A replie to Iesuit Fishers answere to certain questions propou[n]ded by his most gratious Matie: King Iames By Francis White D: of Div· deane of Carlile, chaplaine to his Matie. Hereunto is annexed, a conference of the right: R:B: of St Dauids wth the same Iesuit*

About this Item

Title
A replie to Iesuit Fishers answere to certain questions propou[n]ded by his most gratious Matie: King Iames By Francis White D: of Div· deane of Carlile, chaplaine to his Matie. Hereunto is annexed, a conference of the right: R:B: of St Dauids wth the same Iesuit*
Author
White, Francis, 1564?-1638.
Publication
London :: Printed by Adam Islip,
1624.
Rights/Permissions

To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.

Subject terms
Fisher, John, 1569-1641 -- Controversial literature -- Early works to 1800.
Church of England -- Apologetic works -- Early works to 1800.
Catholic Church -- Controversial literature -- Early works to 1800.
Cite this Item
"A replie to Iesuit Fishers answere to certain questions propou[n]ded by his most gratious Matie: King Iames By Francis White D: of Div· deane of Carlile, chaplaine to his Matie. Hereunto is annexed, a conference of the right: R:B: of St Dauids wth the same Iesuit*." In the digital collection Early English Books Online. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/A15082.0001.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed May 24, 2024.

Pages

ANSVVER.

The Popish speculation of the speculatiue glasse of the Tri∣nitie, is not Catholicke Doctrine in their owne Schole a, and therefore the Iesuit is ouerseene in obtruding the same vpon vs. Pius a Ponte b a moderne Scholeman, hath these words: The diuine Essence cannot bee tearmed a Glasse properly, neither by [ B] Metaphor doth the condition (or likenesse) of a Glasse properly agree vnto it: and he citeth for his Tenet, Thomas, Caietan, Capreolus, Durand, Ferrariensis, and Bannes, and the greater part of Ponti∣ficians hold, that it doth not represent things, according to the manner of a naturall Glasse, but onely according to the good will and pleasure of God, and thereupon they say, that it is Speculatum voluntarium c, such a glasse as (according to our manner of apprehension) maketh reflection of such notices as God is pleased to manifest, more or lesse d, when, in what man∣ner, [ C] and to what persons himselfe pleaseth. And therefore the Iesuits supposition, if there were a glasse of diamond, may conclude according to the reflection of a naturall glasse, but it is inconsequent according to the reflection of a volun∣tarie glasse e.

Gregorie, in the places obiected, according to Aquinas f, spea∣keth

Page 309

of the sufficiencie of the obiect in it selfe, and not of the [ A] actuall demonstration which it maketh: or else he speaketh of the knowledge of all things essential to blessednesse, as Occham and Lombard take it a. And if his words be taken general∣ly, then it will follow, that the blessed Saints are ignorant of nothing that is done without them, and that they be∣hold intuitiuely euery particular and speciall action and mo∣tion, both of superiour and of inferiour creatures: but our Aduersaries themselues denie this b, as it hath formerly beene shewed.

Notes

  • a

    AEstius. in 4. Sent. d. 46. §. 19. Non est necesse af∣firmare, quod sem∣per omnes Sancti cum Christo reg∣nantes, cognoscant particularitèr, om∣nium & singulorū praeces quomodo∣cun{que} generalitèr, ad se directas, & fortè ob huiusmo∣di dubitatiunculam non fuit visum pa∣tribus, Trid. Con∣cilij, quaestionem hanc an Sācti, prae∣ces viuentium cog∣noscāt absolutè de∣finire.

  • b

    Pius a Pont. in 1. p. Tho. qu. 12. ar. 8. dub. 5. Dicen∣dum igitur diuinam essentiam non dici proprie speculum, nequè per Metaphoram ei propriè accomodari condi∣tionem speculi. Bannes. in 1. p. Tho. q. 12. ar. 8. Resp. Cum. Caiet. in hoc art. & colligitur ex D. Tho. q. 8. d. Verit. ar. 4. & q. 12. ar. 6. Diuina Essentia, propriè loquendo, non est speculum creaturarum, nec creaturae continentur in ipsa tanquam in speculo. Quoniam de ratione speculi est, quod representet per distinctas species acceptas ab ipsis rebus representatis. Continentur ergo creaturae in diuina Essentia propriè loquendo, tanquam in causa ef∣fectiua & exemplari & ita continentur per modum vnius, & eodom modo representantur, & ex consequenti non est necesse, quod visa diuina Essentia, distincte cognoscantur in ipsa, omnes creaturae.

  • c

    Bannes. in 1. p. Tho. [ D] q. 12. ar. 8. Nullus beatus cognoscit necessario, & ex natura visionis beatificae, aliquam creaturam quantum ad eius actualem existentiam, sed cognitio actualis existentiae cuiuscunquè creaturae, pendet ex dispositione Diuinae vo∣luntatis. Gabriel. Biel. 3. d. 14. q. vnic. Deus est speculum voluntarium ostendens in se quae vult, caetera occultans, nec in eo relucent, nisi quae vult à vidente se cognosci, quià Deus in intellectu se videntis causat cognitionem vo∣luntariè, & contingentèr illarum creaturarum quas vult 〈◊〉〈◊〉, & quarum cognitionem non causat, occultare dicitur. Velosillo. Aduert. in Aug. tom. 9. ad. q. 16. Ità intelligendum est quod inquit Augustinus lib. de vid. Deo. Deum esse speculum voluntarium, quià, scilicet plus velminus ostendit se, & ea quae in se lucent, prout ipse vult.

  • d

    Bannes, in 1. p. Tho. q. 12. ar. 8. B. Dominicus, B. Franciscus fortè sunt aequales in beatitudine, & tamen B. Dominicus alia videt in verbo, & alia B. Franciscus. AEstius. 4. sent. d. 46. §. 19. Est speculum illud voluntarium, repraesentans in se, ipsum aspicientibus, ea quae vult, & quandò vult.

  • e

    Idem. Diuina Essentia necessario & naturalitèr repraesentat diuino intellectui omnes cogitationes & volitiones ipsius Dei, intellectui verò creato nullam repraesentat necessariò, sed prorsus voluntate libera repraesentat quas vult cogitationes. Occham. in sent. lib. 4. q. 13. Deus est speculum voluntarium, & aliquae creaturae possunt videri in eo sine alijs, ità quod beatus non [ E] videat alios effectus nec creaturas in Deo, nec sicut in causa, nec sicut in speculo praesentante, nec sicut in effi∣ciente, sed si naturalitèr repraesentaret, tunc non videtur ratio, quarè vna creatura esset magis visa, quam alia.

  • f

    Aquim. p. 1. q. 12. ar. 8. Ad. 1. Gre∣gorius loquitur, quantum ad sufficientiam obiecti, scilicet, Dei, quod quantum in se est, sufficienter continet om∣nia, & demonstrat. Non tamen sequitur quod vnusquisquè videns Deum, omnia cognoscar, quià non perfectè comprehendit ipsum.

  • a

    Occham. Dial. pa. 2. tr. 1. cap. 3. Dicédum est quod dicit magister. sent. lib. 2. d. 11. Grego∣rius haec dicit lo∣quens de Angelis, &c. videtur dicere quod omnia sciant Angeli, & nihil sit quod nesciant: sed hoc accipiendū est de hijs, quorum cognitio beatum facit cognitorem, vt sunt ea quae ad [ B] mysterium vnitatis & Trinitatis pertinent.

  • b

    Nauarret. in 1. p. Tho. q. 12. ar. 8. contr. 44. Non enim beatus, eo ipso quo aliquis viator fuit commissus eius regimini, 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 cogitationis 〈◊〉〈◊〉, &c. 282. Ad. b. Virginem non 〈◊〉〈◊〉 cognoscete omnes cogitationes Christi Domini.

Do you have questions about this content? Need to report a problem? Please contact us.