that M. Whyte can not reply in answear hereto that because there are some other protestantes that do mantaine the said positions with him against his former learned brethren that therefore such his positions are freed from all imputation of vntruth and consequently him self of lying This his answeare is most insufficient First because some of his vntruthes do rest in affirming that not any one Father or any one protestant taught such or such a poynt or doctrine against which generall assertion including all Fathers and protâ—stantes if I can produce but any one Father or protestant as indeede I can for the most part produce many it is enough to conuince him of lying Secondly in that all Maister W. vntruthes do make head against the Catholick Faith and strengthen the protestantes religion in which respect they may be presumed to be the more wilfull it can not therefore with any shew of reason be otherwise conceaued that such learned protestants for the most part mantaining against the Catholicks the poynt or conclusion of faith out of which such assertions do ryse and therefore are not become parties against M. Whyte therein would euer defend against the Doctor the contrary assertions much weakning their owne cause thereby were it not that the euidency of the truth on the Catholick side doth force them thereunto And therefore it followeth euen in reason that the voluntary acknowledgment of any such one learned protestant ought to ouer balance weigh downe euen scoares of others not confessing so much so true is the saying of Irenen li. 4. ca. 14. Illa est vera sine contradiction probatio quae etiam ab aduersariis ipsis signa â—â—stiâ—iâ—atioAâ—â—s prosâ—rt But to make this poynt more perspicuous to the reader by example our minister in one place which hereafter shall be alledged anouchâ—th that the doctrine of Transubstantiation was neuer heard of before the Councell of Lateran for here he speaketh not of the definition of that Article but of the doctrine onely To conuince this as a most notorious vntruth I produce not Catholick authorities for they would seme to the readers eye ouer partiall but because all perfect differences are made vpon vnequall standinges I insist in dyuers learned protestantes otherwyse our professed enemies who do not beleue our Catholick doctrine herein as true neuerthelesse do confesse that such such Fathers liuing in the primitiue Church and therefore many ages before the foresaide Councell did teach the said doctrine of Transubstantiation Now here I say M. Whyte is not excused from lying in that he is able to bring forth other particuler protestantes teaching with him the said innouation of Transubstantiation euen at the same tyme and not before in reguard of his former learned brethren confessing the further antiquity thereof to the much disabling of their owne cause Now what can our Doctor obiect herein not their ignorance for they are the most accomplished protestantes for their literature that euer liued not their partiality in the cause for they here speake against them selues and do conspyre in the fnndamentall and primitiue point of faith therein with M. Whyte him self Onely therefore it is to be said that these protestantes thâ—s confessing to their owne preiudice are more ingenious vpright and lesse impudent in their wrytinges and M. Whyte and his compartners are of a canterized and seâ—red conscience not caring euen against their owne knowledg by their shameles mantayning of lyes to suppresse Gods truth and Religion Now this Basis and groundwork being immoueaable and this firmly laid let vs proceede to these his vntruthes The 1. Vntruth The first vntruth that Protestantes embrace that kinde of tryall which is by antiquity Therefore first in his preface to the Reader pag. penul thus you see the very front of his book is no lesse subiect to lying then before as I haue shewed it was to corrupting our minister still forgeating that a great sore in the body is more tollerable then a moale in the face there speaking of the Fathers of the primitiue tymes and of their IudgmeÌ„ts in matters of Faith betwene the protestantes vs thus writeth We are so well assured meaning of the resolution of the Fathers that we embrace that kind of tryall which is by antiquity and dayly fynde our aduersaries to be gauled thereby A most vast vntruth and acknowledged to be such euen by the most iudiceous protestantes For we fynde that wheareas M. Iewell with the lyke hipocrisy did appeale to the auncient Fathers at Paules Crosse euen his owne brethren did rebuke him greatly for those his inconsiderate speaches in so much that D. Humfrey the half-arch of the English Church in his dayes affirmeth that to vse his owne wordes M. Iewell gaue the papists therein too large a scope that he was iniurious to him selfe and after a manner spoyled him self and his Church To the lyke ende D. Whitaker but with extraordinary scurrility wryteth that The popish Religion is but a patched couerlet of the Fathers errours sowed together From whence it followeth that D. Whytaker would be loth inappealably to stand to their determinations Finally Luther him self the first mouer of our new Gospels Spheare so farr disclaymeth from the Fathers Iudgmentes as that he thus insolently traduceth them The Fathers of so many ages speaking of primitiue tymes haue bene blynd and most ignorant in the Scriptures they haue erred all their lyfe tyme vnlesse they were amended before their deathes they were neither Sainctes nor perteyning to the Church Thus Luther Here now is euident the vntruth of M. Whyte appealing to the Fathers since we fynd that the most learned members of his owne Church do reiect them with all contempt charging them with slat papistry which they would neuer haue done if they could haue vsed any other conuenient euasion Be affrayd M. Whyte of Gods iust reuenge for this your mantayning of euill by euill for thus you here do first by impugning the true faith of Christ then for your better warranting thereof in traducing the auncient and holy Fathers as enemies to the said Faith And remember the sentence Metum auget qui scelere scelus obruit The second vntruth Against Traditions But to procede to other vntruthes pag. 2. our M. Whyte laboureth to proue that the protestantes Church receaueth not nâ—cessarily any one Tradition and answearably thereto in his first Table before his booke he thus wryteth No part of our faith standeth vpon Tradition Now here his owne brethren will charge him with falshood For seing M. Whyte must and doth acknowledg that to beleue that such bookes as the wrytinges of the four Euangelistes the Actes of the Apostles the Epistles of S. Paule c. are the sacred word of god is a mayne article of both his and our Faith The falshood of his former Assertion is euidently euicted from the wordes of learned protestantes who teach that not from our pryuate spirit or scripture
WHereas according to Catholick doctrine different degrees of honour are to be exhibited to god and his blessed Angels and Sainctes as to the first Adoration and to the other in a far lower degree not onely damned spirites but damnable beritykes their painefull schollers as enuious emulators of glorious Sainctes do euer labour by many subtiltyes to rob them quyte of all deserued veneration In which kynd M. Whyte willing to acte his part euen against the B. Virgin the Mother of God modele of all piety for better shadowing of his enuy pag. 344 he alledgeth Epiphanius c. her l. 3. haer 79. c. Collyridianos saying The Virgin Mary was a virgin and honorable but not geuen for vs to worship but her self worshipped him that tooke flesh of her But for the cleares reuealing of this illusion it is to be obserued that Epiphanius wryteth here purposly against certaine women who adoring a Chariot or foure squared seate and couering the same with linnen cloath did at one solemne tyme of the yeare bring forth bread and offer the same vp in the name of Mary which he proueth at large to be vnlawfull in that it was neuer permitted to women to offer vp sacrifice as also in that sacrfice is an honour onely peculiar to god yea he maketh an expresse difference betwene adoration and honour or woorship attributing the first onely to god and the second with vs Catholickes to the blessed Virgin and Sainctes which is further manifest euen by the wordes obiected being truly translated which are these Verily the body of Mary was holy but yet not God Verily the Virgin was a Virgin and honorable but not geuen vnto vs for adoration but her self adored him who was borne of her flesh As also Let Mary be honoured and the Father and Sōne and the holy Ghost adored Let no man adore Mary c. This mistery is due to God And againe Though Mary be must excellent and holy and honourable yet not for adoration And sundry other such lyke all which do euidently conuince that S. Epiphanius alloweth woorship and honour to be geuen to the B. Virgin but not adoration to wit with sacrifice which is an honour Peculiar onely to God The 2. Paragraph S. Gregory notoriously corrupted against the woorshiping of Images Speaking against Images pag. 152. he affirmeth that the Church of Rome forbade the woorship of them us appeareth saith he by the Epistle of Gregory to Serenus which he noteth in the margent to be Epist 109. li. 7. It is this ministers euill hap by most of his citatations to manifest to the world his foly and falshood For who not distracted would vrge that against his aduersary which impugneth him self and that in such a maner as will easely conuince him of fraude and wilfull malice For fiirst S. Gregory in the place cyted reproueth Serenus for breaking casting downe of Images which were set vp in Churches though the said Serenus did the same through zeale by reason of some who committed Idolatry thereby affirming further that therefore Pictures are vsed in Churches that those which know not letters at least should reade by seeing in the wales those thinges which they could not reade in bookes And then he concludeth Thy brotherhood therefore ought to haue preserued the pictures and to haue hindred the people from their adoration that so the ignorant might haue from whence to gather knowledg of the history and the people not sinne in adoration of the picture Here S. Gregory alloweth the vse of pictures in Churches shewing the commodity arrisinge thereby and withall reprehendeth Serenus though through zeale for breaking and casting them downe what may we thinke then he would haue said against Whyte and other his brethren who through heresy and malice prohibite all vse or place thereof in Churches if they had bene then extant and made knowen vnto him But though with Catholickes he allow the placing of them in Churches yet M. Whyte will vrge that he forbiddeth their woorship The woorship which he forbiddeth according to his owne wordes is adoration which word the Fathers frequently vse for that honour which is onely proper to God And that S. Gregory ment no other is manifest by an other Epistle writen to the said Serenus Ep. 9. l. 9. vpon the self same occasion where hauing repeated the forsaid vtility of pictures and adding that not without cause antiquity admitted Histories to be painted in the venerable places or Churches of Sainctes he directethe Serenus in him all pastors how to instruct the people in theire lawfull vse as shewing them by testimonies of sacred scriptures that nothing made with hand ought to be adored seing it is writen Luc. 4. The Lord thy god thou shalt adore c. As also By sight of the thing done or the history let them conceaue the feruour of compunction and let them be humbly prostrated in the adoration of the onely omnipotent holy Trinity By which it is most manifest that the woorship here forbidden by S. Gregory to Images is onely that adoration which is proper to god And that otherwise he thought Images duly to be worshipped appeareth by his 7. booke and 5. Epistle wheare wryting to Bishop Ianuarius concerning one Peter lately conuerted from Iudaisine to Christianity who violently had taken a Sinagoug from the Iewes and placed therein the Image of the Mother of God and our Lord and the venerable Crosse c. In redresse whereof he exhortethe the said Bishope that the Image and the Crosse taken away againe from thence with that veneration or reuerence which it meete to restore that which was violently taken away to wit the Sinagouge So that in steed of impugning due worship to Images these poyntes folowing may all heritikes learne of S. Gregory First that he proueth the vse thereof from antiquity Secondly that he alloweth the placing thereof in Churches and impugneth the breakers or pullers of them downe though their excuse or pretence be feare of Idolatry in the People Thirdly that the same in steed of hurt do much profit the ignorant that can not reade And lastly that in plaine tearmes he calleth the Crosse Crucem veneran dam Venerable And directeth that both the Image of our B. Lady and the Crosse should be remoued cum ea qua dignum est veneratione with that worship which is meete or they deserue So that I could wish our needy minister to be better aduysed hereafter in his citinge of S. Gregory against Catholick religion The 5 Paragraph The Councell of Eliberis corrupted against Images Here now I am come to the last corruption which I intende to display the which I haue purposly reserued therewith to close vp the taist of my Reader so notorious it is for the Authors depraued and so pregnant and dextrous in the conueyance As touching the first whearas euery one of the former deprauations those of the Rhemistes onely excepted resteth in abusing the authority of some one particuler man this stryketh at a whole
in the tyme of Christianity there are no Traditions but the Scripture of the old Testament it the onely rule of Faith Againe Remember the Law of Moyses my seruant which I commaunded him in Horeb for all Israell with the statutes iudgments Therefore no Traditions Lastly The brethren of the rich glutton had Moyses and the Prophets Therefore no pointes of Christian Faith are to be proued froÌ„ any Traditions of the Church Strangly wildly most exorbitantly concluded for what reference haue these textes with the rule of Faith the which is not so much as glaunced at in any one of them or graunting that they had why should the old Testament be a paterne for the Faith professed in the new Testament since all Christians do graunt that the time of Grace is enriched with many priuiledges and immunities whereof the old Law was altogether depriued After these and such like textes of Scripture he descendeth to proue the soresaid point from the testimonies of the auncient Fathers as to omitt diuers others he alledgeth Tertulian saying The Scripture is the rule of Faith which we graunt for we teach that it is Regula partialis fidei a Rule of our faith in part yet hence it followeth not which is the point here onely to be proued that it is Regula totalis an entyre sole rule of Faith without the help of any Traditions and as large in extent as our faith is Also S. Augustine thus wryting This controuersy depending betwene vs requyres a Iudg let Christ therefore iudg and let the Apostle Paule iudg with him because Christ also speaketh in his Apostle As if Christ his Apostles could not aswell speake in Traditions as in writinges or because graunting that that particuler controuersie there ment by S. Augustine was proued from the wrytinges of S. Paule therefore all other Articles of Christian Religion should thence also receaue their sole proofe Againe Gregory Nyssen tearming the Scripture a strait and inflexible Rule as in that the Scriptute is inflexible and inchangeable for those pointes which it proueth therefore it alone and no Apostolicall traditions is to proue any article of our Faith Lastly he introduâ—eth S. Austine againe saying Whatsoeuer thing it be that a man learnes out of the Scripture if it be hurtfull there it is condemned if it be profitable there it is found Which place particulerly concerning conuersation of life as vertue and vyce of both which the Scripture most fully discourseth how it may condemne Apostolicall traditions which may deliuer supernaturall and high misteries of Christian faith I leaue to the censure of any iudceous man This done he next falleth to the sentences of more late Catholick writers as first of S. Thomas Aquinas saying The doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets is Canonicall because it is the Rule of our vnderstanding But what do these wordes force onely in the behalfe of Scripture and against Apostolicall Traditions since in leede they do not peculierly concerne the Scripture but as the wordes litterally import that the doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets in generall whether it be written or vnwritten is Canonicall Againe he vrgeth S. Thomas the second tyme Our Faith resteâ—h and stâ—eth it self vpon the reuelation geuen to the Apostles and Prophets which write the Canonicall bookes and not vpon reuelation if any such haue bene made to any other Doctors But who denies that the prophets Apostles did write the canonicall bookes Or who reacheth that our Faith ought to rest vpon the reuelation of any other Doctors then the Prophets the Apostles Or shew any reason which is the cheif point in this sentence to be shewed why the reuelations of the Prophets and especially the Apostles may not aswell comprehend traditions as the writen word In like sort he bringeth in Gerson saying Scripture is the Rule of our faith which being well vnderstoode noe authority of men is to be admitted against it As I haue said before we do teach that the Scripture is the Rule of Faith but not the sole Rule which M. Whyte ought to proue Againe we willingly acknowledg that no authority of man is to stand against the Scripture but what doth this impeach Apostolicall traditions which are nomore the bare authority of man then the Scripture it self both equally proceding froÌ„ God by the assistance of the holy Ghost Finally he comes in with Perisius wryting that The Authority of no Sainct is of infallible truth for S. Augustine geues that honour onely to the sacred Scriptures But here the question is not touching the tradition of any other Sainctes then onely of our Sauiour his Apostles and the whole Church yet we see Peresius here speaking of Sainctes must needes meane only of Particuler Sainctes or holy men since the tymes of the Apostles seing otherwise he should teach which were most wicked that the authority of the Apostles and the Euangelistes are not of infallible truth Besides S. Augustine in that place restrayneth without any reference at all to Traditions his meaning onely to the writinges of priuate Doctors in respect of the sacred Scripture and in this reguard still speaking of bookes written we all graunt that the Scripture is of an infallible truth Such vnprofitable and wast testimonies M. Whyte is accustomed to heape together in his booke the which that they shall not so easely be espied he subtilly for the most part mingleth them with other Authorities more pertinent at least in outward for the c shew of wordes lyke a good Captaine who rangeth his worst weakest souldiers in the middest thâ—ong of the more experienced so making those formes to serue onely to encrease in the enemies eye the number though not their force The 2. Paragraph Wherein are discussed certaine Arguments drawne from Scriptures and Fathers in proofe that the sacred Scriptures the true sense there of are made sufficiently known vnto vs without any approbation or explication of the Church The next subiect of his loose kind of Inferences wherein I will insist partly conspireth with the former and is touching the absolute and supreme soueraigâ—ty of the Scriptures in determining of controuersies without any needefull explicatioÌ„ of gods Church this assertion being indeede a head Theoreme or principle with the sectaries of this age For page 4â— M. Whyte thus writeth Digressio 11. prouing that The Scripture it self haith that outward authority whereupon our faith is built and not the Church Now here for the better vindicating and freeing vs from all contumelious calumnies touching our supposed contempt of the Scriptures as also for the more manifest discouery of M. Whytes weake arguing herein the Reader is to take notice that the Catholicks do ascribe all due reuerence estimation and respect to the Scripture whatsoeuer acknowledging it to be gods embassadour which vnfouldeth vnto man vpon earth the sacred will and pleasure of our heauenly King as also that it is the spirituall
WHYTE DYED BLACK OR A Discouery of many most foule blemishes impostures and deceiptes which D. Whyte haith practysed in his book entituled The way to the true Church Deuyded into 3 sortes Corruptions or deprauations Lyes Impertinencies or absurd reasoninges Written by T. W. P. And dedicated to the Vniuersity of Cambridge Hareticum hominem post vnam alieram correptionem deuita sciens quia subuersus est qui eiusmodi est delinquit cum sit proprio iudicio condemnatus Tit. 3 Cathedra tibi quid fecit Ecclesiae Romanae in qua Petrus sedit in qua nunc Anastatius siue Paulus quintus sedet Cur appelas Cathedram pestilentiae Cathedram Apostolicam August lib. 2. con lit Petil. Cum priuilegio 1615. TO THE MOST CELEBRIOVS and famous Vniuersity of Cambridge Ingenious and learned Academians I do not present this my small about vnto you intreating hereby your patronage thereof For how can I expect so greate a fauour since most of you dissent from me in that Religion which is here mantayned neither as houlding this poore worke for any art therein worthy your iudiceons vew For I am not onely conscious to my self of myne owne weaknes but do also grearly admyre your pearcing and cleare eyed indgmentes To you then I exhibite it as appealing to the Mother such is my confidence in your impartiall and euen censures as Iudg betwene her sonne and my self For wheareas my designed aduersary at this present M. Whyte to whom your vniuersity haith first geuen his education for literature and since hath graced him with the inuesture of Doctorship in answear to a Catholic Treatise first peÌ„ned by one of my fellow-labourers in the vineyard of Christ haith written a most virulent and scandalous booke entituling it The way to the true Church The which booke was fownde so full of corruptions vntruthes and other such baisse matter that it was houlden in the opinion of many great and learned Preistes rather worthy of contempt then answear Neuerthelesse M. Whyte not onely in the Preface of this said booke but also in diuers places of his second worke vaunteth much of his sincere dealing in the first as particulerly pag. 129. where saying that it is the profession of Iesuites in their wryting to rayde bookes counterfeat forge and lye he then thus ambitiously concludeth My aduersary can not present the Reader with one conclusion meaning of his first book one doctrine one quotation one lynâ— on letter to make him really see wherein I haue fayled Now this idle venditation of ingenuity and vpright dealing haith awakened my sleeping pen and indeede haith geuen birth to this short Treatise whearin I do vndertake to make good our former censures that is to demonstrate that the very ground and burden of his first booke is mere corruptions vntruthes and other such impostures in the euicting of which poynt I am so secure that I willingly make your selues Iudges both of him and me being assured that in a true and serious perusall of this my accusatioÌ„ you shall synde no caâ—dor in Whyte nor any of Gods spirit in him who styleth him self Gods minister but rather in reguard of your frustrated hope you shall haue iust reason to say of this childe who seming Iacob proueth Esau Expectauimus lucem ecce tenebra Es. 59. which deformities of his I am not of so rigide a Iudgement as to ascribe to your famous vniuersity for at this present I do not wholly approue that comoÌ„ position of the Ciuilians partus sequitur ventrem And we all obserue that those faire heauenly bodies somtimes bring forth monsters It is certainly reported that desyre of praise a windy Mâ—teor ingendred in the Region of self conceate first inuyted M. Whyte to support forsooth with his learned hand the threatning and falling piller of his new Church and thereupon he instantly stept into the number of writers hauing thereby already gayned great applause and approbation from the wauering vncertaine multitude in whose weake opinion he seemeth to haue ouerpassed most of his tyme and ranck but I doubt not but by the assistance of him who In veritate educet iudicium Es. 42. and by the ensuing discouery of his calumnious forgeries so to picke the swolne bladder of his pryde as that all his frothy ostentation shall resolue to nothing and that his wrytinges lyke vnto new found wells being commonly of acompt onely for a yere or two which heretofore his fauorites haue so highly estemed shall for euer after remaine contemned and neglected which euent may well be expected since it often hapneth that he who ryseth sodainly faleth precipitatly But as in this following Treatise you shall be fully satisfyed of the want of his sincerity so here I hould it not inconuenient to geue some touch of that opprobrious tongue of his which casteth most fowle and vndeserued aspersions of contumely and reproch vpon all Preistes and Catholickes For euen in his Epistles of this his booke impugned by me he wryteth that the Iesuites are the Popes Ianisaryes that Priests are cunning seducers possessing mens wyues c. vsing their goods to swager and serue their owne luxurious vse that since the Harpies were chaced away and Bet was ouerthrowne neuer was such a greedy and rauenous Idol as the seminary and that friars seminaryes and Masse Priests are so many beares and bloody the Tigars the fatall enemyes of Princes c. that the Papists laity doth liue in extreame ignorance and finally that their religion teacheth to pay no depts murther Kings and tendeth cheifly to all bloody conspiracies Our innocency in all which pointes one daye will discouer when the valye of each mans actions shal be drawne awaye and when all deedes and thoughts shal be plainly laid open at what time M. Whyte for theese and other his most false iniurious and vnchristian reproches must render a seuere account only at this present our retaliation to him shal be to saye with the Apostle maledicimur sed benedicimus blasphemamur sed obsecramus and telling him that by these his Philâ—ppickes and declamatory inuectiues he haith worthily gotten the reputation of being counted a good rayler and hath bene carefull as it should seeme to warrant in him self those wordes of the Scripture the touge is an vnruly euill full of deadly poyson And now illustrious Academians whome God hath endued with transcendent spiritts and vnderstandings farr aboue the vulgar suffer me before I remit you to this following discourse to present vnto you touching our Catholicke faith these few admonitions the which you are not to contemne as proceeding from me how meane soeuer but rather herein to remember that from the earth the lowest element of all we best obserue the motions of the heauens Make then particuler triall of the cheefe grounds of our Catholicke religion and looke backe vnto the Continuall practize of Christes Church since it first beinge assure your self that we shall not be found
superstitious and blynd as it pleaseth M. Whyre others to terme vs for how can they be blind who behould the articles of there faith with the eyes of all antiquity Examine it by the rules of Gods sacred word for the true sence of his written word as following euen the iugments of the most dispassionat and sobeâ— Protestants recur to the ioynt expositions of the primitiue fathers who liued when the church was most florishing and in her full orbâ— and know that the leaues of scripture without the intended sence of the holy Ghost are but leaues without frute as touching his vnwritten word call to mind that saying of Tertulian Id uerius quod prius id prius quod ab initio id ab initio quod ab Apostolis Remember that the most markable Protestants for learninge do confesse that those doctors are patrons of our Catholicke fayth who liued when the Spouse of Christ was most spotles chast and intemerat Apoynt indeed so euident as that from their learned monuments we are able to delineat and draw the very Image and face of the present Romane religion as for the more obscure passages occurring in them your ingenuityes may suppose them to be the sad colours or darke groundes seruing onely to giue greater luster and life to the whole portrayture Be neuer perswaded since it is graunted that the Romane Church was once the true church and the time of her supposed reuolt cannot be knowne that the daughter of Sion could euer so vnespiedly become a Babilonian strumpet Deuide not your selues froÌ„ that most conspicuous church of Christ which haith bene promised that in all ages it should gloriously appeare to the eye of the world lest so in sew thereof as for the last refuge you be forced to forge a Mathematicall and aery Church consisting of certainâ— imaginary inuisibilites impugned by the fathers and your more iudicious wryters since it being mearly consisteth in a not being Suffer not a Heteroclyte sectary who reiecteth though contrary to gods word and his owne brethren all regular ordinary and mediate vocation like an other Melchisadech borne without father or mother to plant in your soules a new kind of religion neuer heard of before till a libidenous Monke by mutuall breach of vowes had yoked him selfe with a lapsed Nunn and be a certained that such a nouelist must needs be one of those who say they are Apostles and are not but are found liars Finally relinquishe and abandon that supreame soueraignty of the priuat reauealing spirit condemned euen by Christs owne Apostles it being first cheefly erected therby to decline the weighty authorityes of the auncient fathers in the exposition of Gods sacred wryt to reduce all thinges to the most graue for-sooth and inappealable tribunall of each illiteterate mans empty scull and braines Thus do the gospellers of these dayes hould the fanaticall reuealing Spirit as their mount Sinay from whence they receue their new euangelicall lawe it being in deed shadowed with a cloud not wherewith to couer it owne ouer glorious infallibility but with a cloud or mist of pride ignorance and vncertainty And thus worthy Academians leauing you to the censure of your vnworthy sonn I take my leaue expecting that my good meaning herein shall ouer-ballance with you my bouldnes and wishing euen in the bowels of Christiane charity that euery one of you weare strong armed with our most auncieÌ„t Catholicke Roman faith for then you would easely learne to contemne those poore and weake assaults which euery first appearance of new doctrine doth threaten it being an acknowledged experienced truth that Hareses apud cos multum valent qui in fide non valent Your well willer in Christ Iesus T. W. P. THE PREFACE TO THE READER Good Reader before I remit thee to the perusall of this ensuing discourse I here thinke it good to acquaint thee with the occasion inducing me to wryte it and with my methode houlden therein And as touching the first thou art to conceaue that the worthles esteeme which we haue had of M. Whyte his booke how soeuer his owne followers do magnify it as seeing it fraught with such impurity of stuffe haith for theese yeares past preuailed with most of vs so far that we weare determined to forbeare the answearing thereof houlding it altogether vnworthy of such labour yet seing in diuerse passages of his late second worke he vaunteth in great exultation and iolity of words that this his first booke doth not stand chargeable with any wilfull corruption falsification or other such imposture and that he confidently prouoketh his aduersary if any such be to set them downe Therefore to controule this mans most shamelesse asseueration as being one of an obdurat conscience not caring how falsly he wryteth or how impudently he iustifieth it being wrytten I do here charge his said first treatise with most fowle abuses falsifications other such fraudulent dealing will in theese few sheetes following particularize to thee diuerse of them whereby thou shalt haue reason to assure thy selfe that M. Whyte in reguarde of his calling in his new Ministery and his exercise therein may truly be numbred amongest them Qui Commutauerunt veritatem Dei in mendacium who changed the truth of God onto a lye Now concerning my methode taken in displaying of his falshood and deceate thou art to be aduertised that my cheefe proiect in this treatise being to proue M. Whyte in his wrytings a most dishonest conscionles and faithles man therfore forbearing to confute the whole course of his booke in respect of doctrine which is already learnedly performed by my fellowe A. D. in his reply to M. W. said worke I do here restraine my selfe to three heads reduâ—ing all theese impostures in which hereafter I intend to insist to some of them The heads are these Corruptions Lyes and ImpertineÌ„cyes By CorruptioÌ„s I meane those depraued authorityes of the auncient Fathers and our own moderne Catholicke authours which this our Minister thereby to make theÌ„ to speake in his protestant language and dialect haith most shamelesly altered either by inserting or adding some words of his owne as part of their sentences or by concealing of some part of their words which do expound the rest of the testimonyes in a far different sence froÌ„ that in which M. Whyte doth vrge them or lastly though setting downe their words truly by strangely detorting and wresting them from the intended sence of the authors By Lyes I vnderstand false assertions and vast vntruthes mantained by M. White whom the more fully and irrepliably and for the greater compendiousnes to coÌ„uince therein I haue made choice of those vntruthes as are acknowledged for such by the most learned Protestants thus making his mother to wit the Vniuersity the iudg and his owne Brethren the plaintifs betwene himselfe and me herein By ImpertineÌ„ces
I conceaue his idle and fruteles aledging either of scripture fathers or Catholick writers to disproue thereby some poynt of our religion where my meaning is that allowing the sense and constructions to those authorityes which the wordes necessarily and truly importe yet they doe in no sort disable weaken the catholicke poynt for the impugning whereof they are there by our Minister produced so that it followeth that his illations drawne from those testimonies to the question intended are most absurd incongruous and inconsequent These three now are the seuerall particuler deliueries of our minister in his so much applauded worke himselfe in this his scene sometimes acting one part sometimes an other agreeable to the former heades but wee lesse maruaile since eich man knowes that whyte is successiuely capable of seuerall tinctures Now touching the number of these his impostures thou art good reader further to vnderstand that my meaning is not to displaye all those with which his booke is stored for this would require too painful a labour and rising to an ouer greate volume would be lesse fitting to be printed and diuulged Besides seeing my maine proiecte here is to decipher the dishonest dealing of our minister euery cleere iudgment will acknowledg that the true charging him euen with a few wilfull and vniustifiable corruptions doth condemne and proue him for such a man and euery one knoweth that who is found out of malice to corrupte some few places would in like sorte depraue as many authorities as opportunity might licence him Therfore touching his Corruptions or deprauations I haue contented my selfe onely with fourty which fourty are taken out of about some twenty different writers hauing in truth no more bookes alledged by him wherewith to examine it from which circumstance thou maist thus conclude that if restraining my selfe onely to twenty authours more or lesse I can find fourty most notorious corruptions of theyr testimonies how many scores in all liklihood of such like deprauations might be found in all the rest of the authors alledged by him which amount nere-hand to a hundred if diligent search weare made of them the rather considering that many bookes produced by him but omitted by me are most to be gotten and therefore he might corrupte their sayinges more securely and with greater bouldnes as presuming beforehand that such his corruptions through want of the bookes them selues could not easely be espied In like sort concerning his lyes I haue made choyce onely of such as are all of theÌ„ acknowledged for vntruthes by his owne learned brethren From which point thou maist also thus infer if M. Whyte his booke doth minister sundry such grosse lyes against our catholicke faith as that the most learned protestants that euer writ are forced though to their owne disaduantage to confesse them for such How many other vntruthes might be found therein which through some shewe or culour of answeare and euasion are such as though being lyes indeed wil not yet be so acknowledged by our aduersaries who are loth to confesse more in fauour of our catholicke religion then the vnauoidable euidence and clearenes of the truth it selfe constrayneth them Lastly all his impertinencies or weake absurd reasons hereafter set downe are taken out of lesse then twenty leaues of his booke from which thou maist in like maner thus collect that if twenty leaues and theese in the first part of his booke deuiding the whole into three partes do afford such a boundance of impertinent allegations and authorityes how many hundreds then in all probability of like nature are dispersed throughout his whole treatise it contayning aboue two hundred leaues And the rather seeing that diuers authours do commonly fortify and strengthen the first part of their wrytings with more forcible proofes and authorities then the latter part both thereby the sooner and with greater speede to inuade the iudgment of the reader as also knowing that many do peruse the beginninges of bookes who through a werisome carelesnes do neuer reade the latter part of them And thus much of my methode in this my treatise Here now thou seest curteous reader what I vndertake to performe that is to make euident that M. Whyte his first booke is stored with most shameles falsifications lyes and other such collusions the which if I doe not effect I am content to become a reproche and shame not onely to my particuler profession the sacred function whereof I hould my cheefest honour but also to the Catholicke cause in generall for here I protest in the sight of god and as I shall answere the truth or falshood of this my protestation at the most dreadfull daye that I neuer perused booke of this quantity wherein I did find more vnanswereable corruptions lyes and impertinencies then in this worke of M. Whytes And if so eminent a man as he is presumed by many to be doth stand chaâ—geable with such prophane and wicked deportments what shall we then censure of other inferiour wryters of his side Since if the light be darknes how great is the darknes or what may we iudg of thâ— iustnes of their cause seeing the faith of Christ is of that force as it scorneth to be vphoulden with the weake supporters of such deceatfull meanes it being no better then an impious deuotion or irreligious godlines to deferd truth with falshood or to blaze forth the light of the gospel by the workes of darknes And as touching his second booke which is fraughted with all base scurrility of wordes and railing I will onely say that seing there hath not bene as yet sufficient opportunity for the particuler examining of it yet I am assured that who shall impose that labour to himself shall find the same to stand chargeable with no lese store of impostures then this his other for if this his booke impugned by me being the strength and first borne of his cause be found so corrupt how can we probably coniecture that this other second feminine and lesse perfect labour of his should not pertake of the former blemishes and deficiences But now good reader I will detaine thee no longer from perusing this my accusation earnestly entreating thee euen for the good of thy soule that if thou vnderstand latin thou wouldest see the testimonies them selues as they lye in the authours the which I doe avouch to be here corrupted which if thou dost doubtlesly thou shalt be forced to confesse that M. whyte is a most egregious falsary and howsoeuer he enameleth his cause with the phrazes of the waye to the true Church of the enlarging of the Ghospell of Christ of rooting out superstition and blindnes and the like neuerthelesse thou shalt find that he is most conscious and guilty both of his owne weake cause as also of his perfidious and prophane mantaining and defending of the same so as in reguard of his hipocrisy and dissimulation herein thou shalt see the wordes of the apostle iustified in him all they are
Councell consisting of many scores of Fathers so happy a progresse M. Whyte haith made in his profession of corrupting Now for the conueyance though it be not to be paralleled with diuers of the former extensiué as the schoole-men speake in multitude and stoare of wordes corrupted it lying onely in slye transposition of one or two wordes yet intensiué for the art thereof it may be equalled with any This then it is Our minister there pag 344. to ouerthrow the religious vse of Images produceth the 36. Canon of the Councell of Eliberis to wit No picture is to be made in the Church lest that be adored which is paynted on wales The wordes of the Canon are these Placuit picturas in Ecclesia non debere ne quod colitur adoratur in partetibus depingatur It pleased the Councell that pictures should not be in the Church leste that which is worshipped and adored be painted on the wales Be obseruant here Reader and marke the difference which is made of the same wordes by a witty interchange of their place in their translation thou shalt see that my delicate minister here euen transcends him self The Councell saith Images are not to be in the Church lest that be painted on the wales which is worshipped M. Whyte translateth lest that be worshipped which is painted on the wales Thus the difference breefely resteth in this lest that which is worshiped be painted And lest that which is painted be worshipped A small difference in shew of wordes but great in sence For the wordes of the Councell acknowledging the worship of Images maketh the worship due to them to be the cause why they are not to be painted on wales But M. Whyte saith that they are not to be painted on wales because they are not to be worshiped and so maketh the Councell to speake lyke good protestantes Now the reason why the Councell would not haue the wales of Churches to be painted with Images was in reguard of the due respect they bare to them not as M. Whyte falsly suggesteth For being so painted they were subiect to be defaced either by the inuasioÌ„ of the enemies in those tymes or els by the rayne and bad wether whereas Images drawne in Tables of which the former Councell maketh no restraint in that they are portable and remoueable do not lye open to the same daunger Therefore the intention of the CouÌ„cell herein was the same with the intention of that decree by the which it was ordained that in reuerence to the Crucifix no Crosse should be made vpon the plaine ground because it being so made must needes be often irreuerently be tramped with the feete of meÌ„ Thus is M. Whyte in seking to disproue the lawfull vse of an Image become him self a perfect Image of deceate fraude and collusion But here now I make an ende of his corruptions deprauations hasting my self to the second Part of his scene which is his lyes and falshoods Onely I must say that in reguard of the impurity and conse onlesse deportment of him in his whole Treatise I can not but commiserate all such poore credulous soules as do highly Preiudge of his booke as beiug writen in all sincerity and plainesse and free from the least touch or aspersion of any wilfull deprauation And therefore I hould it most strange that M. Purchase a scholer and ingenious though extremely maliuolent should in his owne booke pag. 100. entytle M. Whyte Via Lactea alludinge perhaps both to his name and his supposed candor in wrytinge But since his mistakinge is not iustifiable I will allow to M. Whyte the same tytle though through a differeut reason For as the Via Lactea appeareth to a vulgar sight to be a part of heauen and yet indeede is not being if we follow the iudgment of the auncient Philosophers far lower then the heauens as it is necessarily euicted from the different parallayes and variations thereof taken from seuerall places So is M. Whyte reputed in the comon eye and censure of vnlearned protestantes as a man which in all truth haith much laboured in that heauenly course of dilating the Gospell and faith of Christ whereas we fynd that the contrary is most true as haith fully appeared from his seuerall exorbitant deprauations of so many Catholick Authors and others Wherefore to be short I greatly feare that except hereafter there follow a feeling remorse of this foule and vnchristianlike dealing the wordes of S. Iohn the Euangelist may be more truly applyed to our Sir Iohn the minister Nomen habes quo viuis mortuus es Apoc. 3. The ende of the first part WHYTE DYED BLACK THE SECOND PART Contayning sundry notorious vntruthes or Lyes proued to be such euen by the confession of the most learned Protestantes And first is preuented a weake euation which may be vsed by M. Whyte against this second parte FROM Corruptions good Reader we are next to descend to vntruthes for lying indeede is the second piller which supporteth the whole weight frame of M. Whytes worke This passage I here make distinct from the former For although all the precedent deprauations of the first part do potentially include vutruthes and falshoodes yet our Doctors proteruity therein doth cheifly rest either in corrupting other mens wordes or in alledging them directly against the knowne intention of the Authors whereas here the reduplicatiue formality as I may terme it of his hereticall deportment consisteth in plaine lying to wit in setting downe and instifying certaine most false assertions and positions a course little sorting to one who styleth him self a minister of gods word in that his sacred word is altogether incompatible with falshood The floate of these his vntruthes is so greate as that our Doctor assordeth vnto vs many scoares of this nature yet because he would make shew to mantaine diuers of them vnder some prâ—text either of much reading or in wrasting the sence of such produced authorities if I should fortify the contrary truth from their particuler testimonies of Scripture Fathers Histories c. being a kynd of proofe in reguard of the often suggested doubtfulnes of the true sense directed by many wheeles of inferences and deductions Therefore to the end that I may euâ—n chokingly and irreplyably conuince him of such notorious miscariage I haue thought good to supererogate with him in disprouing his said falshoodes I meane in restrayning my self precysely to such his lyes as the contrary thereto is acknowledged for true euen by his own brethren and these not mâ—n obscure or vulgar but the most eminent and learned protestantes of Christendome and such as haue euer bene accompted starres of the greatest magnitude in their euangelicall Spheare Neither will I alledge so many of them as I could but for the greater expedition I will content my self for the most part with the testimonies of two or three of our learnedst aduersaries Now here I would haue the iudiceous reader to obserue
weightiest alterations of our publick English Lyturgy since the first entrance of protestancy into England And first it is euident that the Lyturgy of the Church of England in King Edwardes tyme at which tyme there was an euident bringing in of protestancy published by Crammer Peter Martir Bucer and approued by the authority of the Parleament kept almost all the prayers and ceremonies of the Masse the reall presence onely reiected with crossing of both their Sacramentes and the accustomed rites of Baptisme as a formall consecration of the water of Baptisme with the signe of the Crosse the vsing of Chrisme and the annoynting of the child Againe it retayned prayer for the dead and the offering of our prayers by the intercession of Angels But when Quen Elizabeth came to reigne the said Lyturgy was so altered as that it is needles to reste long in the discouery thereof for it tooke away prayer for the dead and prayer to Angels besides most of the former Ceremonies vsed in King Edwards time In lyke sort in the Communion booke of K. Edward we fynde confirmed baptisme by lay persons in tyme of necessity and grace geuen in that Sacrament the Confirmation of children and strength geuen thereby the Preist blessing the Bryde grome and the bryde euen with the signe of the Crosse. The Preistes absolution of the sick penitent by these wordes By the authority committed to me I absolue thee of all thy sinnes The speciall confession of the sick penitent and finally the annoynting of the sick Of all which particulers see the Communion booke of K. Edward printed in fol. by Edward whitchurch cum priuilegio ad imprimendum solum An. 1549. All which dyuers of them including poyntes of faith and doctrine are now vtterly left out in the Communion booke published in Q. Elizabeths tyme In so much as Parker an english protestaÌ„t thus writeth thereof The day starr was not risen so high in their dayes when as yet Q. Elizabeth reformed the defects of K. Edwardes CommunioÌ„ booke Answearably hereto wryteth Cartwright saying The Church of England changed the booke of Common prayer twyce or thryce after it had receaued the knowledg of the Gospell Thus Cartwright in his 2. Reply par 1. pa. 41. who in that very booke laboureth yet for a fourth change And thus is M. Whyte not affrayd to suggest to the world euen in printe fonde man that could not be idle enough in pryuate talke such vnwarrantable vntruthes which course of his if it proceded from his owne inaduertency and ouersight as not hauing seene the Common prayer booke of K. Edward declaring the contrary then were it more pardonable but this I think him self out of his pryde and shew of much reading will not acknowledge therefore we may probably ascribe it to his mere wilfull forgery who to defend his owne heterogeneous and mongerell faith which mantayneth at different tymes different doctrines dare aduenture to broach falshoodes though neuer so eminent But let him remember that by so doing he with disauantage to his cause vainly spendeth his labour for Qui nititur mendaciâ—â— hic pascit ventos Who trusteth to lyes feedeth the wyndes The 6. Vntruth In proofe of the Romane Churches mutability in matters of Faith Page 150 he confidently auerreth that The Church of Rome is varied from her self in matters of Faith since she began to be the seate of Antichrist Thus charging our Church with great mutability of beleefe as before he laboured to grace and adorne his owne Sinagouge with all speceous constancy in the same Now for the better ouerthrowing of this vntruth it is necessary to recurr to those first supposed tymes of Antichristes being perusing the doctrine then taught to see if the Church of Rome haith made at this day any change thereof in any matters of Faith for euen so far doth the minister stretch out his lye First then the most receaued opinion of the protestantes touching Antichrist his coming for they are most various amonge them selues therein is that S. Gregory the great was the first Antichrist Now to obserue what his Religion was will be made euident by taking vew of the Religion which S. Augustine being a Monke of the Church of Rome and sent by this S. Gregory did here plant in England For the tryall of which poynt I will first produce D. Humfrey who thus writeth hereof In Ecclesiam verò c. What did Gregory Augustine bring into the Church c. A burden of Ceremonies c. They brought in the Pall for the Archbishop in celebrating of Masse and purgatory c. They brought in the oblation of the healthfull Hoast and prayer for the deade c. Relickes c. Transubstantiation c. A new consecration of Churches c. From all the which what other thing is gathered then that Indulgences Monachisme the Papacy and all the rest confusion of the Popes superstition was then erected all which thinges Augustine the greate Monk and taught by Gregory a Monk brought to vs English men Thus farr D. Humfrey In lyke sort the Triumuiri of Magdeburg whose censuring pennes haue controuled more ages then euer the Romanes Triumuiri gouerned Prouinces I meane the 3 Century wryters in the Index or Alphabeticall Table of the 6. Century after the first Edition thereof at the word Gregory do relate the particuler doctrine of S. Gregory as popish and erroneous For thus they here note with particuler references to the places of S. Gregories writinges prouing the same Eiusdem error c. The same Gregories errour of good workes of Confession of Wedlock of the Inuocation of Sainctes of hell of Iustification of Free will of purgatory of Penance of Satisfaction Now this former doctrine contayning the cheife pointes wherein we differ from the sectaries of this tyme being acknowledged to be the Faith of Gregory who is supposed to be the first Antichrist most articulatly at this day beleued of all Romane Catholickes I would aske M. Whyte with what forhead he can auouch his former wordes to wit that the Church of Rome is variâ—d from her self in matters of faith since she began to be the seate of Antichrist But all this ryseth from an inward repugning of the Min. against our Church in reguard of the vnchangeable certainty and constancy of faith professed by her whereas the want thereof in our aduersaries religion is most notorious as appeareth not onely from their seuerall confessions one euer impugning an other but also from their different translations of their Bybles still made to sort to the faith of their last Edition so as in respect of their wonderfull mutability and variance among them selues whereby indeede they indignify and wrong the nature of true faith we haue reason to demaund of any of the professors of what thinking he is rather then of what faith The 7. Vntruth In proofe of the protestantes concord in matters of Religion Page 139. To proue that protestantes haue true vnity
did withdraw men from the first forme thereof In lyke sort Sebastianus Francus an other learned protestant thus plainely writeth Statimpost Apostolos c. Presently after the Apostles all thinges were turned upside downe cana domini in sacrificium transformata c. The Lordes supper is turned into a Sacrifice To conclude M. Bacon a great protâ—stant here in England thus confesseth The Masse was conceaued begoten and borne anone after the Apostles tymes if all be true that Historiographers do write Thus much of the antiquity of the Masse which poynt thus acknowledged who seeth not that the testimonies of the former protestantes do vtterly ouerthrow the supposed truth of the D. Wordes affirming that the Masse came in by degrees and intimating to the credulous Reader that it was brought in by litle litle in these latter ages But M. Whyte if in the defending of your former vntruthes you can not blush for shame yet here grow pale through feare for your sinne is not ordinary seeing your mendaceous assertion doth obtrude an innouation vpon no lesser Article then the immolation and offering vp of the most sacred body and bloud of our Sauiour and Redeemer to his heauenly Father for the expiation of our sinnes first instituted out of the bowels of his mercy euen by Christ so as him self being the Preist did the sacrifice him self Quid gâ—atius offerri faith one Fa. aut daripotest quam caro sacrificiâ— nostri corpus effectuÌ„ sacerdotis nostri The 27. Vntruth Concerning wafer Cakes Page 389. the Doctor inueighing further against the Masse that wafer-cakes were first brought into the Sacrament in the eleuenth age or Century after Christ and answearably thereunto he haith made a reference to this place in his Alphabeticall Table at the latter end of his booke at the word wafer thus setting down wafers when brought in Sect. 5. nâ—m 31. Now that this procedeth from the same sirayne to wit a spiritu mendacit from whence all his former assertions had their origine is proued in that it is confessed by D. Bilson that in the dayes of Epiphanius it was rownd in figure Cartwright though he will needes find a beginning thereof after the Apostles yet thus writeth of the bread of the Sacrament It was a wafer-cake brought in by Pope Alexander which Pope euen by the testimony of Osiaâ—der liued fifteene hundreth yeres since And yet contrary to all these authorities we mightily wrong our minister if we will not beleue him affirming that wafers were brought in about a thousand yeares after Christ. The 28. Vntruth Against the adoration of the B. Sacrament Page 399. The minister persâ—sting in his serpentyne and vâ—nemous disposition against the most B. Sacrament touching the Adoration thereof thus lyingly forgeth The Adoration of the Sacrament is a late inuention folowing vpon the conceit of the Reall presence and prescribed 1220 yeres fâ—â—â— Christ by Honorius the third c That Adoration followeth vpon the beleefe of the reall presence it is graâ—â—ied but that it is a late inuention begon in the tyme of Honorius is false Thus the Doctor for the letter countenancing of this lye doth calumniously coople with it a truth that the one might be shrouded vnder the winges of the other Now that there was no innouation touching the Adoration of the Sacrament at that tyme is euinced from two reasons First because no Historiographer doth geue the least intimation of any such institution as then but newly brought into the Church onely Honorius decreed that the preist should more diligently admonish the people thereof in reguarde of some former negligence crept in concerning the same And this is all which can be truly collected from the Decree of the said Honorius Secondly the former poynt is proued from the abundant testimonies of our aduersaries charging the tymes precedent to Honorius with the said doctrine of Adoration For first we reade that Auerroes a hea then Philosopher who liued aboue 80. yeres before the prescribed time of Honorius his former supposed innouation did perticulerly deride the Christians of his dayes for the Adoring of the Sacrament This is acknowledged by D. Fulke and D. Saâ—liffe But to ascend to higher times the Centuristes speaking of the prayers of S. Ambrose in his booke entituled Orat. praeparat ad Massam do thus write Continent adorationem panis in Sacramento Those prayers do conteâ—ne the Adoration of the bread in the sacrament Chemâ—â—tius produceth diuers sentences of Augustine Ambrose and Nazâ—anzen which sentences in Chemâ—â—tius his Iudgment do affirme the Adoration of the Sacrament Now all these authorities do demonstratiuely conuince that the Adoration of the Sacrament was not introduced in the Church as an innouation in the time of Honorius From all which it is manifest that as in any other poynt of Catholick Religion so also in this of Adoration we altogether do conspire and agree with the venerable Fathers of Gods Church And therefore as Aristotle and other auncient Philosophers did teach that this our inferiour world was ioyned to the Superiour and Celestiall world that by the helpe of this coniunction we might more perfectly participate of the influences and vertues of those heauenly bodies So we may say that these our latter tymes through a continuall and vninterrupted current of beleeuing God and practising the same poyntes of Faith with the Auncient Doctors are indissolubly and nearely tyed to those primitiue dayes so as nothing is found in those reuerent dayes instituted either by Christ or his Apostles which by this meanes is not securely deryued to the Catholick Church of these moderne tymes The 29. Vntruth Against the Succession of Catholick Pastors Page 412. After the D. haith Trasonically boasted of the succession of the protestantes in his owne Church he procedeth further affirming that Succession of the pastors and Bishops in the Church of Rome haith bene interrupted And answearably hereto in the Table in the end of his booke at the word Succession with reference to this place he thus saith The Romane Church haith no true outward Succession Where you see by his owne wordes that the question here intended by this minister is not of succession of doctrine by which sleight and euasion diuers of our aduersaries vse to decline the testimonies of the auncient Fathers alledged by vs for strengthning the argument drawne from Succession but onely of externall succession of Bishops and Pastors which the minister falsly challenging heretofore to his owne church doth now as falsly take away from ours How maliceous a lye this is shall appeare from the mouthes of his owne brethren And â—iâ—st we finde that the Centuristes do very diligently and elaboratly set downe the succession particulerly of the Bishops of Rome in the 10. Chapiter of euery Century And this Methode they precisely obserue in all ages of the Church euen from S. Peter to their owne tyme entituling the said Chapiter de Episcopis
Doctoribus Doctor Fulke doth in like manner ingeniously acknowledg the same in these wordes You can name the notable persons in all ages in their gouernment and ministery and especially the Succession of the Popes you can rehearse in order vpon your fingers Thus writeth he in his answear to A counterfait Catholick p. 27. And the lyke doth he write in his Reioynder to Bristoes reply p. 343. Thus do our aduersaries acknowledg in our behalfe touching Succession which Caluin flatly denyeth to be found in his owne Church who plainely teacheth that with them the true succession of ordination was broke of so daungerously wounding him self with that sentence of S. Augustine In Ecclesia gremio me iustiss mé tenet ab ipsa sede Petri c. vsque ad presentem Ep scopatum successio Sacerdotum To conclude the vninterrupted descent and current of Succession in the Catholick Church is infallibly euicted from our aduersaries acknowledgment of the continuall visiblenes thereof since the one doth reciprocally imply the other For if our Church was euer visible and the doctrine thereof neuer suffered any disparition or vanishing away then were the Bishops and Pastors in lyke sort euer visible since without Pastors to minister the word and Sacraments and to gouerne the flock the Church like a maistlesse shippe can not for any tyme subsâ—st or bee And thus far of this point Wherein our minister by denying Succession to be in our Church and falsly ascribing it to his owne new congregation doth thus in aduancing the one aboue the other make innouation to take the wall of true Antiquity heresy of true Religion The 30 Vntruth In defence of Martyn Luthers lyfe and manners From page 425. to 433. The D. becometh Luthers Encomiast and much laboureth to free his life and death from all obloquy and infamy often affirming that what soeuer touching his lyfe may seeme worthy of reprehension is onely forged by his aduersaries meaning the Catholickes and therefore in his table in the end of his booke at the word Luther he thus saith Luthers lyfe iustifyed against the maliceous reportes of the papists Now to conuince this shamelesse vntruth I will forbearing herein the credible reportes of Catholickes alledg onely the confession of Luther him self deliuered in his owne wordes or els the testimonies of learned protestantes so shall we see that our minister here perfectly acted his part in bouldly mantayning against such euident testimonies that what may seeme to detract from Luthers honesty and integrity are but the fictions of his enemies And here for greater compendiousnes I will insiste onely in two pointes first in displaying in part his Sensuality Secondly his Pryde And first touching his sayinges of lust and incontinency he thus admonisheth Si non vult vxor aut non possit veniat ancilla If the wyfe will not or can not let the maid come Againe he thus writeth As it is not in my power that I should be no man so it is not in my power that I should be without a woman And there after It is not in our power either that it should be stayed or omitted but it is as necessary as that I should be a man and more necessary then to eat drink purge make cleane the nose c. And yet more fully he speaketh of his owne incontinency in these wordes I am almost mad through the rage of lust and desire of women As also he thus further confesseth I am burned with the great flame of my vntamed flesh I who ought to be feruent in spirit am feruent in the flesh in lust slouth c. Eight dayes are now past wherein I neither write pray nor study being uexed partly with temptation of the flesh partly with other trouble This point is so euident that Benedict Morgenstern a protestant writer saith of the Caluenistes when they intend at any tyme to geue assent or prouocation to nature Non verentur inter se dicere hodie Lutheranicè vinemus They were not afraid to say among them selues to day we will liue after the manner of Luther Thus vsing the name of Luther the more fully to expresse the libidenous lyfe and custome of Luther Now to all these confessions of his owne other protestantes it can not be replyed that him self did write thus when he was a papist aud before his reuolt for of his lyfe during his stay in the papacy you shall heare his owne report that he honoured the Pope of mere conscience kept chastity pouerty and obedience and whatsoeuer saith he I did I did it with a single heart of good zeale and for the glory of god fearing greauously the last day and desireous to be saued from the bothom of my heart Thus he confesseth of the integrity of his mind and intention during the tyme of his continuing a catholick And thus much of his inclination to lust and wantonnes Now touching Luthers pryde forbearing his owne sayinges deliuered most insolently in contempt of the auncient Fathers and of King Henry the eight I will content my self with the testimonies onely of protestants who particulerly inueighed against him for his pryde Zuinglius in reguard of his insupportable pryde thus saith of him En vt totum c. Behould how Sathan laboureth wholly to possesse this man And OEcolampadius admonisheth Luther to beware lest being puffed vp by arogancy and pryde he be seduced by Sathan Answearably hereto Conradus Regius a learned and famous protestant thus writeth of him Deus propter peccatum superbiae c. God by reason of the sinne of pryde wherewith Luther was puffed vp as many of his owne writinges do witnes haith taken away his true spirit fâ—om him as he did from the Prophets 3. Reg. 22. and in place thereof haith geuen him a proud angry and lying spirit To conclude omitting diuers other learned protestantes testimonies the Diuines of Tigur being Caluenistes thus censure Luthers booke writen against the Sacramentaries and Zuinglians that it was Liber plenus demoniis plenus impudiciâ— dicteriis scatet tracundia et furore And thus we fynd in what height of spirit and elation of mind he did write against his owne brethren and how for the same he was rebuked by them Now hauing displaid in part Luthers deportment and this either from his owne mouth or from the confessions of his owne brethren I refer two thinges to the Readers consideration one whether our D. did auer an vntruth or no in iustifiing that whatsoeuer could be produced against Luthers life conuersation was malignantly forged onely by vs his enemies The second and that much more importing whether it standeth with probability of reason or the accustomed course of Gods proceding who euer electeth meanes sutable and proportionable to their eÌ„des to make choice for the restoring and replanting the truth of his Gospell and Religion supposing it was then decayed of a man whose course of lyfe writings
onely like the Centurion should slie to the boundlesse and infinite mercy of his diuine Maiesty Wherefore M. W. can not dispute thus from the Cardinals wordes In reguard of the vncertainty of our owne righteousnes and because of the daunger of vaine glory the saifest way is to put our sole confidence in the sole mercy of God Therefore workes in generall do not merite or therefore workes done in true humility and proceding from one that is righteous donot merite For the doubt here which Bellarmine intimateth resteth not in the doctrine of merite but in the vncertainty of our doing of them to wit whether thâ—y are performed by vs in that state and with all those due circumstances as are requisite for them that they may merite But it seemeth that M. W. can not fall vpon any obscure sentences of Catholicks but instantly he striueth to turne them as if they were the sayinges of his owne brethren like the fyre which coueteth to conuert euery thing it toucheth into it self This done M. Whyte page 159. descendeth to shew the different opinions of Catholickes touching some pointes of the reall presence as first whether after the bread and wyne being changed by the words of Consecration into the body and bloud of Christ the accidences do remaine without a subiect or that they haue their inherence in the quantity or that the body of Christ sustaineth them or the lyke Secondly how the accidents remaining after consecration haue power to nourish to wit whether the thing nourished therewith procede from the quantity or that the substance of bread and wyne returneth againe and so it causeth the nutrition or that the accidences by Gods power are changed into the thing nourished or some such lyke manner Thus our minister goeth on discoursing very soberly how it appeareth from these and the like examples that the papistes agree not in their doctrine and further thus saith You may see by these few examples how the papistes are deuided about the principall articles of their faith c. But here the iudiceous Reader may see that touching the fust sort of Catholick testimonies aboue explayned we finde no difference of iudgment at all betwene the Catholickes by him alledged and other Catholickes And as concerning their seuerall opinions about those secondary questions of the blessed Sacrament they are onely pointes of indifferency and do not at all imply any disunion in matter of faith For touching the B. Sacrament that which is principally an Article of our faith is whether bread and wyne be really and truly changed by the wordes of consecration into the Body and bloud of Christ the which all Catholickes whatsoeuer do iointly and constantly beleue And as concerning those other doubtes resulting out of the former confessed Article and vrged here by M. Whyte they are onely indifferences and philosophicall questions disputed in the schooles and by seuerall men seuerally mantained without any breach of faith But here I should make bould on the contrary part to put M. M. Whyte in mynd touching the diuision in doctrine among the protestantes a point heretofore touched in this Treatise that they are such euen by the acknowledgment of them selues as do wound the soundnes of Christian faith I think the displaying thereof would be litle pleasing vnto him gratefull to his cause But for this present I will forbeare and will onely adde hereto for the greater disaduantage of our aduersaries that when a Catholick obstinatly and pertinaceously mantaineth any heresy for such accompted by the Church he ipso facto deuideth him self from the Church and so seaceth to be a member there of as seuerall tymes we graunt it hapneth But the case is otherwise among the protestants For albeit each of them doth defend his seuerall opinions in the weightiest pointes of faith yet they neuerthelesse accompt one an other as members of one and the same Church as we see by experience it faleth out not only betwene the Lutherans and the Caluenistes but also betwene our English protestantes and the puritanes who notwithstanding the great disparity of faith and doctrine amonge them do in their owne opinions make vp one and the same protestants Church and do still repute each other as faithfull brethren of the said Church and zealous professoures of the gospell Here now I will close vp this third and last part of this small Treatise wherein I trust I haue discouered M. Whytes disioynted and loose kynd of writing all which his reasoninges and authorities seruing onely as a taist to the Reader what more he may expect in this kind if the ministers whole booke should be iudicially perused are taken out deuiding his booke into three partes onely of the first part and fewer then twenty leafes of the said part affordeth them all Many other scores there are which are scattered here and there by one or two as incidentally he taketh occasion to write but all such I haue omitted and purposly made choice of such passages within the former small compasse of his booke as do minister seuerall and diuers testimonies of this nature of one and the same subiect It were ouer laboursome to examine his whole book in this sort since indede it is throughout euen loaded with an oâ—ercharg of the like bootelesse testimonies he still filling vp many blankes and spaces thereof with such idle impertineÌ„cies the which 〈…〉 may seeme to crosse our Catholick doctrine yet indeede the transparency of them is such as they cause not so much as any reflection in the eye and vnderstanding of the iudiceons but in reguard of their emptines and want of force they may be resembled to speake in S. Peters wordes 2. Pet. 2. to wells without water and cloudes carried about with tempestes THE Conclusion WOrthy and iudiceous Academians here now I am to geue a fâ—ll stop vnto my pen since I hope according to my vndertaken taske I haue discouered such stoare of impostures in this my aduersaries booke as that they may in reason be sufficient to disopinion you of his supposed worth and estimation He is I graunt your sonne in respect whereof I know you can not but with a motherly and compassionate eye behould his blemishes and inwardly lament to see your Whyte thus soyled Notwithstanding it resteth on your part euen for the saluing of your owne honoures to withdraw hereafter your fauoures from so vndeseruing a branch since pittie it is that learning ingenuity and integrity whereunto your selues deseruedly pretend should become a sanctuary to collusion falshood and impurity And now seeing here I haue vntwisted the cheife threedes whereupon the whole loome of his Treatise is wouen I doubt not but out of your owne cleare-eyd Iudgmentes you will immediatly looke vpon the same as it is in it self fraughted with such vnworthy stuffe and not as it haith receaued light and grace from the weake opinion of the ignorant and seduced multitude which I rather expect peculiarly at your handes since your selnes know