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*

ANSVVER.

WEe measure not supernaturall Doctrine, by humane sence or reason; neither can any seeming repug∣nances of reputed Philosophie, to Diuine Reuela∣tion

hinder our Faith, where the holy Ghost commaunds vs [ A] to beleeue a, as appeareth in the articles of the sacred Trini∣tie, Incarnation, Resurrection, &c. Est quidem de communibus sen∣sibus sapere in Dei rebus, sed in testimonium veri, non in adiutori∣um falsi, quod sit secundum diuinam, non contrà diuinam dispositi∣onem, saith Tertullian b, We must haue vnderstanding in the things of God out of common sence, but this must serue to testifie truth, and not to patronise errour, according to diuine disposition (Reuelation) not against it. So farre as sence and reason are not repugnant to diuine veritie, but subseruient, we may giue credit to them, and euerie good Christian (saith S. [ B] Augustine) Vbicunque inuenerit veritatem, Domini sui intelligat esse, Wheresoeuer he findeth veritie (taught either by nature or grace) must vnderstand, that it is his masters.

The question betweene the Romists and vs is not, Whether if Transubstantiatiō be reuealed by God, we may notwithstan∣ding [ C] therefore refuse to beleeue it, because the matter is diffi∣cill to be conceiued, or because it hath manie seeming repug∣nances to sence; for if they be able to demonstrate the first, we must renounce the latter: But the question is, Whether Transubstantiation, hauing no certaine and manifest ground in diuine Reuelation, and many repugnances to common sence and reason; and besides, being expressely repugnant to the let∣ter of the Scripture, we are to beleeue the same?

First, the holy Scripture calleth consecrated Wine, the fruit of the Vine; and consecrated Bread, by the name of verie [ D] Bread, Luc. 22.18.1. Cor. 10.16. & 11.26.27.28.

Secondly, the same affirmeth not that the substance of Bread and Wine is abolished.

Thirdly, naturall reason sheweth, that accidents must haue a subiect of inhaerencie, and that bare formes and shadowes of things cannot nourish without corporall substance.

Fourthly, the sences of Tast and Feeling discerne apparantly a corporietie in the elements receiued. In this case there is no reason to imagine that our sences are deluded, or that God almightie by miracle worketh in a contrarie manner, to the [ E] course of nature, and to that which he hath otherwise reuea∣led in his word.

It is not sufficient for Romists to affirme, That God vseth a miraculous course in these things; and to palliate absurdities, re∣pugnant

to sence, reason, and scripture, vnder pretext of Gods [ A] omnipotencie: but they must prooue by diuine Reuelation, that he will doe this, for God effecteth not all things by his omnipotencie, which men may imagine to be possible. In the wordes of our Sauiour, This is my Bodie, This cuppe is the new Testament in my Bloud, &c. there is not a sillable concerning ac∣cidents without a subiect, or concerning any miracle wrought in the Sacrament by omnipotencie, neither is there any such doctrine elsewhere reuealed. And if Christs words be expoun∣ded figuratiuely according to S. Augustine a, Tertullian b, Theo∣derit c, Origen d, Bertram e, &c. they make nothing for corpo∣rall [ B] presence by indistance of place: and if they be vnderstood literally, they prooue not Transubstantiation; for Bread may be called the bodie of Christ by an inusitate forme of spea∣king f, which according to the Tenet of some learned Di∣uines g is no trope or figure. And if neither of these exposi∣tions content our Aduersaries, they might haue beleeued the words of the holy Text as they sound literally, and a reall presence of Christs Bodie and Bloud wrought by the power of the holy Ghost, without defining and determining the ex∣presse manner how. For if they beleeue that accidents subsist [ C] without a substance, and nourish, and are tasted, and felt, and passe into the stomach h, and yet are not able to expresse the di∣stinct manner how: and if they beleeue a substantiall presence of Christs indiuiduall humane bodie in many hosts, and yet are vnable to declare the maner how i; Why might they not haue suspended other questions concerning the distinct manner of presence, and maintained onely a true and mysticall presence, the distinct manner whereof is incomprehensible in this life, and not haue disturbed the peace of the Church by defining as an article of Faith, such a doctrine as hath no foundation in [ D] diuine Reuelation, to make it appeare certaine and infallible? [ E]

Notes

• a

  Chrys. in 2. Tim. ca. 1. ho. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉August. d. Temp. ser. 147. Si argumenta 〈◊〉〈◊〉 diffi∣cilè soluimus, illud quod demonstratū est in Domino sinè difficultate fidei te∣neamus, illi garriant, nos credamus. Idem. d. Ciuit Dei, lib. 12. ca. 17.
• b

  Tertull. d. Resur. car. cap. 3. Hieron. Proaem. in Dan. Hilar. d. Trinit. lib. 1. Respuit captiosas & inutiles Philosophiae quaestiones fides constans, nequè humanarum ineptiarum fallacijs succumbens, spolium se praebet veritas falsitati. Aug. d. Trinit. lib. 1. cap. 1. Fidei contemnentes initium, immaturo & peruerso rationis amore falluntur. Idem. d. Ciuit. Dei, lib. 18. cap. 40. Aug. d. Doctrin. Chrst. lib. 2. cap. 18.
• a

  Aug. in Psa. 3. Idem. d. Doctr. Chr. lib. 3. cap. 16. Idem. in Leuit. q. 57. Idem c. Adimant. cap. 12.
• b

  Tertull. cont. Marc.
• c

  Theod. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 1.
• d

  Orig. c. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Dial. 3. d. 〈◊〉〈◊〉, hom. pa. 552.
• e

  Bertram. d. Corp. & San. Dom. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. sup. Mat. 26. ca. 65. pa. 305.
• f

  Busherus. Ex∣ercit. d. Eucha. pars 2. Sect. 2. Inusitata praedicatio est in qua duae res dispa∣ratae vocibus pro∣prijs affirmate 〈◊〉〈◊〉 vnum{que} di∣citur 〈◊〉〈◊〉, prop∣tèr arctissimam cō∣iunctionem & rea∣lem, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ad 〈◊〉〈◊〉 praesentiā.
• g

  Melanchton. Chemnicius.
• h

  Innocent. 3. Myst. Miss. lib. 4. cap. 9. Post consecrationem accidens est sinè subiecto, quià existit 〈◊〉〈◊〉 per se. Transit enim substantia, sed remanent accidentia: nec dicitur accidens in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 participij, sed accipiendum est in vi nominis. Non solum accidientales verum etiàm naturales proprietates remanere videntur vt paneitas quae satu∣rando famem expellit, & vinitas quae satiando sitim extinguit.
• i

  Ibid. ca. 8. Verum an partes in partes, & 〈◊〉〈◊〉 transeat in totale, nouit ille qui facit. Ego quod 〈◊〉〈◊〉 est, igni comburo: nam credere iubemur discutere prohibemur. Ibid. Licet corpus Dominicum sit in loco locale, quaeritur tamèn vtrum in Sacramento sit locatum localitèr, id est vtrum faciat localem distantiam, & an habeat localem situm, vt dici debeat quià sedet, iacet, aut 〈◊〉〈◊〉, sed & 〈◊〉〈◊〉 multa circà praesentem articulum possunt inquiri, quae melius est intacta relinquere, quam teme∣re definite, nàm bestia qua tetigerit montem lapidabitur. Ibid. cap. 12. Ego, diuina Sacramenta magis veneran∣da quam discutienda profiteor. Ibid. cap. 16. Si quaeratur vtrum 〈◊〉〈◊〉 localitèr 〈◊〉〈◊〉 de Coelo, vel ascen∣dat in Coelum, cum exhibet 〈◊〉〈◊〉 praesentiam corporalem an alitèr incipiat vel 〈◊〉〈◊〉 esse 〈◊〉〈◊〉 specie 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Respondeo non oportere nos in talibus curiosos existere, ne plus quam possumus praesumamus, & non 〈◊〉〈◊〉, salubre concilium dedit Apostolus, Noli plus sapere quam 〈◊〉〈◊〉, &c. Ego nescio quomo∣do Christus accedit, sed & quomodo recedit ignoro, nouit ille qui nihil ignorat.