The answere vnto the nine points of controuersy, proposed by our late soueraygne (of famous memory) vnto M. Fisher of the Society of Iesus And the reioynder vnto the reply of D. Francis VVhite minister. With the picture of the sayd minister, or censure of his writings prefixed.

In lieu of answering, you confirme the Iesuits Arguments. §. 5.

THE Iesuit pag. 38. accuseth Ministers of abusing the word of God, who to proue the sole suffi∣ciency of Scripture in respect of all men, cite the text of S. Paul 2. Tim. 3.15. The Scriptures are able to make vs wise vnto saluation. For the words of the A∣postle are directed particulerly to Timothy, saying, they are able to make THEE wise vnto saluation: whence it is consequent, that the Scriptures were sufficient for Timothy, and are sufficient for such men as Tymo∣thy was, to wit, for men learned and aforehand in∣structed by word of mouth, and therupon firmely beleeuing all the most maine and necessary points of Christian doctrine and discipline. That the Scrip∣tures for men in this manner taught and grounded in fayth, are aboundantly sufficient, who will deny?

Thus the Iesuit. Vnto whom you shape this answere pag. 39. Although sentences of holy Scripture are some∣times restrayned to the personall and particular subiect of which they are first spoken; yet this is not generall, and when the same hapneth it must be proued by better argu∣ments then by the bare Emphasis of a word. For God said 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Iosuah (a man qualifyed aboue the ordinary ranke) I will not leaue, nor forsake thee, Iosuah 1.5. Yet the promise implyed in this text is generall, and common to all 〈◊〉〈◊〉 persons, Hebr. 13.5. Thus you, confirming the Iesuit••

••olution in lieu of confuting therof. For as the pro∣••ise, I will not leaue thee, made particularly vnto Io∣••ue in regard he was a iust man, doth not agree vnto ••ll men, but onely vnto such as Iosue was, to wit, ••nto iust men, and such as seeke God as he did. So the ••ext of S. Paul, they are able to make THEE wise vnto ••aluation, spoken particulerly vnto Timothy, in re∣••ard he was learned, iudicious, aforehand instru∣••ted & grounded in Christian tradition, doth agree ••nely to Timothy, and such men as Timothy was, to wit, men aforehand taught, and grounded in the ••ayth of tradition. On the other side, as the promise ••ade to Iosue in regard he was a Iust man, cannot ••e challenged of other men, that be not iust as he was, & if they rely theron they deceaue themselues; ••o the promise, the Scriptures are able to make THEE ••ise vnto saluation, made vnto Timothy in regard he was aforehand taught and grounded in the fayth of Tradition, cannot be challenged of them that are ••f a differrent stampe from Timothy, to wit, men ••hat were neuer taught the fayth of Tradition, or ••lse so vngrounded therein, as vpon a seeming eui∣••ence of Scripture they be ready to chāge their f••rst ••eceiued fayth. Hence it is manifest, that the Iesuit ••ad reason to say, Ministers abuse Gods word when ••hey cite it, the Scriptures are able to make vs wise vnto ••aluation, making that common to all men, which was spoken onely to Timothy, and vnto such as he was.

Will you haue another example of the same kind? The Iesuit saith, the words of Christ, Do this in remembrance of mee, was spoken of the Sacrament, in the forme of bread, not vnder the forme of wine. For our

Sauiour speaking of the Sacramēt vnder the forme of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 saith (h) 1.1 not absolutely, doe this, as he did of bread, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 conditionally, do this as oftē as you drinke in memor•••• of me, that the Aduersary of the Church might not haue 〈◊〉〈◊〉 much as a plausible shew to condēne cōmun••o in one kind 〈◊〉〈◊〉 against Gods word. You after much bitter rayling, cal∣ling the Iesuit infatuated Romanist, & vermine, for 〈◊〉〈◊〉 vrging you beyond your learning, answere thus 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the end. Touching the fancy of this obiection, I furthe•• say, that euen as when S. Paul said 1. Cor. 10.31. whethe•• yee eat or drinke, or whatsoeuer else you do, do all to the glory of God; If these word•• should be resolued 〈◊〉〈◊〉 this manner: As often as yee eate or drinke, or do any thing else, do all to the glory of God, the placing 〈◊〉〈◊〉 this word, as often, restrayneth not the speach frō being a precept: so likewise when S. Paul saith: As often as ye•• drinke, do this in remembrance of me, this manne•• altereth not his words from being a commandement. Thus you, confirming the Iesuits answere. For no example could haue been deuised, or imagined more fit to shew, that Christs words, as oftē as you drinke import not an absolute, but onely a conditionall precept▪ Which thus I demōstrate. You grant that the words of Christ, Do this as often as you drinke in remem∣brance of me, be preceptiue in the same manner, as, & no more then these of S. Paul, as often as yee eate or drinke, or walke abroad, or do any thing else, do all to the glory of God. But no man that hath his right senses will say, that this speach doth absolutely command Christians to eate, or drinke, or sleepe, or ride, or walke, or to do any of the like actiōs of human life, but onely doth conditionally command, or direct men, that when they will eate or drinke, or sleepe, or

••••de, or walke, that they do all to Gods glory. Ergo, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 words of Christ, saying, do this as oftē as yee drinke 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ••emembrance of me, do not imply an absolute precept of ••••••nking of the cup, but onely a conditionall direction, that ••••en men drinke, they do that Sacramentall action in ••emory of his Passion. So that in lieu of soluing the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the Iesuits argumēt, you intangle your selfe, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 tye the same more fast.

Notes

• (h) 1.1

  1. Cor. 11.