Selected quad for the lemma: faith_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
faith_n catholic_a church_n true_a 17,747 5 5.6225 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A08330 A true report of the priuate colloquy betweene M. Smith, aliĆ¢s Norrice, and M. VValker held in the presence of two vvorthy knights, and of a few other gentlemen, some Catholikes, some Protestants : with a briefe confutation of the false, and adulterated summe, which M. Walker, pastour of S. Iohn Euangelist in Watling-streete, hath diuulged of the same. S. N. (Sylvester Norris), 1572-1630.; Walker, George, 1581?-1651. 1624 (1624) STC 18661; ESTC S461 30,866 65

There are 5 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Church of Iesus Christ nor That it hath his true faith I demanded of M. Walker whether the true Church be alwayes visible or no M. WALKER The true Catholike Church is not visible because it comprehendeth the whole companie of the elect of which the greatest part being Saynts in heauen are without the ●each of mans eye and cannot be seene M. SMITH My question is not of the Church Triumphant in heauen but of the true Catholike Church Militant vpon earth M. WALKER But thus your wordes and question cohere not togeather for it is as absurd to say that the Catholike Church is militant on earth as it is absurd to affirme that all mankind euen the vniuersall race of Adam are now liuing M. SMITH Was S. Cyprian then absurd who called the militant Church vnited and conioyned in the vnion and linke of Priests adhering togeather The one Catholike Church To communicate with Cornelius the head only of the militant was to communicate with the Catholike Church Was S. Augustine absurd who tearmeth the militant Church whose communication we must hold The Catholike Church The militāt Church dispersed ouer the face of the earth The Catholik Church The militant Church in which alone one baptisme may be wholesomelie obtayned The one incorrupt Catholike Church The militant Church in which by imposition of handes the holy Ghost is giuen The only Catholike Church The Church in which good and euill be as chaffe and corne The Catholike Church The Church in which the sacrifice of bread and wine in faith and charity ceaseth not to be offered throughout the vniuersal world The holie Catholike Church But to presse you no further with the testimonies of men was the Sonne of God absurd when he sayd Other sheep● I haue that are not of this fold thē also I must bring they shall heare my voyce there shal be made one fold one Pastour Who were these other sheep but either Predestinate or many of them at least To what Fold were they brought Without doubt to Christs visible to Christs militāt to Christs Cath. Church for to no other would he bring them no other is his fold no other his one and that singular one of which he is chiefe and supreme Pastour Therfore not your inuisible but the visible and militant is the true Catholike Church of IESVS Christ Neyther are the Predestinate as you pretend before they be called mēbers of his Church because this is the oracle of Truth They are not of my fold So much by the way for this Now that you may cease your wrangling and stick no longer in ambiguity of tearmes I tell you once agayne that I speake not of your Catholike and Inuisible but of that militant Church which we are bound to obey and heare that of whose Communion we ought to be that of which Christ sayd di● Ecclesiae Tell the Church What hold you of this I● this Church visible or no M. WALKER I distinguish That Church may be two wayes considered either in regard of her outward men outward duties of Christianitie outward preaching of the Word and administration of the sacraments and so it is visible Or in respect of the inward election inward faith and spirituall graces and so it is inuisible A Catholike Gentleman Reserue your distinctions vntill you neede them and now answere directly to the Question M. SMITH Aske me any question and try whether I will vse any such tergiuersation What is your Conscience so horride or cause so bad as you dare neuer giue a direct answere M. WALKER I answere as I belieue M. SMITH And doe you not belieue what your owne men teach concerning this poynt Doe they not teach that the Church which we ought to heare is visible Or may we heare an inuisible Doth not D. Whitaker define it by these markes to wit by the true preaching o● the word and the true administration of the Sacraments And although he addeth that the whole Essence of the Church consisteth in them yet he sayth that these markes signifie and denote a visible Church Now doe not you belieue as he doth Or are you afrayd to confesse that Church to be visible which he confesseth Man consisteth of an inuisible essence yet is a visible man so the Church may haue some inuisible dowries yet be a visible Church M. WALKER You wronge D. Whitaker He neuer taught that the whole Essence of the Church consisted in the true peaching of the word and administration of Sacraments M. SMITH I wrong him not He teacheth writeth and diuulgeth it in print though you wrong both your self and vs in making these digressions and picking euery occasion to run from the matter M. WALKER Dare you stand to this that M. Whitaker writeth it I haue b●th read him and studied him I am sure he hath no such matter M. SMITH His bookes are extant you studied thē sleightly or vnderstood them not I am sure he hath it M. WALKER Because I will not spend tyme in contesting with you let this be the issue before these Gentlemen let vs send for D. Whitakers workes and if I doe not shew that he doth proue against Bellarmine that the Catholike Church i● inuisible that this is a mayne poin● large lie disputed by him and a mayne controuersie betweene him and Bellarmine let me branded with the marke of a wilfull liar M. SMITH Will you still fly to the ambush of your hidden Church Shall I neuer bring you into the open field Haue I not sufficiently inculcated vnto you that my question is of the Church now militant on earth of that Church which we ought to heare and obey of that which M. Whitaker describeth by the marks before mentioned of that which your selfe distinguished to be partly visible partly inuisible And run you now back againe to your counterfait Catholike and wholy inuisible Church Are you so sodainly distracted of your wi●s as not only to forget what I had sayd but what your selfe had written immediatly before Yet perhaps I may mistake It proceeded not so much from the giddines of your braine as from the guiltines of your cōscience which mistrusting the vaine vnaduised chalenge you made would now like a cunning Cheater by foysting in these words guilefullie diuert it to a quite cōtrary purpose For I neuer denied that M. Whitaker forgeth an inuisible Catholique Church but I so often canuased you frō straying thither as cōmon sense might haue taught you to keep on your way stād to your tackling in mantaining the quarrell or saucie exception you tooke against me for saying that M. Whitaker placed the whole essence of the Church in the true preaching of the Word and true administration of the Sacraments This was that which then I sayd Against which you contested as before your words to deliuer the contestation truly as it was I must in part repeate againe leauing out that counterfait passage which you
second Principle presupposeth that Faith must not only be infallible but whole also and entire Witnes S. Athanasius in the beginning of his Creed Whosoeuer doth not beleiue the Catholike faith wholy i●uiolably he shall vndoubtedly perish And S. Leo A great safeguard is faith entire true faith in which nothing can be added by any nothing de●racted because vnlesse fayth be one it is no fayth the Apostle auerring One Lord One fayth To which purpose our Sauiour himself auoucheth He that beleiueth not shall be condemned that is he that beleiueth not euery Article expresly or implicitely he that beleiueth not the whole summe of Christian doctrine shall incurre the forfaiture of his saluation For as all thinges are to be obserued whatsoeuer Christ commanded so all thinges to be beleiued whatsoeuer he taught and in such manner that albeit the mysteries in themselues are some of lesse some of greater moment some necessary some contingent yet as they are testified reuealed by God they ought all with equall certaintie with the same suretie to be credited imbraced because God in all things little or great necessarie or contingent is equally great of infallible credit Wherby euery Article is so fast riuetted and conioyned one with the other in such vniforme due proportion as they make sayth S. Gregory Nazianzen A Chayne truly golden and soueraigne From which if your withdraw but one you withdraw your saluation as S. Ambrose writeth The third principle is that the ordinary meanes of atteyning the whole and infallible fayth is from the mouth of the Church from the lipps of her Priests because fayth is by hearing and hearing by the word of Christ to wit by the word expounded and preached vnto vs by his lawfull Pastours for it goeth immediatly before How shall they heare without à Preacher and how shall they preach vnlesse they be sent Whervpon it necessarily ensueth that if they be sent from God to teach his heauenly doctrine if we be bound to beleiue vpon their testification and preaching their preaching must be certaine their testification vndeceiuable that we may securely receyue the word they deliuer not as the word of men but as it is indeed the word of God who by their mouthes speaketh by their testimony sealeth and witnesseth it vnto vs especially seeing he commandeth vs to heare them as himself to obey them as his Vicegerents to beleiue them vnder penaltie of damnation seing he giueth them the Holy Ghost to teach them all truth to sanctifie them in veritie that we be not carryed about with any winde of doctrine Therefore as God cannot immediatly by himself or mediatly by any other deliuer that which may be doubtfull or vncertaine so much lesse by the mouth of those his witnesses his iudges his interpreters by whome he vttereth the Oracles of truth as I might more fullie demonstrate if I had not already elswhere vncontrollably euicted and proued the same Yea the very nature and condition of fayth perforce requireth it for that being an assent of our vnderstanding to thinges not appearing that is not appearing true through the euidence of truth in themselues or through the light of humane reason but only by this Authority of God who testifieth them not immediatly but by the meanes of his Church by the true Pastors and expounders of his word if they might vary or fluctuate in the rules they follow of expounding Scripture their expositions were wauering their preaching vncōstant they could neither assuredly teach nor we vndoubtedly giue credit to that which they propose as to constant stable and immoueable truth For it is a warrantable position of M. Whitakers Such as the meanes be such of necessitie must be the interpretation it selfe But the meanes of interpreting obscur● places are vncertaine doubtfull and ambiguous Then it cannot possibly be but that the interpretation it self is vncertaine if vncertaine then may it be false But if it may be false as M. Walker acknowledgeth the interpretation of the Protestants Church may be it ouerthroweth the ground of fayth the foundation of Religion For what els can be or any of his fellowes assig●e on which they stay o● an●ker the certaintie of diuine beleife Their particuler pastor Their priuate spirit But if their Pastours in generall may trip and slumble how much more their particular If the publicke spirit of their Church be errable how deceiuable is their priuate Againe the priuate spirit is hidden it cannot be discouered and opened to others and yet it is open it self to a thousand illusions Therefore it must be tryed by some more known and certaine spirit What then do you build vpō the voice of God that speaketh in the Scripture but that voyce is no other then the bare word or out ward letter of Holy writ of that ariseth our strife and debate That also speaketh most errably to you as your owne contentions and infinite hersies sprung from thence beare euident witnes If your reply that it speaketh inerrably to such a read and heare it with faith and humilitie as they ought you send me still a rouing in the wildernes of vncertaintie for how shall I know who they be that obserue those conditions as they ought And what is this as they ought after your Puritanicall or Caluinian manner Lastly let it be for this wil be your last and poorest refuge that the true Church of IESVS Christ hath alwayes such well known to him what is this to you if you know them not What if we disproue as we plainly doe your Church to be his Where are your humble Readers your faithfull interpreters Or to yield you the vttermost your can aske though most impudently begged at our hands let there be such Readers such Interpreters among you eyther they alwayes infallibly obserue the conditions specified interpreting still a right and then your Church by their direction contrarie to your Tenent can neuer erre Or they fallibly obserue them and so your Church may run astray it cannot be the pillar of faith the storehouse of truth the voyce or trumpet of supernaturall beleife as my last two Syllogismes printed by M. Walker vndeniably conclude which as long as they shall remaine registred in his Pamphlet so long shall it beare the record of his owne disgrace so long shall it proclayme the victorie of our Catholike cause so long shall the Protestant Church lie panting in the dust without life without strength without vitall breath Now let vs behold what new life M. Walker can breath into it to reuiue it againe Marry that a true Christian Church may erre for a tyme in some one fundamentall poynt necessarie to saluation he disputeth thus M. WALKER That which the auncient Apostolicall Church might doe other succeeding Churches may doe with the same successe But the Apostolicall Church might erre and did erre in a maine poynt and yet haue a true faith and was a true
signifieth to redeeme as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greeke Redime doth in Latin hence Peric signifieth a Redeemer Purkan Redemption and so Theodotio so Vatablus so S. Ierome and so all others expresse the word wherfore either all texts are falsified or all are true If all be false the Hebrew is tainted with corruption as wel as the Greeke and Latin if all true your translation is inexcusable in discording frō the truth of all originalls from the version of all the Auncients Syr Edward Harwood with others These Disputations about the Hebrew text are aboue our capacity an● filter for the Schooles I pray you descend to some more profitable matter and easier for our vnderstanding M. SMITH Vpon this motion only I ceased to rip vp the residue of Protestant corruptions but not because neyther I nor my Companion had any more to say as M. Walker according to his fashion peruersly relateth for infinite other deprauations of theirs are obuious and apparent as the fraudulency they vse in translating one and the same Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Traditio For in such textes as mention good and holsome Traditions they in lieu of Traditions read Ordinances where the Scripture speaketh of such as be naughty or friuolous they in hatred of our Apostolicall Traditions carefully set downe the right word Traditions The same deceit they practise in expressing the Hebrew word Sheol Hell For where it may import a third place besides Heauen Hell they warily turne it into Graue Gen. 37. v. 35. Osee 13. v. 14. but where it cannot be meant of any other then of the dungeon of the damned there they rightly translate it as in the 15. of the Prouerbes v. 24. Hel beneath I might haue vrged how they iuggle with the word worthy or make worthy against the merit of workes how they change Iustifications into Statutes Iustice into Righteousnes against inherent Iustice how they sometyme forsake the Hebrew and retire to the Greeke as in the 9 of Prouerbes v. 2. Wisdome hath mingled her wine because the Hebrew word Masecha wholy fauoureth the ancient mingling of water and wine in the Chalice which the Fathers vrge as necessary and Protestants vtterly neglect they fly to the ambiguity of the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which may signify to powre out as well as to mingle so did they alwayes read before his Maiesties Correction Otherwhiles they leaue the Greeke and haue recourse to the Latin as Act. 13. though the Greeke be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they sacrificing to our Lord as Erasmus translateth it yet your translation still runneth according to the Latine they ministring vnto our Lord because you cannot abide that word although written by God which doth any way relish of the Sacrifice of the Masse These and a thousand such of your guilefull sleights I might haue alleadged howbeit to condescend to the reasonable motion of Syr Edward Harwood and the rest I willingly omitted them and returned to prooue the second part of my first Antecedent which you denied The Antecedent was this The Word of God preached in the Church of England is corrupted with errours and the men that deliuer it are subiect to errours The former part is already prooued by the manifest adulterations of your Bible before mentioned The second Part. That your men also are subiect to errour I conuince by the confessiō of M. Reynoldes M. Whitaker and the most learned Protestantes of our tyme who expresly write that the true Church which they suppose theirs to be may erre and all her Pastours in some points of fayth euen necessary to saluation Therfore your men your Preachers and Pastours are subiect to errour M. WALKER I graunt that the true Church may erre for a tyme insome one fundamentall point necessary to saluation this I affirme of the Protestant Church of our Church of England Ground what you can vpon this M. SMITH Though some of the Catholikes heerevpon cryed out We haue inough inough let vs leaue of our dispute yet to giue more full satisfaction to the Protestāt Gentlemen who perceaued not so soone the absurdity of this Paradoxe or folly of M. VValker in granting that very part of my Antecedent which before he denyed I proceeded a little further and argued thus against him If your Church may erre in one point necessary to saluation it may as well erre in another and so cā propose nothing vndoubtedly to be belieued as an article of fayth Which inference though M. VValker denyed and with many cauillations laboured to diuert yet it euidently followeth as I thus declare That Church which hath not sufficient authority to persuade all the mysteries of fayth she proposeth to be infallibly true can propose nothing vndoubtedly to be belieued as an article of fayth But your Church which may erre now in one point now in another at least for a tyme hath not sufficient authority to persuade all the mysteries of fayth she proposeth to be infallibly true Therefore your Church can propose nothing vndoubtedly to be belieued as an article of fayth For seeing the Articles in which your Church may erre are not specified by God nor knowne to your followers they may iustly feare and suspect least those she now proposeth be some of them in which she may erre But with feare and suspition no fayth can stand nothing can she propose which ought vndoubtedly to be belieued as S. Augustine in the like case most excellently discourseth saying How can he be belieued who thinketh he may sometyme tell a lye for perchance he then lyeth when he c●mmaūdeth vs to beleeue him So you that hold your Church may sometyme erre haue cause to doubt least then perchance she erreth when she commaundeth you to follow her doctrine If cause to doubt no cause to obey no cause to credit her Nay it implyeth cōtradictiō we should with diuine fayth giue credit vnto her For by fayth we are assured that the thing she teacheth cannot possibly be otherwise then we belieue By doubtfulnes or suspicion we mistrust they may be otherwise Els why do we doubt Why do we suspect Therfore it is a manifest implicancy and irreconciliable cōtradiction that fayth and doubtfulnes should cōsist togeather that we should be vndoubtedly persuaded of the truth proposed yet stagger and misdoubt of the truth therof as you haue iust cause to do as long as you maintayne that your Church may deceaue you Besides to prooue out of the former Paradoxe that your Church is not the true Church I framed these Syllogismes That Church which may erre for a tyme in a fūdamentall point necessary to saluation hath no certainty for that tyme. Yours is such Ergo it is no true Church Againe That Church which may erre for a tyme in a fūdamentall point necessary to saluation hath not sufficient meanes of saluation for that tyme. Yours is such Ergo it is no true Church M. WALKER These
arguments are sophisticall and faulty because they haue foure termes With the same Censure he discarded other Syllogismes as crazy imperfect he denied to answere any Enthymeme and such was his feare of hazarding both cause and credit as he reiected also a true and perfect Syllogisme in moode in figure as the Roman Catholike whome he mentioned maintayned against him Though he did not renounce his saluatiō if it were not true which M. Walker after his wonted fashion most iniuriously reporteth of him M. SMITH Your cause lyeth a bleeding whē you thus begin to wrangle about Syllogismes yet these two which I haue heere repeated with the third which immediatly followeth in your Summe are such as no Scholler would reprehend For the conclusion which seems to make the Syllogisme consists of foure termes supposeth another Syllogisme vertually inuolued which to auoid tediousnes I did not expresse After which manner all Enthymenes are iustified and allowed notwithstanding one of the premisses be suppressed and the conclusion be immediatly inferred A thing very vsuall amōg the learned in all Vniuersities especially when the Disputant is either straitned with shortnes of tyme or the Auditory ouer-wearied as now it was with the combersome delay of 4. long houres by reason of your manifold digressiōs idle repetitiōs impertinent discourses ouer-tedious writings c. But you who neuer appeared in any such schooles neuer peeped out of Aristotles Parua's no meruaile though you could not apprehend that kind of arguing I pardon your ignorance I beare with your dulnes passe to those Syllogismes in moode and figure which you could not gainsay That Church which hath not the whole entire and infallible fayth hath not meanes sufficient to saluation But that Church which may erre for a tyme in a fundamētall point hath not the whole entire and infallible fayth Therfore it hath not meanes sufficient to saluation M. WALKER I deny your Minor and do put you to prooue that the Church which may erre hath not the whole and infallible fayth M. SMITH If it do erre it hath not whole entire fayth if it may erre it hath not infallible fayth as thus I prooue That Church which is subiect to errour in a fūdamentall point hath not the whole and infallible fayth But that Church which may erre in such a point is subiect to errour Therfore it hath not whole and infallible fayth M. WALKER I must tell you that your Minor proposition is false For a Church may be so farre subiect to errour that it may haue a possibility to erre yet not be void of the whole and infallible fayth It is one thing to be subiect to errour and another to erre actually We hold that our Church may erre but doe not thinke that it doth erre in any fundamentall point M. SMITH If it may erre if it hath a possibility to erre it is as bad as if it did erre in respect of the certainty which fayth requireth for thus I argue That Church which is fallible in a fundamental point of fayth is not also infallible in the whole and entire fayth But your Church which is subiect to errour which hath a possibility to erre in a fundamentall point of fayth is fallible Therfore it is not also infallible in the whole entire fayth Vnlesse it may be in one and the same thing both fallible and infallible subiect to errour and not subiect which is impossible M●●revpon I concluded that sith the Protestāt Church is fallible in fayth it hath not any true supernaturall fayth if it hath no true fayth it cānot be a true Church which were the two things I was engaged to prooue and so I haue fully discharged my taske to the satisfaction I hope of all that be present For M. Walker being caught in this net of contradiction had no meanes to escape vnles as S. Augustine writeth of Maximin●s the Arrian Bishop By talking much and nothing to the purpose he might seeme at lest to answere who was not able to hold his peace Therfore some of his companions intreated he might argue a while to see whether he could haue better fortune in impugning our Church thē he had in defending theirs But before I relate the disputation he begā I think it expedient for the instruction of such as are better conuersant in Diuinity to vnfold certayne Theologicall Principles or Articles of fayth whereby the force of my former argument the truth of our doctrine the folly of protestancy and the enormity of M. Walkers answere may more apparently be discouered The first Principle is that Fidei non potest subess● falsum fayth cannot be subiect to any falsity Faith is infallible sith it hath for its former obiect the prime Verity or authority of God it relieth vpon his infinite Knowledge which cannot be deceiued in vnderstanding any thing and vpon his infinite Veracity which will not beguile vs in testifying an vntruth It is impossible for God to lye we haue a most strong comfort But as it is impossible for God to lye impossible for him to witnes that which may be false So it is impossible for the habit of Fayth to incline or for the act of Fayth to assent to that which is lyable to any falshood As S. Thomas singularly well prooueth by these 3. Reasons First because nothing can belong to the habit or act of fayth except that which appertaineth to theyr formall obiect and in such sort as it is instilled conueyed and drawne from thence Euen as no colour can be seene vnlesse it be garnished with the beames of light But to prime Verity no falsity can belong not only any actuall falshood but not so much as any thing that hath a possibility to be fals no more then any pronesse to euill can appertayne to soueraigne goodnes or the least shadow of darknes to light inaccessable Therfore Fayth which hath prime Verity for her obiect must not only be free from actuall errour but from all lyablenes therunto or possibility of erring Secondly euery act euery habit is necessarily lincked with equall proportion of certainty or assurance with the certainty of the obiect of which it borroweth its dignity nature and forme Wherfore as the prime Verity and testimony of God so the habit and act of Fayth are both infallible Thirdly Fayth is an intellectuall Vertue which doth perfect enoble the faculty of our Vnderstanding which cannot receaue the dye of perfection from any other thing then that which is true because that only as all Philosophers teach is her proper peculiar obiect Hence it is that S. Paul describeth Fayth not only to be the substāce that is the setled ground the constant and stabl● foundation according to S. Dionysius of our hope but also an argument of things not appearing that is a firme assent a demonstratiō or Conuiction as S. Augustine sayth of our vnderstanding which cannot be obnoxious to any danger of falsity The
Church Ergo Other Churches also M. SMITH I deny the Minor The Apostolical Church did not erre in a maine point of Fayth M. WALKER The act of Christs Resurrection from the dead taught in Scripture is a fundamentall point of Fayth The Apostolicall church did erre in it Ergo c. M. SMITH I distinguish the Minor The Apostles erred or rather were ignorant of the act of Christes Resurrection as a matter of fact I graunt the Minor as an Article of faith I deny it for it was indeed a diuine verity a true matter of fact at that tyme yet no article of faith M. WALKER Behold Gentlemen he denyeth the Resurrection to be an Article of faith M. Smiths Companion You wilfully abuse him he denyeth it not absolutly but only for that tyme because it was not then sufficiently promulgated M. WALKER Reach me the Bible I will shew the contrary in expresse words of Scripture So opening the booke he read how some of the Apostles knew not the Scriptures that he must rise from the dead how our Sauiour appeared to the eleauen Apostles and vpbrayded their incredulity and hardnes of hart because they belieued not them who had seene him after he was risen At this Syr William Harington houlding vp his handes sayd Oh I protest I neuer heard any poynt so playnely prooued M. SMITH Proued he hath proued nothing For I graunt the Apostles were slow in belieuing dull in vnderstanding the resurrection of Christ but I say it was not then an article of fayth which they were obliged expressely to belieue because it was not so clearely promulgated and proued vnto them as to bynd them vnder the payne of Heresy or note of Infidelity at that tyme to imbrace A Protestant Gentleman Say you soe Was it not expressely reuealed in Scripture sufficiently promulgated by Christ himself M. SMITH I acknowledge the reuelation of scripture the promulgation of Christ sufficient in themselues yet not in respect of the Apostles capacity for they were yet rude and weake of vnderstanding they had not as yet that inward illustration and light of the holy Ghost those outward motiues and arguments of credibility which did binde them to giue infallible assent to so deep a mystery They assented and belieued that all was true which Christ sayd all true which the Scriptures reuealed concerning his Resurrection yet they knew not whether the sense and meaning of those passages were to be taken truely or enigmatically properly or figuratiuely Of this only were they ignorant and this ignorance proceeded from their imbecillity and weakenesse and not from the insufficiency of holy Scripture The Gentleman satisfied with this M. Walker grauelled with the former answere his reasoning was at an end howbeit his brawling would haue no end for the foresayd distinction held him at such a bay as notwithstanding he bragged much of his dexterity in disputing yet with all his cunning Sophistry he could not so much as frame one argument one Syllogisme or Enthimeme against it But being in a monstrous rage because his pryde could not brooke such a fowle ouerthrowe I thought good to giue way to his chafing fit and so departed with these very wordes VVell well I perceiue my distinction hath choked your argument you are not able to proceed Now after that I arose and walked hard by the other Priest that assisted me explicating the answere that I had giuen sayd M. Smiths Companion It is not much to be meruailed that the Apostles at the first conceaued not aright the Resurrection of Christ for the Apostolicall Church was then in her infancy it was newly raysed not wholy finished begun but not perfected The Euangelicall law was deliuered yet not fully established And can this vndergoe the censure of any other doctrine then sound and orthodoxall Or could M. Walker iustly vaunt of any allegation he brought against M. Smith Then read and detest the arrogant style of an hereticall Impostor who blusheth not to print after his confusion these flourishing wordes M. WALKER M. Smith being put to silence with those proofes the other Priest to make vs this breach fled to another shift and denyed the Apostles to haue byn a Church at that tyme because the Holy Ghost was not yet come downe nor the Euangelicall law reuealed M. SMITH If you were not already returned in open Court for a willfull lyar forger false Prophet and Priest of Baal your wordes might beare some shew of credit but in so much as you are notoriously defamed for such an one I onely intreat the Reader to iudge whether I were silenced or you whether my Companion fled to another shift or defended the answere which I gaue Whether you haue not writhed his wordes to a faulty strayne of purpose to reprooue them For he denyed not the Apostles to haue byn at that tyme a Church nor that the Euangelicall law was reuealed but that it was not promulgated that the Church was not yet perfect or law cōplete For how could it be then fully cōplete when it wanted diuers guiftes and endowments necessary to the entyre complement and perfection therof When it wanted the spirituall comfort and inward Vnction of the Holy Ghost When it wanted her outward promulgation essentially required to the establishmēt of a law When it wanted the guift of tongues most requisit for the conuersion of all Nations When it wāted that vigour or strength of verity of which our Sauiour sayd Tarry in the Citty till you be endued with power from high How then M. Walker how could your conscience serue you to carpe or reprehend that saying of his strengthned and supported by such warrantable proofes To peruert and disorder the whole frame and methode of your owne disputation How could it serue you 1. To charge me with tearming the Apostles ignorance or hardnesse of hart an errour of forgetfulnesse 2. To faygne me to say that the Scriptures had not expressely reuealed how Christ should rise from the dead 3. To faygne that I intreated you to shew it me out of the Ghospell 4. That I persisted still how the Scriptures had not sufficiently reuealed it All most iniurious and hideous lyes Notwithstāding these leasinges of his or selfe-deuised fancyes he mustreth a band of three seuerall probations and graceth the last with the admiratiō or solemne acclamation of one of his Assistantes howbeit it was vsed vpon another occasion Such is euery where the iugling of that vain-glorious Sycophant yet he dischargeth me from the labour of refuting his arguments sith they are nothing else but engines raysed to batter the forts of his owne conceits which neuertheles he suffereth not to fall to the ground without the sound of his fellowes applause praysing himselfe for ouercomming himselfe in such a skirmish in which he is both the assayler and the assayled he the Maister and he the maystered idely conquering and basely conquered both at once Moreouer he reprooueth me for making a strange