce betwene to adore to reuerēce or serue For latria or to adore