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
IESVIT.
Protestants answer, that it is sufficient that the Ro∣man Doctrine was contradicted by Orthodox Fathers, and that this may be prooued by their writings which they haue left vnto posteritie, though their opposition was not noted by Antiquitie, nor by fame of Tradition deliuered vn∣to [ D] posteritie. But this answere leaues no meanes whereby common people may know certainely the perpetuall Tradi∣tion of Gods Church, without exact examining and loo∣king into their workes, which common people cannot do. J prooue it, if against euery Tradition of the Church, difficill and obscure passages of the Fathers may be brought, and this doth suffice to make the same questionable; then no [ E] Tradition can be certainely knowne without exact reading and examining, and looking into the holy Fathers.
But no Tradition or Doctrine is so constantly and cleere∣ly deliuered by the Fathers, but diuers obscure and difficill
descriptionPage 141
places, out of their workes, may be brought against them, [ A] with such a shew, that common people shall not know what to say. For what Tradition more constantly deliue∣red by the Christian Doctours than our Sauiours consub∣stantialitie with his Father according to his diuine nature? And yet the new reformed Arrians bring very many testi∣monies of antient Fathers to prooue, that in this point they did contradict themselues, and were contrarie one to another: which places whosoeuer shall read, will cleerely [ B] see, that to common people they are vnanswerable, yea, that common people are not capable of the answeres that learned men yeeld vnto such obscure passages. What then shall they doe? They must answere, that Antiquitie did neuer acknowledge such dissention among the Fathers, in the point of our Sauiours consubstantiality; which they would not haue omitted to doe, had there beene any such reall dis∣sention, seeing they noted the Fathers opposition in lesser [ C] matters.