made man absolute perfect wisdome and other gifts of the spirit were heaped vpon him certainly he had it not alone nor am I moued with the authority of the schoolmen who lest they might seeme to thinke lesse honorablie of Christ doe attribute to him presently all perfections And Damascens argument taken from the personall vnion doth not conclude it Damasc lib. 3. de Orthodox side vnlesse we will thinke that the Deity did infuse all the quality of it selfe into the humanity of Christ That which the Euangelist writeth of this progresse of wisdome pertaineth only to the human nature of Christ And seeing that Christ would assume the whole nature of man Heb. 4.15 sauing in sinne and lay off that person of God and emptie himselfe and take the forme of a seruant Phil. 2. will it be vnbeseeming the person of Christ that wee say hee was made both wiser and fuller of grace by little and little He was indeed most full of grace â—nd whatsoeuer grace any bodie hath al that he drew out of this euer remaining fouÌ„taine of most abundant grace Ioh. 1.16 but yet this hindreth not but that Christ as the Euangelist writeth might grow in grace which thing also Ambrose confesseth For so he saith Ambros in Luc. lib. 2. cap. 2. k DVR But he saith lib. 5. de fide cap. 8. I say that the Sonne was ignorant of nothing but he tooke vpon him our affection that hee might say hee was ignorant by our ignorance WHIT pag. 553. If Christ as a child was ignorant of nothing because of the personall vnion with the Deity yet it is a very childish argument to reason from the person to the humane nature that because the man Christ is ignorant of nothing therefore the humaniâ—y of Christ is not ignorant of any thing If Ambrose sometime vpon occasion diffeâ— from himselfe let him looke to it According to the flesh certainly hee was filled with wisdome and grace Nor doe some of your men Campian differ from this iudgement lest you should perhaps imagine it to be so horrible as that it cannot fall vpon a Catholike for I anseniiâ—â— Bishop of Gandaua Comment in concord cap. 12. Erasm annot in Luc. cap. 2. who was present at the CoÌ„uenticle of Trent professeth that he doth willingly incline to this iudgement and Erasmus albeit I name him not among writers on your side doth giue his note that it is the truer opinion But say you they affirme also that Christ was ignorant of some things And why may they not affirme it This say you is as much as if they affirmed that he was defiled with originall sinne Now at length you begin to argue very wittely that our Vniuersitie men may vnderstand your wonderfull subtiltie in disputing Would you deale on this manner with vs Campian if that dispute which you so often wish might bee permitted you For what could be spoken more absurdly Christ was ignorant of something therfore Christ was defiled with originall sinne As if he that is ignorant of something which may be knowne or he which is not endued with the perfect knowledge of all things it must needs be that he is defiled with sinne Thus then I will returne you a like argument l DVR Though they were ignorant of many things yet they had not that ignorance which commeth frâ— originall corruption vvhich if you say Christ had you must affirme that he was defiled vvith originall sinne WHIT. pag. 555. All ignorance commeth not from originall sinne as appeareth by the ignorance of Adam and the Angels therefore Christ might be ignorant without sinne And though we affirme all ignorance is now the punishment of sinne yet will it not follow that no ignorance was in Christ nay rather that there was for hee was to take vpon him the punishment of all our sinnes Therefore hee vnderwent not only this punishment but also death being the punishment of sinne Rom. 6 2â— yet for all this was he not defiled with originall sinne DVR The Fathers say he knevv not the day of iudgement because hee hath not reuealed it and would that others should be ignorant of it WHIT. pag. 556. This interpretation is easilie refelled For from this will follow that the Father also was ignorant of it seeing the Father did no more tell it and manifest it to others then the Sonne did The Angels are now ignorant of many things for they know not that day and houre and Adam Mar. 14.36 before he sinned was ignorant of many things for he did not vnderstand that Satan lay in waite for him therefore both the Angels are now defiled with sin and Adam in his greatest innocencie was a sinner You shall neuer pricke vs with these goades so as that wee may feare any deadly wound If you know not that there is an ignorance void of all fault learne it of Thomas who wil teach you that negatiue ignorance which he termes nescience 12. q. 76. art 2. is not sinne but the priuatiue If you can conclude that consequent out of our iudgement that Christ was ignorant of somewhat which hee then ought to haue knowne when he was ignorant of it then you put vs downe from this our standing For it is not a fault not to know those things which yet may bee knowne vnlesse it concerne vs to haue them knowne For who will blame a Porter for that he is ignorant of the Mathematikes But concerning Christ I answere now that vnto you which toucheth this cause neerer Although he were most pure from all spot of sinne so as nothing could be more vncorrupt yet hee tooke vpon himselfe the punishment due to sinne that he might deliuer vs from it Therefore also hee would die albeit death issued from sinne He then that suffered death for vs which sinne brought in can any thing which is ours be vnbeseeming him so as it be not infected with sin And you can neuer proue that ignorance in Christ was any whit more faultie than death Christ as he was a true man albeit a pure man so hee did neuer thinke imagine or vnderstand all things at once and he did sleepe sometimes Do you thinke that Christ while hee was sleeping did comprehend all things in his memorie which though you should affirme yet I see no reason to beleeue you That which Christ spake of that day and houre no man knoweth it Marc. 13.32 nor the Sonne himselfe Cyrill writeth that Christ spake it of himself and that he knew not the day of iudgement Cyril Thesaur lib. 9. cap. 4. as he was man because it is proper to the humane nature to bee ignorant of things to come But now say you wee shall take knowledge of worse things and here you recite many things concerning Christs sweaâ—e horror and sudden outcrie I acknowledge that which you alleage but I see no paradoxe therein I am not ignorant what is wont to be giuen out by you
and Page 210 14 There is a negatiue ignorance which is not sinne Page 208. 209 15 Châ—â—â—t â—â—oke vpon him the punishment due to sinne both â—gnorance and dâ—ath Page â—â—9 16 That which raised such feare and horror in Christ was not the feare of naturall death but the bitter wrath of God against mankind pag. 210. and 211 17 What the hell was which Christ suffered and as man feared pag. 211. nota 18 Christ suffered in soule as well as in bodie pag. 211. 212 19 Christ did not goe into Limbus after his death pag. 214 20 Many auncient Creedes both in the Romane and East Church haue not this article of Christs descension into heil pag. 215. nota 21 What the image of God was in man before his fall pag. 216 22 The whole image of God is not razed in man but some reliques are remaining Naturall gifts are corrupted supernaturall distinguished pag. 216. 217 23 That which is in the regenerate of themselues is corrupt that which they haue from God is contrarie to their corruption pag. 218 24 Sinne is not a substance nor a meere priuation but an accident and a corrupt habit like to a disease pag. 220 25 Concupiscence is sinne and so iudged by Augustine vpon great and weightie reason ibid. nota 26 Sometime he calleth it no sinne in opposition to actuall sin pag. 221 nota 27 Sinnes are not equall neither doe Protestants so teach they all deserue eternall death though some more some lesse pag. 221. 222 28 Grace is double either the free mercie and loue of God towards vs which is without vs in God or those gifts which flow from this grace and this is in vs. pag. 223 224 29 Christs righteousnes is onputed to vs as our sinnes to him Christ hauing paid our debt the paiment must needs be ours by imputation and if Papists allow the imputation of the righteousnes of Saints why should they so much scorne the imputation of Christ his righteousnes ibid. nota 30 Charitie cannot iustifie vs because it is imperfect for that which is faultie cannot iustifie vs. ibid. 31 Imputed and infused righteousnes goe together in one and the some man Iustification and sanctification are distinguished in the word pag. 225. nota 32 The regenerate by grace cannot so resist their temptations that they should neuer sinne as the example of S. Paul and others manifest pag. 226. 227. nota 33 Our righteousnes is a reall relation 228. nota 34 All our righteousnes being stained cannot iustifie vs and faith hope and charitie being imperfect cannot doe it pag. 229 35 Christ is he that couereth vs by whose righteousnes wee are adorned Our righteousnes is the couering of the fault pag. 231 36 Faith alone iustifieth but it is not alone when it doth iustifie pag. 232 37 The reasons why wee are exhorted to performe workes and obedience as also that wee are commanded to apprehend Christs righteousnes by faith pag. 230 38 A man ought and may be certaine of his saluation by the certaintie of faith pag. 232. 233. nota 39 Many are deceiued with a conceit of faith but he that hath it knoweth certainly that he hath it pag. 233. nota 40 From Gods predestination a man may be sure of his perseuerance so the Fathers teach yet a man must vse the meanes pag. 234. 235 nota 41 The number of Sacraments are but two in the Church the noueltie of the other fiue not any antiquitie for them and pregnant reasons against them pag. 237. nota 42 Hugo de S. Victore and Peter Lombard brought seuen Sacraments first into the Church No Councell before the Florentine did euer confirme them ibid. nota 43 Popish ceremonies in Baptisme are new ibid. nota 44 Protestants haue both bread and wine and the bodie and blood of Christ Papists haue no bread nor wine nota pag. 239 45 Baptisme is both a chanel of grace and that which confirmes grace but giueth not grace by the word wrought Duraeus contrarie to the schoolemen maketh it but an instrument pag. 239. nota 46 The Baptismes of Iohn and of Christ were both one in ceremâ—â—ie in doctrine and in grace pag. 240 47 The place against it Matth. 3.11 Act. 19.4.5 expounded and answered ibid. nota 48 Baptisme is not so simplie necessarie to saluation that the want of it will condemne but the neglect or contempt of it is a sinne pag. 241 49 Papists thinke infants dying without Baptisme are dâ—â—â—â—â—ed A barbarous and a seâ—selesse opinion and against all reason ibid. nota 50 Infants may haue faith as they haue life and know not of it pag. 242 51 The Sacrament is a Sacrament to all without faith but not a sauing Sacrament to men of yeeres without faith yet to infants it may be because the spirit worketh secretly and powerfully ibid. nota 52 Luther earnestly held that Baptisme ought to bee giuen to children and thought they had faith pag. 243 53 Caluin against the Anabaptists proued the baptisme of infants not by tradition but Scripture pag. 244. nota 54 Campian hath no cause to vpbraid Protestants with corruption of manners so long as Rome is so corrupt as as is and publike Stewes maintained in it pag. 245 55 Luthers lasciuious speech obiected by Campian plainly excused and a worse obiected of Pope Clements 246.247 56 Luther makes three causes of diuorce and the Papists many moe pag. 246. nota 57 Mariage is most necessarie for men who cannot liue chast and commanded pag. 247 58 Mariage is oftentimes simply better than virginitie though this be to be embraced when a man hath the gift that he may more freely serue the Lord. pag. 248. nota 59 The speech of Lauther saying The more wicked that thou art the necrer art thou vnto grace defended in his true sense pag. 249 60 How all our good actions are tainted with sinne and so may be called sinnes in Gods seuere indgement and yet good and to be done pag. 250. nota 61 The good actions of those who are once in Christ though tainted are acceptable vnto God because he lookes vpon the person not the worke pag. 251 62 The law belongs to Christians for a rule of their life though it be abrogated by the new couenant For they are deliuered not from the obedience of it but the curse of it by Christ pag. 252 253. 254. nota 63 God respects the good workes of his but not to instification pag. 254. nota 64 The iust not onely liues but is iustified by his faith and so much the place of Habacuck prooueth ibid. nota 65 Workes not the cause but the manifestation of righteousnes out of Thomas ibid. 66 They who haue broken hearts and contrite spirits are fittest ghuests for the Lords table neither is this against faith pag. 255 67 Luther was not against publike confession but a priuate auricular confession of all sinnes to a Priest onely when by the word it may be made to others pag.
remembred as the Patriarks Prophets and Apostles were to shew she was of the communion of Saints ibid. 306. nota 17 Prayer for the dead rose not from the scriptures but from the excessiue loue of the liuing to the dead ibid. 18 Augustine neuer prayed for his mother as thinking her to be in Purgatory ibid. 19 The auncient Fathers are to be iudged of not by one particular iudgement but by their constant opinion ibid. 20 The Monks of Popery much vnlike the Monks of auncient time 307 21 Satyrus challenged by Campian for this because he could swimme ibid. 22 The Schoolemen differ often in matter of faith 308. nota 23 Papists and the Iesuits liue as if there were no heauen ibi 24 The doctrine of Papists is such as whosoeuer holdeth it wholly cannot raigne with Christ 309 25 Antichrist of Rome hath inlarged hell more then all tyrants and heretikes ibid. 26 The cause why Christians resorted so much to Ierusalem after Christes death 310 27 Superstitious pilgrimages are contrary to the word and condemned by Gregory Nyssen and Bernard ibid. nota 28 The cause why the Iewes hate Christians is the Gospell not the spoiling of them of their priesthood and kingdome which was done by heathenish Tyrants ibid. nota 29 The Papists great friends to the Iewes allowing them toleration 311 30 Papists are not the ofspring of the Fathers 312 31 Lights were vsed by Christians only when they were forced to meete in the night and after without any ground of scripture custome brought them to be lighted at noone day 312. nota 32 The church of Rome was once poore when it had woodden Chalices and golden Priests But Vâ—bane the Pope made all the ministring dishes of siluer 313. nota 33 Constantine quieted the troubles of the church of Rome and since his time as sâ—e hath increased in wealth so she hath decreased in pietie ibid. 34 Constantine was not baptised by Syluester Bishop of Rome who was dead long before his baptisme 314 35 Constantine vsed the crosse in his armes and banners but neuer worshipped it ibid. 36 Constantine had not the lowest place in the Councell of Nice but the chiefest ibid. 37 The Turke neuer lesse preuailed theÌ„ since Luthers time 315 38 The Pope and his dealings did much enlarge the Turks by diuiding the Empire ibid. 39 The Turks are greater enemies to the Greeke Church then to the Latine 316 40 Symon Magus denied all freewill vnto men which Protestants do not neither did Caluine ibid. nota 41 Protestants are farre from that error of the Nouatians touching the repentance of those who are fallen ibid. 42 They are farre different from the Manichees in the matter of Baptisme 317 43 The church of Rome for along time was more excellent then the rest and so accounted yet for all that it neuer had neither in that respect ought to haue dominion ouer the rest 318. nota 44 Augustine and the Councell of Carthage forbad that the Bishop of the chiefe sea should not be called Prince of Priests ibid. And to it the Bishop of Rome submitted himselfe for a time 319. nota 45 The Greeke Church is opposite to the Romane Church and hath her bishoply succession ibid. 46 The Papists haue not ouerthrowne the idols of the heathen but filled the world full of their idols 321 47 The Iesuites haue diuided Christ and haue no proprietie in the name of Iesus ibid. nota 48 Luther preached the true Christ the papists neither haue him nor preach him 322 49 Britanie receiued tâ—e faith many ages before August the Monke came who brought more euil then good with him ibid. The end of the Contents TO THE MOST LEARNED VNIVERSITIE MEN FLORISHING BOTH AT OXFORD AND Cambridge Edmond Campian sendeth greeting WHen I returned most worthy men into this Iland a yeere agoe vpon commandement of my superiours according to the order of that Religion which I professe I found stormes farre more dangerous on the English coasts than those were which I had lately escaped on the Brittaine Ocean But when I had gone further into England I sawe nothing more vsuall then vnusuall punishments nothing more certaine than vncertaine daungers Then I plucks vp my heart as well as I could calling to mind the goodnes of my cause and not forgetting the troubles of these times And least peraduenture I should be caught before that any man heard what I had to say forthwith I writ downe my determination why I came what I sought for what manner of warre and against whom I purposed to proclaime it The first draught of my writing I kept still about me that if I were apprehended it might be found with me A copie thereof I left in keeping with a friend of mine which vnawares trulie to me was shewed to many other men and by them coppied out The Aduersaries tooke the schedule being published in ill part most spitefully reprehending both all the rest as also this that I alone in this matter of Religion had made the challenge to all Although in very deed I alone would not haue entred the list if with licence of her Maiestie and safe conduct these disputations had been granted Hanmer and Charke haue made answere to my challenge what I pray you though it were long before To no purpose at all for they shall giue no answere honestly but one which I feare they will neuer giue to wit We accept of your answere The Queenes Maiestie hath giuen her word that you shall come and goe safe make haste hitherwarde In the meane while they are full of their exclamations Fie vpon thy societie out vpon thy seditions art thou not ashamed of thine arrogancie thou art a Traitor doubtles thou art a Traitor foolishly said of them Why do those men not the vnaduisedst of all the rest so lauishlie loose their labour and cost of pen inke and paper But there is of late a little booke very plaine set forth for these two men to peruse the former of which for his pleasure and recreation took my said paper in hand to confute the same the other more maliciously hudleth vp the whole matter which so farre forth as was expedient entreates both of our society and of these mens iniuries and of the charge which I haue vndertaken There remaineth only for me for as I perceiue our Bishops prouide scourges and not Schooles that I might render an account of my said fact euidently to shew and as it were with my finger to point out vnto you the chiefe Chapters and fountaines of the things that breed in me such confidence And withall to exhort you who especially aboue all others haue to do herein that you will looke vnto this charge with such carefull diligence as Christ the Church the Common-wealth and the saluation of your owne soules do require at your hands If I vpon the affiance of my wit learning art reading or memorie haue thus challenged the best learned of the
Aduersaries I was in so doing most vain-glorious and proud aboue measure for that I considered neither them nor my self more deeply But if vpon considerations of the cause I thought my selfe able enough to proue that this sunne shineth now at Mid-day you must beare with this my feruent zeale which the honor of Iesus Christ my King and inuincible truth haue vrged me vnto Yee know that Marcus Tullius in his oration for Quintius when Roscius warranted him that he should get the better if he could proue that it was not possible for a man to trauaile 700. miles within two daies space was not only nothing afraid of the force and strength of that famous Orator Hortensius but also cared nothing for Philippus Cotta Antonius or Crassus who were Orators farre more excellent then Hortensius was And were as he iudged the principall Orators of his time There is vndoubtedly a truth in all matters so apparent and euident that neither any iugling trickes or enchaunting words can darken the beames thereof But that which I intend to proue is much more plaine then was that supposition of Roscius for if I shall proue this that there is a heauen a God a faith a Christ I haue gotten the victorie Should I not in this cause then be couragious Truly wel may I be killed but ouercome I cannot be for I depend vpon those Doctors whom that holy spirit hath instructed which can neither be deceiued nor ouercome I beseech you haue a care of your soules health of whom I shall obtaine this I expect the rest assuredly Let this be your only care and cogitation First to giue your selues to earnest prayer then diligentlie to studie also and yee shall find out the very depth of the matter and that the Aduersaries are in despaire and that we being so surely grounded haue good cause chearefully and couragiously to looke and long after these disputations I am the shorter in this preface because that all the Treatise following appertaineth properly to you Fare you well AN ANSWERE TO CAMPIANS EPISTLE WRITTEN TO THE STVDENTS OF THE two famous Vniuersities Oxford and Cambridge A Yeere agoe you write it fell out That according to the order of the religion which you professe vpon the commaundement of your Superiours you returned into this Iland Whether Campian you came willingly and of your owne accord or of a certaine necessitie by the order of your profession and Iesuiticall sect you were compelled to returne into England whence some yeeres ago you departed I will not be inquisitiue of because it is not much for the purpose we haue in hand It had bin far more glorious for you and more befitting the person you made shew to be not to haue crept in obscurely and by stealth but to haue returned with credit and authoritie But who is he that had power to send you an Embassage into a forreine country or what necessity lay vpon you to obey his commaundement who had no authority to enioyne you a iourney whither you were vnwilling to goe If that Spanish Souldier the first Author of your Iesuiticall societie were now aliue and should enioyne you to set your country on fire would you obey him I am sure you would say he would neuer commaund so foule a fact And yet he might better commaund and you execute that then this thing for which you professe you are now come hither For whether I pray you may we deeme lesse to set houses on fire then to diuert the minds of people from true Religion to trouble the peace of a Common-wealth to estrange the minds of loyall Subiects from their lawfull Prince and to turne all things topsie turuie which yet was the end of your comming and the order of your profession required no lesse at your hands But let vs heare how you go about your Embassage when say you I had gone further into England I saw nothing more vsuall then vnusuall punishments But Campian what be they Do you eft-soones so slaunder the mild gouernment of gratious Elizabeth accuse it of cruelty England neuer enioying a more mercifull Prince that you affirme you find nothing so common as vnusuall punishments But what new kind of torture haue you seene in Englād since you came into it Or which of your men can you name who hath bin condemned put to death for Religion not only since you came into England but for these 23. yeeres the whole time that good Elizabeth hath swayed the Scepter of this kingdome It is true indeed that some few haue bin punished who iumpe with you in opinion and Religion but they died not for religion but were by open iudgment of law conuicted of Treason There was of late executed one Euerard a Priest sent from the Colledge at Rhemes into England Who though he was in daunger to the Lawes many waies yet might haue had his life but that impudently at the barre he vttered things shamefull vile and intolerable For he boasted himselfe both to be the subiect and Vassall of the Pope euen in England and affirmed that the Pope was no lesse the head of the Church of England then of the Church of Rome Auouching further that he was verily perswaded that the Pope did not erre when he termed Queene Elizabeth an Heretike and the Patron of Heretikes and denounced her no lawfull Queene Euerard was for this confession conuicted and condemned who afterwards as if this had not been enough in prison professed plainly and directly in the presence and hearing of Sixteene men of credit That it was no sinne against God to commit treason against his Prince Yet for all this he suffered no new and vnusuall punishment but the same that all Traytors suffer among vs in the like case But who are you and what is your religion that you so bouldly obiect crueltie vnto vs Heare me this one thing Campian and denie it if you can It is not long since moe of our brethren were condemned by you at one Session executed in one day consumed in one fire then you can recount to me haue yet bin put to death for the Popes cause at any time or by any kind of death in the whole happie raigne of Queene Elizabeth Doe but call to mind Campian the rare cruelty the exquisite tortures the frequent Martyrdome of former times and if there be in you any sparke of humanity you cannot chuse but confesse that your side hath been extreme cruell and we sufficiently prouoked to seueritie against you and to haue repayed you with the like For what times I pray you can afford vs such and so many butcheries of men as was to be seene when you were Lords ouer vs and which are yet fresh in memorie Tell vs what sexe or age you spared and did not bloodilie execute all without difference and distinction of learned or vnlearned male or female old or young Children Virgins Married Clergie and Laytie Bishops Archbishops escaped not your hands The Martyrs you did
offended with Basil Naziancene Leo and Chrysostome which haue published excellent Sermons of Lent Christ ordeined no set and ordinary fasts in the Gospell k DVR Who hath but so much as saluted the Fathers and knoweth not this to be salfe for the obseruation of Lent is most auncient and ordained by the Apostles WHIT. pag. 371. I deny it not to be most auncient but not instituted by the Apostles for Apollonius writeth that Montanus first made lawes for let and certaine fasts and Tertullian when hee was become a Montanist writeth as much in his booke wherein he defendeth the fasts of Montanus Againe the Apostles neuer put any religion in choise and change of meats Rom. 14.17 Coll. 2 16. Tit. 1 1â— and so ordeined not Lene Lastly the Churches of the Apostles differed much in this fast both in their times in their kinds of meat as Eusebius â—ocrates record which would neuer haue bin if it had bin Apostolical at least as Papists do affirme who take in for a truth that those Churches would faithfully persist in the Apostles decrees Lent was appointed long after and the manner of obseruing it in those times was not one the same in all Churches We both allow and vse publike and Christian fasts which are fitted to the time and the Churches occasions as for your appointed and yearely solemne fasts we do with good reason reiect them because they are full of superstition and iniurious vnto Christian liberty Our iudgement of fasting is the same which Augustine hath taught August Epist 86. I find it not set downe in any Commandement of the Lord or his Apostles what daies we ought to fast what not Augustine then knew not these your set yearely ceremonies of fasting not your Lenten fast which hath a certeine time and number of daies prescribed Further you say they that haue set their soules to sale for gold lust excesse and worldly ostentation how can they be but most opposite to Basil Chrysostome Hierome and Augustine whose bookes of the profession of Monkes are in euery mans hands what will you censure all to be couetous lustfull gluttonous or ambitious that are not Monkes backe with that foot you were best for feare of your head for neither the Pope nor his Cardinals and Bishops hold it either necessary or conuenient for them to lay aside their abundant wealth continuall pleasures their dainty fare their kingly honor and thrust themselues into a Monasterie whosoeuer liueth after their fashion cannot be well affected to Basil nor any man that is holy l DVR VVhen you are ouercome by the truth you slander our liues and speake euill of our persons WHIT. pag. 377. I do not slander you nor detract from you the world hath vnderstood long agoe what manner of men you vvere If you be grovvne better I should be glad of it But I knovv men haue iudged othervvise of this order and such as did not hate your Monasticall life For the Romish Cardinals and Priors did vvrite thus to the Pope himself There is another abuse amongst the orders of religious men for many are so deformed and out of order that they are a great scandale to the people and hurt much by their example VVe thinke that all orders ought to be abolished For they are altogether so drowned in sensuality and excesse making themselues drudges vnto their ambitions banquets and delights And to conclude in the whole course of their liues so behauing themselues as becommeth better sensuall and voluptuous persons proceeding out of the gardens of Epicures then graue teachers out of Christs Schoole Who knoweth not that the whole world crieth shame vpon you and hath done continually and most deseruedly you for all that blush not to lay those things to our charge which are well inough knowne to bee your owne fault your Prelates and Monkes whose goodly order and straite rule of seuere discipline you report differ as much from other men as the Tarrentines were wont to affirme that they excelled all others who giuing themselues wholy ouer to pleasures while the most tooke great paines and alwaies did something whereby to liue thought their life the only true life Such is and hath bin your life that others must seeme not to liue if that be to liue which you haue esteemed But what need I answere you any more of fasting and Monkish orders which haue not one Monke in your whole Church any thing resembling those of auncient time neither do you obserue the old manner of fasting but you goe on and vpbraide vs with fouler matters They that haue brought a bondage vpon mans will which haue taken away Christian funerals which haue burned Saints reliques can they say you be well pleased with Augustine we Campion haue wronged no Saints we haue neither burned their reliques nor taken away their funerals m DVR Therefore you haue taken away the reliques of the Saints and the funerals of Christians as superstitions and iniurious to the maiestie of God WHIT. pag. 370. Are you so vvithout iudgement that you cannot distinguish betvvixt things and the superstitious vse of them It is not these not any comely buriall vve dislike but Popish pompcions funerals and impious vvorshipping of reliques only we could not suffer any prophane superstition iniurious to the Maiestie and glorie of God and for this we haue the direction of God himselfe being our patterne whom we follow and Augustine also herein consenteth with vs But we haue captiuated the will of man and then you say how can we be well affected vnto Augustine well inough why not for say you he writ three bookes of free will A most witles and ridiculous collection Augustine writ three bookes of freewill ergo Augustine affirmeth that men haue freewill If that reason be currant then this also Augustine writ a booke of two soules against the Manichees also a booke of lying another of the quantity of the soule ergo Augustine defendeth two soules in a man ergo he praised lying ergo he attributeth greatnes quantity to the soule I pray you what difference is there I graunt Augustine writ those bookes you mention but they ouerthrow not our opinion who affirme that the will of man is in bondage if euer you had perused those bookes you would neuer haue affirmed it nor once named the bookes in this matter Augustine writ these bookes against the Manichees wherein he disputeth not of mans freewill which is the point in controuersie but of the cause of sinne which proceeded from freewill and he entituled those bookes of freewill because in them he intendeth to shew that the originall and beginning of sinne is to be found in mans freewill not in God This you might easily haue learned out of his retractations for thus he writeth Retract lib. 1.1 q. The discourse was vndertaken for them that deny sin to haue his originall from the free action of our will affirming that from this
did he not teach that grace was inbred in nature and your Popish crevv defendeth the same who seeth not then Pelagius sitting in your triumphant chariot Romish Church seek for the auncient Church of Rome you shall neuer find it for shee hath now lost not the life only but the very colour and appearance of the true Church Seeing therefore all other things faile you and also Histories themselues on which you seemed much to relie helpe you nothing what remaineth but one of these two either must you yeeld before the battaile or die in the battaile I wish you would once at length take knowledge of that which Nazianzen writeth We haue learned it to bee commendable aswell to yeeld vnto reason as with reason to ouercome EDMVND CAMPIAN The eighth Reason which is the Paradoxes of our aduersaries WHen that most excellent men I reuolue in my mind amongst many heresies wherewith I haue to doe certaine moÌ„strous opinions of such as are fantasticallie giuen I could not but condemne my self of slouthfulnes and cowardlines if making triall thereof I should bee afraid of any mans actiuitie and strength let him be as eloquent as yee would wish let him be as much exercised as you would desire yea let him be one that hath throughly studied all sorts of books yet must he needs be to seeke both for matter and words also when he shall vndertake to maintaine those his vnpossible propositions as follow for if he perhaps will giue his consent we will dispute of God of Christ of Man of sinne of Iustice of Sacraments and of Manners I will trie whether they dare maintaine their opinions such sayings as they lingring after their owne lure haue bruted abroad by their writings God graunt they will acknowledge these their owne a De Deo Cal. Inst lib. 1. cap. 18. lib 2. cap. 4. lib. 3. cap. 23. 24. Pet. Mart. in 1. Sam. 2. Methanct in cap. Rom. 8. VVittem 1524. Sic docet Luther in asser 36. in resol asser 36. in lib. de ser arbit Praesat in anno Phil. In Apol. Eccl. Ang. Vide Ench. pre an 1543 axiomes * This is most false not any one of our men haue affirmed that God is the author of sinne God is the author and cause of sinne willing prompting making commaunding and working it and their gouerning the wicked counsels of naughty men * This is false we do not so compare togither The adultery of Dauid and the treason of the Traitor Iudas was as properly the worke of God as the calling of S. Paul was This monstrous doctrine whereof Philip Melancthon was once ashamed yet Martin Luther from whose brest Philip suckt the same as highly extolleth as though it had been some heauenly oracle and therefore matcheth his said scholler in a manner with the Apostle S. Paul I will demaund also what mind Luther was of whom the English Caluinists affirme to haue been a man sent from God to lighten the Word when hee razed out of the Letany vsed in the Church this verse O blessed Trinitie and one God haue mercy vpon vs then in order I will proceed to the person of o De Christ Inst lib. 1. c. 13. nu 23. 24. Beza in Hess Beza contra Schmidel lib. de vnit Hypost dua in Christ. nat Christ demaund of them what these Paradoxes meane whereas the Catholike Church holdeth that Christ is the Son of God and God of God * Christ is Son of the Father but God of himselfe Caluin saith that Christ is God of himselfe and Beza affirmeth that he was not begotten of the substance of the Father also be it agreed saith he that there are in Christ two vnions consisting in one substance the one of the soule with the flesh and the other of the Diuinity with the humanity That place of S. c Caluin in Ioh. 10. v. 30 Iohn I and the Father are one doth not proue that Christ is God of one substance with God the Father yea and my soule * This is false reade the answere saith d Luther cont Laton Luther cannot brooke this word Homouotin Proceed yee forward e Bucer in Lu. 2. Calu. in â—ar Eu. Christ from his infancie was not full of grace but daily encreased in gifts of the mind as other men vsually doe and waxed wiser through experience euery daie more then other so that in his childhood he was subiect to f Luth. Loss Hem. Mela. in Euang. de 1. post Epist Marl. in Matt. 26. Cal. in Har. Euan Brentius in Luc. par 2. Hom. 65. in Catech. an 1551. in Ioh. Hom. 54. ignorance which is all one as if they should say that Christ was corrupted with the spot and staine of * This is false for all ignorance riseth not from originall corruption originall sinne But listen and you shall know more pernitious doctrine then this Christ when he praied in the garden and plentifully sweat both water and blood trembled through feare and sensiblie feeling of eternall damnation vttered certaine speeches without reason and without consent of the inward spirit yea speeches without consideration through the vehemencie of his griefe the which speeches as vnaduisedly spoken he quickly corrected Is there any more such stuff giue diligeÌ„t eare Christ wheÌ„ he cried out with a loud voice hanging on the Crosse My God my God why hast thou forsaken me was tormented with the flames of hell fire he let ouer-slip * This is false neither Birutius nor any of our men euer said so him g Caluin in Har. Euang. in eand sent Loss in Matth. 26. desperate speeches being no otherwise affectioned then if he should haue died an eternall death if they haue any worse stuffe then this let them emptie their gorge Christ they saie descended into hell that is Christ after he was dead tasted of the paines of hell nowhit h Schmidel conci de Pass câ—â—ua Dom. Aepinus Com. in Psal 16. lesse then the damned soules doe sauing that he was to be restored againe for as much as by his corporall death he could haue profited vs nothing it was therefore requisit that his i Caluin Instit lib. 2. cap. 16. Bren. in Catechis 1551. soule also should striue with eternall death and in this manner to tolerate the paine and paye the ransome of our sins And lest peraduenture any man should suspect that this escaped Caluin by ouersight the said k Instit lib. 2 cap. 16. nu 12. Caluin calleth you all forlorne knaues if any of you haue debated vpon this * They who deny this doctrine to be full of comfort may worthily be accounted desperate men comfortable doctrine oh cursed times oh cursed daies what miserable doctrine haue you bred vp Hath that precious and princely blood which gushed out of the torne pierced side of that most innocent Lambe Christ Iesus euery little drop of which blood for the worthines
impossibilities that al men may perceiue they were ascribed to vs by you most falsly and most impudently I do craue not only of all men of our Vniuersities but also of all ChristiaÌ„s that haue care of true religion and of their owne saluation that they will not suffer themselues to be misled by any lies and impostures of the aduersarie from that holy doctrine which they haue learned Wherefore I will set vpon these your monsters Campian that after I haue stopt your mouth being ful of blasphemy both the glory of God which is in hand and our innocency which is oppugned may be preserued from your violence You say the disputation shall be if they please of God of Christ of Man of Sinne of Righteousnes of the Sacraments of Manners But we are readie to dispute with you not only about these but also about other points which are now in difference of the Scripture of the Church of the Bishop of Rome of Transubstantiation of Freewill of Indulgences of Purgatorie and of the rest of your doctrines Neuerthelesse either many are deceiued or else you do rather thinke of fighting then disputing And I hope that you shall once haue freedome granted you for that disputation which you so often desire But now let vs attend how you endeuour to make vs know these positions of our men God say you is the willing Of God suggesting efficient commaunding and working author and cause of sinne and such a one as therein gouerneth the impious counsels of the wicked It is an horrible thing and not to be vttred Campian that any one should make God the author of sinne such an one were worthy to be smitten instantly by the Lord with a thunderbolt into the deepest pit of hell If a DVR But if I do not shew that Caluin is the maintainer of this so horrible ablasphemy I refuse no punishment for so great a slaÌ„der thus he writeth Instit lib. 1. cap. 18. sect 1. Absolom defiling his fathers bed with incest committed a detestable crime yet God pronounceth that this was his worke WHIT pag. 525. I wonder that there is any maÌ„ found like to Campian who will â—uow that to be said and defended by our men which they haue euer most plainly condemned as Melanct. on Rom. 1. c. Pet. Mart on Iudg 9. and Caluin on Iam. 1. vers 13. Beza against Castellio of eternall predestination for touching these words which you obiect to Caluin what doth he affirme but that which the Scripture hath deliuered 2. Sam 12.11.12 vnlesse perhapâ— you will deny that to be Gods deed which God himselfe witnesseth to be his Neither will your sophisme follow hereupon ergo God is the author of sin for Caluin ascribeth not the sinne but the worke to God For if in that incest you can consider nothing but sinne it must bee imputed to your ignorance Caluin or Martyr or Philip or Luther or any of vs do affirme it I do not denie but we are all guilty of horrible blasphemie and impiety If I would largely prosecute this whole cause which you doe but touch I should make no end therfore I will declare in few words both what we teach and wherein you lie We professe not only that God is good but also goodnes it self yea good in himself in his owne esseÌ„ce in whom there is no euill from whom nothing but good can come who is so good that all his doings be very good and that not so much as any of his thoughts can be euil These things we speake these things we teach these things we beleeue with our harts and confesse with our mouthes Seeing therefore God is so perfectly good that all his things be in a certaine excellent manner good it hath been in times past inquired and most grauely disputed wheÌ„ce that euil sprung which had spread so far what might be the cause of this euill This question Augustine often handled because of the Mâ—nichies In 12. quest 79. art 1. 2. and therein also Thomas of Aquine imployed himselfe much and diligently Wee say that this euill was brought in by the b DVR But Caluin saith that when the Diuel moueth men to sinne hee is rather the instrument of God than thâ— author oâ— sinne Instit lib. 2. cap. 4. Ser. 5. WHIT pag. 528. This allegation is full of slander This is Caluins meaning that albeit the Diuell be rather an instrument than the author of the action yet hee is the supreme and chiefe of the sinne in the action Diuell who although hee were made good in the beginning by the Lord yet by his freewill he made defection from the Lord and sinned â—nd did perswade and was the author vnto man to commit sin from hence whatsoeuer is sin either in the diuels or in men did wholy flow and not any the least peece of it had being from God whom we do maintaine by infinite testimonies of Scripture to be the author of no c DVR But what is more often in the mouth of Caluin all Caluinists â—hen this that God doth not only permit but will sinne that he doth moue and thrust vs forward to sinne nay that be doth by the efficacie of his will impose a necessity of sinning vpon vs WHIT. pag. 529. God willeth sinne but not simplie and so farre forth as it is sinne but as it is a chastisement so 1. Pet. 4.19 and God doth stirre vp and moue that sinne which lieth hidde in vs yet he doth not frame or put sinne into vs as the Physitian is not the author of dâ—seases when he purgeth out the most corrupt humours And man not indued with the holy Ghost falleth of his ovvne accord into a necessity of sinning so as he sinneth not by any fault of God but by his ovvne fault sinne and so do teach it in our schooles and Churches Psal 44. Zach. 8.17 Gen. 18.25 1. Ioh. 1.5 For he hateth sin he loueth righteousnes he which is the Iudge of the whole earth it must needs be that he is euery way most iust God is light and there is no darknes in him And these are the things which wee teach the people concerning God that all may vnderstand hee is a most seuere reuenger of all sinnes Now then Campian with what face dare you seeing you know these to bee our doctrines impute vnto vs such a slaÌ„der not to be vttred in so much as you affirme that we speake and thinke things flat contrary But you say Caluin and Martyr haue taught this this thing Nay rather they are wholy bent vpoÌ„ this that they maintaine that can by no meanes bee It would be long to set down their words I do beseech the Reader to reade with an attentiue and peaceable mind these same very places which Campian hath abused vnto slander And if they doe not both deny most plainly that God is the author and cause of sin and also if they do not proue that they
do most truly deny this which they deny I will submit my selfe to any punishment But yet there is doubtlesse somewhat which these men say and which Campian doth attribute to them what that is let vs consider There was a certaine inueterate opinion among men that whatsoeuer sinne was committed by any all that was done God only permitting and not willing it now they did separate this permission vtterly from all will of God so as they affirmed that God did no way will those things which he had permitted But now seeing the Lord is to be held to d DVR Here you while you vvould defend that God is not the author of sinne yet do nothing else but make him the author of sinne for if he do not only permit but also willeth that man sinne tell me which way if the will of God be the first and effecting cause of sinne God is not the author of sinne WHIT. pag 535. There is no need that I should expound to you that which you demaund for we do not make the will of God to be the first and â—ffecting cause of the sin but of the action which as it commeth from a wicked man is vitious so then not the vvill of God but the naughtines of the instrument is the cause that those things are done vvicâ—edly which the Lord doth rightly permit those things which are done not only that they might bee done as if hee did no whit intermeddle himselfe in those things nor had nothing at all to do therein but also doth by his speciall prouidence so gouerne all things as that nothing in the whole world happeneth against thaâ— that he hath willed decreed certainly it caÌ„not be denied that God doth will after a sort those things which the wicked doe that this wil of God is so effectual that in the wicked actions of men God doth execute his owne decree For in sinne two things are to be considered the action it selfe and the corruption of the action which thing your Aquine might teach you which also he learned from Augustine The action so farre forth as it is a thing and a worke is good for God effecteth it but so farre forth as this selfe same action is vitious it proceedeth not from God but from the corrupt nature of man Although therefore God who worketh all things in all and against whose will nothing can bee done doth bring to passe a certaine worke of his in the euill actions of men yet hee doth those things that are iust nor ought he any way to be thought to be guiltie of the sinnes of the men themselues therefore that which a wicked man doth that as it is a sinne and as it hath the proper nature of sinne the Lord neither willeth nor suggesteth nor biddeth nor effecteth nay he detesteth and reuengeth it and iudgeth it worthy of euerlasting punishment But that which is spoken of the thing that you applie malitiously and vnskilfully to the qualitie of the thing that you may conclude that God because he is the author and cause of the action is also the author and cause of whatsoeuer corruption is found in that action I will not prosecute any long digression nor ouerwhelme you with that multitude of Scrâ—ptures which I could here vse for I haue not taken vpon me to expound any poynt in the Schooles but briefely to confute your filthie slaunder Now answere me Campian doe you thinke that that which any one doth how wicked soeuer is done whether God will or no If you hold that any thing is done against Gods wil what prouidence or omnipotencie doe you leaue him For he which permits that to be done which he would by no meanes haue to be done it is certaine that he is not endued with so great power as that he can forbid that which he would not haue done Wherefore you must needâ— confesse that all things which are done are done by the will of God not that God doth will that is e DVR You say that God willeth euill but that he doth not allow it as if God could will that vvhich he doth not allovv or as if he could not allovv his ovvne iudgement and decree WHIT. pag. 538. It is no hard thing to proue this that God doth vvill many things vvhich he doth not allovv for if is do happen to Princes that they doe not simplie allovv of vvarre as being dangerous to them and their subiects but they vvould vvillingly shun it it they could and yet they are compelled sometime to vvill it for the publike peace sake and so to a Magistrate vvho spareth the liues of his people and neuer liketh of murther yet novv and then doth vvillinglie deliuer some one or other malefactor vnto the executioner shall vve thinke that the like cannot happen vnto God that hee vvilleth some thing in some sort and for some other respect vvhich hee doth not allovv simplie and of it selfe Thus then God cannot but allovv the action vvhich he hath destinated to a certaine end but he doth not allovv the corruption and sinne of the action vvhereof not he but man is the author allow the sinnes of men but because by this means he doth exercise his iudgement and execute his decree which he both willeth and alloweth God can vse euill instruments well and bring to passe by wicked men those things which agree with his will and liking Now whatsoeuer things God doth by euill instruments those he neither doth nor alloweth as they be euill things but as they be his good and holy iudgements so as although he both willeth those things which be done doth moue the wils of men and doth exercise in euill instruments though vnknowne to the instruments themselues an effectuall power and doth gouerne the wicked counsailes of impious men that they can doe nothing which hee willeth not yet both men are wicked albeit they doe those things which the Lord willeth and the Lord is holy howsoeuer he willeth those things which the wicked doe This may be made manifest by examples but I had rather you should heare Augustine than me When the Father saith he deliuered the sonne August Epist. 48. ad Vincent and the Lord his body and Iudas the Lord by treacherie why is God iust in this deliuerie and man guiltie but because in one thing which they did the cause was not one for which they did it Againe In that the wicked sinne it is their owne in that in sinning they doe this or that it comes from the power of God who diuides the darkenes as he seeth good And in another place It skilleth much saith he what will agreeth to man and what to God and to what end each one referreth his will so as it may be allowed or disallowed For God fulfilleth certaine of his wils being surely good by the euill wils of euill men as by the ill willed Iewes through the good will of the father Christ was slain which was so
in corners that Christ is reproched when wee say he was tormented with so great griefes of minde But it is so farre off Campian that I doe either denie or dissemble those things which you now obiect that I doe teach and auow them openly and freely And though the whole nation of Iesuits should set vpon me yet I will neuer be ashamed to celebrate Christs mercie which I see to bee violated by them with vnspeakable iniuries For what thinke you was it that Christ felt which brought so great sadnes and vexation to him that it wrung from him a bloody sweate was it only death 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which takes away life and sense Doe you thinke that Christ could be broken so with the feare of that death that he should conceiue so much griefe in his minde to make him sweate water and blood for the desire he had to escape tasting of that cup which hee came to drinke of Did Christ so much abhorre this death which the Martyrs haue gone vnto ioyfull and cheerefull That were indeede to cast a greater reproch vpon Christ while ye would auoide the lesser Wherefore that which raised so great horrors in Christ was the most bitter wrath of God against mankinde which Christ must needes haue suffered for a time For the whole weight of our sinnes was imposed vpon Christ which brought with it a most heauie remembrance of Gods wrath Seeing therefore Christ our Mediatour being laden with our sins did suffer the greatnes of Gods displeasure and did alone endure the punishment of our sinnes certainly he did quake as man and did expresse those incredible sorrowes of his minde many waies Hence came that speech vpon the Crosse My God my God why hast thou forsaken me which he vttered not fainedly but from his heart not despairingly as you wickedly write but vpon the consideration of Gods wrath which then he was to be subiect vnto m DVR Christ truly was the Sonne of God who knew nothing in himselfe worthie of wrath and so could not feare the paines of hell WHIT. pag. 558. You dispute wittily as if he were not the Sonne of Man also and sustained the person of sinfull men Neither did he so feare hell as you imagine but when the punishment of vs all was vpon him alone he must needs as a man be greatly affected and moued with it For God was exceedingly incensed against vs for our sinnes Christ interposed himselfe and he alone vnâ—erwent the greatnes of that wrath powred vpon him he therfore that saith Christ felt nothing diminisheth the greatnes of sin the iustice of God and the merit of Christ I hat he was not swallowed vp of those torments it must be imputed to the power of his diuine nature DVR But how could hee thinke himselfe forsaken of God vvho offered himselfe vvholy to God WHIT. pag. 559. If be did nor feele this defection why did hee say vainely and rashly that he was forsaken he oâ—â—ed himselfe by his eternall spirit that is his Diuinity Hebr. 9.14 Therefore this freewill offering did not hinder but that he might feele in his mind those sorrowes which men should haue suffered This is that Hell of which Christ while he was aliue and not as you obiect against Caluin after he was dead did taste And certainly this vexation which Christ endured at that time did equall after a sort the very paines of hell But these things are reproued by you because they bee not vnderstood For the Papists with their dull hearts cannot conceiue what Christ performed for vs by his death and what paines hee endured for the satisfying of his Father Therefore they thinke wrong is done to Christ when we say he suffered those things which hee both would and ought to haue suffered for vs. For it was necessarie not onely that Christ should die in n DVR Christ being God and man satisfied the diuine iustice not by the greatnes and multitude of his punishment but by the weight of his actions euerie one of vvhich is sufficient to be a full price of mans redemption Neither vvas it necessary that Christ should vndergoe the same punishment vvhich man should haue suffered as if any man vvould free another from prison vvho is cast into it for debt it is not necessary that be go into prison for him Besides who will say that the body of man aid sinne it is man that sinneth not the bodie WHIT. pag. 562. See I pray you what followeth vpon your defence that it was needlesse that Christ should die at all for if any action of him being God and man would haue satisfied Gods iustice and wrought mans redemption in vaine did hee shead his blood and suffer death But if this be contrary to the decree iustice of God and not euery punishment but extreame sufferings both of body and soule was to be vndergone as Christ suffered in his body the most bâ—â—ter â—eath so did he in his soule exquisite and extreame sorrowes And out of your similitude it will follow â—s well that he need not to haue descended from heauen to haue been made man or to haue suffered any sorrowes and yet who knoweth not that not only the debtors themselues but their suâ—â—ies must be cast into prison till the creditor be saâ—â—fied And seeing that in such a suerty as this not the bare payment of money but a reall suffering of grieuous paines was necessary why should we doubt but Christ hath most truly accomplished the part of a suertie Lastly if the bodie doe not sinne why should it suffer the punishment of sinne for is it equall that the body which in your iudgment doth not sinne should be grieuously and eternally punished for sinne And if it bee as you say that the man doth sinne then must the body haue a finger in it for the soule of it selfe is not a man And if Christ tooke mans sinne vpon him it was certainly the sin of the whole man because he hath redeemed the whole bodie but also in his soule wrastle with death because not onely mans bodie but also his soule had offended God and deserued euerlasting death And they that speak against this doctrine being very full of diuine comfort if Caluin doe prosecute somewhat eagerly no good man ought iustly to bee displeased with him for this cause But that you cannot abide and therefore you cry out Oh wicked daies oh monstrous times It may be you haue seene a monster at Rome or rather many monsters which trouble you now with furious thoughts and vrge you to make an outcrie But we Vniuersitie men are not woont much to bee moued with the clamours of mad men For he ouercomes in the Schooles not who can crie out most shrilly but who caÌ„ dispute most sitly vnto the truth But I pray you Campian spare your voyce a while and gather your wits together and then I trust you will be somewhat milder anon when you haue rested you a
little for I doe not heare that this is the continuall dint of your minde and I doe not doubt but you may bee pacified with words You say that Christ hath contumelious iniurie offered him by vs. Wherefore because he is by this meanes too much abased and much is detracted from his Maiestie Concerning that Nazianzen answers you Is Christ therefore spoiled of his honour Nazianz. because hee is become humble for thy sake Now how great bitternes of griefe Christ felt learne of Rabanus Rabanus in Catena Thoma if happely you regard him Thus doth he expound those words of Christ Why hast thou forsaken mee Our Sauiour saith he spake this carrying about him our affections who being in danger thinke our selues to be forsaken For his humane nature was forsaken because of sinne but because the Sonne of God was made our Aduocate he bewailes their miserie whose fault he tooke vpon him And Hierome though he did differ from this opinion because of the Arrians Hieronym yet the very power of truth did wring frō him some confession Concerning Christs prayer wherein he entreated that that cup might be taken away thus he writeth Neuerthelesse returning to himselfe that which he had refused somewhat fearefully in his nature as man he ratifieth in his nature as he was God and the Sonne Yet not as I will but as thou wilt saith he let not this be done which I speake in my humane affection but that for which I came downe to the earth by thy will Ambrosius And Ambrose vseth these words to Gratian As he tooke my will so he tooke my sorrow Finally Melch. Canus lib. 12. cap. 13. I will annexe the iudgement of Melchior Canus to whom you owe much on good cause that you may know the opinion of a flat Catholike touching this matter Surely saith he it was conuenient that the Sonne of God being to exhibite himselfe a sacrifice for sinne should take vpon him not onely the sorrowes of the bodie and of the sensitiue facultie of the soule but also the o DVR But it followeth not that so he did dispaire or feele the paines of hell WHIT. pag. 564. There was no dāger lest Christ might perchance despaire nor is it necessary that whosoeuer sustaineth the paines of hell for a while the same should bee ouerwhelmed with perpetuall despaire many of the godly are sometime afflicted with a very deepe sense of Gods anger which they yet ouercome through Gods spirit much more then could Christ ouercome all the paines of hell torments of the spirit and the griefe of the will to the end that that most acceptable sacrifice to God for all our sinnes might be by all meanes broken and bruised And a little after Hee being forsaken of God and destitute vtterly of all comfort did not reioyce You say that Bucer in comparison of this madnes was modest although hee were very impudent who takes Hell in the Creed for the graue I let passe your reproch which you lacke not in any place nor am I disposed to extend any longer answere about this Hell The matter is in some difference among learned men who albeit they agree not so well among themselues about the thing yet they agree herein excellent well in that they affirme that the Papists doe very wickedly vnderstand it of Christs descent into Hell For as for Hell whether it signifie the buriall of Christ as Bucer thought or that sorrowe of minde wherewith Christ was affected a little before his death as Caluin would haue it yet we retaine the Article and we teach that Christ did descend into Hell If that cannot bee otherwise vnderstood than thus that Christ did descend into I know not what Limbus Patrum wherein you suppose the Fathers to haue been and that hee did out of that place bring with him an infinite multitude of holy men I will confesse that Bucer did erre and that Caluin made a foule slip But those your dreames concerning Hell are worthie to be buried in Hell it selfe Now as for that you say that it was in deliberation in a certaine conuenticle at London how that article might bee taken out of the Creed this certainly is the first time that euer I heard of it neither doe I giue any credit either to your selfe or to your wretched Cheiny who told you this tale Although if the ancient Creeds of the Romane and East Church did lacke that Article as hee affirmeth whosoeuer hee is that in Cyprians workes expounded the Creed with his Commentaries perhaps their fault was p DVR Js it a small fault to crosse out of the Apostles Creed Christ his descension into hell It is solid in the Creed of Athanasius where there is mention of buriall and in the Nicene Creed when his buriall is mentioned this descension is not expressed And who seeth not that it was necessary that his soule must descend into the common place of other soules WHIT. pag. 568. If it be a haynous fact to put out this article then the Church of Rome which you say cannot erre is guiltie of this as Ruffinus writeth in exposit Symb. And it is no strange thing when in very few auncient Creeds it is to be found I could produce fiftie Creeds which haue it not in certaine it is found but then saith Ruffinus it must be vnderstood by the precedent article for it is the same with that which saith he was buried And this was Bucers opinion which the two Creeds of Athanasius and Nice do confirme for if they be so diuersly set downe that in some of them is mention of his buriall only in others only of his descension it is manifest that there is one and the same sense in them and that to be buried is as much as to descend into hel and this as much as that Finallie it is true his soule went into the common receptacle of soules but how proue you that that place is in hell for if his soule went into Paradise it could not go into hell vnlesse Paradise be there lesse which would imitate the Church of Rome which you hold cannot erre Of Man Now you make your question concerning man and you bring vs in speaking on this fashion The image of God is vtterly blotted out in man no sparke of good being left For so say you haue Illyricus and Caluin taught I know well the iudgement of Illyricus which I doe not thinke ought to bee laide to our charge For you are not ignorant Campian that his opinion touching the image of God and of the nature of originall sinne hath been reprooued and confuted by our men he went somewhat farther than he should I beleeue he did it that he might remooue himselfe farthest off from you whom hee throughly hated But I would he had amended some things then certainely had he been a very excellent man As for Caluin you doe him open wrong whom you ioyne with Illyricus in the fellowship of this
any do denie to be good and holy he may well be held blasphemous against the holy Ghost As for that you both faine that we speake these things and also expresse for what cause wee speake them you bewray your wonderfull wisedome which for those things that are not at all can set downe a reason wherefore they be But we doe willingly preach faith and doe easily permit it to bee contemned of you For you that defend nature against grace and doe trust rather to your owne power than to Christs mercie and doe make voide the promises by precepts cannot haue an honourable opinion of faith You neuer keepe your standing Of Sinne. Campian and you begin the battaile like a runnaway For you haue a wandring and vnstable wit as it seemeth You oppose Illyricus to vs againe in the same cause whose testimonie ought not to be of force against vs. For herein I professe my selfe no lesse an aduersarie to him than your selfe I had almost said than to your selfe For what an vniust and vnreasonable thing is it that you should taxe that opinion as defended by vs which your selfe knoweth to be condemned by our Churches Obiect our owne opinion to vs Campian if you can obiect any wee are not such as that we should thinke whatsoeuer Illyricus could as being a man erre in did any whit concerno vs. But either Illyricus must needes be drawne into this taxation or else this place was quite to be left voide by you For beside Illyricus I thinke you haue no man that thinkes so If you desire to know our opinion of this matter I confesse indeed that that defence of Illyricus did seeme euer very absurd to me For it both smels of the follie of the Manichies and it maketh two soules in a regenerate man and which is a greater matter it destroyes the soule That was alwaies the iudgemeÌ„t of the Catholike Church which I professe to be ours that the substance of the soule was not quite slaine by sinne but onely charged and infected with vitious qualities and that sinne is no inward substance of the soule but an r DVR The Catholike Church neuer beleeued that sinne was an accident or qualitie but only a priuation for if it were an accident God should be the cause and author of it WHIT. pag. 573. But this priuation is it not an accidentall thing vvhy then make you a scruple in vvords vvhen you vnderstand the sense An accident is commonly called that vvhich is in some substance but is no part of it vvhich may either be absent or present without the corruption of the subiect and such a thing euery man knovveth sinne is And though I confesse that the nature of sinne consisteth in a priuation yet it is not a bare priuation as you may learne ouâ— of your Thomas For. 1.2 quaest 82. art 1. he saith sinne is not a meere priuation but a corrupt habit like vnto a disease vvhereby not only health is taken avvay but bad humours are brought vpon the bodie And the Schoole men vvhen they make priuation of originall iustice to be the forme of originall sinne and the matter to be concupiscence or a corrupt inclination of the faculties of the soule vvhat doe they teach but that in sinne there is some positiue thing as Thomas vseth to call it But vvhy do I endeuour to refell you for vvhom Physike is fitter then a refuration As for your reason it hath no force for God is not to be accounted the author of all accidencies but indirectly and by accident Basil saith That the roote and cause of sinne is in our selues euen our freewill accident Å¿ DVR Basil saith not that sin is an accident or a quality but an affection coÌ„trary to vertue WHIT. pag. 575. Then must it be somevvhat for nothing cannot be contrarie to vertue Basill writeth truly in that hee denieth that sinne is any liuing substance or indued with a soule Basil iâ—ubâ—â—p hons 2. August de nuptijs lib. 1. cap. 25. but a qualitie contrarie to the vertue of the soule Augustine t DVR Augustine vvill accuse you for slandering him because he spake not of sin but of concupiscence vvhich he accounted to be no sinne WHIT. pag. 576. Doth Augustine account concupiscence no sinne vvhy then calleth he it an affection of an euill quality vvhy doth he compare it to a disease vvhy doth he demaund the question hovv concupiscence should remaine in the regenerate vvhose sinnes are all remitted if it vvere not a sinne his ansvvere proueth it yet more fully For he saith concupiscence is remitted in Baptisme not that it should be no sinne at all as you vvould haue it but that it should not be imputed for a sinne If it vvere no sinne hovv could it be imputed for a sinne Finally August cont â—ulian lib. 5 cap. 3. affirmeth that it is a sinne and a punishment of sin and a cause of sinne and that in the regenerate It is manifest in the place that he speaketh of that concupiscence against vvhich the spirit lusteth and vvhich in vvithout the consent of the vvill It at any time he denie it to be a sinne it iâ— not simplie but in opposition to actuall sinne for hovv should that be nothing vvhich is remitted in Baptisme vvhich Christ satisfied for by his blood or is God angry vvith vs for nothing It must therfore needs be sin Originall sinne saith he remaineth not substantially as it were some bodie or spirit but it is a certaine affection of an euill qualitie like a disease Finally Ambrose most plainly Ambros in Rom. 6. c. 7. u DVR Ambrose his vvords refell your error WHIT. pag. 577. Nay they refell your error For hee saith it is a straying from good Novv this straying is an action and not a meere priuation And you your selues earnestly defend that sin is an action If it be an action then an accident then no meere priuation theÌ„ not nothing How dwelleth sin in the flesh seeing it is no substance but a straying from good Therfore let vs if you please send away the suspition of this error imposed by you vpon vs to the author himselfe As for that you adde that it is a thing commonly held by this filthie sect that all sinnes be equall verily nothing could be spoken more impudently Pardon me Campian if I answere you somewhat sharpely for your vnmodest and intolerable impudencie wrung that terme from me Are you so far spent that you are not able to charge vs with any true crime but shamelessely to obiect those things against vs from which we of all others are farthest off For who did euer more vehemently disallow or more strongly confute this paradoxe of the Stoiks than our Diuines whom you now pursue All records of these times may be witnesses hereof our bookes Churches and Schooles be witnesses as also both the ciuill and Church Discipline may be a witnesse Did you thinke that you could creepe
if charity be truly in vs vve haue true iustice and vvell said Augustine Charitie begun is iustice begun charitie encreased is iustice encreased great charity is great iustice perfect charitie is perfect iustice WHIT. pag. 583. All is true you say touching charitie Loue your neighbour as the law requireth and you haue fulfilled the second Fable but this you cannot doe therefore be not brag in the opinion of your charitie which if it were as great as euer any man had yet it should be farre short of that the Law requireth neither can it make you iust As for Augustine wee confesse as much as hee saith but this is not the iustice which freâ—th vs from the wrath of God for that neuer increaseth or groweth but is euer most absolute and perfect that is Christ his obedience imputed vnto vs by faith Of charitie August Epist 29. writeth thus As long as charity may be encreased that verily vvhich is lesse is faulty by that vvhich is faulty there is none iust vpon earth goodwill and fauour whereby the Lord embraceth vs in Christ and forgiueth vs our sinnes and receiueth vs into fauour we place it in God but the effects of this Grace are in vs which effects are these that we do by the holy Ghost perceiue that wee are loued of God that we beleeue in God and repose al hope of saluation in that mercy of God We do not therefore take away all grace from man and place it only in Gods fauour but that first grace wherby he hath reconciled vs to himselfe in Christ and wherin our saluation is contained that alone wee place in God which being felt by vs faith hope and charity and other vertues do follow it which are ours and resident in vs. But we deny that position of yours of infused grace whereby you defend that the grace whereby we are iustified is a certaine habite situate in our minds within and we acknowledge no other iustifying y DVR Why do you not then freely confesse that you doe place all grace only in the fauour of God vvithout vs vvhich fauour doth neither amend the wicked nor purge nor illuminate nor enrich them but only dissemble their old remaining stinking chanell God winking at it WHIT. pag. 584. You cease not to trouble vs with your ignorance for doth it follow that wee remoue all grace from vs because wee place iustifying grace which is the mercy of God in Christ not in vs but in God only for beside this grace there is another grace communicated to all the Saints wherby their soules â—re purged and renewed This consisteth in faith and in the fruits of faith which they coÌ„monly cal Grace infused therfore that chanell of sin doth remaine not within them that haue attained true righteousnes as you slander vs to teach but by the power of the holy Ghost it is daily purged out yet so that as loÌ„g as we liue there remaine some reliques of sin old Adam For if that chanel were so purged that no blots of sinne did remaine in vs neither would S. Paul complaine of the law of his members and the body of death Rom. 7.23.24 Neither should wee neede the renuing of the spirit 2. Cor. 4.16 grace but the great and free mercy of God whereby hee did elect and predestinate vs in Christ before all eternitie vnto life euerlasting and hath called vs in time and iustified vs. z DVR But vvhat place of Scripture doth distinguish iustification from sanctification S. Paul doth not 1. Cor. 6.11 Rom. 6.13 That also is a strange thing that faith should iustifie vs and not sanctifie vs but more strange that Christ should impute his righteousnes to vs that vve may be iust and yet not holy and sanctified WHIT. pag 586. Who can reade the Scripture specially the Epistle to the Romanes and not find these two distinguished for in the first part of it he treateth of iustification in the latter of sanctification vvhat is more manifest then that he vvriteth Rom 8.30 vvhom he hath called those hee hath iustified vvhom hee hath iustisted those hee hath glorified Now this glorification signifieth the glorious renouation which is begun heere and perfected in another life as your Thomas vpon this place hath obserued Againe 1. Cor. 1.30 Is not heere iustification and sanctification distinguished iustification and sanctification are inseparable yet must they be distinguished which because you do not you place iustification in sanctification Your place out of the Epistle to the Corinthes doth plainly distinguish them Your second place sheweth that a kind of iustificatioÌ„ is in sanctification but it is not that perpect iustice by which we are iustified before God but only an imperfect one As for your wondeâ—s and strange things they come from your ignorance for we haue neuer sepaâ—ated these two but affirme that he who is by faith partaker of Christ his righteouâ—nes must needs haue the old man crucified and the body of sinne destroyed in him that he may no longer serue sinne For grace infused wherein regeneration and sanctification consisteth and which the Scriptures call the new man is not strong enough to iustifie vs a DVR Grace infused and our inherent righteousnes though it be not perfect yet it is true iustice and doth iustifie vs. WHIT. pag. 58â— By this you ouerthrow your doctrine of iustification for that iustice which doth reconcile vs to God ought to be most perfect that such as neither the law nor God himselfe can require a more perfect That which is not perfect is in it kind corrupt If then â—n imperfect iustice can please God then a corrupt thing will please him and so should he not be perfectly iust but being most iust that only pleaseth him which is according to the prescription of the law most perfect Luk. 10.27.28 Leuit. 18.5 because it neuer satisfieth the law of God in this life and ought euery day to be restored and aspire to greater perfection For so Paul saith 2. Cor. 4.16 Although our outward man perish yet our inward man is renewed daily which place Augustine hath very often vsed in this cause You see therfore both what grace we place in God and what we confesse to be infused into our hearts For as for that you say wee barke out that grace is not strong enough for the resisting of sinne therein you goe about thorough our sides to wound Paul himself vppon whoÌ„ this your reproch reboundeth Rom. 7.18.19.21.23 For though he were indued with infused grace as much as any other yet he denieth that he could attaine to perfect that which is good b DVR S. Paul saith only that hee vvas assayed and tempted by those motions but seeing it is not sinne vvhere the consent of the vvill is not bee saith it vvas not hee that did it but the flesh for hee doubted not but grace vvas sufficient for him vvhereby be might ouercome all these seeing he had the
without faith but to his perdition who receiueth the Sacrament that monster I doe abhorre and detest with mine whole hart You adde therfore they haue made no more reckoning of the Baptisme of Christ then of Iohns that is a meere ceremonie I am not ignorant what the Fathers thought of the Baptisme of Iohn But I heed what the Scriptures teacheth not what they imagined In them both there was the u DVR But Matth. 3.11 Iohn baptised with water only Christ with the Spirit WHIT. pag. 669. Here is no comparison betweene the Baptisme but the persons for not Iohn only but not Peter nor any Minister of the Gospel can giue the holy Ghost to those whom they doe baptise Men giue but the outward signe it is Christ who giueth the Spirit DVR VVhy vvere they Act. 19 4.5 baptised againe vvhom Iohn had baptised if it be the same Baptisme WHIT. pag. 671. They were not rebaptised as Ambrâ—se saith de Spirit Sanct. lib. 1. cap. 3. And the 5. vers being S. Pauleâ— words they are to be vnderstood not of those Ephesians but of the people whom John baptised As if S. Paul had said John taught those who came to his Baptisme to beleeue in Christ who was to come and they when they heard it were baptised in the name of the â—ord Iesus From this then can be gathered no differencâ— of thesâ— tvvo Baptismes same ceremonie the same doctrine and the same grace If there were any thing vnlike in these things I refuse not to confesse that the Baptisme of Iohn and Christ were diuers Now Iohn ioyned repentance Mat. 3 2.1â— Luk. 3.3 which is the fruit of true regeneration with his Baptisme and offâ—ed this Baptisme for the remission of sinnes If the Baptisme of Iohn wanted not repentance and remission of sinnes I see not why it should bee held so much different from the Baptisme of Christ And what is the cause * DVR Because that Baptisme did prepare men to regeneration of vvhich preparation Christ had no need WHIT. pag. 673. This is but your coyned distinction for the Fathers speake and answere otherwise Chrysâ—st in 3. Matth. not that he should receiue remission of sinne by â—aptisme but that be might leaue saâ—ctified waters for those who should after be baptised And August in cat â—ur in 3. Matth. Our Sauiour would therefore be baptised not that bee might bee sanctified but that he might sanctifie the waters for vs. why the Fathers demand wherfore Christ who needed no regeneration did come to the Baptisme of Iohn but because they iudged that his Baptisme had the power of regeneration Concerning that which you annexe If you haue it it is well if you want it there is no hurt beleeue and you shall be saued before you bee baptised wee doe not speake so loosely as you imagine For wee will not haue it to be in any ones choice to be baptised if hee will and to leaue it if hee will not Yet wee doe not thinke that Baptisme is so x DVR VVhat If without Baptisme infants may obtaine eternall life is it not your iudgements that it is no burt to them though they want Baptisme But Christ thought farre â—therwise Ioh. 3.5 WHIT. pag. 675. It is a wicked and batbarouâ— opinion to thinke that they who die before they can come to Baptisme are damned For who will say that the infants of the Iewes who died before the eight day did pâ—rish And when in former ages they deferred Baptisme till the houre of death did they think it so absolute necessary Will you say that an infant is not of the nuÌ„ber of the elect because God wil that he die before Baptisme if you will you shall be accounted bold rash and impious As for the place of Iohn Christ doth not thinke that none can come into heauen which wanteth the outward Baptisme The theefe was with Christ in Paradise and yet was vnbaptised with the outward Baptisme But the truth is by water Christ meaneth there the Spirit as appeareth by conference of places Matth. 3.11 As there fire so here water signifieth the power of the Spirit Ioh. 4.10 simplie necessarie to saluation that he that is not entred by Baptisme must needs perish euerlastingly For the saluation of a Christian man coÌ„sisteth in the mercie of God which is not so tyed bound to any Sacraments y DVR God hath shewed his vvill Ioh. 3.5 And â—hen S. Paul makes all by nature the Children of wrath Ephes 2.3 If there be no remedie against this euill in the Scripture but Baptisme what can be but that they vvho die vvithout Baptisme must needs die in the same condition WHIT. 677. God in no place hath shewed this to bee his will that they who die without Baptisme shall perish Of the words of Christ haue â—in spoken which if they be vnderstood of Baptisme they belong only to those who are of growne yeares That by no other meanes we can be freed from the miserable state of nature but by Baptisme is very false For the Spirit of God doth in and without the Sacrament doth communicate his graces as that he cannot saue those whom he will not haue perish without them Where the opportunity of Baptisme is not Gods promise alone is abundantly sufficient of it selfe But whosoeuer either neglecteth Baptisme through heedlesnes or boldly contemneth it him we condemne of very hainous sin For he doth both diminish the Maiestie of Christ and also refuseth his owne saluation But he that committeth neither shal not answere for the fault of another Therefore verie right was that iudgement of Bernard z DVR He speaketh not of infants but of those vvho indued with true faith were preuented by an vntimely death that they could not be baptised WHIT. pag. 680. How truly you speake we may iudge out of the same Epistle For he thus writeth VVho is ignorant that in former times they had other remedies against originall sinne besides Baptisme for to Abraham and his seed vt as the Sacrament of Circumcision giuen to this end But in other nations so many as vvere found faithfull vvee beleeue that they vvho vvere of yeares vvere sanctified by faith and sacrifices but the parents faith did profit their infants yea and vvas sufficient for them If this was so before Christ shall we thinke the condition of infants is now worse not the want but the contempt of Baptisme is damnable Bernard in Epist. ad Hugon In the rest that follow as being small matters you doe but trisle For neither doe you your selfe declare any thing of your owne opinions nor can you reproue any thing in ours But I long to know what you thinke of the faith of Infants I suppose you wil grant that they haue grace For say you Baptisme conferreth grace But will you not yeeld that they haue faith I wish therefore you would teach me to the end you may draw me wholy into your opinion how