know in the whole world yea the Apostle S. Paul himselfe to boote too if some of them may be beleeved for Socinians and blasphemous heretiks For I would fain know of M Walker how this differeth that he so chargeth from what Pareus saith and avoweth to be S. Pauls that Faith is the condition under which Christ is given us for a propitiation Or not to looke out abroad but to keep our selves at home I should desire to understand from him what he thinketh of these passages in some writers of our own and those men of no mean note neither First that of M. Fox The condition whereby we are properly justified is this that we beleeve in Christ. And againe The Evangelicall promise requireth no other condition to the attaining of salvation besides Faith onely whereby we beleeve on the Sonne of God Secondly that of M. Perkins in his Reformed Catholique In the Covenant of Grace two things must be considered the substance thereof and the condition The substance of the Covenant is that Righteousnes and life everlasting is given to Gods Church and people by Christ. The condition is that we for our parts are by faith to receive the foresaid benefits And this condition is by grace as well as the substance Or if these men be not of that esteem with M. Walker but that he can be content to let them go for damned heretiks to beare M. VVotton company in the same condemnation I should crave to be informed what he deemeth of M. Pemble some of whose works he hath deigned to honour with a Dedicatory Epistle wherein he commendeth him as a righteous and faithfull servant of Christ excelling in grace and vertue abounding in all wisdome and in all knowledge lively sense and utterance of heavenly and supernaturall mysteries far above all that could be expected from or is ordinarily found in one of his age and yeers Nor doubteth therefore nor is afraid to say of him that he is ascended up into that supercelestiall glory towards which he had ever bent all his studies and desires This M. Pemble then whom M. Walker thus extolleth and not altogether undeservedly in another of his works hath these words There are two covenants that God hath made with man by one of which salvation is to be obtained The one is the Covenant of works thè tenor whereof is Doe this and thou shalt live The other is the Covenant of Grace the tenor whereof it Beleeve in the Lord Iesus and thou shalt be saved The condition of this Covenant required in them that shall be justified is faith The performance whereof differs from the performance of the condition of that other Covenant Doe this and live is a compact of pure justice wherein wages is given by debt so that he that doth the work obeying the Law may in strict justice for the work sake claim the wages eternall life upon just desert Beleeve this and live is a compact of freest and purest mercy wherein the reward of eternall life is given us in favour for that which beares not the least proportion of worth with it so that he that performs the condition cannot yet demand the wages as due unto him in severity of justice but onely by the grace of a free promise the fulfilling of which he may humbly sue for And againe Altho the act of justification of a sinner be properly the onely work of God for the onely merit of Christ yet is it rightly ascribed unto faith and it alone for as much as faith is that main condition of the New Covenant which as we must performe if we will be justified so by the performance whereof we are said to obtaine justification and life Thus M. Pemble in which passages tho I will not justifie all therein contained he fully and cleerely expresseth M. Wottons meaning not as his owne judgment only but as the doctrine of the Reformed Churches by them so explained Now I demand of M. Walker whether for this damnable and detestable position we shall doe well without further search or triall the rather since that the same he saith is found in Socinus to condemne M. Pemble of heresie and require if not his bones to be digged up againe and committed to the fire yet his books at least containing such blasphemous stuffe to be burnt Which if he shall deem fit sure Pauls Epistles unlesse Pareus be much mistaken must goe the same way Or if he shall be of another mind concerning these blessed men whether it be not extreame partiality to let that goe for sound doctrine in M. Fox Perkins Pareus and Pemble that in M. Wottons writings without further adoe upon M. Walkers bare relating of it must be condemned for blasphemous heresie Secondly I desire to have it considered whether it were equall to censure a man for an heretike upon bare positions or sayings extracted out of his writings without any regard had to or notice taken of his own Expositions of them or his Reasons alledged to prove his dissent in them from the errors of those whom he is charged to concurre with confirmed by collation of place with place in his writings and by consideration of the maine scope and drift of the dispute course and tenor of the discourse and the different sense and meaning of the words and terms used by either For example M. Walker in his parallel alledgeth a saying of Servetus and that is all that he hath out of him throughout his whole Parallel that For one act of Faith was Abraham righteous And presuming that M. Wotton saith the very same though he alledge not any one place at all out of M. Wotton where these words are found from hence concludeth that M. Wotton and Servetus do in the doctrine of justification hold one and the same opinion in all points Now suppose wee that the very selfesame words were found in M. Wottons wrirings and againe that that saying in Servetus were condemned yea and that justly for hereticall yet were it therefore agreeable to equity without further disquisition to passe sentence thereupon that M. Wotton Servâ—tus do in all things hold the same opinion in the point of justification yea or that in those very words they speake the same thing when it may easily be made evidently to appeare that Servetus speaketh of justification in one sense and M. Wotton intreateth of justification in another sense and that neither the Faith nor the Righteousnesse nor the manner of imputation of Righteousnesse that they speak of in their writings are the same That which any may soon see that shall read the summe of Servetus his discourse related out of Calvin in my postscript Surely by the same reason might M. Walker prove S. Paul and Servetus to be both of them in all things of one mind concerning the doctrine of justification because Servetus saith that Abrahams beleeving was imputed unto him for righteousnes and S.
and advice taken with other grave Ministers as he is also pleased yet to stile us concurring with him therein 2. I would demand not of M. Stock for he is gone nor is it certain to me whether he ever passed that censure so directly contrary to his own subscription but of M. Walker what he thinks of these words Faith is that alone wherewith we are by it selfe and properly justified whether they containe heresie and blasphemy or no and what difference he can find between M. Wottons words and these Yet are they M. Bucers own which he ascribeth also to Saint Paul as a principall part of his main Argument concerning the doctrine of justification And if those other upon the bare recitall appeare to be manifestly hereticall and blasphemous then these surely no lesse and so M. Wotton yet shal have one other at least to goe along with him for an heretick yea a blasphemous heretick whom yet none I suppose other then ranke Papists ever condemned for such Howbeit M. Walker should have done wel to have delivered M. Wottons Exposition as he tearmeth it all out and not to have hackt it off as he hath done by the hams For his words are entire thus I never said or thought that Faith doth justifie us by it selfe and yet had he so said he had said no more then Bucer long before him had done This onely I say that in this Proposition Faith is counted for Righteousnes the word Faith is to be taken properly not tropically the question being in such propositions not of the meritorious or formall cause of justification but of the condition required on our part in stead of keeping the Law To which I may well ad out of his Animadversions which I have by me on the dispute between Lubbertus and Bertius these sayings of his to the same essect Faith doth not justifie us as a quality habitually neither is it either the matter or the forme of our Righteousnes in that regard alone it is to justification available as it relieth upon Christ to the obtaining of forgivenes of sins for his obedience And againe Faith surely doth not justifie but onely by and for the obedience of Christ. When it is said to be imputed unto righteousnes it is thereby signified what we must perform that we may be justified And a little after By faith we are said to be justified not in a tropicall but in a proper manner of speaking whereby is signified that Faith is that which God requireth of us to the obtaining of justification for the obedience and sacrifice of Christ. For as for those words that M. Walker putteth into his third Error that he chargeth upon M. Wotton That Faith doth not justifie us as it apprehendeth Christ and his righteousnes they appeare not in any passage at all by M. Walker out of M. Wottons writings alledged So that M. Walker maketh M. Wotton speak not what he doth but what himselfe pleaseth and then pronounceth him an hereticke not for what he saith but for what himselfe would have him say To make this evident to the meanest understanding Should a man say The word hand in this proposition my hand feeds my body or in this This child is fed by hand is taken properly not tropically would it by any reasonable consequence thence be inferred that the party so saying should therefore affirm that the hand doth not feed by putting meat into the mouth And what M Calvins judgment is of that trope in the Apostles words of Faith put for Christ may appeare by these words of his in confuting of Osiander the first man for ought I can find that broached that Exposition of them and brought in that strange trope I admit not this Sophisters writhing or wrigling some figures when he saith that faith is Christ. Whereby Faith which is the instrument onely of obtaining righteousnesse is confounded with Christ who is the materiall cause and both the Autor and minister of so great a benefit Thus is the knot also unknit to wit how the tearm of Faith ought to be taken where the point of justification is handled Howbeit as it would justly be deemed unequall to charge all that hold Faith there put for Christ with Osianders monstrous opinion as Calvin well tearmeth it of I know not what essentiall righteousnes by which Christian men are justified so no lesse unequall is it to condemn all of Socinian heresie and blasphemy that hold Faith to be taken for Faith in those passages of S Paul But of this and some other things concerning that argument I may peradventure being by divers importuned thereunto if God shall please to afford life liberty ability and leisure entreat further more largely hereafter unlesse I shall find my selfe prevented by some fuller satisfaction given by others whose labours either are abroad already or may before that time come abroad for then my paines will be superfluous and whether by my weak helps or the more able work of others the truth of God either in this or in any other point be cleered to me it shall be all one And thus much for the point concerning which by M Walkers own relation M. Stock upon the very reading of it should in direct contradiction to his own subscription passe such a censure As for the speech he frameth in the words following for M. Stock to excuse himselfe by and his inference thence how dangerous a thing it is even for godly men to be Judges in a controversie between a familiar friend as M. Wotton was to these men and a stranger as himself was to the most of them As the latter intimateth M. Stock M. Wotton to have been at that time familiar friends and so D. Baylie and the rest and on the other side M. Stock for of him principally here the speech is with the most of the rest and M. Walker to have been meere strangers either to other which is the one of them as true as the other so it adds little credit to the excuse pretended to be made then by him which may well be questioned considering M. Walkers minting and dilating faculty before shewed whether much if not all of it came not out of his own forge And this shall suffice for the suggestions concerning some of M. Walkers partiall and unjust Judges as he deems them to prove that they subscribed in favour of M. VVotton against their own consciences and judgements elsewhere either in publike or in private delivered directly to the contrary of that they then signed unto Which I might well have leaft to be answered by those whom they concerne save that some of them are now deceased for me they touch not at all nor my Relation who report only what they subscribed to and that firmed with the Attestation of such of them as survive 18. But for that which concerns them all and my selfe among the rest to prove that
charge him with and pleading that because they were condemned for other heresies therefore this was no heresie which yet M. Walker knows to be heresie and blasphemy and other learned proclaim it so to be yea M. Wottons own conscience told him that his opinions were condemned for such which for fear of shame therefore he sometimes denied and frequently contradicted himself saying and unsaying as Socinus his Master often did To all which punctually in few words 1. It would deservedly have been expected that M. Walker having charged M. Wotton with maintaining teaching and infecting divers with the most pestilent and dangerous errors and opinions of all that ever the devil sowed among Christian people the heresies of Servetus and Socinus those most damnable and cursed hereticks the greatest monsters that ever were born within the borders of Christs Church I say that having thus charged M. VVotton he should have proved him to consent with them in those monstrous and most pestileâ—t errors of all that ever were by them held and taught otherwise his evidence falleth far short of his Charge And surely one of these two M. Walker by vertue of that his charge stands bound to maintain and make good either that those prodigious â—â—tages and detestable blasphemies of Servetus related by Calvin to let pas Socinus and his denial of Christs deity yea not those of him alone but the like of the Ophites the Cainites the Nicolaitans the Basilidians the Valentinians the Carpocratians the Marcionites the Manichees and the whole rable of abominable old hereticks whose positions and practises were so hideous and horrible or so unclean and obscene that they are not almost to be related yet are not so vile and pestilent as are those errors that either M. Wotton indeed held or were by M. Walker truly or falsly shal be all one objected unto him or els that tho these are not so vile and pestilent as those that those were none of them by the devill sown among Christian people but these were Otherwise if he wil be but judged by his own words he must acknowledge himself a most notorious sycophant that chargeth so deeply and so poorly and slenderly makes his charge good And this unles he wil eat his own words how he can avoid I see not 2. It is most fals that I use any such plea that therefore what M. VVotton held concurring as M Walker pretended therein with them was no heresie because they were condemned for other heresies For which assertion I here charge M. Walker with a manifest and palpable untruth which together with divers others herein avowed by him until he disclaim and acknowledge I shal not desire to have further dealing with one that regards no more what he saith Among other things indeed which he glides by I question his candor in charging M. VVotton to concur with Servetus in all points concerning the doctrine of justification when he produceth but one short saying of Servetus concerning Abrahams Faith wherein yet M. Wotton neither in expresse tearms and in sense and meaning much les as I have above shewed concurreth with him and withal I shew by an instance M. Walkers iniquity and unequal dealing therein such as himself would by no means admit or endure in his own case That which M. VValker being altogether unable to wipe of he slily slips away and insteed thereof shifts in a supposititious absurdity a brat of his own brain to delude his reader and to make him beleeve that M. Gataker so argues as himself too oft doth 3. Whereas he saith he knows this I know not what of M. Woitons to be heresie and blasphemy what need I say more but as he sometime that herein I beleeve him not no more then M. Richardson if as before he told us he affirmed on his knowledge that whosoever lived and died in it should be damned What he knows I know not but what he was able to make proof of when time was I know and men of as good credit every inch what if I said of as great knowledg to in matter of divinity as M. Walker do give testimony thereunto 4. What he jangles so much and so oft of other Autors I leave him to try it out with him whom he affirms to have renewed M. VVottons opinions and to have filcht all out of his writings Onely making bold to tel M. Walker that when he hath read over a few of Pareus his works one of the Autors he so oft mentions and by name that of his concerning Christs Active and Passive obedience out of which I have presented him with one or two small snips I am half of the mind that he wil pas the like censure on him also for an heretick that he hath done upon M. VVotton And it may not without good ground of probability at least be conjectured that therefore he waived medling with the latter part of my Postscript because I therein evidently shew that a man may hold not a few points held by Socinus and yet not be therefore a Socinian heretick And I would but request of M. VValker to tel his mind plainly what he thinks of those who stifly hold and maintain that justification consists wholly in Remission of sins that Christs Righteousnes in fulfilling the morall Law is not imputed unto us for justification and that God without breach of his justice might have pardoned mans sin requiring no satisfaction at all for the same whether they be Socinian hereticks as wel as M. Wotton or no. to which demand if he shal return an affirmative answer he may be pleased to take notice by my Postscript if at least he list so to do what a large list of new hereticks never before taken among us for such must upon his doom now be taken in and ranged in that rank 5. For his peering so narrowly into M. VVottons conscience as before so here I shal leave him to render an account unto him who challengeth unto himself that Prerogative to see into mens souls and whose power therefore M. Walker therein usurps 6. For M. VVottons pretended contradictions enough already hath been answered tho neither is it my part to make them all good nor doth it either make him an heretick albeit they be not all made good or prove him conscious to himself of what M. Walker would thence infer Howbeit if M. Wottons feare of shame as M. Walker here saies induced him unto them then had M. Wotton that which I feare M. Walker too much wants since that otherwise he would have been afraid to expose himself so to shame as by his cariage in this very Pamâ—hlet besides what elswhere he hath done As for Socinus M. Wottons master as he pâ—… here to call him it is no new thing with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to enlarge Socinus his schoole and to assigns him schollers whom he lists more then a few who yet abhor Socinus it
AN ANSWER TO Mr. George Walkers VINDICATION OR RATHER FRESH ACCUSATION Wherein he chargeth Mr. Wotton besides his former foul aspersions of Heresie and Blasphemy with Arianism Mr. Gataker with Socinianism Dr. Gouge and Mr. Downham with a false Attestation Dr. Baylie and Mr. Stock with Self-condemnation All the eight Ministers employed in the busines between himself and Mr. Wotton with Partiality and Unjust judgement Upon occasion of a Relation concerning that busines written by the said Thomas Gataker and by him now again avowed Wherein the said M. Walkers Vindication is in many things shewed to be An Untrue Relation LONDON Printed by E. G. for F. Clifton in New-fish-street 1642. Some few things to be supplied or amended PAg. 2. after line 13. ad for words spoken of a dead man himself being p. 5. l. 16. read hath at any time ex p. 6. l. 28. pressure p. 14. l. 27. he then did p. 16. l. 28. wrote p. 38. l. 18. crave leave of p. 42. l. 14. put in the margine against pointing See Cameron Myrothec p. 25. p. 53 marg put out * Ibid. p. 9â— l. 32. read have past p 98. l. 26 sift q. p 115. l. 28. Post script p. 119. l. 3. he deemes HAd M. Walker either dealt more fairely at first with his Christian brother and fellow-Minister of Christ M. A. Wotton or upon second thoughts which are wont to be the wiser better considered of what before he had unadvisedly attempted he had therein peradventure in part at least either saved or salved his owne credit sure I am he had eased me of some labour that I had little lust unto He traduced M. Wotton in the Pulpit as a vile hereticke while he lived what time he knew Master Wottons tongue through the iniquity of the times to be so tied up that he could not in publique plead his owne cause Long after his decease he reneweth his revilings of him and brandeth him againe for the like in print when being hence translated he cannot now either in publique or in private personally appeare for himselfe A true relation of the carriage of the maine matter in controversie between them in a meeting of M. Walkers owne procuring wherein M. Wotton was acquitted being hereupon published he proceedeth after his wonted guise in violent and virulent manner not onely to charge him as before with heresie and blasphemy in the doctrine of justification but yet further to expresse his extream malice and rancor against him with the deniall of the eternall Deity of Christ how soundly yea or seemingly for any shew or shadow of reason let any intelligent Reader judge And over and besides that hoping thereby to help himselfe where he sticketh fast in the mire he sticketh not to cast foule aspersions upon all those that had any hand in that hearing not sparing them therein whom himselfe had made choise of His Vindication as he tearmeth it he beginneth with a preamble consisting of two parts In the former whereof he complaineth grievously of me and chargeth me with breach of piety and charity and defect of humanity and common honesty in labouring to set upon him foul brands of the like nature being a Minister yet living in Gods Church and in adding thereby affliction to him who hath suffered persecution and bonds for the truths sake Which passage when I read minded me of the Italian professor of the Civill-law at Oxford who having in some things carried himselfe neither so religiously nor so respectively towards divers worthy Divines as had been to be wished and being therefore by Doctor Rainolds in a private Letter freely told of it and withall admonished to have more regard of piety and modesty in his writings for time to come then in some formerly he had shewed in way of answer to his Letter taketh on and stormeth not a little against that mirrour as well of modesty as of learning as having done him no small wrong in taking upon him so to checke and controle him who had left his own countrey for his conscience and was for Religion sake content to live as an exile tho meane while it may be enjoying as plentifull an estate here as ever he had or might have attained had he stayed still where before he was But to come more directly to M. Walkers exceptions against me or prescriptions rather for himselfe as a sacred person or a Sanctuary man and not therefore to be so dealt with as I have herein dealt with him and to discusse them briefly apart I suppose a little selfe-love and selfe-respect proceeding from it had drawn a filme over M. Walkers eyesight or cast a mist at least before his eyes when he entered these pleas that kept him from considering what the party was whom himselfe had so despightfully dealt with For first is M. Walker a Minister of Gods Word and was not M. Wotton the same and that peradventure nothing inferiour to M. Walker in ought however M. Walker may please to esteem or deem of him At whose doom yet well it is that he neither stands nor fals Secondly as concerning survivorship I have ever held it and so still shall having votes therein with me I am sure not a few untill M. Walker shall be able to convince me of errour in it that it is a worse matter to traduce the dead then the living Since that the one may the other cannot now make apologie for himselfe Besides that it is generally held an argument of no ingenuous disposition to insult over or dealeâ— igorously with the deceased And it may well be questioned whether an injury done to a Saint in Heaven have not the greater guilt in regard oâ— his present estate Sure I am that against those of the Romish party our Writers use it as an argument and the Apostle may well seeme to adde strength thereunto that it is a greater wrong to offer any indignity to Christs body now glorified in Heaven then it had been to do the like unto him then when in the state of humiliation he conversed with men here on earth Nor see I ought why it may not hold as well in the other limmes as in the head that the greater sinne it is to offer any wrong or contumely to them the more highly they are now honoured and advanced by God And what greater wrong or contumely can be done to them then to blast their reputations to charge them with inexpiable crimes to damn them to Hell that now reigne with God in Heaven So sacred hath the condition of the deceased been deemed that it hath been accounted a point of sacriledge to disturbe their remaines or to meddle with the monuments wherein their corps lie inclosed But the godly deceased had they sense and understanding of what is here done as they had wont to speake and we well may would without all doubt account it as well they might a far greater
yoaked with such and to have deemed rather as they then as M. Walker either then did or now doth Mean while how little cause M. Walker hath to crake so much of these Authors by what hath been said may easily be deemed and muchlesse to affirm what so confidently elsewhere he doth that he hath all learned Divines agreeing with him in what he holds and that the whole stream of learned Orthodox Divines hold the same Doctrine with him concerning justification by Christs righteousnesse imputed to beleevers Which in such sense and manner as he maintaines it he cannot but know to be most untruâ— unlesse he will expunge Pareus Piscator and I know not how many more generally so esteemed onâ— of the List of learned and Orthodox Divines 3. Yea but M. Wotton 〈◊〉 M. Wâ—lker is proved a blasphemous 〈◊〉 by hâ—…â—onfâ—ssion I answer in a word How M. 〈◊〉 â—…th the deniall of Christs righteousnesse impâ—… to be hereâ—icall and blasphemous he plainely exâ—resseth himselfe in his defence whence M. Walker produceth it To which therefore and M. Bradshawes Preface to his English Treatise of justification I referre the Reader yet so that of the one and out of the other somewhat hereafter also shall be said 4. How farre forth M. Walker hath Gods Word for his warrant in condemning M. Wotton not of errour for that neither was nor is the question but of heresie and blasphemy for that was the point in controversie when time was he hath not yet made to appeare no more then he did For what here fondly and ridiculously in that kind he presumeth by the sentence of his owne delegates he was not then able to make good What else is here ferced in concerning the cariage of the businesse at that meeting shall in its due place by Gods assistance be discussed The other doubt he moveth concerning the cause of my proclaiming so bitterly against him and being so highly offended with him is Whether it be because he calleth M. Wotton by the name of Anthony Wotton And if that be the cause he telleth me that therein he did him a favour For that under that obscure tâ—â—le his person might have been hid and not made known to any but those who are acquainted with all the passages between him and M. Walker But M. Gataker is the man that hath exposed his person to much shame and stained his name and memory with the brand of heresie c. Sure he must be some not merry but very sad person not grave and sage onely that can read this passage without laughing or smiling at least Which to shew let me entreat M. Walker to make M. Wottons case a while here his owne M. Walker as by his Parallell plainly appeares denieth Faith to be a condition on mans part required unto the attaining of justification Now suppose that some one of his own spirit should thereby take occasion in a Treatise of his published many yeeres after M. Walkers decease to traduce him for the same by the name of George Walker as the first publisher in this Land of a most pestilâ—â—t heresie and thereby charge him to have made himselfe guilty of Paganisme Indâ—isâ— and Mahumetanism Would it not be ridiculous for the party having so dealt with him to demand of one that should write in his defence Why he is so highly offended with him and whether it be for this cause or no because he calleth him George Walker c. For were it not all oâ—… as if some rude fellow having câ—st a shovell of duâ—t or two upon a man as he passeth in the street should aske the party so misused contesting with him about it what he aileth to be so offended with him and whether it be because he did not make him a legge or give him as we use to say the time of the day He might as well have moved question whether I were not so offended because he stileth him barely Anthony Wotton and not Mr. A. Wotton Or whether because he calleth him Anthony and not Antonie as he usually and rightly wrote his name save that by the Printers correction or corruption rather he found it so also in my relation But that that followeth is yet more ridiculous that herein he did M. Wotton a singular favour For under that obscure title he had lien hid and unknown to any but those alone that had been acquainted with all that had passed between M. Walker and him Is the name of Antonie Wotton then so obscure a title or are there so many of note so named that this our A Wotton may lie hid in the heap among the multitude of them unlesse be be by some speciall notes and marks otherwise deciphered And yet any man not utterly crackt-brained would have thought that Anthony Wotton one that some 28. yeeres agoe lived in London and there in Manuscript Pamphlets and Printed bookes dispersed his opinions concerning justification and by the fame and opinion which men had of his great learning and no lesse piety drew many zealous professours into the liking of his errors and afterward â—rought a booke De Reconciliatiâ—…e in Latine c. Any man would thinke I say unlesse he wanted his â—its that thus much were sufficient to discover who the man were that M. Walker meant though they that read him were not privy to all M. Walkers either revilings of him in publique or baitings of him in private Suppose M. Walkers adversary before assigned him had onely stiled him George Walker one that so many yeeres agoe had in the City of London out of the Pulpit inveighed and declamed oft against M. Wottons writings and M. Bradshaws works as containing much heretical and blaspemous matter c. were it not enough to let men know who the man were that be meant notwithstanding I suppose there be and have been about the City more Walkers then Wottons unlesse they had been acquainted with all things that either at the solemne meeting of Ministers or in private otherwise had passed between him and M. Wotton But that which herein exceedeth all the rest is that M. Gataker by his relation of the businesse that passed between them and thereby blasoning his Armes hath exposed him to shâ—me and stained his name with the brand of hereâ—ie I never knew that I had any skill in Heraldry before nor have heard of staining with brands till now Two new trades M. Walker hath here put upon me both which I must needs professe my selfe utterly unskilfull in But to let these things passe whether of the two staine a mans name and expose him to shame he that publikely chargeth him with heresie and blasphemy or he that publisheth his acquitall from such horrid imputations by the verdict and under the hands of those whom the same party appellant himselfe had made therein his Judges I am well content that any not wholly in Orestes his mood whatsoever else he be
Paul expresly in so many words saith the same Or that Musculus agreeth with Servetus in all things for the matter of justification because he saith in neerer terms to Servetus then any M. Walker alledgeth out of M. Wotton that Abraham for that faith of his was of God reputed just Yea take away all benefit of Exposition and who almost may not be condemned of heresie and blasphemy For example He that shall mention Gods hands and feet as concurring with the Audians who held that God had the shape limbs and lineaments of a man he that shall affirme with the Evangelist or with Christ himselfe rather that the Father is greater then he as consenting to the Arians who maintained an inequality among the Persons in the Trinity And here I shall crave of M. Walker and my Reader to tell a story or two it is the humour of old men such as M. Walker and my selfe to be now and then telling of tales I remember that while I aboad at Lincolns-Inne the night before Legate the Arian appeared in the Bishops Consistory at Pauls of whose being in trouble I then knew nothing there came to my chamber there at a very unseasonable houre a Gentleman-like man who having knockt at the doore ask'd to speake with me and entrance afforded him reacht me a little scrole wherein were these words written Whether was the Godhead of Christ begotten of the Godhead of the Father from all eternity and withall desired me to give mine opinion whether that were not an error I required to know first what the meaning of the party was that held or affirmed it He answered me According to that in the Creed God of God light of light I told him that these were not the words there used and that to speake properly the Godhead was not said either to beget or to be begotten If the parties meaning were that Christ being God was begotten of the Father who is likewise God from all eternity the sense were sound but the speech improper Then belike as it is there written quoth he it is an error As the words sound replied I it is yet it may be not in his sense that spake it He requested me to give him that under my hand I craved his name He told me I must excuse him for that I told him he should likewise excuse me for this And so we parted But the next day hearing Legate in the Consistory as I past thorow Pauls I began to surmise that this party might be some friend of his and that some Divine or other in conference with him having let some such speech slip from him this party his friend might beate about to get under some other Divines hands the censure of it as an error Whence I then gathered that a man had need to be wary how he condemne a man of error of heresie much more upon a bare relation of words before he understand what his meaning is Againe I remember that a busie Separatist being committed to Newgate and there arrogantly challenging to dispute with all commers and scornfully playing upon and gibing at such as dealt with him M Bradshaw whom we shall find M. Walker anon grinning at was by some friends brought to him who perceiving the mans spirit and having had some discourse with him the issue whereof he caused to be set down in writing under both their hands that he might not talke of this and that after they were parted M. Bradshaw a little to represse his insolency told him that for all his prating so much of the Constitution of a Church the common subject of such mens disputes yet his skill peradventure might be but mean in the maine principles of religion And being by him provoked to make triall if he pleased he demanded of him whether Christs Deity assumed the Person of man or no. To which question the bold bayard without stop or stay returning an affirmative answer that it did M. Bradshaw told him it was grosse heresie And so left him And indeed if the words alone be regarded so it is even the heresie of Nestorius who maintained two-persons in Christ not two natures in one person And yet neither doe I nor did M. Bradshaw hold the silly fellow to be an heretik no more then those that beare the name of Nestorians in the Eastern parts are deemed so to be at this day And indeed take mens words apaâ—t from their meaning and how many shall be ranked though in judgement never so sound and orthodox among heretiks as concurring with such because the same words and sentences are found in either To cleere this a little consider we an instance or two Salvian Bishop of Marseiles a very pious and learned ancient Writer saith that Our Saviour Christ is the greatest begger in the World Meaning it of the poverty which he sustaineth not in himselfe but in his in the severall members of his body mysticall or spirituall rather here upon earth shall he be hold therefore to concurre in opinion with Pope Nicolas 3. and those other who maintained that our Saviour Christ was a very beggar indeed and lived here in the very lowest degree of beggary that can be which Pope Iohn 22. condemneth for an heresie Againe Luther in his Commentary upon the Epistle to the Galatians saith that Christ was the greatest sinner in the World meaning it in regard of the sinnes of all the faithfull which he took upon himselfe and were reckoned as his And we read of one Austen of Rome Archbishop of Nazareth who maintained some assertions not unlike that of Luther to wit that Christ sinneth daily and ever so did Understanding what he spâ—ke of the body of the faithfull who being in Christ and one with Christ have the Name of Christ sometimes given them in Scripture The speeches I confesse are both overharsh and the Archbishop was for his taxed in the Councel of Basil. Yet were it no lesse harsh or hard to condemne either of them as concurring in judgement with those blasphemous Pharisees that said our Saviour Christ was a sinner tho the words were the same with either Yea to ad onely one instance more S. Iohn himselfe faith that No regene rate man doth sinne nor can sinne And yet who dares be so bold as to say that S. Iohn therefore concurreth either with the old Cathari or with the late Familists who dreaming of an absolute perfection in this life do of their illuminate and regenerate ones say the same In regard hereof a man may precisely relate an other mans words and yet be a slanderer a false accuser a false witnes For example that I may refresh my Reader a little with some matter of more abstruse learning yet other mens not mine own lest M. Walkers tongue again lash me and season therewith somewhat this not very savoury discourse
Suppose we that those persons that were deposed against our Saviour had given in his precise words as he himself spake them without addition detraction or alteration of ought Dissolve this Temple and within three daies I will reedifie it understanding and affirming it as it seems they did and as the Jewes that heard him tooke it to have been spoken not as he meant and intended it pointing in likelihood when he spake to it of the Temple of his body wherein his Deity dwelt but of the Temple of Lime and Stone built by Herod of which they spake when they said Forty and six yeeres hath this Temple been building as the words may well be translated and so long by just computation it is by some deemed that it had then been in building and the former And indeed it may seeme by was not yet fully finished and of which some understand not without some good ground of probability those words of the Prophet Silver is mine and Gold is mine or Of Silver and Gold I have store enough The glory of this latter house shall be greater than the glory of the relation of those that saw it that the second house as the Jewes tearme it which tho demolished by Herod yet still bare that name because there was no interruption or intermission by occasion thereof of the daily solemne sacrifice was by that magnificent King built up againe in more stately manner then by Salomon it was built at first Now suppose I say these men that were suborned to accuse our Saviour had in their evidence to a syllable given in his owne words and had agreed in their testimony as they did not had they been ever a whit the lesse false-witnesses therefore I trow not And here I cannot let passe as notorious and yet as grosse and palpable a calumny as ever I read or heard of of that Romish sycophant that wrote against that acute and nimbleheaded defender of The safe way to salvation by Protestants Religion a worke which for the main substance of it as it opposeth Popery I looke not to see answered by that side in hast however they nibble at some passages here and there in it and snarle at the Author He renders you the Authors words to an heire not a word not a syllable not a letter not a point not a title detracted added altered or displaced No man that reads the Jesuite having not M. Chillingsworths booke by him but would verily beleeve he had uttered and meant the thing spoken of himselfe For thus they runne in his Relation This man to wit M. G. C. speakes so irreligiously sometimes that it may give just occasion for men to enquire what he beleeves concerning the Divinity of our Saviour Christ as when he saith that the doctrine of Transubstantiation may bring a great many others as well as himselfe to Averroes his resolution Quandoquidem Christiani adorant quod comedunt sit anima mea cum Philosophis seeing Christians adore what they eate my soule be with the Philosophers Which having recited he begins to debate the matter with the Authour as having said thus of himselfe Is this matter of eating our Saviour such a pill to your understanding that rather then disgest it you will turne Turke or Infidel If you beleeved indeed that our Saviour Christ is truely God you would not be scondalized that Christians adore him who would and could be eaten no more then him who stood in need of eating and whom the Iewes might have eaten even in a Capharnaiticall and savage manner if it had been his will to permit it Perhaps for these reasons having subjected Faith to reason you wish with Averroes a prosessed enemy of Christians My soule be with the Philosophers Whereas let any man but lightly cast his eye upon the Authors owne discourse and the knavery will at the very first sight without further enquiry evidently discover it selfe His words are these I should desire you to tell me ingenuously whether it be not too probable that your portentous doctrine of Transubstantiation joynd with your forementioned perswasion of No papists no Christians hath brought a great many others as well as himselfe to Averroes his resolution Quandoquidem Christiani adorant quod comedunt sit anima mea cum Philosophis You see the Authours own words exactly retained precisely reported and yet that resolution thence gathered and therein fathered and fastned upon the Author then which he nothing lesse there either uttered or intended Which the rather I recite here partly to shew the desperate shamelesnes of those of that faction not regarding what lies and falshoods they report as out of our Writers tho the books repaired to may presently convince them of grosse untruth of which their practise examples not a few might be produced and partly to manifest how exactly for words men may cary themselves in this kind and yet not escape the just censure of fals-witnesbearers and unjust slanderers of their brethren Lastly to come full home to our selves as he may be a false-witnes who yet relateth a mans own words so Iury and Iudge may both be unjust tho upon a mans own words the one cast him and the other condemn him excluding his exposition and either perverting or mistaking his meaning witnes to go no further but content our selves therewith those that cast and condemned our poore Countreyman a Citizen and Grocer of London one of M. Walkers name in King Edward the fourths time as guilty of no lesse then high treason for which also he was executed for saying he would make his child if he plied his booke heire to the Crown thereby meaning no other then his own dwelling house at the signe of the Crown in Cheapside commonly known and called by that name Nor I suppose could we justly have escaped that censure should we as M. Walker here would have us upon his bare reading of M. Wottons words to us without all further examination of them or hearing of him have proceeded to condemn him of heresie and blasphemy that is no lesse as I take it then high Treason against the highest Majesty But thus much may suffice if not more then sufficient to evince the iniquity and inequality of M. Walkers here pretended request Which yet he was not so unreasonable then as to motion or mention much lesse to presse upon us being then somewhat more reasonably minded then it seemes he now is and which had he pressed upon us as now he saith that he did had been most unequall and unjust for us to have granted 13. As far from truth as the former are those things that in M. Walkers narration next follow to wit that at an other day M. Wotton brought his Expositions whereas in truth his Answers which he cals his Expositions the same word for word that by his sonne have since been published were delivered in