William Whitaker · 1 of 89

Preface

It seemed desirable that this, the great work of one of the greatest of our early divines upon the cardinal point of difference between the churches of the Roman and the reformed communions, should be comprised in the collection of the Parker Society; not only on account of its intrinsic merits, but also for its historical value; as exhibiting the posture of defence assumed by our schools against that change of tactics in the management of this great controversy, which is to be dated from the institution of the Society of Jesus.

William Whitaker (or Whitacre) was born at Holme, in Lancashire, A.D. 1547, of a good family, nearly related to Alexander Nowel, the celebrated dean of St Paul’s. He was bred at Cambridge, where he soon distinguished himself, and was in 1579 appointed the Queen’s Professor of Divinity. In 1586, through the influence of Burghley and Whitgift, and in spite of obstinate and powerful opposition, he was made Master of St John’s College in that University; soon after which appointment he took his degree of Doctor in Divinity. His delay in assuming the doctorate seems curious, and it was maliciously made the ground of a most unjust imputation of puritanism. How small was his sympathy with the disciplinarian party, appears from the manner in which he speaks of their great leader, Cartwright, in a letter preserved by Bancroft: “Quem Cartwrightus nuper emisit libellum, ejus magnam partem perlegi. Ne vivam, si quid unquam viderim dissolutius ac pene puerilius. Verborum satis ille quidem lautam ac novam supellectilem habet, rerum omnino nullam, quantum ego quidem judicare possum. Deinde non modo perverse de Principis in Rebus Sacris atque Ecclesiasticis auctoritate sentit; sed in papistarum etiam castra transfugit; a quibus tamen videri vult odio capitali dissidere. Verum nec in hac causa ferendus, sed aliis etiam in partibus tela a papistis mutuatur. Denique, ut de Ambrosio dixit Hieronymus, verbis ludit, sententiis dormit at, et plane indignus est qui a quopiam docto refutetur.”

But though far removed from the disciplinarian tenets of the puritans, Whitaker undoubtedly agreed with them in their hostility to the Arminian opinions, which in his time began to prevail in the Church of England; as appears from the share taken by him in the prosecution of Baret, and the devising of the Lambeth articles. The history of such proceedings is foreign from my present purpose; but the reader will find a full detail of the circumstances connected with them in Strype’s Life of Whitgift, Book IV., Chapters 14–18. Shortly after the termination of that memorable dispute, Whitaker died in 1595, in the forty-seventh year of his age. He was married, and had eight children. It was pleasantly said of him, that he gave the world a child and a book every year. Of his children I have nothing to communicate, and his books will speak for themselves. They gained for him in his life-time a high character, not only with friends, but with enemies also. “I have,” says the writer of his life, in Lupton’s Protestant Divines, “I have heard it confessed of English Papists themselves, which have been in Italy with Bellarmine himself, that he procured the true portraiture and effigies of this Whitaker to be brought to him, which he kept in his study. For he privately admired this man for his singular learning and ingenuity; and being asked of some of his friends, Jesuits, why he would have the picture of that heretic in his presence? he would answer, Quod quamvis hereticus erat et adversarius, erat tamen doctus adversarius: that, ‘although he was an heretic, and his adversary, yet he was a learned adversary,’ p. 359.” “He was,” says Gataker, “tall of stature and upright; of a grave aspect, with black hair and a ruddy complexion; a solid judgment, a liberal mind, an affable disposition; a mild, yet no remiss governor; a contemner of money; of a moderate diet, a life generally unblameable, and (that which added a lustre to all the rest) amidst all these endowments, and the respects of others (even the greatest) thereby deservedly procured, of a most meek and lowly spirit.” “Who,” asks Bishop Hall, “ever saw him without reverence? or heard him without wonder?”

I have only to add, that in the translation I have endeavoured to be as literal as would consist with a due regard to the English idiom. Had I considered myself at liberty to use more freedom, I should have made my task more easy to myself, and the work perhaps less tedious to the reader: for there is a prolixity in Whitaker’s style, which contrasts unfavourably with the compactness of his great antagonist, Bellarmine; though he trespasses far less upon the student’s patience than Stapleton, whose verbose rhetoric made him admired in his own day, and whose subtlety of logic cannot save him from neglect in ours.

It is proper to apprise the reader, that, besides the Controversy translated in the present volume, the only one published in the Author’s life-time, three others are contained in the ponderous volumes of his works, all of which were published after his death by John Allenson, B.D., Fellow of St John’s College. The subjects of these are De Ecclesia, De Conciliis, and De Romano Pontifice. He encountered Bellarmine also on the other controversies in succession, De ministris et presbyteris Ecclesiæ, De sanctis mortuis, De Ecclesia triumphante, De Sacramentis in genere, De Baptismo, and De Eucharistia. “Quas,” adds his biographer, Obadiah Assheton, a Fellow of his College, “utinam licuisset per otium relegisse, et mandasse typis universas: id enim auditoribus erat in votis vel maxime; quorum cum summa admiratione et acclamatione singulas tractarat controversias. Ceterum studio respondendi Bellarmino in omnibus controversiis religionis provectus, optimum censuit has elucubratas disputationes apud se reponere; ratus (quod postea non evenit) aptius fore tempus eas per otium evulgandi. Sed Deo immortali, cujus consilia sunt abyssus inscrutabilis, aliter visum est.”

The following is the list of his works:

1. Responsio ad decem rationes Edm. Campiani. 8vo. Lond. 1581.

2. Responsionis ad decem rationes Edm. Campiani Defensio. 8vo. Lond. 1583.

3. Refutatio Nic. Sanderi, quod Papa non sit Antichristus. 8vo. Lond. 1583.

4. Answer to W. Rainold’s Reprehensions, &c. 8vo. Camb. 1585.

5. Disputatio de Sacra Scriptura contra hujus temporis Papistas. 4to. Cantab. 1588.

6. Pro authoritate atque αὐθεντίᾳ S. Scripturæ Duplicatio contra T. Stapletonum. Libri 3. Cantab. 1594.

7. Prælectiones de Ecclesia, &c., edited after his death by J. Allenson. 4to. Cantab. 1599.

8. Prælectiones de Conciliis. 8vo. Cantab. 1600.

9. Concio in 1 Thess. v.12. 4to. Cantab. 1599.

10. In Controversiam de R. Pontifice, distributam in questiones viii, adversus Pontificios, imprimis R. Bellarminum, prælectiones. 8vo. Hanov. 1608.

11. De Sacramentis. Francof. 1624. 4to.

A complete collection of his works in Latin was printed in two vols. folio, at Geneva, 1610.

Besides the above, Whitaker published in 1569 a Greek translation of the Common Prayer; in 1573, of Nowel’s larger, and in 1575, of the smaller Catechism.

1. Survey of Discipline, p. 379, Lond. 1593.

2. Librum et Liberum quotannis. See Fuller’s Life of Whitaker in the “Holy State.”

3. History of the moderne Protestant Divines, &c., faithfully translated out of the Latin by D. L., London, 1637.

THERE have been many heretofore, illustrious Cecil, who have defended the papal interest and sovereignty with the utmost exertion, the keenest zeal, and no mean or vulgar erudition. But they who have played their part with most address, and far outstripped almost all others of their own side, are those men who now, for some years back, have been engaged most earnestly in this cause; a fresh supply of monks, subtle theologians, vehement and formidable controvertists; whom that strange—and, in former times, unheard of—Society of Jesus hath brought forth, for the calamity of the church and the christian religion. For when, after that black, deadly, baneful, and tedious night of popish superstition and antichristianism, the clear and cheerful lustre of the gospel had illuminated with its rays some portions of the christian world, attracting, and by its incredible charms at the same time moving all, to gaze on, admire, and cleave to it; on a sudden, these men sprang up to obscure with pestilential vapours, and ravish, if possible, from our view, this light, so hateful to themselves, so hostile and prejudicial to their interests. So indeed had John, that holy disciple of Christ, predicted in the Apocalypse, that a star, which had fallen from heaven, and received the key of the infernal pit, should remove the covering of the abyss, and cause a mighty smoke to issue forth, like the smoke of a great furnace, shedding darkness over the sun and heaven. This pit, from the time that it was first opened, hath not ceased to exhale perpetual smoke to blind the eyes of men; and, as the same prophet had foretold, hath sent forth innumerable locusts upon the earth, like scorpions, who have wounded with their deadly stings all men upon whose foreheads the seal of God was not impressed. The event itself, the best interpreter of prophecies, has illustrated the obscurity of the prediction. For who can doubt the meaning of the star, the pit, the smoke, the locusts; who considers the state of the papal power, in which they are all so pourtrayed to the very life, as to be most readily discerned by any one, who can compare together the past and present, and interprets what was foretold, as about to happen, by that which is seen to have occurred?

Amongst these locusts,—that is, as very learned men justly deem, amongst the innumerable troops of monks—none, as we before said, have ever appeared, more keen, or better prepared and equipped for doing mischief, than are the Jesuits at this present day; who in a short space have surpassed all other societies of that kind in numbers, in credit, and in audacity. Other monks, following the rule and practice of former times, lived in general a life of leisure and inactivity, and spent their time, not in reading and the study of the sciences, but in repeating by the glass certain offices for the canonical hours, which contributed nothing to the advancement of either learning or religion. But the Jesuits have pursued a far different course. They have left the shade of ancient sloth and inactivity, in which the other monks had grown grey, and have come forth to engage in toils, to treat of arts and sciences, to undertake and carry through an earnest struggle for the safety of the common interests. It hath come to be understood, that the cause of Rome, which, shaken by the perilous blows dealt on every side by men of ability and learning, had begun in many parts to totter and give way, could never be defended or maintained, except by learned and diligent and active champions.

For just as a dilapidated mansion, unless propped up almost every day by fresh and firm buttresses, will suddenly fall in a violent and total ruin; so they perceived that the Roman synagogue, tottering as it is and threatening to fall, in its wretched state of decay and dilapidation, hath need continually of new supports and bracings, to maintain any remnant of its state and dignity under the pressure of such vehement assaults. Yet, with all their efforts, shall they never be able to avert the imminent calamity, or rescue themselves from perdition. But as buildings, whose foundations are subverted, their walls pierced, their roofs uncovered, having no part secure, can never be supported long by any multitude of artificial props; so that church of theirs, all rent and torn on every side, in which nor roof, nor pillar, nor foundation remains sound, intrinsically devoid of firmness and integrity, must at length fall headlong, and crush many to destruction in its ruins. We are not to believe that the Roman church is flourishing, because the Jesuits are often able to impose upon inconstant and unskilful persons, and lead them into the popish fraud by the lures and blandishment of their fallacious reasoning, any more than we should think that health and life is restored to the frame that labours in a mortal malady, when it gains, for a moment, some casual alleviation of its pain. Let the Jesuits do their best; let them exert, if possible, still more intense sedulity, and omit nothing that learning and diligence can accomplish without the aid of truth. Yet all they can accomplish will be this,—to prop a falling house with mounds and buttresses, to afford some brief refreshment to antichrist, now gasping in his last long agony,—and, despite of all the rules of physic, apply remedies to a desperate disease.

Amongst these Jesuits, Robert Bellarmine, a native of Italy, hath now for several years obtained a great and celebrated name. At first he taught scholastic divinity in Belgium; but afterwards, having removed to Rome, he treated of theological controversies in such a manner as to excite the admiration and gain the applause of all. His lectures were eagerly listened to by his auditors, transcribed, transmitted into every quarter, and treasured up as jewels and amulets. After some time, for the sake of rendering them more generally useful, they were epitomized by a certain Englishman. Finally, the first volume of these controversies hath been published at Ingolstadt, printed by Sartorius; and the rest are expected in due time. Now, therefore, Bellarmine is cried up by his party as an invincible champion, as one with whom none of our men would dare to engage, whom nobody can answer, and whom if any one should hope to conquer, they would regard him as an utter madman.

When you, honoured sir, demanded my opinion of this writer, I answered, as indeed I thought, that I deemed him to be a man unquestionably learned, possessed of a happy genius, a penetrating judgment, and multifarious reading;—one, moreover, who was wont to deal more plainly and honestly than is the custom of other papists, to press his arguments more home, and to stick more closely to the question. Thus, indeed, it became a man who had been trained in the schools, and who had made the handling of controversies his professed business, to dismiss all circumlocutions and digressions, and concern himself entirely with the argument; and, having read all that had been previously written upon the subject, to select those reasons and replies which seemed to have most strength and sinew in them. In the prosecution of which task, he was led to weigh everything with a profound and anxious solicitude, and has sometimes differed from all his predecessors, and struck out new explanations of his own; perceiving, I suppose, that the old ones were not sound enough to be relied on. We have an instance (Lib. II. de Verbo Dei, c. 16) in his treatment of 1 Cor. 14, where the apostle forbids the use of a strange language in the church. The former popish writers had usually understood that place to speak of exhortations or sermons to the people; or, if they conceded that it might be understood of divine service, interpreted it so as to require that the words of the minister should be understood, not by the whole congregation, but only by him who made the responses in their name. But Bellarmine, having reflected upon the falsehood and weakness of these evasions, hath invented another for himself; and pretends that the apostle is speaking not of the offices of divine service, nor yet of the public reading of the scriptures, but only of certain spiritual songs and canticles. What, however, or what sort of things these were, or why they required to be recited in a known language more than the common prayers or the scripture lessons, it is not so easy to understand. But of this place of the apostle, and this new pretence of Bellarmine’s, we have discoursed sufficiently at large in the second question, chap. 18, of this controversy.

So again, (Lib. III. cap. 2) where he is answering an objection drawn from St Peter’s calling the prophetic word a lamp, he does not answer, as Hosius did (Lib. III. contra Proleg. Brentii), that in the prophecies there are many things plain, and that what is enigmatically spoken in the prophets is expressed clearly in the gospel; but he says that prophecy is called a lamp, not because it is easily understood, but because it illuminates when it is understood. He saw clearly that Hosius’ exposition left our doctrine of the perspicuity of scripture in sufficient strength, and therefore excogitated this new one; upon which we have treated, Quest. IV. chap. 4.

In the same way, when we maintain that the mysteries of the faith should be concealed from no one, and allege, in proof, those words of Christ, “What ye hear in the ear, that proclaim ye upon the house-tops;” Bellarmine, (Lib. IV. c. 12) has recourse to a strange and hitherto, I think, unheard of interpretation;—that is, says he, if need so require. He gives the allegation no other reply whatever; and how proper and apposite an answer this is, I am content that others should determine.

Again, when we urge that the scripture is called canonical, and therefore is, what that very appellation indicates, the rule of faith and of living; Bellarmine answers confidently in the same chapter, that the scripture was not published to be the rule of our faith, but to serve “as a sort of commonitory, useful to preserve and cherish the faith received by preaching.” So that, according to this new interpretation of Bellarmine’s, we learn that the scriptures are no rule of faith at all, but a certain commonitory,—an honour which they share with many others;—nor yet even a necessary one, but only useful to the end of preserving the traditions. This is a noble judgment of the value of scripture, and altogether worthy of a Jesuit!—a judgment which leaves the bible only the office of admonishing us, as if we only required to be admonished, and not taught.

Bellarmine hath innumerable such new discoveries; with which he defends the papal cause in a different manner, indeed, from that of its former patrons, but yet is so far from really serving it, that he hath rather done it the greater damage and injury with discreet and attentive readers, who have any care for their faith and religion. For hence it appears that, while Bellarmine cannot approve the answers of others, it is impossible to invent new ones, which are not worse than the old.

I remember, too, that in the course of that same conversation between us, I allowed Bellarmine the merit of dealing less dishonestly with the testimonies of the fathers than is customary with others, and of not captiously or maliciously perverting the state of the question; a fault which, I found, had particularly disgusted you in certain writers; whereas religious disputes and controversies should be managed in such a way as to eschew all craft, and seek truth, and truth alone, with a holy earnestness. I acknowledged that, while our adversaries erred grossly in this respect, our own party stood not so wholly clear of the same fault, as became the investigators of truths so sacred; which, in proportion as they are more heavenly in their nature, and concern us more nearly, should be searched into and handled with so much the more sincerity.

But, since many—more eager for contention than for truth—propose to themselves scarcely any other object than to be able to say something against their opponents, and to be esteemed the champions of a cause, which they love much better than they understand; so it comes to pass, that the just state of the question is laid aside with a cold neglect, and truth, as usual, is lost in altercation. Thus Bellarmine himself, where he undertakes to impugn our doctrine of the perspicuity of scripture (Lib. III. c. 1), lays this down as the state of the question, “Whether scripture be so plain in itself as to be sufficient, without any explication, to determine controversies of faith;” and he imposes upon us the office of maintaining that the scriptures are in themselves most plain and easy, and stand in need of no interpretation:—as if we either thought that every part of scripture was plain, easy, and clear, or ever rejected the exposition and interpretation of the scriptures! Could Bellarmine really hope to impose upon us in so gross a manner, as to make us confess that to be our opinion which had never so much as entered into our thoughts? But to this we have given a sufficiently plain answer in our fourth question.

I could wish that this were the only place in which Bellarmine had shewn bad faith, and that he had not elsewhere also played the Jesuit in matters of no small importance. For there can be no end of writing and disputing, no decision of controversies, no concord amongst Christians, until, laying aside all party feelings, and assuming the most impartial desire and design of investigating truth, we apply ourselves entirely to that point where the stress of the controversy lies,

And now (since I am addressing one who is accustomed both to think of these matters often and seriously himself, and to listen to others delivering their own opinions upon them also), allow me briefly to explain, and commend to your consideration, a thing which I have long wished for, and which I trust might be accomplished with singular advantage and with no great difficulty. Our adversaries have very often demanded a disputation, and declared that they especially wish and long for permission to hold a scholastical contest with us upon the subject of those questions which form the matter of our present controversies. Whether this demand be made hypocritically, as many suppose, or sincerely, I, for my part, would desire that they may have their asking. For, although they cannot deny that they have often been disputed with in Germany, France, and England, nay, that those learned men Melancthon and Brentius repaired to Trent for the sole purpose of defending the confessions of their churches against the Popish theologians; yet I would have them made to understand, that they have no reason for believing that their cause hath become one whit the better, since it hath been espoused by its Jesuit patrons, than it was heretofore, when defended by the ancient orders. Let the Jesuits be allowed acute, ready, practised, eloquent, and full of resources; let them be, in a word, whatever they are, or are believed to be: yet truth is ever one and the same; and still, the more it is attacked, shines out with greater brilliancy and lustre. Perhaps, indeed, it will be said that none can be found who would dare to stand a conflict with the Jesuits, or are fit to be matched with such opponents. I know well, for my part, how confident and boastful these men are, and what a look and mien they assume in disputation; as if they had only learned how most arrogantly to despise their adversaries, not how to give a better answer to their arguments. Yet, since the sacred laws of such conferences secure to each man just so much advantage, and no more, as he can win by reason and argument, and whatever is said must be reduced to the rules of Syllogism; there remains no ground to fear that painted falsehood will prevail more than simple and naked truth. Not to speak of foreign nations and churches, where every one knows that there is abundance of learned men, this island itself possesses persons well skilled in every kind of learning, who could readily, not only explain the truth, but defend it also against any adversaries. In both our Universities there are men so practised and skilled in every portion of these controversies, that they would rather forfeit their recognisance, than shrink from a dispute so honourable, just, and necessary,

Nor do I see that any so great inconvenience is to be apprehended from this course, as some suspect. For, although those who are bound to this cause by a blind superstition, will probably be so far from reaping any advantage, that they will rather be rendered still more obstinate, and some fickle people will, perhaps, be even alienated from our side; as, in every disputation, opinions incline different ways, according as the several auditors are capable of judging or inclined to attend and reflect;—yet, we may reasonably augur the following important results: First, it would easily appear, what is the true state of the question in each controversy; which should be pressed, driven home, and discussed, without regard to impertinent and trifling altercations. In the next place, it cannot be doubted, that all who measured religion, not by the decrees of men or their own caprice, but by the standard of the holy scriptures, and were ready to acknowledge and embrace the truth when it was found, would easily reject the rotten devices of the papists, and prefer that sound and wholesome doctrine of the faith, which our churches have drawn from the pure springs of scripture, to their old and idle superstition. Lastly, the wishes of our adversaries would be satisfied; nor could they any longer, with any shew of probability, reproach us openly with cowardice. Yea, the truth itself, which we profess, would rise above the suspicion which it has incurred in the minds of some, and establish itself in the light and conscience of all the world. There is nothing which truth fears so much as to be prevented from appearing in public, and being exposed to the examination of all men. It would rather have any patron that is not absolutely dumb, than go without defence from the unrighteous calumnies of unjust accusers. One thing only I would have carefully provided. Prudent and grave moderators should preside in this disputation; who should restrain petulance, repress clamours, permit no breach of decorum, and maintain order, modesty and discipline. I have now laid before you my thoughts and wishes. The determination rests with those who are at the helm of church and state;—with yourself especially, in regard of that singular wisdom which hath ever distinguished you in every judgment and deliberation. I now return to Bellarmine.

I am rejoiced that these controversies of his, so much celebrated in common report, have now been published by himself; so as that we all may easily judge of their quality, their value, their strength, and their importance, nor believe Bellarmine to be any other than we find him by their evidence. And, although our adversaries’ opinions might be collected from the many other writers who have appeared in great numbers on the same side; yet, since there are many points upon which they do not all agree, it hath been a matter of some obscurity hitherto, to ascertain the real judgment of the Roman church. But now that Bellarmine hath been published, we shall know better and more certainly what it is they hold upon every subject, the arguments on which they specially rely, and what is (so to speak) the very marrow of popery, which is thought to be as much in the Jesuits as in the pope himself. Knowing, therefore, how much our party desire that these Jesuits should be answered, and having fallen in with a manuscript copy of Bellarmine’s Lectures, I thought it worth my while to handle these same controversies in the schools in the discharge of the duties of my office, to discuss the new sophisms of the Jesuits, and vindicate our unadulterated truth from the captious cavils with which the popish professor had entangled it. Afterwards, being often requested by many persons to publish some of my disputations against our adversaries, and let the whole church share in the benefit of my toil and studies, I determined to commit to the press this controversy concerning Scripture, which is the first of them; and which, forming, as it does, a sort of vestibule to the rest, and sufficing of itself to fill a reasonable volume, seemed, as it were, to demand that I should not wait until I had completed the remainder, but publish it by itself, and separate from all the others.

In all this I did nothing without the approbation of the most reverend father, the archbishop of Canterbury,—a man of the greatest wisdom and the greatest learning, who, having read and thoroughly considered this whole controversy, declared it worthy of publication. Now that it is published, I dedicate it to you, most noble Cecil, whom I have ever esteemed the great patron and Mecenas of my studies; you, in whom this college prides herself as a member of her body, and will always, as long as she stands, challenge to herself on this account a just prerogative; you, whom our university respects as chancellor; whom the whole state celebrates as the father of your country; whom the church recognises as a son serviceable both to its interest and safety. I pray God that he may preserve you ever in safety and prosperity to our church, state, university, and college. Farewell.

Your most devoted servant,

WILLIAM WHITAKER.

Cambridge. From the College of St John the Evangelist. April 30, 1588.

This day enter upon a new undertaking, often demanded by many and not unworthy of our university, the attempt to go through those controversies, both numerous and great, as ye all perceive, which are agitated between the Roman popish synagogue and our churches reformed according to the word of God. Accustomed as I have hitherto been to handle a sedate quiet kind of theology, I here come suddenly upon the sternest strifes and most violent contentions. I hope that this will appear matter of surprise or censure to none of you; at least I should desire that the object of my intentions and design should meet with approbation from you all. For I have not been led to this undertaking through any rashness, or unreasonable and fickle impulses and movement of my feelings, through disgust of old subjects to look out for new ones; but have proceeded with thought and deliberation, and not without the authority and encouragement of those who have the greatest influence in our church and university. Upon these grounds, I am confident that I shall undertake the task upon which I am now entering, not only without blame from any one, but with the highest satisfaction to all except the papists: which consideration inspires me with still greater alacrity for these controversies, although I am by no means ignorant that the toil which I shall have to undergo in managing them is at the same time increased and doubled. But for your interests I should willingly do anything, and spare no labour which I can perform. Indeed, if I wished to indulge myself, or had any concern for my own leisure, I should never have launched out upon this most stormy sea of controversies, in which I shall be exposed to such a tossing as I have never yet experienced in fulfilling the duties of my office, and where all the diligence must be applied, which is required by a business of the highest difficulty. But since our undertaking is both noble and necessary, and long and earnestly desired by you, it did not become me to balk your desires on account of the trouble of the task, but to lay out for the common good whatever strength and ability I may possess.

Now of this discourse I perceive that the utility, or rather the necessity, is three-fold. In the first place, we have to treat not of the opinions of philosophers, which one may either be ignorant of, or refute with commendation,—not of the forms of the lawyers, in which one may err without damage,—not of the institutions of physicians, of the nature and cure of diseases, wherein only our bodily health is concerned,—not of any slight or trivial matters;—but here the matter of our dispute is certain controversies of religion, and those of the last importance, in which whosoever errs is deceived to the eternal destruction of his soul. In a word, we have to speak of the sacred scriptures, of the nature of the church, of the sacraments, of righteousness, of Christ, of the fundamentals of the faith; all which are of that nature, that if one be shaken, nothing can remain sound in the whole fabric of religion. If what these men teach be true, we are in a miserable condition; we are involved in infinite errors of the grossest kind, and cannot possibly be saved. But if, as I am fully persuaded and convinced, it is they who are in error, they cannot deny that they are justly condemned if they still persist in their errors. For if one heresy be sufficient to entail destruction, what hope can be cherished for those who defend so many heresies with such obstinate pertinacity? Therefore either they must perish, or we. It is impossible that we can both be safe, where our assertions and belief are so contradictory. Since this is so, it behoves us all to bestow great pains and diligence in acquiring a thorough knowledge of these matters, where error is attended with such perils.

Besides, there is another reason which renders the handling of these controversies at the present time not only useful, but even necessary. The papists, who are our adversaries, have long since performed this task; they have done that which we are now only beginning to do. And although they can never get the better of us in argument, they have nevertheless got before us in time. They have two professors in two of their colleges, Stapleton at Douay, Allen at Rheims, both countrymen of ours, (besides other doctors in other academies,) who have explained many controversies and published books, Stapleton on the Church and Justification, Allen on the Sacraments. But beyond them all, in the largeness wherewith he hath treated these controversies, is Robert Bellarmine, the Jesuit at Rome, whose lectures are passed from hand to hand, and diligently transcribed and read by very many. Indeed I should wish that they were published, and am surprised that they are not. But many copies of these lectures fly about everywhere among the papists, and sometimes, in spite of their precautions, fall into our hands. Shall we then, whilst these men defend their own side with such activity and zeal, lie idle and think nothing of the matter? These things, although they were in a fragmentary manner explained by the papists, in many commentaries and separate books, yet are now handled in one single volume by themselves; the object and design of which proceeding cannot possibly be a secret to any one. Why then should not we do the same, and put a complete body of controversies into men’s hands, collecting and compacting into one book whatever hath been disputed in defence of the truth against popery, by writers of our own or of any other party? It is not every one that can at once form a judgment of an argument, or find out a fitting reply in the books of our divines. We must take measures for the security of these persons, and especially at the present time, when so many, partly by the reading of such books as are every day published by our adversaries, partly by too great a familiarity with papists, have fallen under a deplorable calamity, and deserted from us to the popish camp.

Indeed, when I compare our side with the papists, I easily perceive the great truth of Christ’s saying, that “the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light.” Mark well, I beseech you, with what solicitude, vigilance, and cunning, these men maintain their own kingdom! They prevent their people from reading our books, and forbid them to have any intercourse with us, that so they may provide against the influence of that contagion which they fear. Surely this is wisely done. Who can deny it? For if we be heretics, as they, though falsely, exclaim, it is but a just consequence of that opinion of us to denounce us, as persons to be carefully avoided by all who are under their control. In the meanwhile we buy, read, peruse all the productions of those whom we justly esteem heretics, and never suspect the possibility of any damage accruing from our conduct. Hence unskilful persons are easily deceived; especially if there be any encourager at hand to lend an impulse, as there are at present everywhere too many. We avoid the acquaintance of no one; yea, we take a pleasure in conversing with papists. This is all well, if your aim and desire be to reclaim them from their errors, and if you are able to do this, and see that there is any hope of them remaining. Those who are perverse and desperate should be left to themselves; you can do them no service, and they may do you much damage. I commend courtesy in every one, specially in an academic or man of letters; but courtesy should not be so intent upon its duties towards men as to forget piety and its duty towards God. Bellarmine compares heresy to the plague, and rightly. For the plague does not hang about the outward limbs, but attacks the heart, immediately poisons it with its venom, and suddenly destroys him who but a little before was in health; then it spreads a fatal contagion to others also, and often pervades a whole family, sometimes fills the state itself with corpses and funerals. In like manner heresy especially assails the heart, and expels faith from the mind; then creeps further and diffuses itself over many. If then you tender your salvation, approach not near so deadly a pestilence without an antidote or counterpoison. Speaking of Alexander the coppersmith, Paul gives this admonition, 2 Tim. iv. 5, “Of whom be thou ware also;” and subjoins as the reason of this caution, “for he hath greatly withstood our words.” Those, therefore, who not only cherish in their own minds a perverse opinion in religion, but cry out against and oppose sound doctrine, and resist it to the utmost of their power, with such persons it is perilous and impious to live on pleasant and familiar terms. For, as the same apostle elsewhere directs, Tit. ii. 10, “A man that is a heretic, after the first and second admonition, must be avoided. For he is subverted, and sins against his own conscience, and is condemned by his own judgment.” Tertullian, in his Prescriptions against heretics, declares that heresy should be “avoided as a deadly fever.” Now “fever,” says he, “as is well known, we regard as an evil, in respect both of its cause and its power, with abomination rather than with admiration; and, as far as we can, strive to avoid it, not having its extinction in our own power. But heresies inflict eternal death, and the burning of a still intenser fire.” And Cyprian, Epist. 40, “Fly far from the contagion of such men, and shun by flight their discourses as a canker or a pestilence; since the Lord hath forewarned us, saying, ‘They are blind, and leaders of the blind.’” Similar to this is the admonition of Jerome, in his Epistle to Pammachius and Oceanus: “Beware, reader, of reading: fly the viper.” Thus it behoves us to fly as poisonous vipers, not only the discourse, but the books and letters of heretical persons. For, as Ambrose says in his 80th Epistle, heretics “shed forth the speech of serpentine discourse, and, turning catholic truth into the madness of their own doctrine, traduce it after the example of the devil, and deceive the simplicity of the sheep.” If this be true at any time, surely we have felt it true of the papists in our time. But let us return to the tenor of our present discourse.

Besides the advantages of this task already enumerated this should be added, in the third place, that, when a fixed method of controversies hath been handled and explained by us, you will be enabled to set down and assign to its proper place and division whatever you may read yourselves in the books of ancient or later divines of any pertinence to these subjects, or whatever arguments against the papists may be suggested by your private meditations. Many things escape us in the course of our reading or reflexion, from our not knowing to what head they should be referred; and many are ill arranged, so that, although we have noted them down, yet they do not readily present themselves at the proper time. But when every thing is duly distributed in meet order, it will be easy both to copy what we please in its appropriate place, and to find it there again whenever we chance to have occasion. And perhaps, in this first essay of ours, some things will be omitted—(though we shall endeavour not to seem to omit many things and those of principal importance)—but if any thing be omitted, it will claim its own place, and (as it were) its proper receptacle, when our work passes under a second review.

And since the new popery, which in general may be called Jesuitism, differs widely from the old, and the former scholastic divinity delivered many things much otherwise than they are now maintained by the Roman church; we must, lest we should seem to construe the doctrines of the papists otherwise than the practice of the Roman church requires, or to take for granted what they grant not, or to ascribe to them opinions which they disclaim, take care to follow this order, namely, first to inquire what the council of Trent hath determined upon every question, and then to consult the Jesuits, the most faithful interpreters of that council, and other divines, and our countrymen at Rheims amongst the rest. And since Bellarmine hath handled these questions with accuracy and method, and his lectures are in every body’s hands, we will make him, so to speak, our principal aim, and follow, as it were, in his very footsteps.

Our arms shall be the sacred scriptures, that sword and shield of the word, that tower of David, upon which a thousand bucklers hang, and all the armour of the mighty, the sling and the pebbles of the brook wherewith David stretched upon the ground that gigantic and haughty Philistine. Human reasonings and testimonies, if one use them too much or out of place, are like the armour of Saul, which was so far from helping David that it rather unfitted him for the conflict. Jerome tells Theophilus of Alexandria, that “a sincere faith and open confession requires not the artifice and arguments of words.” However, since we have to deal with adversaries who, not content with these arms, use others with more readiness and pleasure, such as decrees of councils, judgments of the fathers, tradition, and the practice of the church; lest perchance we should appear to shrink from the battle, we have determined to make use of that sort of weapons also. And, indeed, I hope to make it plain to you, that all our tenets are not only founded upon scriptural authority, which is enough to ensure victory, but command the additional suffrage of the testimonies of fathers, councils, and, I will add, even of many of the papists, which is a distinguished and splendid ornament of our triumph. In every controversy, therefore, after the sacred scriptures of the old and new Testaments, we shall apply to the councils, the fathers, and even to our adversaries themselves; so as to let you perceive that not only the ancient authors, but even the very adherents of the Roman church, may be adduced as witnesses in the cause. Thus it will be clear, that what Jerome, Epist. 139, applies out of Isaiah to the heretics, that “they weave the spider’s thread,” is pertinently applied to the papists. For, as Jerome says, they weave a web “which can catch small and light animals, as flies and gnats, but is broken by the stronger ones.” Just thus many stick fast in the subtleties of the papists, as flies do in the spider’s web, from which they are unable to extricate themselves, though nothing can possibly be frailer than those threads. Such are the reasonings of the papists, even the Jesuits themselves; who, although they seem to spin their threads with greater skill and artfulness, yet fabricate nothing but such cobwebs as may easily be broken by any vigorous effort. Be ye, therefore, of good cheer. We have a cause, believe me, good, firm, invincible. We fight against men, and we have Christ on our side; nor can we possibly be vanquished, unless we are the most slothful and dastardly of all cowards. Once wrest from the papists what they adduce beside the scripture, and you will presently see them wavering, turning pale, and unable to keep their ground. Yet I do not ascribe to myself all those gifts of genius, judgment, memory and knowledge, which are demanded by such a laborious and busy undertaking. I know well and acknowledge how slightly I am furnished with such endowments; nor can any think so meanly of me as myself. But “I can do all things through Christ who strengtheneth me;” relying upon whose assistance I enter upon the combat. They come against us with sword, and shield, and armour: we go against them in the name of Jehovah of Hosts, of the armies of Israel, whom they have defied.

But it is now time to distribute the controversies themselves under their proper heads, that we may see beforehand the order in which we are to proceed. Bellarmine hath reduced all the controversies to three articles of the Creed;—I believe in the Catholic Church, the Communion of Saints, the Forgiveness of Sins. In this respect I shall not follow Bellarmine. I have another, and more certain, plan and method of my own. He could not frame to his method the controversy concerning scripture, which assuredly challenges the first place for its nobility and importance. He therefore calls it a Proem, and says that he hath set it before the rest in the manner of a preface. But since popery is nothing else but mere antichristianism, it is evident that both must fall under the same rule and method, and that popery must have in it all the heresies which belong to antichristianism. Now antichristianism consists not in the open and outward denial of Christ, or in the worn-out defence of obsolete heresies. For who would not immediately recognise, cry out against and explode, the patrons of Cerinthus, Valentinus, Arius, Nestorius, and other heresiarchs of the same complexion? Who could tolerate amongst Christians him who should openly and publicly deny Christ? Antichrist was not so stupid as to hope that he would gain much by such a course as this. It was not fit, therefore, that antichrist should hold those errors which may be generally described as touching the nature of God, the mystery of the Trinity, the person of Christ. But, since antichrist must needs be the opposite of Christ, the same purpose must be gained in a more secret and more artful manner. For it is a certain mystery of iniquity, which in words establishes Christ, but in fact destroys him. This is the very antichristianism of the papists, who leave indeed the natures of Christ intact, but make away with the offices of Christ, and consequently Christ himself. For Jesus cannot be Christ, if he bear not all his offices and merits. Now these offices and benefits are designated by the very names Christ and Jesus. All the heresies of the papists (a very few excepted, which relate to his person,) concern these offices and merits of Christ: on which account it will be no inconvenient distribution of the popish errors and heresies, to set them forth as they are tenets opposed to Christ and Jesus.

Survey now, I beseech you, this whole body of antichristianism, as I shall submit it to your inspection, that you may see, as it were in one view, a monster mis-shapen, vast, horrible, and manifold. For I will present to you the very portraiture and lineaments, drawn out and expressed as it were with one stroke of the pencil; and afterwards distribute and describe its limbs more accurately, when we come to speak severally of each. The name of Christ denotes three offices, as you know, of Prophet, King, and Priest. That of Jesus sets before us the benefits of redemption and salvation; and these latter benefits result from the former offices. For he was anointed to be our Prophet, King, and Priest, in order that he might discharge the function of our Saviour. Now, therefore, we should regard in Christ Jesus his offices and merits as well as his person. In the former the papists are wholly astray: in regard of his person they hold not many errors, but they have some. There are then two chief heads of these controversies; concerning the offices and benefits of Christ Jesus, and concerning his person. Hear, therefore, what particular heresies they maintain against Christ Jesus.

The first office is that of Prophet, which shews that the function of supreme teacher is to be ascribed to Christ. This saving teaching Christ hath proposed to his church in the scriptures. In defending this office of Christ against the papists we handle these controversies concerning the scriptures; of the number of the canonical books of scripture; of vernacular versions of scripture; of the perspicuity of scripture; of the authority of scripture; of the interpretation of scripture; of the perfection of scripture in opposition to human traditions, upon which our adversaries lay such weighty stress as to equal them even to the scriptures themselves. How far from slight this controversy is, you readily perceive.

The second office of Christ is the Royal, which all the heretical opinions of the papists concerning the church impugn. The kingdom of Christ is the church; in it he reigns and is sole monarch. This controversy is complex, and requires to be distributed into its several parts. The church is either militant or triumphant. We must dispute first of the militant, and afterwards of the triumphant church. Our controversies concern either the whole church militant, or the members of it. Of the whole—what it is; of what sort; whether visible; by what notes distinguished; whether it may err; what power it possesses; whether the Roman be the true visible church of Christ. Next, we have to speak of the members of the church. These members are either collected in a council (which is the representative church), or considered separately. Here, therefore, we must treat of councils; whether they must needs be assembled; by whom they should be convoked; of what persons they should consist; what authority they have; who should be the chief president in a council; whether they are above the pope; whether they may err. Next, we come to the several members of the church. Now they are divided into three classes. There is the principal member, or head, the intermediate members, and the lowest. They affirm the Roman pontiff to be the head of the church militant: whereupon the question arises of the form of the church’s government; whether it be, or be not, monarchical; whether the monarchy of the church was settled upon Peter; whether Peter was bishop of the church of Rome, and died there; whether the pope succeeds Peter in his primacy; whether he may err; whether he can make laws ecclesiastical; whether he can canonize saints; whether he hath temporal power; whether he be antichrist. The intermediate members are the clergy, of whom they make two sorts, some secular, some regular. Those are called secular, who are engaged in any ecclesiastical function. Now here arise controversies concerning the election and rank of these persons, whether celibacy be necessarily attached to the ministry, whether ministers be exempt from the secular yoke. The regulars are monks and members of religious orders. Here we have to discourse of evangelical counsels, of vows, of retirement, of the dress and labours of monks, of the canonical hours. The lowest members, as they arrange them, are laymen, even kings or emperors. Here we have to inquire concerning the civil magistracy; whether the care of religion appertains to the civil magistrate; whether he may punish heretics capitally; whether he can ever be excommunicated or deposed by the pope; whether civil laws oblige the conscience. And so far of the church militant.

Next follows the church triumphant; which consists of angels and deceased saints. The controversies are, of the hierarchies, ministry, and invocation of angels. When we come to deceased saints, the occasion requires us to dispute, of the limbus patrum, of purgatory; whether saints are to be invoked and adored, of the relics of saints, of the worship of images, of the temples of the saints, of their festivals, of pilgrimages to their places: and these controversies are concerning the royal office of Christ.

His third office is that of Priest, which includes two functions, intercession and sacrifice. It pertains to intercession to inquire, whether Christ be the sole mediator of intercession. In the question of sacrifice, we shall have to explain the whole body of controversy concerning the sacraments; for by the sacraments, as so many means instituted by Christ, the efficacy of that sacrifice is derived to us. We must treat of sacraments, first generally, and then specially: generally, what a sacrament is, how many sacraments there be, what is the efficacy of the sacraments, what the distinction between the old and new sacraments: specially, concerning each of the sacraments by itself; and first, of baptism, whether those who die without baptism cannot be saved; whether laymen or women can baptize; whether John’s baptism was the same as Christ’s; whether the popish ceremonies are to be used in the administration of baptism. After the sacrament of baptism, we have to speak of the eucharist, which topic contains most important controversies, of transubstantiation, of the sacrifice of the mass, of communion in one kind. Next follow the five sacraments of the papists, upon which great controversies depend, of confirmation, of penance (where we shall have to treat of contrition, confession, satisfaction, indulgences), of extreme unction, of orders, of matrimony; and all these controversies hitherto set forth belong to those three prime offices, which are signified by the name of Christ.

Next we have to handle controversies concerning the benefits of our redemption and salvation, which are indicated by the very name of Jesus. Here first arise questions concerning predestination and reprobation; whether God hath predestinated or reprobated any persons, on what account he hath done so, whether predestination be absolute. Next we have to treat of sin, what it is, how manifold, whether all are born with the infection of original sin, even the virgin Mary; whether all sins be equal; whether any sin be venial of itself; whether concupiscence after baptism be sin; whether God be the author of sin. Next in order, we must speak of the law, whether it can be fulfilled, and even more done than it commands. Afterwards we must explain the controversy concerning free-will; faith, what it is and how manifold; good works and merits; justification.

In the last place, there remain a few questions concerning the person of Christ, as whether he is αὐτοθεος; whether he increased in wisdom; whether he suffered in his soul the pains of hell, and whatever others there be of this sort.

You have now the principal classes and heads of those controversies which are contested with the greatest earnestness between us and our adversaries at the present day. You see almost the whole mass and body of the popish heresies. In considering, revolving, and explicating these matters it becomes us now to be wholly occupied. We must begin from the first, and proceed through the intermediate to the last, at which we hope at length to arrive, and pray that the issue may correspond to our hope and wishes.