not vouchsafe the Doctours an answere shall they be sent away before they haue receiued their answere Camp They wrote vpon occasion against an heretike hauing affiance in workes Charke Be it so then they write aswell against Papists hauing affiance in workes Camp They had affiance in workes done without Christ and are therefore reproued by the Fathers Charke This is onely sayde to shake them all off with one false distinction Agayne it was a straunge occasion you speake of that made the Fathers write an vntrueth But rather you are straunge to expounde them directly against their wordes saying Faith onely doeth iustifie I could here helpe you with a better answere which the better learned on your side vse to this obiection Camp It was the heresie that most troubled Christians in the Primitiue Church Charke This is a newe question and in doubt But howe will you euer bee able to proue that the Apostle disputing for iustification by fayth against iustification by woorkes excludeth onely Paganisme Answere this Camp I haue answered Charke In deede you haue stil somwhat to say but not to answere that point of the argument which most woundeth your cause Therefore a Syllogisme against your shift The Apostle excludeth the morall Lawe from iustifying Therefore your distinction is wast Camp But he excludeth not charitie and good workes Charke What a But is that Is there any charitie or be there any good workes not conteyned vnder the morall and eternall Lawe of God If the deedes of the morall Lawe be shut out from the causes of our iustification by S. Paul what doore can you open to let them in againe Camp I say charitie and good workes are not excluded Charke And I say this is still to begge the question and not to answere the Argument So your doctrine is sufficiently ouerthrowen Walker Besides a great sort of places that master Charke hath brought Sadolet one of your owne hath a plaine place in Epist. ad Rom. Abraham attulit tantum fidem non sua opera And againe Quantum quisque affert de sua iustitia tantum defert de diuina beneficentia c. Camp It is but lost time that you you alleadge Sadolet Hee was but a man of late yeres whose credite is not to be set against the determination of the whole Church besides his meaning was that man should not trust in his owne workes Walker You will allowe no man neither those that are against you nor with you But if he had dealt as soundly in other things as in this he had bene to be striued withall He sheweth by an apt similitude that if a man take a Potte hauing some troubled water in it and goeth to the cleare water to fill it the troubled foule water in the potte doeth not become cleare but rather troubleth and defileth the water which was cleare Euen so the more we bring of our owne the lesse we attribute to God and the lesse we receiue from God Wee must bring nothing of our owne to God It is troubled water when we mingle our workes and righteousnes with Gods Camp Let the similitude be rehearsed It is an apt similitude He that commeth to be iustified by Christ must not bring troubled water but cleare that is those good workes that he did before and those prayers that he made before his morall deedes his almes his fasting c. For all the morall workes that are done before they are troubled water but those we doe afterwards they are made cleare in the Passion of Christ although they be not in all respects perfect Charke I wil so proue that good workes haue no place in iustification that you shall not be able to answere and because the Doctors can haue no answere I will returne to Scripture Sanctification and iustification are two sundry things Therefore good workes the fruites of sanctification haue no place in iustification Camp Make your Syllogisme Charke Whatsoeuer is an effect of sanctification that followeth is not a cause of iustification that went before But charitie and other good woorkes are effectes of sanctification which followeth Therfore they be no causes of iustification which goeth before Answere if you can Camp I deny that they are onely of sanctification they are of both Charke They be disparata handled by the Apostle as diuers things also the one some degrees before the other Therfore you doe euil to confound priora posteriora the effectes of the latter with the causes of the former Camp Is this the argument that can not be answered I say whosoeuer is iustified is also sanctified and so good workes proceede from both Charke Let all men marke the absurditie of this speache If good workes proceede from sanctification and sanctification from iustification howe can good workes goe before them both as a cause seeing they come after both as an effect Thus you are entoyled Here was an open misliking of the answeres and some speach of making an ende Then M. Charke saide I woulde faine vse one argument more to turne Campion out of all his shiftes and to let the company vnderstand his weakenes and especially the weakenes of his cause Campion Let vs heare what argument this is whereof you make such bragges Charke The authoritie and trueth of scriptures for my cause maketh me so confident Therefore marke the argument well We are iustified by Imputation onely Therefore by faith onely Camp Nego Maiorem I deny your Maior Charke I proue the Maior if you so call it Christ died onely by Imputation Therefore we liue onely by Imputation and are consequently iustified by faith onely Camp I deny the argument Charke I proue it by Analogie Christ died onely through the imputation of our sinne Therefore if we liue we liue onely by the imputation of his righteousnes And therfore to say that we liue by any imputation of our owne good workes is asmuch as to say that Christ died by imputation of some of his owne sinne For this analogie and proportion betwixt the causes of Christes death and the causes of our life doth necessarily hold and must diligently be obserued Camp I answere to your similitude Charke If it be a similitude it is by good analogie and demonstration of trueth out of the scripture It is you that abuse the hearers with similitudes that are not similia my argument is demonstratiue Camp I answere then to your analogie So farre as the scripture doth intend it holdeth like as Christ did beare our sinnes so we haue in vs the iustice of Christ. The righteousnes that we haue is giuen vs by Christ. Christ had our sinnes by imputation onely because hee was not capable of sinnes inherent But we are capable of iustice inherent which Christ doth giue vs and therefore in vs we haue the iustice of Christ both by imputation and also inherent giuen by him And therefore it is called the iustice Non qua ipse iustus est sed qua nos iustos fecit Not
mislike onely he sayd that he vnderstoode not of our comming Then we beginning with the first part of his sayd booke did demaund of him with what reason he could charge the Queenes Maiesties most mercifull gouernment and vs that at this time professe the Gospel as he did in yâ— Preface of his said booke with unused and strange crueltie and torments practised vpon his fellowes in religion seeing that the Authors and professors of their Religion had most cruelly burnt aliue so many thousands of vs for the maintenance of our Religion onely besides diuers other wayes of most horrible torments whereas none of them was euer executed for Religion but either for treason or some other notorious crime punishable with death by the Lawes of the Realme Whereunto he answered that he was punished for Religion himselfe and had bene twise on the Racke and that racking was more grieuous then hanging and that he had rather chuse to be hanged then racked Whereunto one of vs sayd that belike Master Campion being the Popes tender Pernell accounteth a litle racking of him selfe to be more crueltie then the roasting quicke of many thousands of vs. You must quoth Master Campion consider the cause the cause why and not the punishment onely It hath bene euer your maner sayd we not onely to vse petitione principij but totius also not only to require a principal point in controuersie but euen the whole it self to be graunted vnto you as that your cause is good and that you be the true Church of Christ as you continually presume and take vnto you But thanks be to God the contrarie hath bene so prooued that a great part of Christendome doeth euidently see it And many thousands who were before of your Church haue fled to vs from it as from the synagogue of Antichrist And concerning his racking Master Lieutenant being present sayde that he had no cause to complaine of racking who had rather seene then felt the racke and admonished him to vse good speache that hee gaue not cause to be vsed with more seuerity For although said he you were put to the racke yet notwithstanding you were so fauourablie vsed therein as being taken off you could and did presently go thence to your lodging without helpe and vse your handes in writing and all other partes of your body which you could not haue done if you had bene put to that punishment with any such extremitie as you speake of Besides this Master Beale one of the Clarks of her Maiesties priuie Counsell being by chaunce present demaunded of him before all the companie there assembled whether that being on the racke he were examined vpon any point of Religion or no Whereunto he answered that he was not in deede directly examined of Religion but moued to confesse in what places he had bene conuersant since his repaire into the Realme Master Beale sayde that this was required of him because many of his fellowes and by likelihood he him selfe also had reconciled diuers of her Highnes subiectes to the Romish Church and had attempted to withdrawe them from their obedience due to their naturall Prince and Soueraigne Whereunto he answered that forasmuch as the Christians in olde time being commanded to deliuer vp the bookes of their Religion to such as persecuted them refused so to doe and misliked with them that did so calling them Traditores he might not betray his Catholike brethren which were as he sayd the temples of the holy Ghost But it was replied by Master Beale that it was conuenient in policie for the Prince to vnderstande what such as were sent from the Bishop of Rome her Maiesties and the Realmes mortall enemie did within her dominions and to knowe her foes from her faithful subiects specially in such a time as this wherein we liue that this inquirie did not touch the cause of Religion After this we came to the matter of his booke And first where he chargeth vs that we haue nowe of a sudden cut off many goodly and principall partes of the holy Scriptures from the whole body thereof of meere desperation and distrust in our cause as hee writeth and for example and proofe thereof he nameth first the Epistle of Saint Iames which Luther that flagitious Apostata saith he in the Preface of the same Epistle and in his booke De captiuitate Babilonica nameth contentious puffed vp drie or barren as a thing stuffed with strawe and iudgeth it vnworthie the Apostolique spirit wee answered that if Luther had so written yet Master Campion did vs wrong to charge vs with violating of the Maiestie of the holy Bible for reiecting of the sayde Epistle of S. Iames who doe and alwayes haue receiued the same Epistle Yet we prayed him that he would shewe these wordes in the places by him noted which he sayd he would if he had the bookes The booke wherein was Luthers Preface to that Epistle being deliuered him when he had read some part of the sayd Preface and found that Luther did allowe and commend that Epistle as in deede he doeth testifying that though it were reiected of some olde writers yet he commended it and tooke it to be good and profitable which wordes of Luther when Master Campion had read he shut the booke and sayde that it was not of the true edition We answered that the print was not lately published being almost fourtie yeeres sithence and that we had searched all other printes that we could come by and found them to agree with this and that we thought there was no other and therefore we prayed him that he would shewe some edition wherein it was so set downe as he alleaged it in his booke He sayd he thought it was so as he had alleaged in the same booke of Luther in the Dutch tongue Then we offered to bring him the Dutch booke for the triall of the trueth of the Latin translation but he refused to see the same But it was aduouched vnto him as the trueth is in deede that it was likewise in the Dutch booke as he had read it in the Latin for that we had made conference thereof Then he desired to see Luthers booke De captiuitate Babilonica This booke also we deliuered to him and desired that he would shewe those wordes there He read the wordes in Latin which are these in effect I passe ouer saith Luther that many doe very probablie affirme that this Epistle is not Saint Iames the Apostles nor worthie the Apostolike spirit Here Master Campion thought that he had founde at the least that Luther had sayd that the sayd Epistle was not worthie the Apostolike spirit But wee prayed him to consider that Luther spake of other mens iudgement and not of his owne as in the same place is most euident to see and also before in his Preface to that Epistle he expresly deuideth his iudgement from theirs But Master Campion much vrged the wordes very probably whereby saith
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
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
Queenes Maiestie was it I pray you so outragious in the Latine tongue as seuerally to admonish Master Campion him selfe without the vnderstanding of the common auditorie for one of vs to say Qui hic mos est mi homo Quis hic gestus Et loqueris pultas fores Gloriosus miles Proijcis ampullas sesquipedalia verba We may bee bolde to saye that considering Master Campions bragging in English and the admonition of the other in Latine there was no such outrage as they doe note But this they much disdaine that he sayde once Os impudens Truth it is but vpon his often and fierce affirmation that all the printed bookes of Luther in Englande were false and vpon Poundes odious interpellations as we knowe you to be a good Terence man and his most scornefull lookes through his fingers staring vpon him cōtinually whiles he was reasoning with Master Campion to put him out of his memorie hee being offended both with Poundes mockings wordes and lookes and with Campions shameles sayings brake out with Os impudens as he thinketh most deseruedly on their partes Yea but he vsed the word obgannire or oggannire Hee denieth not but comming by commandement to conferre with Campion onely when two or three of them spake together and many other of them muttered and sometime brake out into scornefull laughter he sayd Siccine tam multos oggannire obstrepere This is the rage and railing wherewith the Pamphleters do charge him They say that he by a Commissioners checke put the priests that would haue spoken and Master Sherwin to silence The trueth is that though we were sent onely to Master Campion at that time yet others did speake sometime and Master Sherwin specially very much almost as much as did Master Campion Whereupon not we but Master Lieutenant told him that he should be dealt with another time and willed him then to quiet himselfe Hereupon it is that the Pamphleters say wee should haue vsed them as the Queenes prisoners Wee say they should haue remembred and behaued them selues as becommed prisoners and not as Ruffians in all libertie or licentiousnes rather as they in deede and specially Master Campion in the forenoone behaued himself And yet the Pamphleters are not ashamed to write The Catholikes vsed no such wordes as did the Protestants and one of them specially but being passing modest went directly and soberly toche cause And againe God gaue Master Campion speaking very mildely as hee euer vsed such modestie in answering Thus write they c. Then surely his speaking did much differ from his writing as is to bee seene by that his chalenge and booke the most bragging and vaine glorious that euer was written Nowe Sherwin hath his contrarie commendation of whome they write thus But Master Sherwin like him selfe with excellent courage spake Master Sherwin here notably tooke the aduantage Crosse blowes were continually giuen to the Protestantes by Master Campion and Master Sherwin Master Campion and Master Sherwin framed their reasons exceedingly well with many such like commendations But of vs they write The Protestantes shufled vp the matter They answered to an argument of the Catholikes there be foure termes in this syllogisme and no further answere Silence here was their answere M. Daye hauing belike of olde collection an other place in store spent much time in that impertinent question The Deane of Paules when he could doe naught els grinded with his teeth for despite rage And so the Catholikes by the iudgement of those that were not wholly wedded to will did get the goale Scilicet But the Pamphleters labour about nothing more then to deliuer Master Campion from the note and blemish of ignorance in the Greeke tongue whereof one of them writeth thus The Deane of Paules and Master Beale shewed great ostentation towardes Campion in offring him a Greeke Testament to reade a text of Paul To whome Master Beale said Graecum est non potest legi calling vpon him to reade if hee could c to the others vtter defacing if he could haue procured it But our good Lord gaue the other such modestie in answering him as al indifferent persons were edified by it And refusing there to reade wherby Beale and the rest were flatly then persuaded it was for lacke of skill in the ende it fell out that Saint Basill was offered him in Greeke and the booke holden him by a minister wherein he read skilfully and by the hearing of all the auditorie confessed the text to be as they alleaged it answering it as before And withall quoth he let this man witnesse whether I can reade Greeke or no who in open hearing answered Uery well Whereupon being confounded We confesse quoth the Deane of Paules you can reade Greeke whereat some might haue blushed if they had had any such good humour in them Thus writeth one of them Another of them reporteth the matter thus It happened in processe of their disputations by occasion incident there was talke of a text of Scripture which forsoth must bee viewed by Master Campion to make the matter most plausible as the Protestāts imagined they caused a Greeke testamēt to be brought vnto him which he refused to take saying merily to his contrarie it shal be yours At which doing many laughed condemning him for ignorance of the tongue and therefore gestingly by the Protestants it was said Graecum est non potest legi It is Greeke perhaps it cannot be read Whereunto Master Campion gaue no answere but rested at the matter as a man vnable to reade Greeke or to vnderstand the same But it chaunced not long after that the Protestantes as they had prepared before were to alleage a place out of Saint Basil the Greeke doctor and againe thinking to giue the Catholikes another bob they commanded againe the booke of that ancient father to be giuen to Master Campion that he might reade whome before they derided as not able to doe the same But he tooke the booke and hauing one of their ministers at his elbowe both read and gaue the sense of the writer and bad him beare witnes that hee was able to reade and vnderstande Greeke whereat there was some admiration made among the Protestantes and he was demanded why hee did not so before who mildely answered that the print was ouer small Why saide they had you not declared so much before that had bene sufficiēt The like triall they made of an other Catholike to wit Maister Sherwin who by report of his fellowes and companions is very well seene in the Greeke and Hebrewe tongues yet hee tooke the booke and viewed it but openly did not reade which was imagined that he did to be accounted ignorant in the tongue or rather for that he was willed to holde his peace for that there should bee other times to talke Thus they write of this matter farre more largely and earnestly then of any other But the truthe is that when we had read the
Goade That is not to the point though some remained yet they were hidde All being persecuted and put to death that coulde be knowen or founde Campion The time of these persecutions was euen like to our times For then the Christians were exiled put to death driuē into corners as the Catholikes are nowe and yet there remained inough c. and they were knowen Goade Surely you make euill and vntrue conparisons you haue no such cause to complaine of bloody persecutiōs in the time of our gratious Queene and doe not wel to compare her highnes peaceable and milde gouernement with those tyrannical persecutions ye might better liken your crueltie shewed in Queene Maries time to those examples I had thought to haue founde more modestie in you Campion Well let the comparison bee of Q. Maries time then Protestants were put to death yet there remained many Goade The question is not whether they remained but whether they were seen But you said of those Emperours times that there remained many and they were not vnknowen They were vnknowen both to the faithles and faithfull ergo they were altogether vnknowen Campion I deny both partes of the antecedent Goade Then I must proue both distinctly and first touching the faithles The faithles could not knowe the Church therefore they did not knowe it Camp They knew it not by faith but by sense they knewe it Goade Iohn 3. The worlde knoweth not vs because it knoweth not him Campion I tolde you they did not knowe him as they ought to know him to saluation They knewe but not fruitfully and effectually As I knowe you are a Protestant but yet beleeue not your religion And a man that saith Masse is knowen and yet you doe not beleeue in it Goade But though the persons were knowen yet they knewe them not to be of the Church I will come to the other part of the antecedent As is the whole so are the partes But God onely knoweth the whole Ergo he onely knoweth the partes For the members of Christ are knowen to Christ alone By reason of many hypocrites men are not able to iudge who are truely faithfull There are many wolues within and many sheepe without Deus nouit qui sunt sui 2. Tim. 2. God knoweth who are his therefore the true members of Christ can not be knowen but to God alone Campion I knowe not who is elect but I knowe who is a Catholike I knowe not whether the Bishop of Rome bee elect or no c. Goade Onely the elect are of the Church whereof Christ is the head Camp I say that both good euill are of the visible Church Goade Christ hath no dead members of his body therefore the reprobate can not bee of the Church I will helpe you with a distinction They may be in the Church but not of the Church Campion The distinction is Caluins and therefore I refuse it But you answere your selfe for euill men may be viua membra Christi the liuely members of Christ in respect of faith but not in respect of charitie A man may be a member of the body of Christ as it is here in earth being a wicked man but onely the godly are members of his body as it is in heauen Your own argument doth confound you It is impossible to knowe the elect therefore it is impossible the Church should be inuisible Goade It is your parte to answere not to oppose you vse many words graunt absurdities Your argumēt doth not folow Campion You cannot know any particular man to be elect you cannot pronounce it of your selfe therefore you cannot measure the Church by election then it remaineth the Church must be visible because it must be knowen Goade To be elect or true members of Christ is one thing to be in the visible Church is another Campion This was Wickliefes error that onely the electe were true members of the Church but as I haue sayde no man can knowe who is elect and therefore you teache that no man can knowe a member of the Church nor no man can knowe that he shall be saued Goade Particular electiō is not so vnknowen as you would make it for a man may haue knowledge of his owne election by vndoubted testimonies and see the signes of election in others Fulke You saide before that visibilitie was an inseparable qualitie of the Church whereupon I reason thus If it be an inseparable qualitie it is an inseparable note But it is not an inseparable note Ergo not an inseparable qualitie Campion I deny both the Maior and the Minor both may be doubted of Fulke I will proue both Campion Giue me leaue A note is more then a qualitie The qualitie is to goe right to goe the neerest and gainest way the safest way A note is a marke that may be remoued that teacheth to turne on the right hand or on the lefte by this crosse or by that windmill or marke c. Fulke I graunt there is a difference betweene a note and a qualitie and you needed not so many wordes to haue shewed that but I speake of an inseparable note and an inseparable qualitie That qualitie which is inseparable being also a note must needes be an inseparable note Also of that your selfe haue saide that it is an essentiall qualitie I will proue the Maior Whatsoeuer marke is of the essence or nature is inseparable The visiblenes is a marke which is of the essence and nature of the Church Therefore it is an inseparable marke Campion It is an inseparable qualitie but not an inseparable note but after a sorte for a qualitie must euermore stande but a marke may be taken away Fulke The question is whether it be an inseparable note of the Church that cannot be taken away Campion I say it may be in a sense Fulke I know not what sense you speake of but this is euident by your owne confession the visiblenes of the Church is a marke and it is of the nature Ergo it is inseparable so my Maior is plaine Campion Proue your Minor Fulke There was a time when visiblenes was no note of the Church ergo it is not an inseparable note Campion I deny the Antecedent Fulke There was a time when the Church was only knowē by the Scriptures therefore there was a time when visiblenes was no note of the Church Campion I deny both the Antecedent and the consequent Fulke I will proue both and first the Antecedent Cam. Nay proue the consequent first then the antecedēt Fulke Why the other is first both in order and nature Campion Nay Whensoeuer the consequent is denied you must straight proue the argument Fulke That is if the consequent onely be denied but seeing you deny both I will first proue that which in nature order is first and afterward I will proue the other if it neede It is but a sory shift of you to decline from the point of the question Chrysostome
our selues to shewe that it is no righteousnes cleauing in vs but in Christ is made ours by imputation euen as our sinnes were imputed to Christ consider the place hereafter with your selfe Fulke Marke here his absurdities First he holdeth that he can keepe the lawe in such perfection as God requireth and he can loue God with all his heart with all his soule and with all his strength and his neighbour as himselfe Secondly he affirmeth that though he haue a lust to steale yet if he bridle that lust hee loueth his neighbour as himselfe Thirdly he holdeth that we are iustified by inherent righteousnes which he thinketh to colour by the grace and gift of God But neuerthelesse ye are in the case of the Pharisee Luke 18. which trusteth in his owne righteousnes yet ascribeth all to the grace of God saying I thanke thee c. He boasted not before men but humbly gaue thankes vnto God acknowledging his righteousnes to be Gods gift and yet Christ tolde this parable against him and such as he is which trust in themselues that they are righteous that is by iustice inherent although they confesse they haue it by the grace and gift of God Campion But this was of pride that he gloryed in his righteousnes and therefore the parable is told against himselfe Fulke I graunt that he was proude and so are all iusticiaries that trust in themselues that they are righteous howsoeuer they would cloke their pride by ascribing it to the gift of God but he is condemned for trusting in himselfe that he was righteous that is for inherent righteousnes which neuerthelesse he ascribed not to his owne strength but to the grace of God saying I thanke thee God c. But I will go to another argument Campion I pray you let me answere this argument first for it shal be reported that I sayd this and that and my wordes shal be depraued I say therefore there are two wayes of iustification one in vs another without vs. Christ is a cause of iustification by his grace and merite without vs and so we are iustified by baptisme and we are iustified by the giftes of God in vs faith hope and charitie how say you were not these my words And why then do you challenge me for saying we are iustified by Gods righteousnesse saith hope and charitie which is within vs. For how say you are we not iustified by faith and is not faith within vs Fulke I challenged you for blasphemous absurditie in saying you could loue God with all your heart with all your soule and strength And albeit hope and charitie follow that same faith by which we are iustified in the regenerate that are the children of God yet we are not iustified by them no nor by faith otherwise then instrumentally as by apprehending the righteousnesse of Christ which is without vs and is no otherwise ours then by imputation And howe can you loue God with all your heart c. when you can not giue him an entire loue according to his lawe Campion I said a man may loue God with all his heart in this life according to his lawe when he doeth preferre God before all the thinges in the worlde as when a man doeth chiefely preferre him c. Fulke But can you loue God onely Campion A man loueth God onely when hee loueth him chiefely c. Fulke Chiefely and only is all one write that Campion Why thinke you the lawe was giuen to no purpose I am sure it was giuen to be fulfilled and we are notbidden to keepe it if it were impossible Fulke The lawe was giuen for another cause then that we should be iustified by fulfilling it namely to shew vs our infirmitie that we may be conuicted of sinne Campion That is a wise cause in deede Belike a father cōmandeth his children not that they should do his will but because he would haue them to see that they can not do it Fulke As though almightie God can haue none other ende of giuing commaundements then mortall men vse to haue But this is not to the question I would goe forward with another argument if you would suffer me Campion You will giue me leaue to declare my meaning Fulke Belike you haue an yll opinion of the auditorie that they can vnderstand nothing except you tel it them twenty tunes ouer If you will not suffer me to proceede I must desire Matter Lieutenaunt to commaunde you If a generall Councill may erre then the Church may erre But a generall Councill may erre Therefore the Church may erre Campion I deny the Minor Fulke A generall Councill may be corrected as Augustine sayth therefore it may erre Campion It may be declared or explaned but not corrected by a contrary decree Fulke Will you heare the place it is Tom. 6. lib. 2. contra Donatistas cap. 3. Quis autem nesciat sanctam Scripturam canonicam tam veteris quà m noui Testamenti certis suis terminis contineri eamque omnibus posterioribus Episcoporum literis ita praeponi vt de illa omnino dubitari disceptari non possit vtrum verum vel vtrum rectum sit quicquid in ea scriptum esse constiterit Episcoporū autem literas quae post confirmatum Canonem vel scriptae sunt vel scribantur per sermonem fortè sapientiorem cuiuslibet in ea re peritioris per aliorum Episcoporum grauiorem auctoritatem doctiorumque prudentiam per Concilia licere reprehendi siquidem eis forte à veritate deuiatum est Et ipsa Concilia quae per singulas regiones vel prouincias fiunt plenariorum Conciliorum auctoritati quae fiunt ex vniuerso orbe Christiano sine vllis ambagibus cedere ipsaque plenariasaepe priora posterioribus emendari cum aliquo experimento rerum aperitur quod clausum erat cognoscitur quod latebat sine vllo typho sacrilegae superbiae sine vlla inflata ceruice arrogantiae sine vlla contentione liuidae inuidiae cum sancta humilitate cum pace catholica cum charitate Christiana That is to say Who knoweth not that the holy canonical Scripture both of the old new Testament is cōteined within her certaine boūdes and that the same is so preferred before all latter writings of Bishops that of it there cānot be any doubt or questiō at all whether it be true or whether it be right whatsoeuer is certaynely knowen to be written therein But that the letters of Bishops which since the canō cōfirmed either haue bin writtē or be nowe in writing may be reprehēded both by the saying which is perhaps more wise of any man that is more skilful in that matter also by the more graue auctoritie wisdome of other bishops that be better learned if any thing in them perhaps be declined out of the way of trueth And that euen those Councils which are held in euery region or prouince without al doubt must giue place to general
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
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
his conscience be neuer so pure it sanctifieth not the bodie of Christ Therefore there is no way for you to escape Goad If there bee transubstantiation then Christ is really present in his true body But Christ is not really present in his true body Ergo there is not transubstantiation Camp Christ is really present in his true body Goade He is not present in his sensible body Therefore not in his true body Campion I deny your argument Goade It is the argument of our Sauiour Christ who neither deceiueth nor can be deceiued Luk. 24. 39. See my handes and my feete that it is I handle me and see c. Here Christ proueth his true body to be present by the senses of seeing and handling as reasoning thus You see and feele my body Therefore I am present in my true body And it is not a spirite as you feare as if he could not haue bene seene and handled then not to be beleeued to be his true body Camp The argumeÌ„t of Christ is good The body that might be felt must needes be a true body The body of Christ is alwayes sensible but he doth wheÌ„ it pleaseth him withdraw this propertie Goad Then by our Sauiour Christes reason we may doubt of the trueth of his body Camp It is said of Christ that he vanished out of their sight yet his body was visible And can not Christ bee present nowe without our seeing him Goad He was taken out of their sight and then howe could they see him but you say his body is present with vs. Will you chalenge more vnto you then Christ him selfe doth It pleased Christ to be iudged by our senses touching the presence of his body our senses do see feele smell and taste nothing but bread Campion Christes pleasure is â—…nough 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 â—…e him rise out of his sepulchre Goad It pleased the Lorde to holde their eyes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 astonished for feare so when he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is true that wee can not vse this sense Campion Then his body may be 〈◊〉 to â—…s if he will yet he in him selfe is alwayes sensible so the cause of not seeing him is in him and not in mine eye Goade Yea if our eyes were holden that we could not see but it is manifest that the Apostles knewe nothing of this doctrine of reall presence in the sacrament before Christes resurrection For if they had bene taught before in the 〈◊〉 that Christ was present in the sacrament in his naturall bodie and yet they sawe and handled nothing els but bread this argument nowe after his resurrection drawen from their senses had bene of small force Campion Ye haue heard mine answere though now it pleased him to shew him selfe palpable yet there may bee impediment in him and also in vs why this is not alwayes so Here was no miracle when Christ did thus shewe him selfe but Christ wil be present in the sacrament miraculously Goad Let vs ende with prayer Wee yelde thee humbly thankes most gracious God and merciful father that it hath pleased thee to call vs to the knowledge and profession of thine euerlasting trueth reuealed in thine holy worde and although it bee the lotte condition of the same truthe alwayes to haue aduersaries and gainsayers that set themselues against the cleare light of thy word yet we beseech thee so to establish and confirme our faith in the knowen trueth that we be neuer offended by reason of errors and heretiques knowing that as there hath bene alwayes amongst thy people so there wil be still false prophets which priuily shall bring in damnable heresies yea there must be heresies in the Church that they which are approued may be knowen But rather O Lord by this meanes stirre vs vp the more to study and meditate in thy lawe And specially vouchsafe to worke in our heartes a greater measure of zeale and loue towardes thy truthe seeing that of thy iust iudgement thou vsest to sende strong delusions that they should beleeue lyes which woulde not receiue the loue of thy trueth And amongest the multitude of those that wander in blindnes and errour wee beseeche thee in thy good tâ—…e so many of them as pertaine vnto thy kingdome of thy mercie to conuert and the rest that are obstinate against thy trueth and glorie of thy iust iudgement to coâ—…de and finally to breake the might of Sathan by the power of our Lord Iesus Christ to whome with thee and the holy spirit be all glorie now and euer Amen William Fulke Roger Goade A remembrance of the conference had in the Tower of London betwixt M. D. Walker and M. William Charke opponents Edmund Campion Iesuite respondent the 27. of September 1581. as followeth 1. Whether the Scriptures containe sufficient doctrine for our saluation 2. Whether faith onely iustifieth MAster Charke beganne the action with this godly prayer but Campion refusing to pray with them becrossed himselfe on the forehead breastes and other partes after his superstitious maner Our helpe is in the name of the Lord who hath made heauen and earth O eternall God and most mercifull father we thy seruantes doe humbly acknowledge that we are by nature miserable sinners ful of darkenesse and errour without thee neither meete to receiue the loue nor able to yeelde the obedience of thy trueth Therefore wee beseech thee in Iesus Christ to throw all our sinnes into the bottome of the sea to chase away all our darkenes with the brightnesse of thy wisedome that we may growe vp in the knowledge in the loue and in the obedience of thy most holy will And because we are here assembled to maintaine thy trueth against the errour and superstition of Antichrist vouchsafe O Lord our God to be present in this action by thy holy spirit and so sanctifie our hearts and gouerne our tongues that our corrupt affections being suppressed all things may be done in a godly zeale for thy trueth and nothing against it Moreouer for those that are come to heare graunt that as many as loue thy Gospell may be more and more confirmed in the knowledge thereof by that which shal be faithfully deliuered out of thy holy worde such as be otherwise minded wee pray thee that they may yeelde either to the manifest trueth if they appertayne to thy holy election or being none of thine that they may appeare guyltie and conuicted of a lying spirite such as is gone out into the worlde to deceyue those that will not receyue the loue of thy trueth but delight in darkenesse These things O Lord and whatsoeuer thou knowest to be good for vs we aske in the name of Iesus Christ and by that forme of prayer which he hath taught vs. Our father c. After the prayer was ended M. D. Walker entred with this preface Walker Gentlemen ye shall vnderstande that we be sent hither by authoritie to talke conferre with one called Campion an English man borne
versatu◅ fides circa quod In what and about what is fayth occupied Camp Subiectum fidei The subiect of faith is man to whom God hath giuen the gift of fayth and thereupon man is denominate faythfull Walker Doth man consist of one part or more Camp Man doth consist of bodie and soule Walker Whether doe I receyue fayth into my bodie or soule chiefly Camp Fayth is receyued into the soule by the instrument of the bodie Walker What part of the soule is it receyued by For the soule hath diuers potentias faculties Receyue we it per memoriam voluntatem or intellectum by the memorie will or vnderstanding Campion I answere the soule doth receiue it per intellectum by vnderstanding illumined by fayth because that part was properly corrupted by errour Walker Why then Intellectus humanus is subiectum fidei in quo versatur and so intellectu nos cognoscimus deum Mans vnderstanding is the subiect in which faith is and so by the vnderstanding we know God Camp Intellectu illuminati per fidem cognoscimus I grant we know God our vnderstanding being illumined by fayth Walker And what now is obiectum fidei The obiect of faith Camp Obiectum fidei is truth inspired from God Walker Whether it be inspired or no Truth is Obiectum still Aeterna veritas est deus ergo Deus est obiectum fidei promissio Euangelij Gods worde and his trueth is the obiect of fayth and so sayth Thomas of Aquine one of your owne doctours Camp It is no obiect to me till I looke to it God as he is to be knowen is the obiect of fayth and as hee is to bee loued of charitie Walker It is true but God is incomprehensible and wee knowe so farre of him as he hath reuealed of himselfe as in creating to be Almightie in gouerning to be wise in preseruing to be true and helping to be good and in his promises to be sure and true and so much he hath reuealed of himselfe And this to apprehend is sufficient to saluation Camp To apprehend these things effectually so that we also obey his commandements and not onely to grant them to be true but also to apply these things to our selues through the passion of Christ this is saluation and sufficient Walker Hact enus conuenit Hitherto we agree But Paul Rom. 4. writeth Non haesitans fide nititur promissione Not doubting in fayth and leaning vpon the promise So that there were two things the promise which must be beleeued that it is true and the power of God that he is able to performe Camp Concedo I grant it And that made the fayth of Abraham to be fruitfull and meritorious Walker What meritorious But that is Perergon I will come neerer to the matter You will graunt likewise that hope hath suum subiectum obiectum her subiect and obiect Camp Yea that I will that it is in the same soule of man but more properly in voluntate affectu then in Intellectu in the will and affection then in the vnderstanding Walker That is verie true Nowe tell me what is Obiectum spei The obiect of hope Camp The good of the life to come Walker But what was the obiect especially of Abrahams hope Camp The same that is common to all other men but seorsum the comming of Christ the Messias promised to him and his seede after him Walker What commoditie is promised to vs in Christ Campion Saluation which is to haue eternall life with Christ. Walker This promise being beleeued and knowen by faith is looked for by hope euery Christian mā hath a great desire to this saluation promised Either he hath or shoulde haue as Saint Paul Cupio dissolui esse cum Christo I desire to be loosed and to be with Christ. Camp When God hath enlightened his heart by charitie then he hath that desire stedfast Walker Well then I wil leaue the obiect of hope and come to the subiect of charitie What is the subiect of charitie Camp The affection of man Walker What is the obiect Camp It is God as he is beloued quatenus appetitur propter se. Walker Uery good then you see the foundation and causes with the whole order of our iustification what neede all the worlde haue any more but first to beleeue these things next to looke for that which we hope for thirdly to loue him who hath made vs this promise and hath giuen vs these great benefites Nowe see whether we are iustified by faith alone or faith hope and charitie But I leaue the persecuting of this to Master Charke Camp I graunt that this is the order of our iustification wherein these doe ioyntly con◅re and worke together Charke You may not auoyde the point and issue of the question as you did in the forenoone which is that Faith only iustifieth It is a chiefe question and you can not carry the matter so vprightly betwixt the olde popery and the newe but we shall easily finde you out you say faith onely doeth not iustifie but with faith hope and charitie also are requisite as causes and merits of our iustification This is your cunning and newe Poperie to mention onely hope and charitie yet vnder these wordes you carry the olde Poperie which addeth popish shrift penance pilgrimages and other satisfactions all which you would match with the death of Christ if you might recouer your kingdome But I haue to proue against you that Faith onely doeth iustifie without these merits and workes which you adde as though the righteousnesse of Christ were not inough Camp I denie it for you haue it not in all the word of God that faith onely doeth iustifie Charke Surely if you acknowledge any doctrine to be true in all the Scripture this of iustification by faith onely will be proued most trus if any plaine this will appeare most plaine And thus I proue it Euery doctrine the substance and sense whereof is conteined in Scriptures is true But the substance and sense of this doctrine Faith only doeth iustifie is conteined in Scriptures Therefore this doctrine Faith onely doeth iustifie is true Camp I answere that this proposition Faith onely doeth iustifie is not to be founde in all the worde of God and therefore I denie the Minor Charke I haue affirmed in my Minor that the substance and sense of this proposition Faith only doeth iustifie is conteined in the Scriptures For proofe hereof I haue in the worde of God eleuen places all negatiue excluding works in the matter of our saluation Namely Rom. chap. 9. verse 11. where the Apostle saith Not of workes Againe chap. 11. ver 6. Not of works Also Galat. 2. ver 16. Not of workes Moreouer Rom. 4. 6. Without workes Chap. 3. ver 21. Without the Lawe And so in the rest Camp Let me answere them Here the rest of the places were demaunded by them that wrote and by others Charke Turne further to these places
Rom. Chap. 3. verse 20. chap. 4. verse 13. Eph. 2. ver 8. and verse 9. 2. Tim. 1. 9. Tit. 3. 5. beside some other Camp I doe but request that I may answere them seuerally for not one of them proueth your assertion Charke If you answere any of them I will subscribe to your doctrine in this point Tush Camp you may not thinke to face out the matter with these bare words Dare you say our iustification is partly of workes when the holy Ghost saith so often plainely and exclusiuely Not of workes Without workes Not of the lawe but without the lawe Herein I challenge you that make challenge against the trueth will proue that this weightie and great cause which may worthily be called the soule of the Church is directly and plainely set downe in all these places Denie it if you can Camp Bring one of the eleuen places Charke What say you to the Apostles conclusion Rom. 3. verse 20 Therefore by the deedes of the lawe no flesh shall be iustified Camp Will you giue me leaue to answere and to speake somewhat generally to this Charke You haue a particular place make a particular answere plainely and to the issue roue not in generall discourses that come not neere the marke Camp The meaning of Saint Paul in such places is to exclude the Iewes Ceremonies For the Iewes asseuering the obseruation of the lawe the keeping of their sacrifices and ceremonies as Circumcision c. to be necessarie to saluation S. Paul informeth the Gentiles that these things were not so necessary but faith was sufficient This he vrgeth throughout the Scripture So that faith is vrged but not faith only Againe by faith is meant all Christianitie and the whole religion of Christians which is sufficient without any parcell of the Iewes religion This is one generall consideration why Paul so often vrgeth faith throughout the Epistle to the Romanes and else where Another generall consideration is for that the wise men of the Gentiles did alledge their moralities as a cause of their election which Paul in the same Epistle stoode specially vpon and meant to confute as is afore sayde Charke Whether of these two interpretations you will allowe it followeth by your owne exposition that the Apostle concluding for faith against workes concludeth that it is Faith only that iustifieth shutting out all such workes as are opposed vnto it Nowe whereas you say that the workes opposite to faith are onely either the morall workes of the Gentiles or the Ceremoniall of the Iewes I will easily ouerthrowe the distinction Camp Ouerthrowe it then Charke First there was neuer any such errour mainteined in the Church that the morall workes of the Gentiles shoulde iustifie therefore Paul neuer laboured so much and so often to confute that errour which did not trouble the Church As for the Ceremonial workes the Apostles writing to the Ephesians not iustified with the obseruation of Iewish ceremonies had no cause to barre ceremoniall workes from iustification Therefore he teacheth that all the workes of the faithfull euen of Abraham are excluded from being causes of iustification and not Ceremonies onely or the moralities of heathen men as you imagine against the Apostles argument and scope in those places Camp The generall scope of Saint Paul is to exclude all workes both of Iewes and Gentiles in that Epistle but in the way of discourse I denie not but incidently an other answere is to be giuen Charke This last part of your speach is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first doeth graunt all that I desire Camp He excludeth the precedent workes of Abraham Charke The ende why works are secluded from iustification doeth proue for me for the Apostle in that place sheweth the finall counsaile purpose of the Lord to be farre otherwise then you suppose And to remember my promise of Syllogisme I will proue it by the very forme of the Apostles wordes The ende and the meanes differ not The ende of our iustification was to exclude all workes precedent or consequent from being causes of iustification Therefore the meanes also must exclude euen all workes precedent and consequent going before or comming after Camp The ende was not to exclude all workes consequent Charke Whatsoeuer it was wherein Abraham might glorie that was excluded from iustification But in workes consequent or following he might glorie Therefore they also and al other workes whatsoeuer first and last are secluded and can be no cause or piece of cause in our iustification Camp The example of Abraham proueth that Abraham was iust before the couenant of Circumcision and so before the lawe of Moses was giuen and therefore he inferreth that the Iewes must not glorie of iustification through their lawe and by the ceremonies thereof seeing their father Abraham was iust before circumcision and therefore circumcision not necessary to iustification But though workes voyde of Christ are nothing yet thorowe grace they serue to iustification Charke Is this your way to answere Syllogismes to tell a tale of your owne and expaunde newe matter leauing the question Answere shortly Abraham hath nothing left to glorie in Therefore all workes whatsoeuer are excluded and so faith onely iustifieth Camp That is another place Charke Answere it then be it another or the same Camp The Apostle meaneth to shewe that Abraham was iustified by workes done in grace and not by workes without expectation of Christ or voide of Christ. Charke An open contradiction to the holy Ghost note it The Apostle faith Master Campion proueth that Abraham was iustified by workes I reply against you with a double argument First Abraham had all his workes of Christ for hee was faithfull therefore the works excluded are works wrought in grace Secondly he speaketh not of him as of an infidel but as being the father of beleeuers Therefore the Apostle excludeth not workes without expectation of Christ as you speake Answere it Campion Camp I answere that no works of Abraham are excluded Charke And I haue proued that all are excluded and you can neither answere the syllogisme nor satisfie the place of Saint Paul The text and argument is cleare If Abraham were iustified by any workes he had wherein to glorie But he could not glorie in any thing for that were absurde by the Apostles reason Therefore there were no workes of merite or iustification in him Camp This is the Apostles reason All the good workes of Abraham were founded in Christ and by these good workes he was iustified therefore he was iustified by Christ. For if he had bene iustified by other workes excluding Christ he might haue gloried and not bene iustified by Christ. Charke I can goe no further in this argument For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is against you that is the plaine text and argument Also I aduow it and make all this companie witnesses that you haue vttered in these straytes plaine contradictorie propositions The Apostle proueth that Abraham was