Manuductions to the pallace of trueth by F.B. Obseruant

CHAP. X. AN EXAMPLE, SHEVVING that it is but losse of time, to argue with such men out of onely Scripture. (Book 10)

TO the reasons before declared, which prooue how vnpossible it is by onely Scripture, to conuince an Hereticke, I will adioyne a true report of a certaine discourse in ma∣ner and forme, as it is passed betwixt a Catholike and a Protestant, for the more ample euidence of the point in hand. They growing therefore by chance, into dispute about the wor∣shippe and inuocation of Saints, The Caluinist alledged against the Chur∣ches doctrine, that place of Deutero∣nomie:* 1.1 Dominum Deum tuum adorab. & illi soli seruies. The Catholike answered him, that there was no prohibition of other, then that supreame adora∣tion or worshippe, which wee ac∣knowledge to be dew to God only:

and that the communication of tearmes (as one saith) doth neither al∣ter nor prejudice the nature of things.* 1.2 Wherefore that poynt hath no fur∣ther difficultie, but onely to distin∣guish betwixt absolute worshippe, and that which they tearme, relatiue or respectiue, which may be giuen also to creatures,* 1.3 And for Inuocation, the reason is alike. Of both which, hee shewed him diuers authorities out of Scripture, Where adoration and inuo∣cation are mentioned to haue bene done to creatures, but in a farre diffe∣rent sense, then they are to God.

The CALVINIST not content with this answere, still muttered against in∣uocation to Saints, as a thing forbid∣den by the scripture, and namelie, where our Sauiour saith in the Gos∣spel.* 1.4 Come vnto me, all you that labour &c. Which saying, he would haue so to be vnderstood, as if it were not law∣ful to come to any other, but to Christ himselfe. The Catholike replyed, that the affirmation of the one, is no deni∣all of the other: and if he would vn∣derstand it so, then should it not bee likewise lawfull to come to our bre¦thren

here in earth, to begge their praiers for vs. Wherefore that saying of our Sauiour includes no absolute prohibition of comming to others, but onely of comming to them in that maner, and with those circumstances, as we come to him.

The wrangler, loath to giue it ouer thus, made semblance, that he had an∣other place, yet clearer, for his pur∣pose then that; wherewith he would second and interpret the first, which they call conference of places. And he alledged out of S. PAVLS Epistle to TIMOTHIE,* 1.5 that there is but one me∣diatour, which is CHRIST IESVS. The other, produced a like saying out of the Epist. of S. IAMES,* 1.6 Vnus est legis∣lator & Iudex: and yet no man will de∣nie, but there be other law-makers and Iudges, without derogation to that supreame Iudge: so he tolde him, that this place, like as the former, was by him not well vnderstood, because the Apostle speaketh of that mediation, which was wrought by our redemption, (the wordes are plaine) and not of such mediation as is performed by way of suffrage

or intercession, which in the verie same chapter hee allowes; and com∣mends vnto TIMOTHY, as a publike minister, to performe that charge, for all sorts of men. Neither could him∣selfe otherwise haue craued (as he did) the prayers of diuers, to whom hee wrote, nor we commend our selues to the prayers of one an other.

And to prooue, that the word Me∣diator, was to be vnderstood with this distinction, he shewed that in the scriptures, it is likewise attributed to men,* 1.7 as where MOYSES for example, is tearmed a Mediator, and elsewhere also a Redeemer,* 1.8 without derogation for all that, of our onely Mediator and redeemer CHRIST. So the Pro∣phet DANIEL,* 1.9 teacheth by Almes to redeeme sinnes. And the Apo∣stle saieth,* 1.10 Hee that conuerts a sinner from his error, saues his soule. yet for all that, wee knowe, it is onelie CHRIST, who properly and abso∣lutely speaking, doeth redeeme and saue vs.

Being thus put to a new shift, hee found out an other place in the Epi∣pistle to the Romaines, where it is,

saide: Howe shall they inuocate,* 1.11 in vvhome they doe not beleeue? To this, vvas answered first, that those wordes of the Apostle, were spoken of that inuocation, which is made vnto God alone, as the Author and giuer of grace and glorie. it is mani∣fest by the words going before; omnis qui inuocauerit nomen Domini saluus erit. And in this sense we graunt, that the Saints are not to be inuocated. Se∣condly, that it hath no inconueni∣ence to beleeue that by the prayers of Saints, we may receaue helpe: which beleefe, no doubt, PAVL himselfe had, when he besought the Romaines, Colossenses, and Ephesians to pray for him. vnlesse perhaps the Saints in earth are able to afford vs this helpe, but the Saints in heauen haue no such power, as VIGILANTIVS the hereticke blasphemed. Then in∣deede (as S. HIEROME tolde him) we must needes graunt, That better is the con∣dition of VIGILANTIVS, a liuing dogge, then of S. PAVL, a dead Lyon; alluding to that saying of the Hebrew Sage.

Thirdly he answered, that PHILE∣MON was praysed by the same Apo∣stles,

for his charitie and the faith which he had in Domino Iesu, & in om∣nes sanctos. and it is said in Exodus: Credi∣dit populus Deo, & Moysi seruo eius, that it needes not seeme a thing so absurde, to joyne these two together, vt popu∣lus qui crederet in Deum, aequè credidisse di∣catur in seruum, saith S. HIEROME vpon that place: That the people be∣leeuing in God, might be said to be∣leeue also in his seruant.

The man still driuen to seeke fresh euasions, demanded how it was pos∣sible that the Saints could heare vs. To that poynt, the Catholike answe∣red,* 1.12 according to the doctrine of Ca∣tholike Diuines, that they hears vs, either in the beatifical vision of God, tanquam in speculo, or else by reuelation made vnto them: like as(a) 1.13 ELIZAEVS vnderstood the fraud of GIEZI, or as(b) 1.14 DANIEL knew the king of Babi∣lons dreame, or as(c) 1.15 S. PETER, the deceit of ANANIAS and SAPPHIRA. All this notwithstandidg, the wran∣gler could not so be satisfied, but like a Grasse-hopper, skipping from one poynt to an other, hee brought in o∣ther places, as badly vnderstood as

the former, to no other purpose, but as their maner is, diem circulis terere, to waste the time in words, and vn∣profitable jangling.

Neither can any other yshew be expected from the like contentious dispute, but such as TERTVLLIAN obserueth:* 1.16 extreame wearying of a mans tongue, or falling into choller, when the Catholike can no longer indure the aduersaries blasphemy. So vnpossi∣ble a thing it is, to preuaile in reaso∣ning with them out of scriptures, as the same Author had well lear∣ned out of the experience of his time:* 1.17 For that your victorie shall either be altogether vncertaine, or at least wise for a great part doubtfull.* 1.18 VVhen as your assertions shall be stiflie denied, and what you denie, shall be stil by them defended.

So pertinacious is their perseuerance in foolishnes, who take vpon them to maintaine vntruthes, said LACTANTIVS.* 1.19 The rea∣son whereof, hee giues in an other place: Infecti sunt persuasione, ac mentes eorum penitùs fuccum stultitiae perbiberunt. They are poysoned with selfe-per∣swasion, and their vnderstanding hath dronke vp the syrrope of foolishnes.

Neither will they euer want euasions and shifts to bolster their badde cause,* 1.20 who are more desirous of contention, then trueth. For they which once transgresse the lymits of holy Church,* 1.21 & Apostolical Tradition, do range from one argument to another, not standing to any thing, as EPIPHANIVS noteth. And no maruaile. Nā via eunti, (saith SENE∣CA) aliquid extremum est:* 1.22 error immensus est.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Deut. 23
• * 1.2

  Tert.
• * 1.3

  Psal. 98. verse 6. Gen. 18. & 19. Ios. 5.3. Reg. 18. Dan. 2. Act. 10. Gen. 48.
• * 1.4

  Matt. 11.
• * 1.5

  2. Tim. ••
• * 1.6

  Cap. 4.
• * 1.7

  Deut. 5. Gal. 3.
• * 1.8

  Act. 7.
• * 1.9

  Dan. 4.
• * 1.10

  Iac. 5.
• * 1.11

  Rom. 10
• * 1.12

  D. Greg. Mar. 12. c. 13. & 4 dialog c. 33. D. Th 3 p. fupplē. q. 72. a. 1. D. Aug. de cura pro mor. c. 15. ca. 16. & 17.
• (a) 1.13

  4 Reg. 5 & 6.
• (b) 1.14

  Dā. 2
• (c) 1.15

  Act. 5
• * 1.16

  Praeser. ••. 17.
• * 1.17

  Ibid. •••• 19.
• * 1.18

  vbi sup. cap. 15.
• * 1.19

  Lact. l. 3 cap. 24.
• * 1.20

  D. Aug. ep. 174.
• * 1.21

  Epiph. haeres. 77
• * 1.22

  Ep. 16.