pray all indifferent readers to consider of these maner of dealings For Saint Augustine in that place writeth against the wicked opiniō of those who mistaking Saint Paules wordes of Iustification by sayth without workes do by an euill securitie neglect to liue well not seeking by true faith the helpe of God to the ouercomming of their owne euill concupiscences but doe despise the workes of righteousnes by a dead faith do promise to them selues euerlasting life These be Saint Augustines expresse wordes in that place truely translated which they haue most vntruely and malitiously alleaged against vs against the heresie as they terme it of iustification by faith onely which they woulde haue the simple people to mistake as though wee woulde exclude all things vniuersally sauing faith onely and did vtterly cast away all care of good workes godly life yea and all desire of Gods grace to assiste vs as did they against whom S. Augustine in that place did write But we protest before God and all good men that we neuer meant to make faith the chiefe and onely cause of our iustification but that the grace and mercie of God by our sauiour Iesus Christ promised to the faithfull in his holy worde is the principall and originall cause and very fountaine of our iustification and that faith not a dead faith as they thought against whome S. Augustine doth write but a liuely faith being wrought in our hearts by the said word of God and by the operation of the holy ghost beleeuing Gods promise of his mercy in Christ is the instrumentall cause in vs whereby onely wee receiue our iustification without the merite of our workes and yet being iustified we are most boundē to walke in all good works as much as it shall please God to giue vs grace thereunto for the which we ought to sue by cōtinuall most heartie prayer Which our doctrine you may see to bee most contrarie to the wicked opinion of those against whom S. Augustine writeth in that place and that therefore it is most falsely and malitiously alleaged as against vs who by faith onely iustifying vs meane not to exclude the doing but the merites of our good workes which is no heresie wherewith these men would charge vs but the very truthe it selfe taught in the holy Scriptures and by the auncient godly fathers and learned doctors set down in the very same wordes which we do vse as hath bene before at large declared Of the conclusion of our conference the Pamphleters write thus At the last the Protestantes did make a doe as though some thing had bene wonne when in my soule I protest there was not but in any indifferent audience the aduerse Protestants had bene quite confounded For Master Campion and Sherwin too would haue sayde much more in defence of their cause but one of them by his Commissioners authoritie suddenly made an ende cutting them off from all further speache Thus they do write In deede when we had continued very long and the sunne shining vpon our faces in at the South windowes and the throng being very greate and by occasion of both the heate so intollerable that some of vs were fayne to go out of the chauncel to take breath and to returne againe and Master Campion and wee being nowe come to a very neare point of agreement in the question of iustification as is afore noted in the end of our conference we turning to Master Lieutenaunt sayde If it shall so please you let vs here make an ende With a good will sayd he and so we brake off And here is all the Commissioners authoritie which they speake of that wee or any of vs did take vpon vs. And thus ended our conference with Campion the iudgement of the trueth of their or our reportes whereof wee doe leaue vnto God and to those who were present thereat Surely we by our notes set downe whiles our cōference was yet fresh in memorie and by sundry conferences amongst our selues sithen and with other also who were there present yea and by diligent perusing of the pamphlets written against vs haue endeuoured to set downe all poyntes that were dealt with in our sayd conference with as much trueth concerning the substance of the matter as our diligence and memory and the remembrance of other also could possibly attayne vnto Alexander Nowell William Daiie ¶ The three last dayes conferences had in the Tower with Edmund Campion Iesuite the 18 23 and 27. of September 1581. collected and faithfully set downe by M. Iohn Feilde student in Diuinitie Nowe perused by the learned men themselues and thought meete to be published Ianuarij 1. 1583. ⧠To the Christian Reader grace and peace THou hast here gentle Reader a true report of the whole substance of the conferences had in the Tower the last three dayes faythfully gathered out of the notes of diuers that wrote there and afterwarde perused by the learned men them selues and nowe lastly published by authoritie If any man be inquisitiue why they were set forth no sooner he may vnderstande that being priuate conferences it was thought not much requisite to make thē publikely knowen neither had they bin now set forth if the importunitie of the aduersaries by their sundry vntrue and contrary reportes made and scattered amongst their fauourites had not euen perforce drawen thē forth If Campions answeres be thought shorter thē they were thou must knowe that he had much wast speach which being impertinent is nowe omitted although I protest nothing is cut off from the weight and substance of the matter for of that I made conscience and had speciall regarde Againe if the repliers speaches seeme to be more ample it is because their authorities then alleadged onely in Greeke or Latine are nowe at large put downe both in Greeke Latine and English But for the arguments and answeres I was euen religious faythfully to reporte them as they were Wherein I appeale to all the hearers in Gods sight to whose grace I commit thee Iohn Feilde ⧠A remembrance of the conference had in the Tower with Edmunde Campion Iesuite by William Fulke and Roger Goade Doctours in Diuinitie the 18. of September 1581. as followeth AFter that Master D. Fulke had made a godly prayer for direction in that action that it woulde please God to confirme the faithfull and to confounde the obstinate and wilfull that Campion denying to pray with them had superstitiously all to be crossed himselfe Master D. Fulke beganne with this preface in effect D. Fulke Where as there hath bene some proceeding with you before and we are come by order to the thirde chapter of your booke where you slaunder our Church of Englande the whole Church of God for the definition of the Catholike Church for that we define it so as it shoulde be inuisible we come to prooue both by the Scriptures and Fathers that it is inuisible But this I woulde haue knowen vnto you that our
labijs charitatis meae And againe Verte sermonem meum in fraudem Do you thinke this speach proceeded of the holy Ghost Nay rather howsoeuer it displease you to heare of the matter it proceeded froÌ„ a prophane spirit as I haue said to charge the holy ghost with fraud to pray for such an effect that Holofernes might be taken with her loue snared with her kisses Camp There be no such wordes in the booke Charke Here you are manifestly ouertaken for they are worde for worde in the 9. Chapter and after your translations the vulgar and Vatablus Camp Is that to be esteemed fraude which the holy Ghost deuiseth Is it fraud to deceiue the deuill blame you her who did that she did to a good end and for the deliuery of the Church Char. What dealing is this Euen now he denied the words now finding them strong against his cause he would auoid them with a distinction of good intents to iustifie bad parts Thus you Papists hold against the word of God that we may do euill that good may come of it No Campion Gods spirit is alwayes like it selfe It is not agreeing with the maiestie of the spirit of God for any woman to pray that a stranger should be taken with the snare of his eyes looking vpoÌ„ her or that she may deceiue by lies This story therfore this practise proceded not froÌ„ the holy ghost Camp It is a shame for you to bring that example She desireth God that it will please him to turne the wickednes of Holofernes to the deliuerie of his people She prayeth not as you say that he should sinne Charke She doth pray for it in plaine words and set out her selfe in sumptuous apparell and ornaments to that purpose It is a shame for you Campion to mainteine any such absurditie and againe to deny and misconster the manifest wordes of that you would haue Canonicall scripture We stand before the face of God for the maintenance of his truth and giue such honour therunto that we acknowledge with our harts coÌ„fesse with our mouths that it is perfect full and sufficient and that there is no prophanation in it but you would haue that to be matched with holy scripture which is far vnworthy that honor What say you to the argument the place Let him be taken with the snare of his eies in me turne my speach into deceit or fraud This is a praier for successe in a matter of sinne most vnseemly for the holy ghost Camp I receiue this booke first because the Nicene couÌ„cill hath allowed it then I say further that this was her meaning that whereas God had giueÌ„ Holofernes ouer to fleshly lust that he might be taken with the loue of his eies towards her to be besotted with her yâ— she might the better performe her determinate purpose she prayeth that God will turne his sinne to the deliuery of his distressed people And what doth she commit worthy of blame in this Charke This is not only worthy of blame but also to be condemned as sinfull and sauouring of a prophane spirite that shee prayeth God to blesse her lyes and falshood her tentations and allurements to lust For the Lord hath appointed good wayes for good purposes and for the performance of that his worke he needed not her deceit For as Iob saith God needeth not any mans lie or any mans fraude Which is also true of the fraude and dangerous allurements mentioned in that chapter Camp What Chapter what Chapter Charke The ninth Chapter Reade and acknowledge the words you haue denied Here Campion read in his owne booke saying he perceiued we builded vpon our owne tâ—…slation Camp Well this is mine answere It was not truely and formally fraude but materially in the formall act fraude as for example when the people of the Iewes were commanded to steale from the Egyptians it was in the act theft but not formally theft So Abrahanis intent to kill his childe was to do murther in the act but formally it was no murther Charke You woulde nowe in steade of a short and schoolelike answere drawe me to a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the place in hande to the examination of newe matters Therefore to take you where you will needes be I say the Hebrewe worde hath not that signification that it shoulde import theft but a spoyle which was iust and commanded of God as after a victorie or for a rewarde of their labours seruice in Egypt therefore no theft But this fraude is another thing So the first example is vnlike proueth nothing no more do the rest For Abrahams act was no murther nor intent of murther but a duetiful obedience and seruice to God who had expresly commanded it Lastly you can not thinke that the Magistrate in taking the life of a transgressor or taking away yâ— head of a traytor is a murtherer No this duetie of iustice is layd vpon him by his office from God and can not but ignorantly be called murther And such was the warrant for Abraham in his office Camp I meane killing as it respecteth the taking away of life and no otherwise Charke How do you confound the speciall with the general All murther is the taking away of life but all taking away of life is not murther To kill and to take away life from the wicked by the sworde of iustice is iust and in no respect to carry the name of murther which is euermore euill Walker Concilium Laodicenum The Councill of Laodicea hath left out Toby Iudith the booke of Wisdome Ecclus Baruch Maccabees Esra the third and fourth and in the newe Testament Luke the Apocalyps these are the wordes Quae autem oporteat legi in authoritatem recipi haec sunt Genesis Exodus c. But those which ought to be read receiued for authenticall are these Genesis Exodus c. Where the forenamed bookes are omitted Camp The Laodicene Councill was particular and not generall And againe it reckeneth vp those bookes that were vndouted and not douted of in that part of the world But what maketh this to proue that they were douted of of that Catholike Church They were douted of in that Church or in that part of the Church Ergo they were douted of of the whole Church How holdeth this Therefore it is plaine that these bookes were not doubted of in that whole Church For the same Nicene Council accepteth Iudeth as Hierome testifieth in the preface to Iudeth Further because the Church of Rome approueth them it followeth not that we should dout of them Walker Then you confesse that the Council set not downe al that we should receiue And where you make the Councill particular it was prouinciall and further was confirmed by the sixth generall Councill holden at Trullo Constantine being president as Bartholomaeus Caranza writeth fol. 71. and therfore we may with them leaue out of the Canon Tobie Iudeth the
saith that Christianitie which is the Church is to bee knowen only by the Scriptures He hath these wordes Tantummodoper scripturas nullo modo nulla probatio c. Wherfore thus I frame my argumēt out of Chrysostoms place The Church is to be knowen onely by the Scriptures But visibilitie is not the Scriptures Ergo the Church is not to be knowē by visibilitie Or thus The only note to know the Church by is y◠holy Scriptures Uisibilitie is not the holy Scripturs Ergo visibilitie is not a note to know the Church by Campion Yea out of the Scriptures the Church may bee knowen for the Scriptures appoint visiblenes to bee a marke of the Church But I deny the Minor Fulke Do you say then that visibilitie is the Scripture Campion I say visibilitie is conteined in the Scriptures Fulke My Minor is that visiblenes is not the Scripture so vpon my Maior which is Chrysostomes authoritie I conclude that visiblenes is no marke of the Church Campion I know Chrysostomes place hee denieth not visiblenes to be a note You may go to an other argument Fulke You would not heare Chrysostome by your will but he shal be read by your leaue Tunc cum videritis abominationem desolationis stantem in loco sancto id est cum videritis haeresim impiam quae est exercitus Antichristi stantem in locis sanctis Ecclesiae in illo tempore qui in Iudea sunt fugiant ad montes id est qui sunt in Christianitate conferant se ad scripturas Sicut enim verus Iudeus est Christianus dicente Apostolo non qui in manifesto sed qui in occulto sic vera Iudea Christianitas est cuius nomen intelligitur confessio Montes autem sunt scripturae Apostolorum aut Prophetarum de quibus dictum est Illuminas tu mirabiliter a montibus aeternis Et iterum de ecclesia dicit fundamenta eius in montibus sanctis Et quare iubet in hoc tempore omnes Christianos conferre se ad Scripturas Quia in tempore hoc ex quo obtinuit haeresis illas Ecclesias nulla probatio potest esse verae Christianitatis neque effugium potest esse Christianorum aliud volentium cognoscere fidei veritatem nisi Scripturae diuinae Antea enim multis modis ostendebatur quae esset Ecclesia Christi quae gentilitas nunc autem nullo modo cognoscitur volentibus cognoscere quae sit vera Ecclesia Christi nisi tantummodò per scripturas c. Then when you shall see the abomination of desolation standing in that holy place that is when you shall see an vngodly heresie which is the army of Antichrist standing in the holy places of the Church in that time they which are in Iury let them flie to the mountaines that is they that are in Christianitie let them get them to the Scriptures For as the true Iewe is a Christian as the Apostle sayeth not which is in open sight but which is in secrete so true Iurie whose name is vnderstood to be confession is Christianitie And the mountaines are the Scripture of the Apostles and Prophets of whome it is sayde Thou doest giue light marueilously from the euerlasting moūtaines And againe he sayeth of the Church Her foundations are in the holy hilles And wherefore doeth he commaunde all Christians in this time to get them to the Scriptures Because in this time since heresie hath obtained those Churches there can be no tryall of true Christianitie neyther can there be any other escape of Christians which woulde knowe the trueth of the faith but the Diuine Scriptures For before times it was shewed by many wayes which was the Church of Christ and which was gentilitie but nowe to them that woulde knowe which is the true Church of Christ it is knowen by none other meanes but onely by the Scriptures This is playne for the Antecedent And these particles are playne Nullo modo cognoscitur It is knowen by no meanes there is no other proofe but tantummodò per Scripturas onely by the Scriptures Campion Master Doctor you knowe the order I deny the consequent you proue the Antecedent Fulke You denied the Antecedent and therefore it was necessary for me to proue it But this place also doeth prooue the Consequence of mine argument which you denyed Let me see howe you can answere to the place All other markes in time of heresie or schisme by Chrysostomes iudgement are excluded but onely the Scriptures Therefore visibilitie also is excluded from being a marke of the Church Campion When the Church was first planted there was miracles by which it might be knowen but nowe they ceasing it is to be knowen sayeth Chrysostome onely by the Scriptures meaning that it is not to be knowen by miracles c. Fulke This answere is a senseles cauil which is easily auoyded For there is an Antithesis or opposition in Chrysostomes wordes howe it was knowen before that is multis modis by many wayes and howe it may be knowen nowe by one onely way tantummodo per Scripturas onely by the Scriptures For nowe that Antichrist is reuealed he excludeth all wayes except one sayeth it must be knowen onely by the Scriptures Therefore he excludeth visiblenesse as well as miracles from being an inseparable note of the Church Campion It excludeth miracles c. Fulke Well then your answere is that nullo modo nulla probatio tantummodò excludeth nothing but miracles Campion Yea and that appeareth by the wordes Ante tempus Antichristi For whereunto els should nunc and ante be referred except it had meant by ante before the primatiue Church and nunc nowe by the present and instant time Fulke You do but talke you cannot so put away Nulla probatio No proofe Nullo modo by no meane it is knowen but tantummodo per Scripturas onely by the Scriptures c. He speaketh of all times since heresies haue occupyed the Churches If you wil answere no otherwise I will rest vpon iudgement Campion I haue answered but I would to God I had a notarie well I commit all to God But I pray you note that I say that visibilitie is included in the Scriptures Goade I will examine this cause by a manifest place one of the strongest that is alleadged by those of your side to prooue the visibilitie of the Church namely that out of the 5. of Matthewe A citie that is buylded on a hill can not be hid whereupon they inferre therefore the Church must needes be alwayes visible Campion If it please you though it be commonly alleaged yet it is allegoricall There are many stronger places and you were best take a more pregnant place c. Goade It is alleadged by Hosius and others on your side to this purpose and therefore I chose it notwithstanding if you shunne it and would haue me to omitte it I will Campion No I say there are apter and stronger places neuerthelesse I shunne it not
erre about the matter of resurrectiō the church of Galatia about the matter of iustificatiō Camp The Apostle though he wrote to all yet he meaneth but some fewe of them And what are these to the whole Church being but particular churches the militant Church of Christ cōprehendeth y◠who le nūber of churches on earth As for y◠error of y◠church of Galatia it was no otherwise reproued then as preachers are wōt to reproue who are wōt to rebuke al for some y◠are faulty Goade In deede you say some thing concerning that of Corinth I grant that the error was not so generall For he said Quidā inter vos c. Certaine amongst you c. But for the Galathians it was otherwise For the whole Church was iustly reproued according to that O you foolish Galathians who hath be witched you that you should not beleeue the truthe These wholy fell were not particular mēbers but whole Churches planted by the Apostles them selues replenished with speciall giftes of the holy Ghost And if these faded in the Apostles time in so great a matter what priuilege haue any other churches since y◠they shuld not likewise erre so cōsequētly what priuilege hath y◠militāt church Camp Make your argument then we shal see what ye will conclude Goade So then I make mine argument Whatsoeuer congregation doth erre in matters of faith is not the true Church But the Church of Rome erreth in matters of faith Ergo the Church of Rome is not the true Church Campion This is from the question M. Lieutenant might doe well to put vs in minde of the question Goad I remember the question well I bring an instance according to your meaning because you in saying that the Church cānot erre meane y◠the church of Rome cānot erre this priuilege agreeth not to y◠church of Rome which you say is y◠true Church Campion I deny your Minor The Church of Rome hath not erred You suppose the Church of Rome to be y◠true Church and I beleeue it Goad In deed I only suppose it for disputatiōs sake beleue it not but y◠errors are infinit I should weary my self al y◠company to rehearse many I omit inferior errors of lesse waight and moment and come to those that shake the foundation of faith Campion We shall then runne into all controuersies bring some proper errour that I my selfe shall coufesse to bee an errour that the church of Rome holdeth Goade Why a general must be taken away by particulars Campion That is true Goade Then I reason thus It hath erred and doeth erre in the foundation touching saluation by Christ Ergo it is subiect to errour Campion It doeth not God forbid it should But if you will properly proue it hath erred shewe me that some generall Councill hath erred Goade Well I will followe you in this poynt The Councill of Trent hath erred in m◅ny poyntes of doctrine and namely in the matter of iustification ergo a generall Council hath erred Campion I deny the Antecedent c. Goade It ascribech whole or part of righteousnesse to be inherent in our selues But this is an errour Ergo it errcth in iustification c. The very words I do not remember but this is the effect of the doctrine that Inhaerens iustitia est pars iustificationis That inherent righteousnesse is a part of iustification Campion The Councill hath no such wordes or if it haue it doth not ascribe any thing to righteousnes cleauing in our selues as of our selues but as giuen of God In deede it is in vs but as y◠gift of God As there are vertues faith hope charity which must be in vs seruing to this righteousnes which yet are not of vs. Goade Whatsoeuer is in vs that must iustifie vs before the iust iudgement of God must be perfect But our righteousnes is not perfect Ergo our righteousnes cānot either in whole or part iustifie vs. Campion I answere your Maior it must be perfect according to that perfection that God requireth of vs in this life Goade This is most corrupt For God wil haue a perfect vndefiled righteousnes such as he hath set downe in his own law Qui fecerit c. He that shall do them shal liue in them Gal. 3. Againe Maledictus est omnis qui non permanserit in omnibus quae scripta sunt in libro Legis vt faciat ea c. Cursed is euery one that abideth not in all thinges that are written in that booke to doe them c. Campion I say God doeth not exact such a perfect righteousnesse according to the lawe for we are deliuered from that by Christ c. Goade Then we must rest on Christ alone but if we will be iustified by any part of righteousnes in our selues it must be perfect For Gods iustice alloweth no vnperfect righteousnes Doe you thinke you can fulfill this law c. Campion Yea that I can Goade Can you loue God aboue all things your neighbour as your selfe Can you loue him with all your heart with all your soule and with all your strength Campion I can For when I preferre God before all things and loue him chiefely I loue him aboue all Fulke Note that Blasphemous absurditie Goade If a man may fulfill the lawe to iustification then Christ dyed in vayne Campion What now shall we haue hissing c. Goade Sure it is worthy of hissing and of blusshing too if you had any feare of God before your eyes or conscience I praye God make you to vnderstand the absurdities that you holde that you may be ashamed of them and renounce them Campion Why is euery motion to sinne deadly sinne c. Goade You are like the Pharisee that thought the keeping of the law to consist in the outward letter What say you is not cōcupiscence the motions of the flesh against y◠law of God sinne Campion No that they are not for if I being tempted refraine my selfe and when I haue a motion to euill bridle my selfe from it as if I see my neyghbours goods and haue a motion to steale and do not do I not herein loue my neighbour as my selfe If a man bee in the Queenes Iewell house where he may take some precious thing and bridle himselfe of it and abstaine shall this man be condemned What wil you cōdemne a man for euery litle tentation It is a good thing to be tempted c. Iam. 1. Blessed is he that endureth temptation Goade Ye abuse the place For it is vnderstode of afflictions And as for concupiscence it is the transgression of the law Thou shalt not lust ergo it is sinne But I will leaue this as impertinent to the purpose Consider that notable place in the ende of the fift chapter to the Corinth Epist. 2. Him that knewe no sinne he made sinne for vs that we might be made the righteousnesse of God in him not in
must eate The wordes which the Apostle vseth here are both the imperatiue mode in the Greke text Let him examine him selfe and let him eate and drinke Campion I graunt there are two precepts but this is the summe and ende Vt dignè edat That he may eate worthely Fulke Here is the booke see it and reade it this is the originall giue him the booke it is a reasonable great printe Campion You are stil vrging me to reade Greeke what childish dealing is this can I not see the imperatiue mode aswell in the Latine as in the Greke shall this disaduantage the cause I haue I thanke God and you shall know it asmuch Greke as wil serue my turne and when there is occasion to vse it I will shewe it But is not the Latin toÌ„gue as good a toÌ„gue as the Greeke c. Fulke You were best confesse your ignorance We make not tongues the measure of the truthe but we bring the originall to preuent your cauillations and your finding faulte with translations But I will deale with you with an other argument The whole Church did thinke it necessarie for infantes to receaue Ergo the whole Church hath erred c. Campion Nowe we shall haue a question whether infantes may receaue so we shall runne into all questions Fulke Not so But I will proue that Innocentius Bishop of Rome and all the Church with him as S. Augustine confesseth held this error that it is necessary for infantes to receiue the communion which you your selfe holde to be an error seeing you affirme it is not of necessitie by Christes commandement that any lay men should receiue it You shal heare the wordes of Augustine and of Innocentius both as Augustine citeth them Why are you afraide of the place before you come at it let me reade it Saint Augustine citeth the wordes of Innocentius out of his Epistle to the Bishops of Numidia Lib. 2. ad Bonifacium contra duas epist. Pelag. cap. 4. Haec enim eius verba sunt Illud vero quod eos vestra fraternitas asserit praedicare paruulos aeternae vitae praemijs etiam sine baptismatis gratia posse donari perfatuum est Nisi enim manducauerint carnem filij hominis biberint sanguinem eius non habebunt vitam in semetipsis qui autem hanc eis sine regeneratione defendunt videntur mihi ipsum baptismum velle cassare For these are his wordes But where as your brotherhoode affirmeth them to preach that litle children may be rewarded with the gift of eternall life euen without the grace of Baptisme it is a very foolish thing For except they shall eat the flesh of the sonne of maÌ„ and drinke his blood they shall haue no life in them selues But they which defende this vnto them without regeneration seeme to me that they wil make frustrate baptisme it selfe Upon which wordes of Innocentius Saint Augustine inferreth Ecce beatae memoriâ—… Innocentius papa sine baptismo Christi sine participatione corporis sanguinis Christi vitam non habere paruulos dicit Behold the Pope Innocent of blessed memorie saith that litle children cannot haue life without the participation of the body and blood of Christ. In these wordes Saint Augustine sheweth the generall practise of the Church was that infantes should receaue because it was thought necessary vnto saluation Campion It was onely a practise it was no opinion of necessitie of saluation Fulke Saint Augustine writeth against the Pelagians that held that Baptisme was not necessarie for infantes and that infantes might be saued without Baptisme against whome he reasoneth thus Infantes cannot be saued without they receaue the communion but they cannot receiue the communion vnles they be first baptized ergo infantes cannot be saued vnlesse they be baptized And to proue that they cannot be saued except they receaue the communion he alleaged the decree or diffinitiue sentence of Innocentius Campion Saint Augustine sayth not that the whole churth thought it necessarie to saluation But when Innocetius commanded that infantes should communicate it was but a necessitie of the commandement the necessitie was not in the thing but to keepe the vnitie of the Church and so no error of faith but a lawful practize of the Church but shewe the decree Fulke You haue heard the wordes of Innocentius out of his synodicall Epistle and thus Saint Augustine citeth his decree Ecce beatae memoriae Innocentius papa sine baptismo Christi c. Lo Innocentius the Pope of blessed memorie c. Campion There is no such decree I will beleeue none of your notes He saith they be damned vnles they be baptized but he sayeth not they be damned except they receaue the communion Fulke He saieth both you shall see the booke seeing you will not credit my notes Goade Upon supposition as before I will suppose as you beleeue coÌ„cerning the Church of Rome The head as you hold him of that Church hath erred in matter of faith ergo the Church being the members are subiect to error Campion I denie your Antecedent Goade Saint Peter did erre in faith and that after the sending downe of the holy Ghost vpon him and the rest therefore the principall head of the Church as you accompt of Peter Campion He did not erre in faith I knowe the place Gal. 2. It was a matter of manners not of doctrine For it was but a litle dissimulation Goade It was matter of doctrine for it was somewhat concerning that where about the CouÌ„cill was gathered at Hierusalem touching Circumcision Campion Ye vtterly mistake it for it was about the obseruation of the Lawe by the Gentiles and not concerning Circumcision Goade I nowe well remember it was not directly about the question of Circumcision But it is certaine Peter was in that error that the Gospell pertained not at all to the Gentiles vntill hee was reformed by vision Act. 10 For then at leÌ„gth he said Nunc tandem comperio c. Now at length I finde c so hee was for a time in error But for the place Gal. 2. it is saide Non ambulauit recto pede ad veritatem euangelij Hee walked not with a right foote according to the truth of the Gospel c. Camp It was but a small matter of dissimulation in maners Goade The text saith Paul withstoode him to the face because he was blame worthy and iustly to be reproued therefore it was no small matter And Augustine against Hierome De Petro iure reprehenso Epist. 19. doth iustifie this open reproofe by S. Paul though Hierome laboured to lessen this faulte c. Campion And so do I. But this proueth not that it was any matter of faith Fulke It was against the truthe of the Gospell Truthe is contrary to error Ergo it was an error of faith Camp I haue saide the faulte was in maners for dissimulation When I sawe that he did not walke well or right c. as at
that but let it be tryed by the authority of the Scriptures not the proper witnesses of any but common to both let matter with matter cause with cause and reason with reason trye it c. And Hierome writing to Laeta de institutione filiae fol. 58. willeth not to reade some without doubting and other some warely but he sayth Caueat omnia Apocrypha Let her beware of all the Apocrypha which he nameth in Prologo Galeato Et si quando ea non ad dogmatum veritatem sed ad signorum reuerentiam legere voluerit sciat non eorum esse quorum titulis praenotantur multaquè ijs admixta vitiosa grandis esse prudentiae aurum in luto quaerere And if at any time she will reade them not for the trueth of opinions but for the reuerence of signes let her knowe that they are not theirs whose titles they beare but that many vitious thinges are mixt with them and that it is a point of great wisdome to seeke out golde in dirt Loe here you see that he biddes her to beware in the reading of them Camp The Scripture is principally to be admitted but I would we might haue an argument Walker Then thus I reason That which he biddeth to beware of is not to be holden authenticall But he biddeth to beware of the Apocrypha Ergo the Apocrypha is not to be holden authenticall Camp Apocrypha are taken two wayes First for those bookes which are doubted of and then for such bookes that are not allowed Such were the prophecie of Enoch Iacobs testament and such like which he calleth Somniolenta deliramenta vitiosa c. of those Hierome speaketh in this place and not of those others For what point is there in Ecclesiasticus the booke of Wisdome that is to be found fault with that is vitiosū not good Walker They are called Apocrypha that are not in the Canon receiued and allowed to haue proceeded vndoubtedly from the holy Ghost these Apocrypha are forbidden to be read And Hierome in praefat in lib. Reg. saith Hic prologus scripturarum c. Si quid extra hos est inter Apocrypha est ponendum c. They are not in the Canon therefore Apocrypha are onely to be read Camp Woulde Hierome forbid the gentlewoman to reade Ecclesiasticus where there are giuen so many morall precepts Non sunt in Canone Hebraeorum sed in Canone Christianorum They are not in the Canon of the Hebrewes but they are in the Canon of the Christians Walker They may be read for morall Lessons but not for matters of religion which must be proued by Canonicall scripture What say you to the second booke of Macchabees Thinke you that to be holden for Canonicall scripture Camp I thinke so What should let Walker What say you to that sentence 2. Macch. 12. thrust into the text Salubris est oratio pro defunctis and to that which followeth Et si quidem bene vt historiae competit hoc est vt ipse velim sin autem minus digne concedendum est mihi And if I haue done well and as is meete for a storie this also my selfe did wish c. Camp It is marueile that you should say that it is thrust in Walker It is noted so by other and the duetie of an historiographer is to reporte things done truely and plainely without arguing like a Logitian but he sayeth Ergo salubris est oratio pro defunctis Therefore prayer for the dead is healthfull which appeareth first to haue bene set in the margent But howe auoyde you the last Can such asking of pardon be of the holy Ghost wherein hath hee fayled or of whome shall hee be pardoned Camp The interpreter asketh pardon of his speach for his style and not for the doctrine The holy Ghost asketh no more pardon then Paul did when he saide Rudis sum sermone I am rude in speach when he spake in a base and lowe stile Charke Campion howsoeuer you labour to auoyde the direct course of disputation and haue obteined some change of the question I must call you home by and by Notwithstanding I minde a while to followe this your course and to finde you out in your owne trace where I maruaile howe you dare thus speake in this assemblie For what a blot is it to the holy Ghost to affirme he should aske pardon and to the Apostle Saint Paul to say his stile to the Corinthians is a base and lowe stile But to vse no further preface I will thus proue that the 2. booke of the Macchabees was not indited by the holy Ghost Whatsoeuer needeth pardon either for matter or maner was not indited by the holy Ghost But the story of the 2. booke of Macchabees needeth pardon either for matter or maner Therefore it was not indited by the holy Ghost Camp This man would be angrie with me if he knew why Charke If I woulde knowe I not why to be angrie with you a notable and vowed enemie of the trueth of God and a seditious man against the state But I come not to deale with your person but against your errors Answere the argument Camp I say the writer of the Macchabees asketh pardon of his speach neyther doeth Paul blotte the holy Ghost when he saide that he was rudis sermone that he spake not so eloquently nor so finely as sometimes he might Charke You answere not directly and beside you affirme an error For S. Paul craueth no pardon for his stile but setteth his plainesse against the set and curious speach of the false Apostles who did come in gay apparance and shewe of wordes as if they had had al the power of trueth that might be and yet in this plaine style the Apostle was of al others most mightie most eloquent As for the 2. booke of Macchabees which you make Canonicall seripture here I will make this challēge if you dare answere it to proue many lyes in it through 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that therefore it was written by a prophane spirite for the matter But to come to the Syllogisme and to disproue your distinction I reason thus The writers of holy Scriptures aske not any pardon at all either for the matter or for the manner Therefore they aske no pardon for their style Camp I deny your Antecedent Paul sayeth Rudis sum sermone Charke If Saint Paul saith Rudis sum sermone doeth he I pray you in those wordes craue pardon for his stile howe hang your wordes together I will proue my Antecedent by the place of Peter None that haue written as they were directed by the spirit of God craue pardon either for matter or for manner But all the holy men of God that wrote the Scriptures haue written as they were directed by the spirit of God Therefore none of the holy men of God that haue written the scriptures craue pardon either for matter or manner Camp This acknowledging
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
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
whereby he is iust but whereby he hath made vs iust Walker Sinnes inherent in vs and righteousnes inherent in Christ Camp Nay I say righteousnes inhereÌ„t in vs giueÌ„ by Christ. Charke Campion ye answere not the argument but in place of answering you lay downe newe positions Your inherent righteousnes is not graunted you if it were yet it followeth not that it should bee a fellowe cause in our iustification with Christes righteousnes Camp I say we haue inherent righteousnes and Christ had not inherent sinne Charke What answere is this to my argument If we had it yet it followeth no more that it should iustifie vs then the inherent sparke and light of nature which is leaft should make vs able of our selues clearely to behold the hidden mysterie of the grace and mercie of God reuealed onely by fayth in the Gospell Camp Will you not admitte an answere Charke You are graueled It is no answere to bring a newe and false position that not applied to the argument But I will not let you rest in this starting hole you shall haue Syllogismes Our sinnes alone were of full sufficient force by imputation to condemne Christ vnto death Therefore his righteousnes alone is of full and sufficient force by imputation to iustifie vs vnto life Againe and shortly In Christ there was no inherent sinne to be any cause of his condemning Therefore in vs is no inherent righteousnes to be any cause of our iustifying Camp I dispute not how he might haue iustified but by what meanes he doth iustifie vs. Charke This is plainely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to say the least Answere the reasons Doe my arguments proue howe he was able or rather proue they not most manifestly howe he hath iustified vs But as the Scribes Pharisees supposed some inherent sinne in Christ so you their successors suppose some inherent righteousnes in vs and we shall as truely liue by this as he iustly dyed for that Campion I deny the argument because his will is otherwise Charke Here againe is a newe proposition brought in place of an answere But I haue proued that GOD hath done it and therein reuealed his will which is most holy and most perfect in al proportion of iustice Camp I deny it For we haue inherent righteousnes Charke I would you would so answere as men might see with what iudgement ye vse so many denials But I will followe my argument and proue there is no inherent righteousnes in vs whereby we are more or lesse iustified If we haue any inherent righteousnes as a fellowe or helping cause of our iustification then the righteousnes of Christ is not alone without vs so full and absolute to our saluation as were our finnes to cause his condemnation But Christs righteousnes alone without our inherent righteousnes is de facto as full and perfect euery way Therefore we are aswell de facto iustified onely by the imputation of his righteousnes as he was condemned onely for the imputation of our sinne Camp I deny the Minor Charke You deny it manifestly against the doctrine of the Apostle Rom. 5. teaching that there was more force in the righteousnes of Christ to saluation then was in our sinne to condemnation Whereupon you are turned out of your shiftes and must confesse that as Christ was condemned onely for the imputation of our sinne without any inherent sinne of his owne so are we iustified onely by the imputation of his righteousnes without any inherent righteousnes of ours Which who so denieth he shal be found to match mans supposed righteousnes with the righteousnes of God and to exalt flesh and blood against the almightie Here Master Lieutenant signified the time was past Let vs conclude with prayer ALmightie GOD and most mercifull Father we giue thee humble and heartie thankes in the name of Iesus Christ for all thy goodnes especially for the alone and all sufficient sacrifice of Iesus Christ beseeching thee that renouncing all opinion of any righteousnes of our owne we may by faith lay holde of his righteousnes to our euerlasting saluation Also wee thanke thee for the inestimable treasure and armour of thy holy worde whereby thou makest thy children rich in all spirituall and heauenly wisdome inhabling them euen the weakest of them to triumphe against proud and bold ignorance against the deceitfull and lying spirits gone out into the world in these last times to deceiue those that receiue not the knowledge and loue of thy trueth Moreouer good Lord as it hath pleased thee to vouchsafe some blessing vpon our labours this day for which we likewise giue thee thankes so we beseech thee yet further to blesse them that the trueth may be more and more precious to thy children and that they which are yet without may either acknowledge the power and light of thy Gospell if they belong to thee or being none of thine may stand conuicted in their owne conscience as children of darkenesse and haue their mouthes stopped which they so open against the light and trueth of thy most holy word Graunt vs these things O Lorde and whatsoeuer else may serue to thy glory and our saluation through Iesus Christ our onely Lorde and Sauiour Amen Io. Walker W. Charke Imprinted at London by Christopher Barker Printer to the Queenes most excellent Maiestie Anno 1583. Flagitiosus Apostata Contentiosam tumidam aridam stramineam Lutherus in praefat in epist Iacobi Hanc epistolam S. Iacobi laudo pro vtili ae commodo habeo S. Aug. in his booke of retractations S. Hieromes wordes Euseb. lib. 3. cap. 25. Euseb. lib. 2. cap. 23. Adulterinam August contra Faustum li. 28. cap. 2. lib. 33 cap. 6. Distinct. 19. cap. In Canonicis Ad normâ—… Hieronimi August De Doctrina Christian lib. 2. ca. 8. Euseb. lib. 3. cap. 25. dubia ficta adulterina August de Ciuit Dei lib. 15. cap. 23. contra 2. Gaudent Epist. lib. 2. cap. 23. Testes Domini Distinct. 19. cap. In Canonicis S. Augustines wordes The report of them Distinct. 19. Cap. de Canonicis Hierom. Prolog Galeat epistola ad Paulinum Distinct. 20. Cap. De libellis The Pamphleter here saith that M. Day meaning the Deane of Windsor hauing belike of olde store an other Canon to reade c. But the trueth is their affirming the word Canonicall to make all writings so named to be of equall authoritie occasioned vs to reade that Canon before Distinct. 19. Cap. In Canonicis The Decretall Epistles are together numbred with the Canonicall Scriptures To the which if you ioyne the saying of Pope Agatho Distinct 19. Cap. Sic Oâ—…es which is neere to it All the Sanctions of the Apostolique Sea are to be taken as established by the deuine voyce of Peter him selfe sayeth Pope Agatho To the which if you ioyne this which Pope Leo magna voce with a great voyce saith here woulde you not thinke that Sathan or Beelzebub bellowed out most horrible
and brought vp in this realme in schooles places where good learning hath bene taught so that he might haue bene a good instrument in this common wealth and Gods Church but contrary to his bringing vp his friendes expectation hope that this Church might haue conceaued of him like an vnnaturall man to his countrey degenerated from an English man an Apostata in religion a fugitiue from this realme vnloyal to his Prince hath not onely fled to the man of Rome an aduersarie to Christ and his doctrine but hath gotten a courage from that Romaniste with certaine other his sectaries to come into this realme againe to vndermine the Gospell of Christ to seduce Gods people and withdrawe her Maiesties lawfull subiectes to disobedience and sedition and hath bene disguised in Ruffians apparel in diuers places of this realme to plant secretely that blasphemous Masse and other Poperie whereunto it appeareth hee hath allured many vnstable fooles and in Yorkeshire where his Sectaries disciples are apprehended iustly imprisoned nowe they rage as I heare say and curse him that euer he came there So ye see what maner of mā we are to talke withal What good we shall do with him the Lord doeth knowe other maner of men then we are and of another calling were more meete to talke with him then we notwithstanding we will doe our best that we can God giue it good effect As for you Campion I heare say that you vse to scoffe and iest at such as come to conferre with you we come not for that purpose it is not our profession yet I giue you warning Si quam maledicendo coeperis voluptatem eam malè audiendo amittes Now to the question which is that the scriptures containe all things sufficient to saluation against the assertion of your booke For you say that the Lutherans haue cut off many bookes from the body of the new Testament and so diuided them from the Canonicall scripture which is not true Camp Yes that they haue and therein they haue done euill Walker Here Master Walker reade the words out of Campions challenge Campion Luther hath cut off the Epistle of Iames the second epistle of Iohn Iude and the seconde of Peter Luther hath found fault with these and improued them in his prefaces vpon those Epistles Walker Luther hath not doubted of them himselfe but shewed that others haue doubted of them Campion It is one thing to doubt an other thing to cut off Bring me the bookes and I will shewe that he hath cut them off Walker That can not bee shewed if the bookes were here For the Doctors doe not agree concerning these bookes that are of the Canon Some recite more some recite lesse as Origen Hierome and others and yet it were hard to say that they cut off any of the Canonicall bookes They doe as Luther may shewe what bookes were doubted of in their time and yet no whitte preiudice the bookes of the Canonicall Scripture Campion Well I say whatsoeuer they might doe then yet now seeing the Church hath otherwise determined it is blasphemie for any to doubt of them The Lutherans doe doubt of them bring me the bookes and I will shewe where Luther doubteth and therefore blasphemeth because the Church hath taken away the doubt videlicet the third Councill of Carthage and that of Laodicea Walker I do not professe my selfe a Lutheran but a Christian But if olde fathers and olde Councils haue not receiued these bookes for Canonical and bookes to ground our faith vpon then can not new men nor the Tridentine Council being ful of errors make thē Canonicall August de doct Christ. lib. 2. ca. 8. leaueth out Baruch the two last bookes of Esdras Hieronymus praes in li. Reg. Hūc prologū galeatū principiū vocat He saith Igitur Sapientia quae vulgo Salomonis inscribitur Iesu filij Syrach liber Iudith Tobias pastor nō sunt in Canone Macchabaeorū primū librū Hebraicū reperi secūdus Graecus est quod ex ipsa phrafi probari potest Eusebius also ecclesi hist. lib. 6. cap. 18. fol. 368. sequentibus omittit tertiū quartū Esdrae Tobiae Iudith Baruch Sapiētia Ecclesiastici Machabaeorum libros Paulo post De eo inquit qui est apud Hebraeos nonnulli dubitauerunt c. Sed ego dico ficut mihi à maioribus traditum est quia manifestissimè Pauli est Ibi de secunda Petri Epistola à nōnullis dubitatur De duabus vltimis Iohannis Epistolis apud quosdā dubia sententia He omitteth in the forenamed place the third fourth booke of Esdras the bookes of Tobie Iudith Baruch of Wisdome of Ecclesiasticus of the Macchabees A litle after Cōcerning that saith he which is written to the Hebrues many haue doubted but I say as hath bene deliuered vnto mee from mine Elders because it appeareth most manifestly to be of Paules There also concerning the second Epistle of Peter he sayth that it was doubted of many and so with some were the two last Epistles of Iohn The same Eusebius lib. 4. cap. 26. loquens de Melitone Episcopo Sardensis Ecclesiae qui recitans volumina veteris Testamenti omittit Esdras Tobi Hester Iudith Baruch Sapientiae Syrach Macchabaeorum c. Speaking of Melito the Bishop of the Church of Sardis who reckening vp the volumes of the olde Testament he omitteth Esdras Tobie Hester Iudith Baruch Wisedome Syrach the bookes of the Macchabees c. And the Laodicean Councill omitteth Lukes Gospel the Apocalyps You see therefore that these old fathers haue left these bookes out of the Canon and yet were they neyther called heretiques nor blasphemers Campion It is not lawfull to cut off the bookes of the olde Testament from the Canon which not onely as I haue sayd Luther hath done but also Caluine The one hath reiected those bookes I haue named and the other reiecteth the bookes of Tobie Ecclesiasticus the booke of Wisdome the bookes of Maccabees Baruch and the like which are de syncero Canone Walker What is this to that I haue saide I haue shewed that the olde Doctors haue refused them for Canonicall and therefore so many may we refuse and they them selues wil de no further admitted then they agree with the Canonicall Scriptures and these bookes which you name haue alwayes bene esteemed Apocrypha Augustine contra Maximinum Arrianorum Episcopum lib. 2. Cap. 14. Nec ego Nicenum nec tudebes Ariminense tanquam praeiudicaturus proferre Concilium nec ego huius authoritate nec tuistius debueris Scripturarum authoritatibus non quorumcumque proprijs sed vtrisque communibus testibus res cum re causa cum causa ratio cum ratione concertet c. August against Maximinus the Bishop of the Arrians Neither oughtest thou to bring the Council of Arimine nor I the Nicene as it were to preiudice the trueth neither should I be holden with the authoritie of this nor thou of
Charke I do not onely thinke but knowe of a certeintie that you are deceiued and will shewe you the booke Camp Note this obiection This is myne answere to it Hermogenes the Heretike did alleadge a bastard tradition and Tertullian doth call him to proue his opinion by true scriptures For Tertullians argument is not to say It is not written Therfore it is not true but to call him to proue the Scripture true which he alledged for him Charke And note this answere He that euen now knewe no such booke taketh presently vpon him to discourse of the argument thereof What great boldnes is this From what present reuelation doth it come Beside your boldnes your error is great in affirming that Hermogenes brought a bastard tradition For there is no such thing as may appeare to any man that for triall hereof wil reade the booke Hermogenes is cōfuted for saying as an Aristotelian Philosopher the God made al things of materia prima Againe of your answere I conclude that of necessitie the proofe of euery particular tradition must be by a true scripture And it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a generall position Tertullian would haue Hermogenes proue all that he helde by scripture Camp I say it is not to shewe a bastard writing for his tradition but that which is true scripture Charke And that is all I aske for what do I seeke more but to proue that euery tradition must be proued by true Scripture when therefore you Iesuites bring in vnwritten traditions concerning your Candles your vnholy graines your Agnus deis and such beggerly stuffe wherewith you abuse and pester the world Tertullian sayth you bring a Vae vpon your selues except you can proue the vse of them by Scriptures Camp Why I say it must needes be proued there or els it is not to be receaued Charke Remember what you graunt I aske no more To leaue Tertullian with you to aduise better of I alledge also a place of Basill out of his treatises called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 capite 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This place doth clearely establish the sufficiencie of scripture and banisheth all vnwritten and selfe will worshippings Consider the place for it is worthy of consideration as making against you in this question and charging you with pride and apostasie for bringing in things not written Camp Well let these your speaches passe Reade the place S. Basill is not against vs. Charke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. It is a manifest Apostasie or falling away from the faith and a fault of high pride eyther to dissalowe any thing written in the Scriptures or to bring in any thing not written seeing the Lorde hath sayde My sheepe heare my voyce with other arguments to that purpose Camp I will not trouble the auditorie with this place For Basill declareth that in some things we must be referred to tradition he speaketh onely for the alleadging of false scriptures and hath nothing against me Charke Then nothing can make against errour if this make not agaynst you But you abuse the auditorie and knowe not the drift of Basill in this place and that I will make euident to all the companie Take the booke and reade it if you can the place is easie Greeke and the sentence but short Camp I had rather reade it in Latine then in Greeke I vnderstande the Latine better I maruell you are so much in your Greeke Charke If I shoulde not haue brought it in Greeke but in Latine then you woulde haue taken exception against the interpreter I bring not the interpretour but Basill him selfe in the tongue wherein hee wrote Here Campion being long in turning the Latine booke coulde not finde the treatise but desired Master Charke to finde it who answered I haue it readie in Basill him selfe If you flee to the interpretour turne your owne booke Camp I haue answered you Saint Basills meaning is as it was then a common doctrine that it is a great fault to disalow true scriptures or to bring in false scriptures and to father a false writing vpon the Apostles Charke I protest that hauing perused the circumstaunces of the place I finde no such generall or particular drifte of the father as you misreport but a playne doctrine and sundrie argumentes to proue it that nothing is to be receiued or brought into the Church that is not written Camp Your protestation is no argument I am acquaynted with this dealing since the other day But the scope of Saint Basill is as I haue saide Charke My true protestation doeth ouerway your misconstruing as wel of Basill nowe as of Tertullian before and therein I referre my selfe to the examination of both places If you will or can read but twentie lines further your owne eyes shal see and giue sentence against your selfe Camp I haue giuen you the sense of the Doctours wordes and neede not reade the place Charke Reade first and then answere What Authour or what place can make against you if you will of your selfe frame an interpretation after your owne purpose without reading the wordes or making conscience what construction you giue Campion Saint Basill in other places is of a contrary iudgement and I am sure he is not contrary to him selfe The Apostles had fayth before they wrote and therefore it must needes be the scope Charke What kinde of answere is this Speake to the purpose or confesse your insufficiencie Basills owne woordes in this place doe euidently proue that hee is against you answere them or acknowledge your selfe not able to satisfie the Doctour Campion Was all written when the Apostles first taught Charke Is this any answere to Basill Propounde no newe questions but answere the former place so full against you Camp You see mine answere Charke I see and all men may see your vntrueth to shift off the matter Basills wordes are too strong against you To your newe question I answere that since the worde of God was first written that which hath bene written conteyned sufficient matter to saluation Campion Then what needed so many additions since of the Prophets and Apostles writings if we had sufficient before Charke The most honourable addition of the Prophetes and Apostles serued to a clearer manifestation of Christ of whome Moses had written before but added nothing to the substance In the after noone The Question Whether faith onely iustifieth M. Charkes prayer OUr helpe is in the name of the Lorde c. Almightie God merciful Father we acknowledge against our selues that we were conceiued and borne in sinne and corruption that wee remaine vnprofitable to any thing that is good and most prone and ready to that which is euill in thy fight Ignorance doeth possesse our mindes and dulnesse ruleth in our vnderstanding so that of our selues wee can not see into thy glorious and excellent trueth and in our selues wee finde no health nor hope of health Therefore according to thy riche mercie O Lord take