not Israell which are of Israell himselfe being one of those which will not cease to peruert the way of our Lord. A TABLE OF THE CONTENTES The first Part. Chapiter 1. Conteyning Corruptions concerning woorkes and Iustification The First Paragraph Premenitions geuen to M. whyte if he entend to reply vpon this present Treatise 2 The Rhemistes Corrupted concerning merite of workes 3 Cardinall Bellarmine Corrupted concerning iustification 4 Bellarmine againe abused against merite of workes 5 S. Thomas Corrupted against iustification by workes 6 S. Augustine Corrupted against iustification Chapiter .2 Concerning the reading of the Scriptures The first Paragraph S. Ierome Corrupted concerning the reading of the Scriptures by the vulgare people 2 S. Cirill of Alexandria abused for the same purpose Chapiter .3 Concerning the Church and the Pope The first Paragraph Vincentius Lirinensis Corrupted in proofe that the Church may erre 2 The Rhemistes Corrupted for the Churches inuisibility 3 S. Augustine Corrupted concerning the same subiect 4 Doctor Stapleton abused in behalfe of the protestantes markes of the Church 5 S. Gregory de valentia Corrupted concerning the same 6 Bellarmine egregiously Corrupted for the same 7 S. Thomas fouly corrupted concerning the Popes authority 8 Doctor Sapleton corrupted concerning the same subiect 9 S. Ciprian corrupted against appeales to Rome 10 The Rhemistes abused concerning the authority of the Church 11 Cardinall Cusanus corrupted concerning the same 12 The canon lawe corrupted concerning the Pope 13 Bellarmine corrupted against the Popes authority Chapiter 4. wherin are discouered sundry corruptions concerning the sacred Scriptures and Traditions The first Paragraph Bellarmine corrupted in behalfe of the Scripture prouing it selfe to be the word of god 2 Bellarmine corrupted in proofe that the Scriptures are the onely rule of faith 3 Eckius abused concerning the Authority of the Church and Traditions 4 Canus corrupted concerning Traditions Chapter .5 Concerning Faith and Heresy The 1 Paragraph Bellarmine corrupted against the necessity of true Faith 2 Bellarmine againe corrupted against the knowledg of the misteries of our faith and in preferring of ignorance 3 Nauar corrupted concerning the sinne committed by the Laity in disputing of matters of faith Chapter 6. Concerning mariage of Preistes Fasting and Miracles The 1 Paragraph Sinesius impudently abused concerning his owne mariage 2 Paphnutius abused concerning the mariage of preistes 3 S. Angustine corrupted against fasting Baronius notoriously corrupted in proofe that heritikes can worke true miracles Chapter .7 Concerning the Sacramentes of the Eucharist and Pâ—nance The 1. Paragraph Bellarmine corrupted against Transubstantiation 2 The. M. of the Sentences corrupted against confession to a Preist 3 Bellarmine corrupted against Satisfaction 4 S. Thomas corrupted concerning the remission of veniall sinnes Chapter 8. Concerning the Author of sinne and Reprobation The 1. Paragraph Bellarmine egregiously falsified in proofe that god is the Author of sinne 2 S. Augustine abused concerning reprobation Chapter 9. Concerning the honour to be geuen to Sainctes and their Images The 1 Paragraph S. Epiphanius corrupted in dishonour of the B. Virgin Mary 2 S. Gregory notoriously corrupted against the worshiping of Images 3 The Councell of Eliberis corrupted against Images The second part Containing sundry notorious vntruthes or lyes proued to be such by the confession of learned protestantes And first is preuented a weake euasion which may be vsed by M. Whyte against this second part The 1. vntruth That protestantes embrace that kind of tryall which is by antiquity 2 Against Traditions 3 In proofe of the protestants Church to haue continued in all ages 4 In proofe of the vnity of faith and doctrine amongst protestantes 5 In proofe of the immutability of the present English Religion 6 In proofe of the Romane Churches mutability in matters of faith 7 In proofe of the protestantes concord in matters of Religion 8 Against the vnity of Catholickes in matters of faith 9 Against the Popes primacy 10 That Gregory the great detested the Popes primacy 11 In proofe that Catholickes are more viceous then protestantes 12 Against auriculer confession 13 Against Fasting 14 In proofe that Montanus the herityke was the first that brought in the lawes of Fasting 15 In proofe that they make not God the Author of sinne 16 In proofe that S. Bernard was noe papist 17 Against the miracles wrought by S. Bernarde and S. Francis 18 In proofe of the protestantes Churches euer visibility 19 In defence of Preistes mariage 20 Against Images 21 Against Transubstantiation 22 Against the conuersion of England by S. Augustine the Monke 23 Concerning the Conuersion of Countries 24 Against the Popes Authority in calling of Councels 25 Against merite of woorkes 26 Against the Sacrifice of the Masse 27 Concerning wafer cakes 28 Against the Adoration of the B. Sacrament 29 Against the succession of Catholick Pastors 30 In defence of Martin Luthers lyfe and manners The Third Part. Contayning diuers impertinences or absurd Illations or reasoninges The 1. Paragraph Wherein are discouered strange Illations or arguinges in proofe that the Scriptures are the sole rule of faith and against Traditions 2 Wherein are discussed certaine arguments drawne from Scriptures Fathers in proofe that the sacred Scriptures the true sense thereof are made sufficiently knowne vnto vs without any probation or explication of the Church 3 Wherein are examined some of M. Whites profes against the visibility of the Church 4 Wherein are discussed certaine proofes of M. Whytes in behalf of the protestantes markes of the Church 5 Wherein are examined strange kindes of Argunges against the Authority of the Church Faultes escaped in the printing In the preface to the Vniuersity of Cambridge Pag. 1 lin 10. for iudiceous reade iudicious Ibid. lin 11. for grearly read greatly Ibid. pag. 4. lin 27. for Iugements read Iudgements Ibid. pag. 5. lin 22. for inuisibilites Inuisibilistes Preface to the Reader Pag. 2. lin 4. leaue out said worke Pag. 4. lin 15. for â—nlour read colour Chapter 1. Pag. 4. lin 25. for Iustifieth read insisteth in Pag. 5. lin 25. for preadmonish read premonish Pag. 18. lin 21 for great read greatest Pag. 27. lin 9. for Quod read Quid. Pag. 31. lin 23. for Anologie read Analogie Pag. 47. lin 4. betwixt druncke and should insorte one Pag. 52. lin 16. 17. leaue out these wordes All which your omissions are impaled and marked in the said english authority Pag. 52. lin 20. for Emprour read Emperour Pag. 53 lin 14. for disopting read dissorting Pag. 53. lin 23. for perusing read pursuing Pag. 64. lin 14. leaue out the word is Pag. 77. lin 10. for Chapiter read Chapter Pag. 87. lin 24. for maliuolent read maleuolent Pag. 138. lin 27. next after the word Masse insert affirmeth Pag. 159. lin 10. betwixt authority the insert in Pag. 73. lin 30. for fully read fouly Pag. 87. lin 33. for paralayes read parallels Pag. 92. lin 4. for differences read discoueries Pag. 97. lin 28. for musk read musick Pag. 114. lin
sence which hitherto I can not find yet it is no small dishonesty in M. Whyte thus vnkindly to match and ioyne together such disopting sentences without the parents consent Againe what a strange construction or translation is this Scriptura non est authentica sine authoritate Ecclesiae The Scripture receaueth all the authority it haith from the Church and from Tradition If this liberty be Iustifiable what errour so grosse may not easely be iustifyed against all Scripture thongh neuer so plentifull though neuer so manifest The 4. Paragraph Canus corrupted concerning Traditions Againe perusing his former proiect he pag. 2. fortifyeth him self with a wrest d authority of Canus whom li. 3. ca. 3. he bringeth in thus teaching There is more strength to confute heritykes in Traditions then in the Scripture yea all disputations with them must be determined by Traditions Here againe the proteruity of our Doctor more and more discouereth it self For thus Canus speaketh Non modo aduersum haereticos c. Not onely against heritykes Tradition is of more force then Scripture but also omnis fermè disputatio almost all disputation with them is to be reduced to Traditions receaued from our Auncestors For seing both Catholickes heritikes doe alledg Scripture for them selues the difference betwene them is in the sence and interpretation thereof Now which is the true and lawfull sence of it can not otherwise certainly be knowen then by the traditioÌ„ of the Church Here now our ministers sleight is three-fould for first Canus borroweth this saying from Tertulian of whom twenty lynes before this place Canus thus us writeth Tertulianus monet vt aduersus hareticos magis Traditionibus quam Scripturis disseramus Scripturae enim varios sensus trâ—huntur Traditiones non item TertuliaÌ„ counseleth vs that we hould dispute against heritikes rather with Tradition then with Scripture since the Scriptures are drawen into seuerall constructions whereas Traditions are not so Thus it appeareth that the opinion is Tertulians and borrowed onely from him by Canus yet M. Whyte thought it more conuenient to deliuer it as proceding onely from Canus so concealing Tertulian as vnwilling to haue it graced and countenanced with the Authority of so auncient a Doctor The second deceipt here lyeth in not translating but concealing the reasoÌ„ of Canus his IudgmeÌ„t therein though it be expressed by Canus in the wordes immediatly folowing the place alledged which shew that the cause why we are to dispute with heritykes with Traditions rather then with Scriptures is not as our minister falsly pretendeth our distrust in the Scripture or want thereof to proue our Catholick Faith but as Canus saith because the true sence of it is cheifely to be taken from Tradition warranted by the Church Thirdly and lastly he abuseth his Reader in concealing the aduerbe ferme in those words aboue omâ—is ferme disputatio almost all disputation whereas he translateth all disputations Thus Canus by vsing the worde fermè exempteth some points from being decyded onely by traditions whereas by our ministers translation not any one is excepted Thus haue we seene how our Doctor by his fowle collusions haith laboured seuerall wayes to depresse and obscure the worthines of gods Catholick Church as by making her become somtimes inuisible by falsly ascribing to her and her head in the catholickes name an vsurping soueraignty thereby to make her due Authority the more contemned to conclude by depryuing her of all Apostolicall Traditions and of all preheminency in explayning and expounding the Scriptures whereas she especially now in the tyme of the Gospell euer sendeth from her self most glorious beames and splendor of truth and perpetuitie according to that of the princely psalmist In sole pos uit Tabernaculum suum for indeede she is that Soon which contrary to our inuisibilistes for these sixteene hundreth yeres did neuer once set vnder the horizon of an vniuersall latency that Soon which neuer expatiates beyond the tropickes of Gods Traditionary or writen word that Soon which with it defyning and infallible authority in explicating the true sense of Gods word dissipates and dissolues all cloudes of errour exhaled through the weake influence of the reuealing spirit finally that Soon whose concentrous vniformity could yet neuer broke any Phaniomena or apparances of innouation and nouelty whereas all other sectes professing the name of Christians are in regard of it but as Planetary and wandring starrs producing many Anomalous irregularities of vncertainty dissention and confusion Chapiter 5. Concerning Faith heresy The 1. Paragraph Bellarmine verrupted against the necessity of true Faith BVT to returne to our Doctor from Traditions we will descend to such other his deprauations as concerne Faith in generall as pag. 212. suggesting that we exact not besides other vertues any true or inward Faith to denominate or make one a perfect member of Gods Church but onely an outward show hereof he introduceth Bellarmine thus speaking de Eccl. mil. lib. 3. ca. 2. Noe inward vertue is required to make one a part of the true Church but onely the externall profession of Faith And then M. Whyte ryoteth in great profusion of wordes that vpon this grounde in the papistes Iudgment all holines of lyfe and conuersation is superfluous and needelesse But let vs recurre to Bellarmines wordes them selues Not credimus in Ecclesia inueniri c. We doe beleue that in the Church are found all vertues at Faith Hope Charity the rest ver vr aliquis aliquo modo dicâ— possiâ— pars verae Ecclesiae c. That any one may be called in some sort or manner a part of that true Church whereof the Scripture speaketh we doe not think any inward vertue to be requyred but onely an externall profession of faith c. And in the folowing paragraph he saith that those who wanting all vertue haue onely an externall profession of Faith câ— are as it were de corpore but not de anima Ecclesiae of the body not of the soule of the Church c. He but sicut capilli an t mali humores in corpore humano So wrongfully here we see is Bellarmine traduced by our Doctor First in concealing the beginning of the sentence wherein he acknowledgeth all theologicall vertues euer to be found in Gods Church Secondly in suggesting to the Reader that Bellarmine requyreth no true inward vertues as necessary for a Christian soule but onely an externall faith this is a false and selanderous contumely for pulchra es decora â—â—lia Hierusalem Caâ— 6. And Bellarmine is so farre froÌ„ teaching that such doe take any benefite by this theire outward profession that he saith as we see they are but onely of the body of the Church not of the soule to which kynd of members internall vertues at least are necessary and that they are to be resembled to the lesse profitable and but excrementall partes of mans body as the hayres of the head the nayles and other such bad humors Thirdly
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
it self or conference thereof but from the tradition and Authority of the Church such wrytinges are certainly knowne to be the vndoubted word of God most contrary to M. Whyte pag. 47. who saith that The Scripture proueth it self to be the very word of god receaueth not authoritie from the Church To this end we fynde D. Whitakar first reiccting the testimony of the pryuate spirit to say thus Non nego Traditionem ecclesiasticam esse argumentum quo argui et conuinci possit qui libri Canonicâ— sunt qui Canonicâ— non sunt I do not deny but that Ecclesiasticall tradition is an Argument from the which it may be proued which are the Canonicall bookes and which are not In lyke sort M. Hooker assenteth hereto saying In thinges necessary the very cheifest is to know what bookes we are bound to esteeme holy which poynt is confessed impossible for the Scripture it self to teach But what the Scripture teacheth not is by our aduersaries confession a mere Tradition Hookers iudgment in this poynt is iustifyed by Doctor Couell Now if these eminent protestantes do ascrybe onely to the Church the Indgment of discerning which is Scripture and which is not Scripture then we know from the Authority and Tradition of the Church not from the Scripture it self which is the true vndoubted word of God and what bookes are but spurious and adulterated and consequently M. Whyte lyed most grosly in affirming that no part of their faith standes vpon Tradition thus ranging him self amonge those who according to the Scripture mendaciorum funiculis conantur subuertere By the meanes of lyes endeuour to ouerthrow The third vntruth The Third vntruth in proofe of the continuance of the protestantes faith in all ages Our minister labouring to enamell and bewtify his deformed faith with the speceous tytle of antiquity succession pag. 86. vseth these swelling speaches Against all papistes whatsoeuer we make it good that the very faith we now professe haith successiuely continued in all ages since Christ was neuer interrupted so much as one yere month or day and to confesse the contrary were sufficient to prooue vs no part of the Church of god Wordes of brasse but if he be put to the proofe no doubt leaden performance To set downe the Iudgmentes of the learned protestantes touching the interruption of their faith for many seuerall ages since Christes tyme were laboursom and withall needeles since to conuince this bould assertion of falshood it is sufficient to insist in any one age or tyme. Therefore I will content my self with the authorities of two learned protestaÌ„ts touchiÌ„g the very time of Luthers first Apostacy and departing from our Church they graunting that their faith before Luthers reuolt was not to be found in any man liuing which they neuer would haue done if the euidency of the matter did not force them thereto considering how much such a confession doth enaruate and weaken their cause First theÌ„ we finde euen Luther himself to acknowledg this poynt who thus wryteth hereof Ego principio causae meae c. In the beginning of this my cause speaking of his change of religion I had this guift graunted me euen from heauen that I alone should vndertake so great a matter and I did conceaue that it should be made good onely by me neither did I put any confidence in the trust of others Here we see that he graunteth him self to haue bene alone in this his supposed restauration of the Gospell And hereupon it is that Luther in an other place thus vaunteth Christum a nobis primo vulgatum andemus gloriari We dare glory that Christ was first made knowne by vs. In lyke sort M. Iewell no meane Rabbi in our English Sinagoge saith that the truth was vnknowne at that tyme and vnheard of when Martin Luther and Vldrick Zuinglius first came vnto the knowledg and preaching of the Gospell The 4. Vntruth In proofe of the vnity of faith doctrine amongst protestantes Pag 138. For the more iustifying of the protestantes doctrine he thus saith of the booke entituled The Harmony of confessions The Harmony of confessions wherein the particuler Churches set downe and name the articles of their faith if the Iesuite can shew to â—arr in Dogmaticall poyntes of faith I am content you beleue him in all the rest Here the reader haith a bould assertion which as you see the more easely to winne a credulous eare is steeped in muske but I feare M. Doctor the note Diapason which implieth an absolute and generall concord and which is so much commended by all the most skilfull in that science will here be wanting And therefore for the more exact disquisition of that poynt we will refer our selues to that very booke called the Harmony of confessions englished printed at Cambridg by Thomas Thomas 1586. where for the greater expedition I will touch but some few stringes thereof onely to heare how they sound First then we fynde this harmony to teach that sinnes are efâ— sons punished euen in this lyfe at Dauids Manasses and the punishments may be mitigated by good woorkes pag. 229. See here how fully it acknowledgeth the abstensiue nature of penance and satisfaction Againe this obedience towardes the Law is a kind of Iustice marke you this discord and deserueth rewarde pag. 266. Like at the preaching of penance is generall euen so the promise of grace is generall c. Here needeth no disputation of Predestination or such like for the promise is generall pag. 268. 269. As touching priuate Confession c. we affirme that the ceremony of pryuate absolution is to be retayned in the Church and we do constantly retayne it pag. 231. In lyke sort it saith that the Bishops haue inrisdiction to forgeue sinnes pag. 366. Finally not to rest vpon euery perticuler stop thereof we thus fynde there We do not speake of the Church as if we should speake of Platoes Idea but of such a Church as may be seene and heard c. The eternall Father will haue his Sonne to be heard amonge all mankinde pag. 326. A note which must needes sound most harshe with our inuisibilistes Now I referr the matter to M. Whyte him self whether there be in these poyntes any concordance betwene the harmony of Confessions the doctryne of our English protestantes of the Hugonots in France and the Caluenistes in Germany so assured I was that a diligent eare would easely obserue many iarring stringes in the Consort The 5. Vntruth In proofe of the immutability of the present English Religion Page 138. He particulerly insisteth in his supposed constancy of religion here in England and thus wryteth If the Iesuite can shew the Church of England since papistry was first abolished to haue altered one article of the present faith now professed I am content c For the disproofe of this falshood we will conuince the same by discouering the manifould
and doctrine do euen breath onely pryde contumacy sensuality Sardanapalisme and luxury Here now M. Whyte I haue thought good in the enumeration of your lyes to end with Luther as originally from him you first did suck your lyinge doctrine Onely I will conclude with this that since you are entred with our vulgar multitude who cheifly rest vpon the outward graine and appearance of thinges into the number and catologue of our new Euangelicall Prophets I would wish such your folowers to entertaine an impartiall vew and consideration of this and other your forgeries and sleightes which if they do doubtlesse they shall in the ende fynde and acknowledg that you are guided therein euen by that ghostly enemy of mannes soule who once said Egrediar ero spiritus mendaex in ore omnium Prophetarum eiuâ— I will go forth and will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his Prophets WHYTE DYED BLACK THE THIRD PART Contayning diuers impertinences or absurd Illations or reasoninges drawne from Maister Whyte his alledged Authorities The 1. Paragraph Werein are discouered strange Illations or arguinges in proofe that the Scriptures are the sole rule of Faith against Traditions HAuing in the two precedent partes set downe many corruptions and lyes practised by M. Whyte it now followeth according to my former intended Methode that I also display diuers of his impertinent and absurde inferences and argumentes for these three pointes to wit corrupting lying idly or absurdly disputing are the three seuerall threedes whereof the whole worke of his Treatise is wouen In all which though different in them selues he still retayneth one and the same intention of deceipt like the loade-stone which though often changeth his place yet neuer changeth it center Now touchinge those his impertinences and loose illations the Reader is to conceaue that they consist in his alledging of such testimonies both of Scriptures Fathers and Catholick writers as being truly set downe do not neuerthâ—lâ—sse impugne that point of our Catholick doctrine against which they were by him so vrged Which course of writing whether it may be ascrybed to our Doctors ignorance want of learning or rather which is more probable to his malice against the Catholick Faith and desire to deceaue the simple and vnlearned or lastly to the beggery of his cause being deuoide of better arguments I leaue to him self to decide But howsoeuer it is here I am to aduertise the Reader that in perusing of such authorities produced by M. Whyte he would euer recurr to the true state of the question and particulerly that he would apply the said sentences to that verie point or touch wherein the life of the question consisteth and then he shall find how rouingly wandringly they are directed still glauncing by vpon some ignorant or wilfull mistaking or other neuer reaching the mark intended And so he may apply the wordes of Tertulian though in a different sense to the loose writinges of M. Whyte and such others Quemcunque conceperint ventum argumentationis scorpii isti quocunque se acumine impegerint vna tam linea ista to wit the lyne drawne from our vnderstanding to the mayne point in controuersy And here M. Whyte can not say in excuse of him self that such testimonies of this nature are produced by him onely to proue so much and no more as the wordes in their litterall and acknowledged sense do immediatly import Which euasion is insufficient for two respects First because the proofâ— of that which litterally plainely they signify is not in controuersy betwene the protestantes and vs and therefore the iustifiing of so much being not denied by any learned Catholick is needelesly vndertaken Secondly in that M. Whyte doth most labouriously painefully and purposly alledg the said testimonies to conuince and impugne some one Catholick poynt or other taught by vs and denyed by the protestantes and this his drift and scope is manifested either by his answearable entituling of the leaues wherein such authorities are found or els by his owne wordes precedent or subsequent to the said sentences But to detayne the Reader no longer from these his allegations The first point of this kynde which presenteth it self is as touching the Rule of Faith reiecting of all Apostolicall Traditions For pag. 13. we thus read digres 3. Wherein by the Scriptures Fathers Reasons and papistes owne confessions it is shewed that the Scripture is the rule of Faith As likewise he entituleth that leafe and some others following in this manner The Scripture onely is tho iudg rule of Faith And so answearably hereto pag. 17. beating the former tytle he thus saith Shall the Libertynes be recalled from their blind reuelations to their writen text and shall not the papistes be reuoked from their vncertaine Traditions to the same rule But that we may the better behould how valiantly our minister impugneth all Traditions by erectinge the Scripture as sole rule of Faith we are here to call vnto mind what the Catholick Church teacheth in this poynt It then teacheth that the word of God is to limit and confine our Faith and that nothing is to be accompted as matter of faith which receaueth not it proofe from thence Hereupon it teacheth further that this word is either writen which is commonly called the Scripture or els deliuered by Christ his Church and this comprehendeth Traditions Both these we beleue to be of infallible authority since the true and inward reason why the word of God is the word of God is not because it is writen rather then deliuered by speach for this is merely extrinsicall to the point but because the said word proceded from them who were infallibly and immediatly directed therein by the assistance of the holy Ghost This supposed let vs see how M. Whyte proueth that the writen word is onely the rule of Faith and consequeÌ„tly that there are no Traditions of the Church which may also in part be a rule thereof First then our Doctor vrgeth to this end seuerall places of Scripture as among others that of Salomon The scripture will make a man vnderstand righteousnes and iudgment and equity euery good path Againe that of Esay We must repaire to the Law to the testimony if any speake not according to that word there is no light in him Also out of Malachy Remember the Law of Moyses my seruant which I commaunded him in Horeb for all Israell with the statutes Iudgmentes In lyke sort he alledgeth that Abraham answearing the rich glutton said that his brethren had Moyses and the Prophets Now that the Reader may see how well these texts are to the point controuerted I will set some of them downe in forme of Argument and so apply them to M. Whytes purpose As first thus Salomon said of the Scriptures of the old Testament The Scripture will make a man vnderstand righteousnes and Iudgment and equity and euery good path Ergo now
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
him self a coople to answeare in his behalf But speake M. Whyte once in good sincerity why did you translate it euidently probable was it to make the Cardinall for his learning and sanctity most Illustrious to speake as ignorantly as a protestant minister Do not your so foule and frequent corrupting of his writinges make it more then probable yea euidently credible that no other meanes is left you to euade the force of his Argumentes Wel my wholesome aduyse is this if you presume to reade Bellarmine be lesse conuersant with Bacchus The 7. paragraph S. Thomas fouly corrupted concerning the popes authority M. Whyte is not ashamed to affirme that we take all authority and sufficiency from the Scripture geue it to the Church finally the Churches authority to the Pope and thereupon insinuateth that we houlde that the Pope at his pleasure is able euen to stampe or create a new faith or Crede neuer afore heard of To this end he alledgeth pag. 68. this saying out of S. Thomas 2. â—â— quest 1. ar 10. The making of a new Crede belongeth to the Pope as all other thinges doe which belong to the whole Church thus insimulating all Catholickes within this errour as houlding that the chang of the articles of our Crede resteth vpon the change of the Popes mynde therein For the fuller discouery of this diabolicall deprauation for I can terme it no better I will here set downe at large the wordes of S. Thomas Thus then he saith Ad solam authoritatem Summi Pontificis pertinet noua Editio Symbols c. A new Edition of the Crede belongeth to the Pope as all other thinges doe which concerne the whole Church And then some few lynes after foloweth which belyke the Doctors hand would haue aked to haue writen downe Haec noua Editio Symboli non quidem aliam fidem continet sed eandem magis expositam This new Edition of the Crede conteyneth not an other faith but the former more fully explicated Here our minister haith practised his profession of corrupting two wayes first in translating noua Editio Symboli The making of a new Crede whereas it should be The new Edition of the Crede thus causing the newnes to consist in the newnes of our beleefe or Crede and yet as you see in S. Thomas the worde new is ioyned onely with the Edition or explication of the Crede Secondly in retayning from the Reader those other latter wordes which doe expresse S. Thomas his meaning therein to wit that no new faith or Crede contrary to the first is decreed thereby but the former onely is more fully explicated the reason whereof he thus deliuereth euen in the same paragraph In doctrina Christi Apostoloris c. The truth of faith is sufficiently explicated in the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles but because wilfull men do peruert to their owne destruction the doctrine of the Apostles and Scriptures therefore it was necessary that there should be in processe of tyme an explication of faith against all ensuing erroures Here you haue manifested the true reason of S. Thomas his former wordes aud consequently here is discouered che vncharitable impudency of our minister to diuorce the said wordes from their legitimate and maine sence but it semeth that he professing him self a publick aduersary to the catholick Religion thinketh it iustifiable to impugne the same by any deceitfull or indirâ—ct stratagems whatsoeuer Dolus an virtus quis in hoste requirat Virg. The 8 Paragraph Doctor Stapleton corrupted concerning the same subiect In lyke sort to shew to his Reader what sâ—pposed transcendency of soueraignty and power the Catholickes geue to the Pope he pag. 68. thus writeth Stapleton Praefat. princip fidei doctrinal saith The foundation of our Religion is of necessity placed vpon the authority of this mans teaching meaning of the Pope in which we heare god hâ—m self speaking In all that Preface I assure thee good Reader there is no such saying at al and therefore it is merely forged by our calumnious minister thereby first to suggest that we make the Pope the foundation of our faith which we asscribe to Christ Iesus onely Secondly that we beare the ignorant in hand that we accompt the Pope as an other God the nearest wordes in that Preface that can beare any resemblance at all to these I will here set downe Quae prima sunt fidei nostrae elementa c. Such pointes as are the first elements or principles of our faith and yet the baises or foundation thereof as the true Catholick and Apostolick Church of God the necessary and infallible power of the Church to teach and Iudg matters of faith the persons in whom this power remayneth the meanes which the said persons ought and are accustomed to vse in iudging and teaching the cheif heades or branches about which this power is exercysed as to determine some certaine and authenticall Canon of Scripture to geue the vndoubted and auâ—henticall interpretaâ—ion thereof and finally besydes the decreeing of the Canon of the Scripture to deliuer and command the vnwriten Articles of faith all these I say which are principia doctrinalia doctrinall principles of our faith and which do teach confirme and explaine the same the heritikes of our vnfortunate tyme haue most fowly denyed contaminated and depraued How many wheeles and deductions of inferences here neede we before we can draw out M. Whytes alledged sence and yet he deliuereth it in a different letter with the vshering wordes of Stapleton saith as though they were the very precise wordes of the said Authour or what is geuen more to the Pope then to the reste heare specifyed Yet our minister blushed not to particularyze what here is spoken in respect of the principles of faith in generall onely to the pope Againe his sleight further appeareth in taking the word foundation in an equiuocall and dooble sence for he will needes accept it to make the saying more odious for that which is an essentiall and primatiue foundation of faith which is Christ Iesus whereas D. Stapleton here meaneth according to the tytle of his booke Principia fidei doctrinalia onely Doctrinall principles or Secondary foundations which as him self saith fidem docent confirmant explicant doe teach confirme and explaine our faith Thus the further we dog him in his allegations the more we shall be assured that deprauing and strangely detorting the wrytinges of Catholick Doctors and the Fathers is among the rest those feble supportes whereupon his cause leaneth The 9 paragraph S. Ciprian strangely handled against Appeales to Rome It haith euer bene the course of former heritikes not onely with contumelies to disgrace the deserued renowne of the Popes and Church of Rome but also with their subtilty and corruption falsely to detracte from theire iust authority and prerogatiues In which kynd our minister to shew him self lawfully descended in proofe of his dislyke of Appeales from other Bishopes to the Bishopes
continentur nihil est notins nihil certius vt stultissimum esse necesse sit qui illis fidem esse habendam neget There is nothing more knowen nothing more certaine then the holy Scriptures which are contayned in the wrytiâ—ges of the Prophets Apostles in so much that it were a most foolishe thing for any man to deny them Here first to make Bellarmine insinuate that he houldeth the authority of the Church in any thing to be doubtfull and vncertaine our minister of his owne brayne haith added these wordes other meanes may deceane me whereas there is not a fillable thereof in Bellarmine Secondly this place as we see is produced by him against the authority of the Church whereas indeede it is directed against the Swink feldians who denying the Scriptures relyed vpon their priuate illuminations as hereafter shall appeare by displaying a strang corruption and wresting of Bellarmines saying practised by M. Whyte in pag. 17. at the letter q. of which place of Bellarmine this here alledged is a parcell Thus our minister extremely strayneth euery Authority that he setteth downe till at the length it burst out into an open and inexcusable corruption The 2 Paragraph Bellarmine corrupted in proofe that the Scriptures are the onely rule of Faith Againe pag 17. to proue that all poyntes in controuersy must definitiuely be determined by the writen word alone without any respect to the Churches Authority in the explication thereof he marcheth owte once againe making Bellarmine his buckler thereupon alledgeth these wordes of his The rule of Faith must be certaine and knowen for if it be not certaine it is no rule at all If it be not knowen it is no rule to vs but but nothing is more certaine nothing better knowen then the sacred Scriptures contayned in the writinges of the Prophets and Apostles wherefore the sacred Scripture is the rule of Faith most certaine and most saife and God haith taught by corporall letters which we might see read what he would haue vs beleue concerning him Obserue here the refractory and incorrigible frowardnes of our minister and how artificiall and exact he sheweth him self in his art of corrupting For Bellarmine in this Chapter as is aboue touched writeth against the Swinkfeldians who denyed the Scripture to be the worde of God and rested onely vpon their priuate and hiddeÌ„ reuelations and answearably hereto the Tytle of this Chapter is Libris qui Canonicâ— appellaâ—tur verbum dei contineri That the word of God is contayned in those bookes which are called Canonicall Now the wordes at large are thus in Bellarmine Regula fides certa notaque c. The Rule of faith ought to be certaine and knowen for if it be not knowen it can be no Rule to vs and if it be not certaine it can be no Rule at all But the reuelation of the priuate spirit although in it self it might be certayne yet to vs it can no way be certaine except haply it be warraÌ„ted with diuyne testimonies to wit true miracles And then some sixe lynes after At sacris Scripturis c. But nothing is more knowen nothing more certaine then the sacred Scriptures which are contayned in the bookes of the Prophets Apostles And some fourtie or fiftie lynes after Quare cum sacra Scriptura Regula crodendi c. Wherefore seing the holy Scripture is a most certaine and a most secure rule of beleefe doubtlesse he can not be wyse who neglecting the same committeth him self to the iudgment of the priuate spirit which is often deceiptfull but euer vncertayne And againe some twenty lynes after Non igitur omnes vulgó c. Teerefore God teacheth not all men by internall inspirations what he wonld haue the faithfull to beleue of him or what they are to doe but it is his pleasure to instruct vs by corporall letters which we might see and reade Here now I referre this point to the most earneste protestant in England if he be Candid and ingenious with what face M. Whyte could alledg Bellarmine in this place to proue from him that the Scripture onely is the Iudg Rule of Faith for so doth the minister entytle that page thereby to make Bellarmine to reiect all Authority of the Church in exposition thereof all Apostolicall Traditions where we see vpon what different occasion from that he writeth in this Chapter against the Swinkfeldians Now here let vs note the particuler sleightes vsed in this corruption First M. Whyte you tye together without any c. or other word or note signifying the contrary seuerall sentences of Bellarmine for your greater aduantage as though one did immediatly folow the other though they lye in Bellarmine distinct by interposition of many lynes Secondly you haue concealed three seuerall parcels of different sentences expressing Bel. true mynde herein and all these parcels are euen partes and therefore the fowler fault of the sentences alledged by you Your concealemeÌ„ts are these Porro priuati Spiritus reuelatio et si in se certa sit nobis tamen nota nullo modo potest nisi forte diuinis testimoniis id est veris miraculis confirmetur And againe Sanus profecto non erit qui ea neglecta vz. the Scripture spiritus interui saepe fallacis semper incerti iudicio se coÌ„miserit And finally Non igitur omnes vulgoó per internum afflatum Deus docet All which your omissions are impaled and marked in the said english authority O how happy M. Whyte were you if you neuer had bene scholler since the tyme will come that you shall say with the Romane Emprour after he had subscribed to an vniust cause Vtinam literas nescirem For good thinges as learning are most perniceous to him who declyneth the true vse of them as you doe And in this respect you are to remember that the Arcke which was a blessing to the Israelites was yet a curse and hurt to the Philistians that abused it The 3. Paragraph Eckius fouly abused concerning the Authority of the Church and Traditions As heretofore he laboured to ouerthrow the doctrine of traditions from the corrupted testimonies of Catholicks and auncient Fathers so heare he endeuoreth from their lyke abused testimonies to intimate that we ascribe to them a greater perfection then we doe And to this end pag. 145. thereby the rather to cast vpon vs an vnworthy aspersion of vnderualewing the Scriptures he bringeth in Eckius in Enchirid. ca. 1. saying The Scripture receaueth all the authority it haith from the Church and from Tradition The wordes of this Author are these Scriptura non est authentica sine authoritate Ecclesiae whereby we see the wordes and from Tradition are falsly inserted by our deprauing minister making vs thereby to geue with we doe not a greater prerogatiue to Tradition then to Scripture And though perhaps he could light vpon those wordes and from Tradition in some other place or Chapter in Ecckius though in a different
Tenure by the which we make claime to our eternall and celestiall enheritance In like sort they willingly confesse that Scripture is Scripture and the word of God before it receaue any approbation from the Church as also that this or that is the true sense of any particuler text of the Scripture before the Church do confirme the same Notwithstanding seing the true sense of the Scripture is as it were the very Soule which informeth the body of the letter and that the Scripture is to be vnderstoode by the Reader with that spirit with the which it was written to wit with the spirit of the holy Ghost Therefore we do hold that so far as concerneth our taking of notice that this or that is the Scripture of Gods word or that this is the true sense of such a passage thereof intended by the holy Ghost we are to recurre to the authority of the Church which we beleue to be directed and guided therein by the same holy Ghost according as the Scripture it self in seuerall places assureth vs. But now let vs come to the proues and testimonies produced by M. Whyte to conuince that the Scripture so far forth as we are to take acknowledgment thereof for this onely is here the point of the doubt as I shewed aboue needeth not for warranting to vs that it is the word of God or for explicating the true sense thereof and Authority or approbation of the Church And first he bringeth to this end diuers texts of Scripture contayning the worth and dignity of it self as when it is tearmed an Immor all seede The demonstration of the Spiâ—it power that it is Liuely powerfull that it maketh our bearâ—â—â— to burne within vs. that It geueth a greater testimony to Christ then Iohn Baptist could geue that A voice from heauen is not so sure as it that It is the spirit which beareth witnes to the truth thereof that If we receaue the witnes of men the witnes of God is greater Lastly he alledgeth those wordes of Christ. They which will not beleue Moyses wrytinges will not beleue him Now let vs see how towardly our Minister can conclude from these textes against our former doctrine The scripture is an immortall seede and it is liuely and powerfull Therefore it ought to receaue no authority touching the manifesting of it true sense to vs from Gods Church which is guided with the holy Ghost Againe It is the demonstration of the Spirit and power and it maketh our harts to burne within vs Therefore it ought to receaue no authority c. If we receaue the witnes of men the witnes of god is greater and he that beleueth not Moyses writings will not beleue Christ Therefore the Scripture ought to receaue no authority c What inferences are these Or who would think that a learned minister of gods word the via lactea a Doctor made onely for desert before his due ordinary tyme Finally that M. Whyte since this very name is supposed to comprehend woorth enough should thus exorbitantly and extrauagantly inferre and conclude contrary to all precepts of art Logicall rules But to passe on the more in his iudgment to depresse the Authority of the Church he bringeth in D. Stapleton though most impertinently alledged saying The Authority of the Church is but a thing created distinct from the first verity which position we willingly admitt who acknowledg the Church to be a thing different from god who is the first truth though guided by his Spirit Againe he produceth to the like effect S. Ambrose who thus writeth Let God him self teach me themâ— steries of heauen not man who knoweth not him self Whom may I beleue in the thinges of god better then god him self which sentence also we embrace yet do affirme that god teacheth vs more securely by the authority of the Church directed by his assistance and consequently not by the authority of man then by the mediation of each mannes priuate and vncertaine spirit Also Salutanus is brought by him saying All that men say needes reasons and witnesses but Gods word is witnes to it self bicause it followeth necessarily that whatsoeuer the incorrupt truth speaketh must needes be an incorrupt witnes of it self As if what the Church assisted by the holy Ghost said were the saying onely of man or as if the question were here whether Gods word be Gods word before it be defined by the Church which no man denyeth and not whether the members of the Church which indeede is the point here issuable is to accept of Gods word as his word by the Authority of his said Church In like sort pag. 53. to the former scope he produceth S. Augustine thus writing to the Manaches You see this is your endevourâ— to take away from vs the Authorityes of the Scriptures and that euery ones mind might be his Author what to allow and what to disalow in euery text and so he is not for his faith made subiect to the Scripture but maketh the Scripture subiect to him self c. Which wordes how they can touch the Catholickes I see not seing they seeke not to take away the Authority of the Scriptures which they willingly reuerence neither teach they that euery ones mind ought to be an authour what to allow or what to disalow in the exposition of any text for they rely herein vpon the iudgment of Gods vniuersall Church the former being indeede rather peculiar to the sectaries of this age in reguard of their priuate interpreting spirit And presently after he also cyteth S. Augustine againe in the former booke Why dost thou not rather submits thy self to Euangelicall Authority so steedfast so stable so renowned and by certaine succession commended from the Apostles to our tymes that thou maist beleue that thou maist behould that thou maist learne all those thinges which hinder thee from doing it through thine owne vaine peruerse opinion How can these wordes be tentred shamed to vs Catholickes Or how can it be tearmed a mannes owne vaine and peruerse opinion by receauing Euangelicall Authority as it is manifested to vs not by our owne imaginations but by the censure of the Church of God which is styled by the Apostle Columna firmamentum veritatis Thus we see how wandringly M. Whyte discourseth matching and coopling together through his malice and ignorance in arguing adulterate aud bastard conclusions with legitimate premisses And after the like manner euen in the first leafe here alledged though somwhat before these last testimonies he vrgeth certaine textes of Scripture intended of Christ as The Scriptures are written that we may beleue in him Againe He that beleueth in him haith a witnes in him selfe Thirdly We are all built vpon the foundation of the Apostles Prophets Christ him self being the head corner stone in whom all the building is coopled together by the spirit Now to
the auncient Fathers and among others whom for breuity I pretermit he alledgeth S. Chrisostome and vshereth his authority with this preface And that Chrisostome thought the Church might be somtimes inuisible appeareth by the 49. homily vpon Mathew where he saith Since the tyme that heresy haith inuaded the Church it can no way be knowne which is the true Church of Christ but by the Scriptures onely in this confusion it can no wayes els be knowne From which wordes I do collect a continuall visiblenes of the Church for if the Scriptures be euer able to make the Church knowne then by them it is euer made visible and consequently since the scriptures haue euer hitherto bene preserued and through Gods good prouidence no doubt shall be euen to the end of the world the Church haith bene and shall be at all times made knowne and visible through the meanes of the Scripture And thus disputing onely ad hominem do I turne the point of M. Whytes reason vpon himself And this may suffice touching M. Whytes weake prouing of the latency of Christes Church where the Reader may behould a longe teame as it were of his lame feeble and impotent authorities one still following an other taken from the writinges of Catholick Doctors and the Fathers whereof some do neither fortify nor hurt his cause and others do proue euen contrary to that for which he alledgeth them In reguard of which his dull grosse and absurd kind of reasoning and arguing if it be true in Philosophy that the vnderstanding doth work better or worse as the spirits are more or lesse pure and that the spirits are become more or lesse pure according to the quality of the nutriment that the body taketh I must then conclude that when M. Whyte penned this his Treatise particulerly for his deare Countrymen of Lancashyre as himself saith it semeth he then remayning there did vse to feede much on his Lancashire dish the Goose. The 4. Paragraph Wherein are discussed certaine proofes of M. W. in behalf of the protestantes markes of the Church M. Whyte in page 104. and some few leaues after discoursing of the notes of the Church vndertaketh to proue that The true doctrine of faith and lawfull vse of the Sacramentes are the proper and infallible markes wherby it must be iudged which is the true Church In proofe hereof he produceth diuers passages of Scripture where our Sauiour said My sheepe here my voice And againe Where two or three are gathered together in my name there am I in the middest of them In lyke sort those wordes of S. Mathew You shall know the false prophets by their frutes And finally that saying of S. Paule As many as walk according to this rule meaning according to the rule of a true Faith peace vpon them and mercy and vpon the Israell of God Againe those wordes of the Apostle touching the Church that It is the howshold of God built vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets As also where it is said that the Scripture is a shyning light Now what Alcumist in the world can abstract out of any of these textes that sense or meaning which shall prooue that true doctrine is a sufficient mark to vs whereby we may infallibly discerne which is the true Church of God He may as easely draw fyre out of water or earth out of ayre betwene which there are no symbolizing qualities For let vs see how probably we can inferre what is intended out of the said Scriptures as thus Christ saith My shepe here my voice Therefore true doctrine is to vs a signe of the true Church Againe Where two or three are gathered together in my name there am I in the middest of them Therfore we are to learne the true Church from the true doctrine Strangely inferred for how shall we know euer abstracting the Authority of the Church who are Christes sheepe or who are they which are gathered together in his name If it be replyed they are those who haue true doctrine then I demaund how can we be assured who haue true doctrine If it be answeared they haue true doctrine who heare the word truly preached enioy a perfect ministration of the Sacraments then I aske how shall I be acertained that such do heare the word truly preached and enioy a perfect ministration of the Sacramentes But here my answear is at a stand and flieth for sanctuary to his Apocalypticall and reuealing spirit Thus it is cleare in what circles mazes M. Whyte or any other walketh through the vaine suggestions and imaginations of a light vaperous giddy braine The like connexion with the former conclusion haue the other places of Scripture aboue cyted The which after he haith set downe then page 107. he descendeth to the Authorities of Fathers and Catholick Authors labouring though most weakly to hayle from their wordes his former Illation To this end he bringeth in S. Epiphanius saying of an heritike This man is found altogether different from the holy Scriptures c. If then he be dissenting from them he is altogether an alyen from the holy Catholick Church Here we graunt that in the true nature of faith who dissenteth from the Scriptures dissenteth from the Church but yet this proueth not that the doctrine of faith or administration of the Sacramentes may serue to vs as markes to demonstrate out the Church Againe he produceth M. Raynouldes affirming that 13 The true Church and the true faith are so knitt together that the one inferreth and concludeth the other for from the true Church is concluded the true faith and from the true faith the true Church All this is true yet it followeth not from hence that faith is more knowne to vs then the Church and couseqnently that it ought to serue to vs as a cleare and euident mark to point out aswell to the vnlearned as learned which is the true Church Adde hereto that these wordes euen in M. Whytes sense asmuch impugne him as vs for if they imply faith to be a marke of the Church they also reciprocally imply the Church to be a marke of the true Faith Finally to omitte many other testimonies of Catholickes produced to the lyke end whose particuler answeares do ryse from the circumstances of the places and thâ—refore here omitted he labouring to shew that Faith is knowne before the Church and consequently that it is a note thereof bringeth in Picus Mirandula thus speaking of the Scriptures They do not moue they do not perswade but they enforce vs they dryâ—e vs forward they violently constraine vs. Thou readest wordes rudely and homely but such as are quick liuely flaming shyning pearcing to the bottome of the spirit and by their admirable power transforming the whole man Now who can inferr out of these wordes that the Scripture is knowne to vs before the Church seeing indeede the priority of the one or the other is not so
much as intimated here at all And what praises are here ascribed to the Scriptures may truly belonge vnto them after we are assured of their being and expositions by the warrant of Gods Church Thus we fynde that the further we enter into our ministers booke the greater ouercharge of bootelesse and vnnecessary testimonies do euer present them selues to vs manifesting vnto the iudiceous and obseruant Reader that this worke though the first borne of his braine is abortiue imperfect and weake from all which stoare of impertinent proofes thus vauntingly by him alledged demonstratiuely forsooth to confirme what he still pretendeth to prooue We may euict one irrefragable demonstration ex posteriori to wit that M. Whyte is absolutly ignorant in the doctrine of demonstrations The 5. Paragraph Wherein are examined strange kindes of arguinges against the authority of the Church M. Whyte labouring to depresse the Churches auuhority and euer more and more venting out his venome and poysen against her in the some of that good spirit wherein he speaketh vndertaketh pag. 126. some others following to proue that the teaching of the Church is to be examined for so he entituleth those leaues As also he saith It is necessary for euery particuler man to examine and iudge of the thinges the Church teacheth him thus geuing the raynes to euery priuate and ignorant fellow vnder the tecture pretext of gods secret illuminations to iudg his owne iudg and so to call in question the reputation honour of her from whose chast loynes euen him self is at least originally descended But that we may better see how little conducing his testimonies alledged are to the purpose let vs first set downe what the Catholickes do freely graunt teach in this point They ioyntly teach that the bound of subiecting ones self to the Churches Authority is properly incumbent vpon Christians who are made members of the Church by baptisme and consequently do owe their obedience thereunto and not vpon infidels or Iewes who are not obliged to embrace Christian Religion except they see it confirmed by miracles or some other enforcing reasons of credibility Neuerthelesse though an heritike do sinne in doubting of the Churches Authority yet supposing that his doubt and sinne he doth not euill to examine the doctrine of the Church according to the Scriptures if so be he procedeth herein onely with a desyre of fynding the truth Now let vs see what Authorities M. Whyte alledgeth to proue his former positions First he vrgeth those wordes of the Apostle Try all thinges hould that which is good As also those of our Sau. If any man will do the will of God he shall know of the doctrine whether it be of God or whether I speake of my self And againe that of S. Iohn Derely beloued beleue not euery spirit but try the spirits whether they be of God In like sort those wordes of Christ. Beware of false prophets by their frutes you shall know them And finally besides the example of the men of Beraea searching the Scriptures he vrgeth that where the Apostle counseleth the Hebrewes that Through longe custome they should haue their wittes exercised both to discerne good and euill But for greater perspicuity let vs shape one or two of these textes to the true point here of the question Thus then Try all thinges and hould what is good therefore euery priuate man may vndertake to censure the whole Church of God Which wordes indeede do not presse the doubt seeing both those wordes and that place of S. Iohn c. 4. are directed properly to such onely to whom it belongeth to trye and examine both doctrine and spirits to wit not to euery particuler member of the Church but onely to the Bishops and Pastors thereof who are Speculatores domus Israel Againe if by this text euery priuate man may trye reiect or allow all thinges at his pleasure then may he reiect or allow as him self thinketh good the holy Scriptures for in the former wordes of the Apostle there is no limitation at all But to procede to an other text Beware of false prophets by their frutes you shall knowe them therefore euery priuate man is to examine the doctrine of all the Prophets and Pastors of the Church assembled together in a lawfull generall Councell Againe the men of Berea who were no Christians were allowed to trye the doctrine of S. Paule therefore euery Christian who by force of his second birth or regeneration is made a member and sonne of the Church may examine controule and reiect the publick faith of the said Church Doctor-lyke inferred as if there were no disparity herein betwene him who is not a Christian consequently acknowledgeth not any submission or reuerence to gods Church and an other who is a Christian and therefore in his baptisme doth implicitly resigne him self and his Iudgment to the Authority of the Church With the lyke want of connection or true referēce M. Whyte presseth to the same purpose the testimonies of certaine auncient Fathers whose drift in such their writinges was to wish men to examine by the Scriptures the doctrine of priuate and particuler men lest as the Apostle saith Circumferantur omni vento doctrinae all which he will needes extend to the discussing of the doctrine of the whole Church And thus particulerly he alledgeth that saying of S. Chrysostome Seeing we take the Scriptures which are so true and plaine it will be an easy matter for you to iudge And tell me hast thou any wit or iudgment For it is not a mannes part barely to receaue whatsoeuer he heareth Say not I am no scholler and can be no Iudg I can condemne no opinion for this is but a shift c. The scope onely of which place is as is said to refute the doctrine of euery new sectary euen from the Scriptures a course which we willingly admit and allow Thus you see how our minister is not ashamed to peruert and detort the graue Authotitie of this auncient Father But here the Reader is to vnderstand that M. W. his cheif proiect in this first part of his booke is to depresse with all contempt scorne the venerable authority of the Church For the more facilitating whereof he masketh this his intent vnder the shadow of ascribing all reuerence and honour to the Scriptures both for their sufficiency as contayning expresly all thinges necessary to saluation as also for their absolute Soueraignty and Prerogatiue in determininge inappealeably all controuersies of faith and religion whatsoeuer The which course is not embraced by him or any other sectary so much for any peculier honour they beare to the Scriptures But that by this sleight and euasion they may declyne the waight and force of all proofes authorities deduced either frō the vnanimous consent of Fathers from Oecumenicall and generall Councels or vnintermitted practise of the Church And so all doubtes of Faith being for their proofes
or before shall refuse to obey the same but for that neare to the tyme of Antichrist and consummation of the worlde there is lyke to be a greate reuolt of Kingdomes people and Prouinces from the open externall obedience communion thereof c. when for the few dayes of Antichristes reigne the externall state of the Romane Church and publick entercourse of the faithfull with the same way cease yet the due honour and obedience of Christians towardes it and Communion in heart with it and practise thereof in secret and open confession thereof if occasion requyre shall not cease no more then it doth now in the Christians of Cyprus and other places where open entercourse is forbidden Here now the parcels of this testimony which are purposly omitted do show that the Rhemistes do euen peremptorily affirme that gods Church shall neuer no not in the tyme of Antichristes greatest persecutions be latent and inuisible Thus doth our M. you see vpon a sudaine breake of with the Rhemistes in alledging their wordes yet after some lyne or two curteously ioyneth with them againe and then after that once more vnkindly leaues them to them selues all this in one poore testimony And here good reader thou art to take notice of an other sleight of our minister touching this particuler place For whereas he in the first Edition of his booke which I here folow setteth downe the Rhemistes wordes as thou seest aboue in no sorte intimating that any one word of their said testimony is pretermitted he in some other of his Editions as it should seme being aduertised that this his egregious corruption was espyed by his aduersaries thought therefore in some sort to salue the matter haith at the last wordes where he breaketh of from the rest of the whole sentence added a virgula or lyne as this ingeniously forsoth to acknowledge that he omitteth some part of the sentence But this I say auaileth him nothing for first it doth not warrant his sincerity in his first Edition Againe though in alledging of a testimony we are not bound to set down euery word thereof yet as I haue before premonished that which is omitted ought to be impertinent to the mayne point for which the testimony is produced But subtily to pretermit with an c. or some such like marck that which punctually doth touch or explicate the true sence of the sentence alledged that directly contrary to that construction there pretended as here it falleth out it is no lesse then most impious corrupting and corrading of other mens writinges And therfore I say M. Whyte is nothing aduantaged hereby but doth for the tyme plaster one euill with an other euill but no meruell for it is a high mistery amongst heritikes to support deceipt with deceipt till at the length all do tumble downe with it owne weight and so erit nouissimus error petor priori Mat. 7. Thr 3 Paragraph S. Augustine corrupted concerning the same subiect of the Churches inuisibility In lyke sort pag. 103. he alledgeth S. Augustine de bap con Don. li. 6. ca. 4. thus to say The Church may be so obscured that the members thereof shall not know one an other S. Augustines wordes are these none other Idem spiritus Sanctus ea dimitit qui datus est omnibus sanctis sibi Charitate cohaerentibus siue se nouerint corporaliter siue non nouerint The same holy Ghost which it geuen to all the Sainctes or holy men agreing together in Charity whether they know one an other or not remitteth the sinnes But what is this to the inuisibility of the Church or by what Sintax or Grammar can M. W. translate thus the former latin lynes Finally by what sublimation or art can he extract such a refyned sence from the bare minerals of the former wordes Neither can he slubber the mater ouer in saying that he here gathereth onely some necessary Illation prouing the Churches latency for the sentence alledged by him is set downe in a different letter of caracter froÌ„ his owne and he there perticularly geueth them as the very wordes Now S. Augustine in that place doth not so much as glance at the Churches visibility or inuisibility but there showing how sinnes are remitted as effectually by the bad preistes as the vertuous proueth it by Anology of reason to wit that the power of the holy Ghost may aswell be geuen to a wicked Preist as to a good and vertuous as it is geuen alyke to all the godly though they know not one an other But M. Whyte fynding that parcell of the seÌ„tence sine nouerint se corporaliter siue non nouerint to be ment of the faithfull and vertuous thought presently that he lighted vpon a bootie and so hoping thereby to entrappe the incautelous reader was the more easely induced to create the world of this his deprauation out of a mere nothing of a sound of wordes And thus farre of his corruptions touching the Churches inuisibility from the mantayning whereof we Catholickes do so far disclame as that euen in the most tempesteous and raging tymes of persecution that either haue or shall happen we acknowledg innumerable members thereof to be euer visible and in faith permanent and vnmoueable for we reade that the beames of the house of Christ his Spouse are Cedars the rafiens are of firre Can. â— The 4. Paragraph Doctor Stapleton abused in behalfe of the Protestantes markes of the Church The next corruption which I here will shew shall be concerning the markes of the Church whearâ— he to proue that we absolutely embrace the markes thereof deliuered by the Protestantes to wit the proaching of the word as acknowledging it to be a more infallible marke to euery Christian then our Catholicke markes are Antiquity Succession Vniuersality c. all which notes he after endeuoreth to confute To this end I say pag. 105. he produceth Doctor Stapleton thus wryting princip doctrinal li 1. ca. 22. The preaching of the Gospell is the proper and a very cleare note of the Catholick Church so it be done by lawfull Ministers Mark heare how he declareth this authors meaning by concealing the wordes in him that there are immediatly subioyned for thus that Catholick Doctor Praedicationem Euangelii We graunt that the preaching of the Gospell by lawfull Ministers is a very cleare and proper note of the Catholick Church Hâ—c est enim ordinaria c for by this is that ordinary and perpetuall Succession of Bishops Preistes and Pastors dâ—ryued in a continued order euen from the Apostles them selues to vs. From which latter part of the sentence purposly omitted by M. W. it is euident that D. Stapleton doth allow the preaching of the Gospell by lawfull pastors so far forth onely to be a note of the Church as it is included in the Catholick note of Succession and in no other sence which point is made more cleare besides his mayne drift in that Chapter diuers others of
of Rome produceth pag. 188 S. Ciprian in these wordes Nay Ciprian saith The vnity of Bishopes is broken when euen runne from theire owne to the Bishope of Rome which wordes if they had bene true being much materiall caused me diligently to peruse the Epistle quoted but indede agreable to my expectation I found none such and therefore truly deemed them to be framed in the fournace of M. Whytes forgeries And though in the Epistle cyted S. Ciprian reprehēdeth certaine heritikes who being iudicially cōuicted in Africk sayled to Rome with the marchandise of their lyes ◠endeuoring by their subtill and cunning rashnes to break the concord of Bishopes yet was he so farr from disprouing of any lawfull Appeale to Rome as that in the same place he auoucheth Rome to be the Chaire of Peter and principall Church from whence preistly vnity aryseth yea he scorned the said heritykes as not knowing◠the Romanes to be those vnto whom vntruth could haue no accesse and withall further affirming that the truth should sayle after them to Rome which with proofe of the thing certaine should cōuince their lying tongues All which doth plainely make knowen S. Ciprianes true conceipt of Romes superiority and indeede doth strongly confirme our Catholick doctrine concerning Appeales For if those heritykes censured by the Bishopes of Africk to auoyde their present punishment appealed to Rome no doubt this argueth that Appeales to Rome were in vse as then and though the Appellantes were heritykes yet in that otherwise their Appeale had bene plainely vaine foolish and fruitlesse it manifestly supposeth the foresaid Authority of admitting Appeales to reside in the Bishope of Rome Further though S. Ciprian reprehended them being lawfully conuicted for their further Appealing and not submitting them selues to their immediate Pastors yet doth he no-where so much as insinuate vpon iust occasions the vnlawfulnes of Appeales but euen in this very place doth imply the contrary by his sending after the foresaid heritikes to the Romane Church to enforme her of the truth which if it had not bene in regard of her foresaid Superiority or Primacy had bene altogether neede-les peraduenture inconuenient And whereas M. Whyte a litle before cyteth these wordes of S. Ciprian vnlesse peraduenture a few desperate and gracelesse persons think the Authority of the Bishopes in Africk that iudged them to be lesse it is plaine by the text that he maketh not this comparison with the Bishop of Rome but with those hereticall Bishopes which were censured and condemned by the Bishopes of Africk To conclude when M. Whyte sheweth me in the Epistle cyted of S. Ciprian these wordes obiected the vnity of Bishopes is broken when men runne from their owne to the Bishope of Rome I will publikely declaime him the cuningest Optician or rather Magician that the whole ministery of England affordeth The 10 Paragraph The Rhemists abused concerning the Authority of the Church Againe pag. 119. our fraudulent Doctor laboureth much to induce his credulous Readers to beleue that we hold that the Church can at her pleasure make that Scripture which is not and vnmake that which once is scripture thereupon saying that the papists haue a principle among them that the Scripres receiue all their authority from the Church he seketh to proue it in the next lynes from a testimony of the Rhemistes gal 6. thus alledging them The Scriptures are not knowne to be true neither are Christians bound to receaue them without the attestation of the Church Here againe he curtayleth their sentence concealing such their wordes as do lymite the Churches authority therein and wherein they do acknowledg an infallible truth of the Scriptures before any approbation of the Church therefore you shall haue their wordes alledged at large The Scriptures say they which are indeede of the Holy Ghosts indyting being put into the Churches tryall are found proued and testifyed vnto the world to be such and not made true altered or amended by the same without which attestation of the Church the holy Scriptures in them selues were alwayes true before but not so knowne to be to all Christians nor they so bound to take them Here the Rhemistes onely say that the truth of the Scriptures can not be made knowne to vs without the attestation of the Church And that this is all which M. Whyte can collect from this testimony which we willingly graunt Yet where the Rhemistes in this very place do vse wordes of reuerence to the Scriptures embrace their infallibility as these The Scriptures are not made true altered or amended by the Church And againe without the attestation of the Church the holy Scriptures in themselues were alwayes true As also wheare it is set downe by them in the mergent euen in that place The Church maketh not canonicall Scripture but declareth that it is so These I say though parcels of the former sentence or merginall explications thereof the D. haith after his accustomed maner most calumniously ouerskipped Thus it will still be found that the sphere of this his learned Treatise what glorious motion soeuer it semeth hitherto to haue in the sight of his ignorant fauorites turneth vpon the poles of shame full corruptions lying deceiptes The 11. Paragraph Cardinall Cusanus corrupted concerning the same subiect Againe continuing his former proiect pag. 51. he bringeth in the Cardinall Cusanus saying Epist. 3. pa. 3. When the Church changeth her Iudgment God also changeth his This he vrgeth to make vs mantayne that God doth so subiect his iudgment to the church that supposing for it is a mere supposall the church should alter or change any essentiall or fundamentall poynte of faith whatsoeuer by interpreting the Scripture otherwyse then before it did for M. Whyte setteth this sentence downe without any restraint so conformably thereto styleth the page The sence of Scripture changed with the tyme that then god also doth chāg his mynde therein so warrantiug the truth of this new stamped article But let vs see how the wordes do lye in Cusanus thus they are Sicut quondam coniugium praeferebatur Castitati c. As in former tymes meaninge in the firster ages of the world matrimony was preferred by the Church before Chastity so was it preferred euen by God But after the Iudgment of the Church being changed therein meaning after the world was fully peopled gods Iudgment it changed also If therefore the Church doth Iudg any act to be of great merite in reguard of the present circumstances and in an other tyme after shall Iudg an other act to be of greater valew c. it is euident that the greatnes of the merite doth much depende vpon the Iudgment of the Church Thus what is here spoken onely of the diuersity of merit of one and the same action according to the different circumstances of tyme or place M. Whyte will needes extend besides the intention of the Author to the chang of any dogmaticall point how great soeuer of
he wrongeth the Cardinall who saith that a man onely of outward profession is but aliquo modo pars Ecclesia meaniÌ„g onely in aÌ„ imperfect equiuocall manner of being whereas our minister concealing the wordes aliquo modo maketh Bellarmine to asscribe to such a one as perfect a being a member of the Church as to any other man endewed with all the Theologicall vertues But M. Whyte as we haue seene in others of his corruptions so also in this haith a great facility in passing ouer and concealing diuters such wordes as si ferme aliquo modo and the lyke in any Author that he alledgeth though they mightely alter the meaning of the sentence It may be perhaps he haith framed to him self a new Accidence houlding such poore particles but as imperfect partes of speach be accomptes them as vnworthy to be traÌ„slated or set downe by his learned pen. The 2. Paragraph Bellarmine corrupted against the kuowledg of misteries of our Faith in preferring of ignorance Againe to our more depressing of faith our supposed aduancing of ignorance the Doctor telleth his Reader how among vs the lay people are not bound to know what the matters of their faith be but that ignorance is better and thereupon in his mergent he fortifyeth him self with a sentence of Bellarmine de Inst. l. 1. ca. 7. in these wordes Fides melins per ignorantiaÌ„ quam per notitiam definitur Faith is better defyned by ignorance then by knowledg I think the minister euen for feare of breach of his oath taken as it should seme to the contrary is loth to alledg any one sentence entyrely ingeniously and truly For mark here how vntruly he diuorceth Bellarmines wordes from his owne drift and mynde For the Cardinall entytuling that Chapiter Fidem iustificantem non tam esse notitiam quaÌ„ assensum Iustifying Faith rather to be assent then knowledg there proueth that faith euen according to the Apostles definition thereof can not be demoÌ„strated and that the assent which we geue thereunto saith he followeth not rationem euidentiam rei a cleare euideÌ„ce of the poynt beleued which is property called notitiaÌ„ but it followeth authoritatem proponentia the authority of the proposer and therfore it is more properly called fides And then some three lynes after he thus sayeth Igitur misteria fides quae rationem superant credivius non intelligimus ac per hoc fides distinguitur contra scientiam melius per ignorantiam quam per notitiam definitur Therefore we beleue the misteries of faith which are aboue reason we vnderstand them not and in this respect Faith it distinguished against science of knowledg and iâ— better defyned by ignorance then by euidency of knowledg Now here I doe demaund euen in sincerity whether these wordes with any tecture of colour of possibility can be wrasted to the supporting of a supine and an affected ignorance of the articles of our Faith as here our minister seeketh to strayne them Wherefore I say that M. Whyte dealeth vnchristianlyke and most irreligiously with Bellarmine herein For first he inuesteth his wordes which are spoken onely of the nature of faith with a new construction neuer dreamed of and therefore you see the minister besides his passing ouer the ground and reason of his sentence purposly omitteth in his translation the beginning of the seÌ„tence alledged though it doth expound the wordes following to wit Therefore we beleue the misteries of Faith which are aboue reason we vnderstand them not and in this respect Faith is distinguished against science Secondly he taketh aduauntage in translating the word notitia which though it signifyeth in large construction knowledg in generall in which sence he forsaw the ignorant reader would take it yet with the schoolemen it is restrayned as Bellarmine here expresly noteth to that kynd of knowledg which is properly Scientia which procedeth out of a demonstrable euidency of the thing knowen and consequently it is incompatible with Faith For shame of your owne credit M. Whyte and for the feare that you owe to God forbeare to seduce any longer the ignorant by these deceauable meanes and making your benesyte of these my trendly admonitions which indeede procede from Christian Charity remember that meliora sunt vulnera diligentis quaÌ„ fraudulente oscula prou 27. The 3 Paragraph Nauar corrupted concerning the sinne committed by the Laity in disputing of matters of Faith Now next let vs come to one or two deprauations consisting of the word heresy where pag. 6. to intimate that we hould it no lesser offence then heresy for a Lay man to argue of matters of Religion as though the Church barred them in any sort whatsoeuer not to speake thereof he alledgeth Nauar Manual ea 11. nu 26. It is heresy for a Lay man to dispute in a point of Faith Nauars wordes are these Quinto qui disputat de fide cum sit Laicus sciens Laicis esse prohibitum sub excommunicationis paena de tlla disputare Fiftly who being a Lay man disputeth of Faith knowing that Lay men are forbidden vnder payne of excommunication to dispute thereof Here you see there is no mention of heresy and indeede without reference to some other wordes the sense is here imperfect therefore the Reader is to vnderstand that the Tytle of this Chapiter in Nauar is this Modivsitatiores peccandi mortaliter contra praeceptum de rectè colendo honorando Deo c. The seuerall more accustomed kindes of sinning mortally against the precept of worshiping and honoring God aright c. and so answearably to this tytle he setteth downe dyuers wayes of sinninge mortally in that sort keping the methode of primo secundo c. and so comming to quinto he sheweth in what manner a man sinneth thereinâ— therefore the offence here committed is not heresy as our minister falsly saith but it is a mortall sinne which yet is so to be vnderstoode as when a Lay person pertinaceously without subiecting his Iudgment to the Church wauereth in disputatioÌ„ in any point of the Catholick faith and thus much of M. Whytes fynding the word heresy in Nauar. But I may well say he is a man of a very strange and as I may terme it imperfect perfect eye-sight since he can not see wordes in testimonies which euery other man doth see and yet seeth other wordes in them which no man els can see Chapter 6. Concerning mariage of Preâ—stes Fasting and Miracles The 1 Paragraph Sinesius impudently abused concerning his owne mariage The next corruption shall be touching mariage of Preistes the lawfulnes whereof this our yoked minister is more willing to iustify in that such as professe voluntary Chastity are according to the principles of his faith accompted noe better then superstitious wilfull Eunuches Now then for the warranting thereof page 343. he produceth a testimony from Sinesitus Bishop of Ptolemais who in his Epistle to a frend called Euopius thus writeth of
there Sozomen doth thus wryte Veterem Ecâ—lesiu â—â—aeditionem esse vt qu Casâ—ties gradum sacerdo â—â—em consâ—euti fuisseur postea minime vxores duderenâ— qui autem post nuptias adteum or dinem vocati essent hit ab vxoribus quas habebaâ—â— minime separarentur â—ta quidem liceâ— Coniuglie pâ—rs fâ—ant Paphnutius It is an ancient Tradition of the Church what such as be vnmaried when they enter the degree of preisthood should not after taâ—â—e to them selues any wyues But those who being afore maried and after arcealled to that order should not be therefore seperated froÌ„ theire wyues and this Paphnutius though him self vnmaried perswaded the Councell vnto and thus far Sozomen of this poynt Now I referre to the iudtecous reader how worthily and sincerely M. Whyte halth quoted Paphnutius out of Sozomen for interpreting of S. Paules wordes in defence of Preistes mariage in generall without any distinction of tymes whereas in deede Sozomen Paphnutius and the Councell of Nyce did absolutely forbid mariage of the Cleargy after their ordination of preisthood directly opposite against the most generall practise of our english ministers who for the most part first seeke after a steeple and then a woman and thus with them a fat benefyce and a sister in the Lord for heresy euer lyes groueling in sensuality are become in our new euangelicall philosophy the terminus ad quem whereunto all other their motions doe finally propend and are directed The 3. Paragraph S. Augustine corrupted against fasting The Doctor through his great auersion which he haith of fasting and of forbidden meates for certaine dayes pag. 307. wryteth that the auncient Monkes made no distinction of meates alledgeth in the margent for proofe thereof S. Augustine de mor. Eccl. li. 1. ca. 33. Now you shall see how truly he auoucheth the Father herein for in that very Chapiter not to insist of his speaking of the Monkes fasting in those wordes Ieiunia prorsut incredibilia multâ—s exercere didâ—ci I haue learned that many Monkes did practise eueÌ„ incredible fastes he thus wryteth touching forbearaÌ„ce of the eating of flesh multi non vescuntur carnibus c. Many Monkes do not feede vpon flesh though they are not perswaded superstitiously that flesh is an vncleane meate after againe Continent se illi qui possunt quâ—â—tamen sunt innumerabiles a carnibus a vino c. Such Monks as in body are hable who yet are innumerable do abstaine from flesh and from wyne Here it is euident what the custome of the ancient Monkes was in those tymes how different from the practise of the new gospellers since infinite of them eating fish neuer tasted of flesh whereas to the contrary I dare auouch in the behalf of this my sanctifyed minister that euen out of conscience he forbeares to feede of superstitious fish But indeede M. Whyte doth well to shew himself so resolute an aduocate as afore of venety in the mariage of Preisles so now of Epicurisme since he well knoweth that there is a secret reference and mutuall dependency betwene these two most spirituall and ghostly Characters of our late stamped gospell a poynte so cleare that euen the Poets do tell vs that Venus was euer much befrended by Ceres and Bacchus The 4. Paragraph Baronius notoriously corrupted in proofe that heritykes can worke true miracles To depryue the Catholick Church of her glory of most certaine and vndoubted miracles wherewith god haith seuerall tymes sealed vp the truth of the faith professed by her Doctors our minister laboureth to proue from the confession of Catholickes that woorking of true miracles are also common to heritikes therefore no peculiar note of the true Church or Faith Now to this end pag. 301. he alledgeth Baronius Annal. An. 68. nu 22. touching the miracles of Simon Magus Simon made Images to walk would lye in the fyre without hurt flye in the ayre make bread of stones he could open doares fast shut vnloose boundes of Iron c. But doth out M. here leaue his accustomed trade of corrupting think you No for he paireth the testimony round aboute for euen both immediatly before and immediatly after the Authority alledged he concealeth Baronius his owne wordes wherein he acknowledgeth that these were no miracles by impostures and sleightes onely For thus he wryteth before Quaenam autem hat fuerâ—t â—â—m reue◠á non essent tament ab hominibus videri videbantur referam c. I will relate what prestigies or steightes those of Simons were seeing indeed they were not true yet semed to be in the sight of men and the mentioneth those reckned by M. Whyte And after Baro. haith nuÌ„bred the said supposed miracles he thus instantly concludeth Hueusque de Simonis imposturis quibus haec per imaginem osteâ—debat visum cum nulla veritaâ—e consisterent Thus farr of the impostures of Simon which appeared but in show and in the eye seing indeede they were not truly performed Now I appeale to the iudiceous Reader with what â—andor and sincerity M. Whyte could produce part of the sentence of Baronius omitting both the beginning and endinge â—â— euict that true and vndoubted miracles are incident also to heritykes and consequently are no competent marke of the true Faith or Church Chapiter 7. Concerning the Sacramentes of the Euchaâ—lâ— and Pennance The 1. Paragraph â—â—â—armine corrupted against Transubstantiation OVR Doctor pag. 24. haith a soule deprauation touching the doctrine of TransubstantiatioÌ„ alledging Bellarmine saving de Euch. lib 2. ca. 2.3 That it may iustly be doubted whether the text be cleaâ—e enough â—o infeâ— Transubstaâ—tiatioâ— seing men sharpe learned such as Scotus was haâ—e thought the contrary The Reader shall see the whole periode of Bellarmine at large and so may discerne how strongly both he Scotus impugne transubstantiatioÌ„ as they are here by our M. traduced to doe Thus then Scotus dicit â—on exâ—are c. Scotus saith that there is no place of Scripture so expresse which fiâ—e Ecclesiae declaratiore without the â—â—claration or interpretation of the Church can euidently force transubstantiation And this is not altogether in probable for although the text of Scripture which aboue we haue alledged sâ—me so cleare 〈◊〉 that it is able to conuince hominem â—on proâ—eruâ—â— a man not obstinate neuerthelesse whether it do so or no iâ— may iâ—â—lâ— be doubted of seing that learned and sharp men such as Scotus was haue thought the contrary But Scotus â—ddâ—â—h that sâ—â—g the Catholick Church haith expounded the said text of Scripture in a generall Councell therefore saith he from the said Scripture so declared by the Chuâ—ch transuâ—stâ—â—tiation is manifestly proued Thus farâ— Bellarmine Now I doe aâ—ke that if we consider the whole coÌ„texture of this passage together whether according to the mynds of Bellarmine Scotus it maketh against transubstantiation or no I say it euen fortifyeth the Doctrine thereof For Bellarmine first
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
he sheweth that the diuisions among them are either falsly layd to their charge through ignorance fury of their enemies c. or els they are not iars of the Church but the defectes of some few therein whereof the Church is not guilty or lastly not dissertions in thiâ—ges of faith but stryfe about Ceremonies c. Thus doth the D. Apologize for his discording brethren Now to conuince this the Reader shall heare what some of their owne brethren do acknowledge therein First then Doctor Willet rehearsing seuerall opinions of Hooker and D. Couell of which Willet presuming that they can not stand with true protestancy thus wryteth From this fountaine haue sprong forth these and such other whirle-pointes and bubles of new doctryne as that Christ is not originally God That Scriptures are not meanes concerning God of all that profitably we know c. That mannes will is apt naturally without Grace to take any perticuler obiect whatsoeuer presented vnto it and so consequently beleue that mennes naeturall workes or to do that Which nature telleth us without grace must needes be acceptable to God c. Thus haue some bene bould to teach and wryte as some Scismatikes meaning the puritanes haue disturbed the peace of the Church one way in externall matters concerning discipline these haue troubled the Church an other way in opposing them selues by new quirkes and deuyces to the soundnes of doctrine amongst protestantes But if the position here ment be against the foundnes of doctrine then can it not be restrained onely to ceremonies Doctor Whitaker speaking of the contentions among the protestantes saith Nostrae contentiones si quae sint sunt piae et modestae et propter fidem religionem c. Our contentions if there be any are pious and modest and for religion From which wordes if followeth that they are not personall or onely about ceremonies as M. Whyte pretendeth Now if we further take a vew of the intemperate speaches geuen by Luther against the Zuinglians it may satisfy any one that the differences were not in small points of gouernment or ceremonies Thus theÌ„ Luther speaketh We censure in earnest the Zninglians all the Sacramentaries for heritykes and alienated from the Church of God And in an other place Cursed be the Charity and concord of Sacramentaries for euer and euer to all eternity As also in the 3. place I hauing now one of my feete in the graue will carry this testimony and glory to the tribunall of God that I will with all my heart condemne aud eschew Carolostadius Zuinglius Oecolampadius and their schollers nor will haue with any of them familiarity either by letters or writinges c. And thus farr of this point From all which may be inferred that dissentions among the protestantes are not merely personall or but pointes adiaphorous indifferent being as it were but peccant humors and not true or formed diseases in their church but they do concerne most profound doubtes of their religion since otherwaies they would neuer anathematize or condemne one an other with such acerbity of wordes Which irreuocable contentions among the protestaÌ„ts being most preiudiceous to them selues is aduantageous to vs for bellum haereticorum est pax Ecclesiae The warr of heritykes is the peace of Gods Church none otherwise then the reciprocall stryfe and reluctation of the 4. humors kepes the whole body in a peaceable healthfull state The 8. Vntruth Against the vnity of Catholickes in matters of Faith Page 153. The Doctor seing his owne sinagogue torne in sonder with diuisions and contentions howsoeuer he slubered the matter ouer before with his faire pretence of concord and well knowing how preiudiciall the want of vnity is to the true Religion of Christ. For God is not a God of dissention but of peace doth maliceously endeuour to cast the lyke aspersion vpon our Catholick Church in these wordes These which know Rome and papistry are sufficiently satisfyed in this matter to wit that the papistes liue not in that vnity which is pretended theÌ„ p. 156. he telleth of what kynd these disagreementes are saying The contentions of our aduersaries touch the faith And pag. 159 he concludeth in these wordes Thus are the papistes deuyded about the principall articles of their faith Vpon which subiect he then after with much earnestnes vainely and idly spendeth dyuers leaues bringing therein euen obtorto cullo whatsoeuer he haith read or heard touching the least disagreement among the Catholickes which labour of his will serue no doubt to a iudiceous eye lyke to the spyders web painfully wrought but to no purpose Wherefore I will breefly make plaine how free we are from all breach of faith euen by the acknowledgment of the protestantes them selues First then D. Whitaker wounding him self and his cause by his confession saith Nostrae contentiones si quae sint sunt piae et modestae propter fidem propter religionem c. Contentiones papistarum sunt friuolae futiles de figmentis et commentis sui cerebri Our contentions if there be any are godly and modest touching faith and religion wheras the contentions of the papistes are but tryflinge concerning the fictions of their owne brayne Thus graunting the dissentions of the protestantes more nearly to concerue faith and religion then the dissentions among the Catholickes do Doctor Fulke saith of our vnity in this sort As for the consent of the popish Church it proueth nothing but that the deuill then had all thinges at his will and might sleepe So acknowledging our vnity truly but falsly and absurdly ascrybing it to the deuill who is the designed enemy to vnity To be short Duditius a famous protestant and highly respected by Beza doth no lesse acknowledg the vnity of our Catholick Church for thus doth Beza relate Duditius his woordes Etsi inquis multa eaque horrenda propugnantur in Romana Ecclesia c. Although many dreadfull thinges are defended in the Romane Church which are buylded vpon a weake and rotten foundation notwithstanding that Church is not deuyded with many dissentions for it haith the plausible shew of reuerent Antiquity ordinary sâ—ccession and perpetuall consent c. Thus Duditius related by Beza and not impugned herein by him Now here we are to note that the testimonies of these and other protestantes here omitted acknowledging our vnity and consent must necessarily be vnderstoode touching vnity in the misteries and other fundamentall poyntes of our Religion which is the thing onely that we are here to mantaine since if vnity alone about pointes of indifferency or of thinges not defyned should be ment by them then in reguard of many such disputable questions yet among the schole men the former iudgmentes of our aduersaries should be false and not iustifiable And thus much for this poynt from whence the Doctor may learne that among those which are true Catholickes vnity of doctrine is most
doth charge condemne the protestant for teaching that God is the author of sinne But as in the former vntruthes so particulerly in this we see how Antipodes-lyke oppositly our Doctor treadeth to the feete of his owne brethren The 16. Vntruth In proofe that S. Bernard was no papist Page 298. He is not affrayd to publish by his pen that Bernard was a papist in none of the principall poyntes of their religion And then he addeth He stoode against the pryde of the Pope c. Good Reader here is no lying for whosoeuer will but obserue what is confessed by the protestantes must acknowledg that impudency it self would be ashamed to haue mantained such a groundlesse vntruth For first it is graunted by Symond de Voyon a protestant that he was Abbot of Clareiuaux And Osiander saith of Bernard that Centum et quadraginta Monasteriorum author fuisse creditur He was thought to be the Author of a hundreth 40 Monasteries In lyke sort S. Bernard was so great a Patron of the Popes Primacy that the Centuristes wryte of him Coluit deum Maozim c. Bernard did worshipp euen to the last end of his lyfe the god Maozim he was a most eager defender of the seate of Antichrist Apoint so cleare that he is charged by D. Fulke and D. Whytaker for defending the Popes Ecclesiasticall Authority and yet if we beleeue M. Whyte he stoode against the pryde of the Pope so euident you see is this made by the free acknowledgment of the protestantes whose censures are passed vpon S. Bernardes Religion and faith in generall And therefore we may well inferr that if they had thought S. Bernard to haue bene but in part a catholick or as the terme is a papist and in other poyntes a protestant they would haue bene glad to haue chalenged him to them selues in the supposed pointes of his protestancy Thus M. Whyte we still obserue that the Reader is euer entertayned by you with nought but falshoods but no meruell for it is your owne position that a man can not hope to learne truth in the schoole of lyes The 17. Vntruth Against the miracles wrought by S. Bernard S. Francis Page 299 Talking of the miracles of the former S. Bernard of S. Francis and others he thus concludeth What is reported of Bernard and Francis c. are lyes and deuyses This is spoken to dishonour the Romane Faith diuers of whose professours through Gods omnipotency and for the manifestation and strengthning of his truth haue in all tymes bene able to exhibite diuers great miracles the remeÌ„brance of which prerogatiue resting onely in our Church is most displeasing to our minister in whose nyce nosethrilles nothing well sauoreth that tasteth of the praise of our Catholick Religion But now let vs see whether the miracles recordâ—d of the former Sainctes be lyes or no as the D. fondly suggesteth One most remarkable miracle of S. Bernard is recorded by Godfridus in the lyfe of S. Bernard It was wrought in proofe of certaine Catholick Articles denied in those dayes by the heritykes Apostolici or Henriciani as at this instant they are denyed by the protestantes The miracle was done in the Country of Tolousa in France and consisted in S. Bernardes blessing of certaine loaues of bread of which loaues for proofe of the truth of our Catholick doctrine then preached by S. Bernard whosoeuer being in any sort diseased of body should eate should be healed of their sicknes whereupon infinite people eating of the same were cured most miraculously of all kind of diseases This miracle was so illustrious and markable that Osiander one of the Century writers doth not say it is a lye and forged as M. Whyte doth but graunting the thing as true doth ascribe it to the power and working of the deuill as the wicked Iewes did the miracles of our blessed Sauiour vnto Belzabub In lyke sort Mathew Paris in his history which is printed by the protestantes at Tigur 1589. whose booke is by the said protestantes highly commended in their Preface annexed thereunto and who him self is reckoned for his defence of certaine poyntes of protestancy in the number of protestantes by Illiricus This man now most seriously recordeth that before S. Francis death there appeared certainâ— woundes in his handes and feete and his syde freshly bleeding such as were seene in our Sauiour when he suffered on the Crosse. The reason of which appearance was as S. Francis said to shew that he did truly preach the mistery of the Crosse and that in further demonstration of the same he tould them before that presently after death the former woundes should be healed coherent lyke to the rest of his flesh the which accordingly did fall forth And thus much but of these for breuity sake instanced in these two Sainctes from whence we may confidently affirme that it is a lye to say with M. Whyte that these Sainctes Mirakles are but lyes The 18. Vntruth In proofe of the protestantes Churches euer visibility Page 225. and 226. In defence of the continuance of his owne Church he thus saith The learned among vs confesse and proue against all that contradict it that euer since Christes tyme 〈…〉 there haith bene a company of men visibly professing the same faith that we do though the Church of Rome a generating into the seate of Antichrist persâ—cutâ—d them and so many tymes draue them â—wt of the sight of the world that to it they were not visible Thus he But before we conuince this I would demaunde where our ministers head peece was when he thus wrote since these few lynes do inuolue an irreconciliable contradiction A company of men visibly professing c. yet to the world not visible O strang neuer before heard of Inuisible-uisible aswell he might mantaine whyte remayning whyte to be black or the moone in her greatest eclipse to shyne as the Church euer to be visible and yet latent and latent to whoÌ„ to the world still good as if it were to be seene only by some who are out of the world But now to the falshood the lyke whereof he ventilated before and haith accordingly bene before refelled Yet because for the honour of his Church he insisteth much in the visibility and want of all interruption of his faith it will not be amisse to repell such an idle suggestion with the testimonies and acknowledgmentes of seuerall learned protestantes And first Napper wryteth that betwene the yere of Christ 300 and 1316. the Antichristian and Papisticall reigne began reigning vniuersally and without any debateable contradiction 1260 yeares gods true Church most certainly abyding latent and inuisible Sebastianus Francus a famous protestant in lyke sort saith For certaine through the worke of Antichrist the externall Church together with the faith and Sacramentes uanished away presently after the Apostles departure and that for these thousand four hundreth yeres the Church
haith bene no where externall and visible Now during all these ages when was M. W. company of men visibly professing the same faith that he doth Finally D. Fulke though not acknowledging so great an inuisibility yet wryteth that in the tyme of Boniface the third which was Anno 607. the Church was inuisible and fled into wildernesse there to remaine a long season To these testimonies we may adde the former heretofore alledged touching their Churches not being vpon the first reuolt of Luther From all which it is ineuitably concluded against this our Architect of lyes that the protestants imaginary Church consisting of aery supposales of certaine inuisibilistes had no subsisting or being in the world for these laste thousand yeres at the least before the Apostacy of that vnfortunate wicked Monke The 19 Vntruth In defence of Preistes mariage Page 343. The Doctor much Apologizing defending the mariage of the Cleargy affirmeth that the Church of Rome houldeth contrary herein to that which was taught in the Primitiue Church Now for the triall of this falshood let vs concurr to that which is confessed by our learned aduersaties concerning the same First then Cartwright confesseth of the first Councell of Nyce which was celebrated in the 3. Century or age after Christ that it taught that vnto those which were chosen into the ministery it was not lawfull to take a wyfe afterwardes only being maried before entrance into the ministery it was lawfull for them to vse the benefyte of the precedent mariage In lyke sort M. Iewell in the defence of the Apology page 195. after the editioÌ„ of Anno 1571. speaking of preistes mariages thus acknowledgeth Here I graunt M. Harding it lyke to find some good aduantage as hauing vndoubtedly a great number of holy Fathers on his side Lastly Chemniâ—ius graunteth that this doctryne that preistes can not mary is taught by Origen Ierome Ambrose Innocentius Ciritius Epiphanius Now here I referr to the iudgment of any indifferent reader whether we are to beleue these former learned protestantes ingeniously confessing the practise of this our Catholick doctrine in the primitiue Church to the preiudice and endangering of theire owne cause or M. Whyte denying the same for the better tecture and pretext of his owne sociable lyfe and his ministeriall copulation The 20 Vntruth Against Images page 344. Inueighing much against the religious vse of Images among other thinges he saith according to the tytle of that his digression that touching Images the Church of Rome houldeth contrary to that formerly was houlden And after alledgeth that the auncient Christians of the Primitiue Church had no Images But the contrary hereto is most true For first we finde that the Centuristes do wryte that Lactantius who lyued in the fourth Century or age affirmeth many superstitious thinges concerning the efficacy of Christes Image Doctor Fulke affirmeth that Paulinus a very auncient Author caused Images to be painted on Church wales In lyke sort touching the signe of the Crosse of which there is the same reason and ground the Centuristes teach that Ambrosius multa commâ—morat superstitiosâ— de cruce inuâ—nta The said Centuristes also affirme of the third age after Christ that Crucis Imaginem c. Tertulian is thought to affirme that Christians had the Image of the Crosse in the places of their publike meetinges as also priuatly in their owne houses So farâ— did M. W. erre from the truth in affirming that touching Images The Church of Rome bouldeth contrary to that which was formerly houlden But I see if it be proofe enough for M. Whyte onely to condemne the Church of Rome must not be innocent The 21. Vntruth Against Transubstantiation Page 346. The D. thus writeth Lastly I name Transubstantiation c. wherein it is plaine that they meaning the Catholickes haue altered the Faith of the auncient Fathers Here for the tryall hereof we are to appeale to the sayinges and confessions of his owne syde where we shall fynd that M. Whytes credit and estimation is particulerly in this as in the former most daungerously wonnded euen by the handes of his owne breethren For we fynd it confessed by the Centuristes that Chrisostomus transubstantiatiorem vid tur confirmare Chrisostem is thought to confirme transubstantiation In lyke sort by the Iudgment of other protestantes Theophilactus Dama ceâ—us plane inclinant ad transubstantiatiorem Theophilact D. mascen do euidently inclâ—ne to Transubstantiation Answearable hereto Occolampadius doth charge Damascen with the said doctrine Finally D. Hâ—mfrey writeth that Gregory the great brought in Transâ—bstantiation In Ecclsiam verò saith he speaking of our conuersion quid inuexerunt Gregorius et Augustinus Intâ—lâ—runt c. Transubstantiationem Now I would demaund of our minister with what countenance he can auâ—rre that in the doctrine of TraÌ„substantiation we haue altered the faith of the auncient fathers if he obserue what is taught to the contrary by his owne brethren who not beleuing the doctrine it self yet do confesse the great antiquity thereof May we thinke that M. W. was ignorant of these Fathers myndes therein If so then are his followers much deceaued in ouerualâ—ing his good partes and literature and withall the obscurity of his owne iudgment touching the said fathers in this poynt haith thus farr preuailed that it haith ministred fitâ— opportunity to the Reader to take notice how cleare perspicuous shyning our Catholick faith of Transubstantiation was euen in those primitiue tymes So the Opacity and darknes of the earth is occasionally the cause of the dayes light The 22. Vntruth Against the conuersion of England by S. Augustine the Monke Page 354. and 355. to depriue S. Augustine the Monke of the honour and reuerence due vnto him by vs English for our conuersion the M. thus wryteth Touching the conuersion of England by Augustine the Monk in which our aduersaries make so much a doe I answeare two thinges fiâ—st that supposing he dâ—d conuert it it was not to the present Romane faith c. Secondly I say he conuerted not our Country at all excepting the planning of some tryfling Ceremonies Here you see that the first poynt of this passagâ— to wit touching Augustines connâ—rsion and his faith is Hipotheticall and deliuered with som hesitation and doubting the other recalling the first Categoricall absolute and peremptory Now in my reprouall of this his falshood I will vnyte together the two former disioynted parcels and directly proue from our aduersaries penaes that S. Augustine did conuert our Country to the present Catholick Romane faith in the euicting whereof I will content my self with the confessions of the Centuristes and of D. Humfrey For if we peruse the history of those Censorions Magdeburgians who reproue and controule at their pleasure all the Fathers of all ages we shall fynd that these Centuristes acknowledging S. Augustines conuersion of vs in their Alphabeticall Table of the 6. Century at
the word Gregory do set downe certaine erroures in their iudgmentes of S. Gregory in these wordes following Eiusdem error de bonit operibus de Confessione de Coniugio de Ecclesia de Sanctorum inuocatione de Inferno de Iustificatione de Libero arbitrio de Purgatorio de Paenitentia de Satisfactione And further in the said Century they charge him with Celebration of Masse Col. 369. with claime practise of supreme Iurisdiction ouer all Churches col 425. 426. c. with Relickes and sprinkling of holy water col 364. with Pilgrimage col 384. with Monachisme col 343. Finally to omit many other pointes with Chrisme oyle col 367. Now this being the confessed Faith of S. Gregory I think no reasonable maÌ„ will deny but that S. Augustine who was sent by him to conuert our Country was of the same Faith with S. Gregory In lyke sort D. Humfrey is most full in this point who thus writeth In Ecclesiam verò quid inuexerunt Gregorius Augustinus c. What brought Gregory Augustine into the Church They brought in the Archbishops vestmont for the solemne celebration of Masse they brought in Purgatory and oblation of the healthfull houst aâ—d Praiers for the dead c. they brought in Relickes Transubstantiation c. New consecration of Churches c. From all which pointes what other conclusion is gathered then that Indulgences Monachisme the Papacy and all the other chaos and heape of superstition was erected thereby And thus faâ—r of this testimony though heretofore vpon other occasion alledged Now here it being confessed both by the Centuristes and by this learned Doctor that S. Augustine did not onely conuert vs but also did teach vs all the former doctrines I would be resolued of M. whyte by what extenuation or figure in Rethorick he can style our instruction in the said maine articles of Catholick Religion the planting of certaine tryfling Ceremonies But I see he is most willing for his owne behalf to alleuiate and lessen the weight and consequence of our former conuersion The 23. Vntruth Concerning the Conuersion of Countries Page 357. Touching the conuersion of other heathen Countries to the Faith of Christ fore-tould so long since by the Prophets of God to be accomplished onely in the true Church of Christ the D. as being emulous of the Romane Catholick Church her honour therein flatly affirmeth of certaine Countries by him mentioned that they were conuerted by that Church which was of his owne faith and profession and not by the Church of vs Catholickes for thus he writeth Allowing all these Countries to haue bene conuerted by such as were members of the Church of Rome yet this was a thousand yeres agoe when that Church was the same that ours is and so the conuersions weare wrought by persons adhering to the protestantes faith This point is discouered to be false first by refuting the reason deliuered by the Doctor why the said Countries should be conuerted by the professors of the protestantes faith Secondly by the testimonies of the said protestantes flatly confessing that their Church as yet neuer conuerted any Country to Christianity As concerning the first poynt I say that the Church of Rome more then a thousand yeres agoe haith seaced supposing that before it was to be protestant and therefore her self professing the contrary faith as then could not conuert the said Countries to protestancy That the Church of Rome acknowledged not in these tymes the protestantes religion is most abundantly confessed by the protestantes them selues who do frequently teach that the true Church of God consequently in their supposales their owne Church haith bene latent and inuisible more then these laste thousand yeres during all which tyme the Antichristian and popish Religion as they terme it haith possessed all Christian Countries whatsoeuer The protestantes abundant confessions haue bene already made so euident in this point incidently in the discouery of some of M. W. vntruthes as that I presume an iteration of the same would be ouer fastidious aud wearisom to the Reader and therefore I will passe on to the other point consâ—sting in the confessions of the protestantes that their Church neuer yet conuerted any one Country to Christianity And first for confirmation hereof we fynde that Sebastian Castalie a learned Caluenist and highly praisep by D Humfray writing of the accomplishment of the prophesies of conuerting of kingdomes saith thus Equidem aâ—t haec futura fatendum est c. Truly we must confesse that these thinges shall be performed here after or haue been heretofore or God is to be accused of lying If any man answer that they haue bene performed I will demaund when If he say in the Apostles time I will aske how it falleth out that neither then the knowledg of God was altogether perfect and after in so short a time vanished away which was promised to be eternall and more aboundant then the floods of the sea And then there somwhat after the said protestant thus acknowledgeth The more I do examine the Scriptures the lesse I obserâ—e it the same performed howsoeuer the said Prophets be vndeâ—stoode To conclude this point the prophecies deliuered by Esay and others the Prophets for the spreading of Gods Châ—rch are so fart from being yet acomplished in the protestantes Church that diuers protestantes haue not onely acknowledged so much but by reason of the not performance thereof haue in the end become most wicked Apostataes mantaining that if the faith and Religion preached by Christ and his Apostles had bene true and his Church that Church which was figured out by the auncient Prophets that then should the said Prophesies touching the enlargment of the Church and the conuersion of nations haue had their successiue euent and infallible performance in the said Church which they affirme hitherto haâ—th not bene effected And vearably hereunto we find that the want of the performance to the said prophesies in the protestantes Church wrought so forcibly with Dauid George a HollaÌ„der once professor of the protestants faith religion in Basill to omitt the lyke examples of diuers others that in the end he taught most fearfull horrible blasphemy affirming Christ to haue bene a seducer his cheifest reason being in that the true Religion our Catholick Religion being by him supposed to be false and therefore the conuersions of Countries made to it not admitted to be intended by the Prophets according to the predictions should haue spred and disseminated it self before this tyme through the most Nations Countries of the world which poynt saith he hitherto is not accomplished Here now the iudiceous Reader may collect both from what haith bene acknowledged aboue as also from the present confession of the former Apostata being accompanied with such a dreadfull euent how vntrue the D. wordes were when he affirmed diuers Countries some thousand yeres since to haue bene conuerted from paganisme vnto Christianity by
that Church which in doctrine and faith conspired with the protestantes Church Thus you see M. W. that not I but such as in other poyntes of Nouelisme do interleague with you geue you the lye therein and thus is falshood truly controuled euen by the Patrones of falshood The 24. Vntruth Against the Popes authority in calling of Councells Page 375. He in charging the Pope with innouation of his iurisdiction thus saith The beginning of the Popes Supremacy ouer Councells was of late since the Councells of Constance and Basill decreed within this hundreth yeres in the Councell of Lateran by a few Italian Bishops wheras in the auncieÌ„t Church it was otherwise In this poynt for the more compendiousnes thereof I will insist onely in the fourth and fifth Century after Christ both being within the circuite of the primitiue Church First then we fynd that D Whitaker confesseth an Ecclesiasticall Canon to be in the fourth Century that Noe Councell should be celebrated without the Bishop of Rome He also further acknowledgeth that Pope Iulius made challenge therby meaning by the benefite of the said Canon to assemble a Councell And where Bellarmine insisting in the president of Iulius and other Bishops vrging this Canon Danaeus a learned protestant thus onely replyeth Nullius est moments c. The example is of noe force since it is proued from the Testimony of the Bishop of Rome who is a party in his owne cause Thus confessing the poynt it self outfaced by the minister but denying onely the lawfulnes thereof Now in the fyfth age we fynde that the Magdeburgians do thus plainely Censure the Popes of that tyme. Generalia Concilia c. The bishops of Rome haue challenged to them selues power of celebrating Councells as appeareth out of the 93. Epistle 7. chapter of Leo. And yet further the said Centuristes do say Ac Synodos c. They haue reiected such Councells as vnlawfull which were not called together by their Authority And thus farr of this poynt where you see that our minister saying that no Bishop of Rome challenged authority of assembling of Councells or being aboue them but within this hundreth yeares last is contradicted by the former learned protestantes who confesse that the Bishop of Rome practised it eleuen or twelue hundreth ages I pray you whether of these is more likly to lye The 25. Vntruth Against merite of woorkes Page 378. For the more disauthorising of the doctrine of merit of workes our minister thus outlasheth The doctrine touching the merit of workes was begoâ— lately by the schoolemen For the triall of this poynt some of the Fathers of the primitiue Church confessed euen by the protestants to teach this our Catholic Faith shall becom the wittnesses bewene the D. and me First then the Magdeburgians do thus write of one Father Chrisastome handleth impurely the doctrine of Iustification and attributeth merite to workes Luther calleth Ierome Ambrose and Augvstine Iusticiarios Iustice-workers of the ould Papacy Finally D. Humfrey ascendeth euen to Ireneus Clemens and others pronouncing of them that then hauy in their writinges the merite of workes And thus farr of this poynt Wherefore our ministers ouersight was most grosse in diuulging such a notorious vntruth contrary to the expresse Iudgment of his owne most learned brethren The 26. Vntruth Against the Sacrifice of the Masse Page 378. The minister endeuoring calumniously to dishonour the most healthfull and incruent Sacrifice of the Masse writeth that the Masse began not all at once but by degrees Now here to instruct the Doctors ignorance or at least to detect his malice I am to lay downe the Iudgmente of the Catholick Church teaching what is maÌ„tayned to be essentiall to the Sacrifice of the Masse and what but accidentall The true nature then and essence of this Sacrifice we hould to consist in the oblation of the most sacred body and blood of Christ and consummation thereof what praiers or ceremonies do either precede or follow the wordes of the institution are no essentiall part of the Masse if they were all omitted in the celebration thereof yet were the Sacrifice of it true and perfect And therefore we willingly confesse without any preiudice to our cause that most of the said prayers or Ceremonies were added by seuerall Popes at different tymes yet from our acknowledgment thereof it in no sort followeth that the Masse came in by degrees since we all teach that they are neither the Masse nor any essentiall parte of it Now wheareas the minister by subtilty and by falsly suggesting to the Reader that the Masse came in at seuerall tymes would haue it to be vnderstoode for our greater disaduauntage of the essence and nature of the Masse it self I will lay downe the Iudgment of the Primitiue Church herein vnanimously teaching euen by the confession of the most iudiceous protestantes the true and vnbloudly Sacrifice oblation of Christes body and bloud to be performed in the celebration of the Eucharist so shall the Reader be instructed in the antiqnity of that which is essentially the masse and withall in reguard of the ministers calumnious dealing herein he shall haue iust reason to say Astonishment and meruelous thinges are done in the land the prophets prophesied a lye And here for greater compendiousnes I will forbeare to set downe the Protestantes confessions of particuler Fathers teaching the doctrine of the Masse and will restraine my self onely to such their sayinges whereof some do belong to the primitiue Church in generall and others to the first age or Century thereof And first we fâ—nd Caluin to wryte of them in generall Veteres excusandi non sunt c The auncient Fathers are not to be excused seing it is euident that they turned from the true and genuine Institution of Christ. For whereas the lordes supper it celebrated to this end that we should communicate with the Sacrifice of Christ the Fathers not being contente therewith haue added thereunto an oblation And to the lyke purpose he saith in his Institutions Veteres quoque illos video c I do see that those Auntient Fathers did detort the memory thereof meaning of the Eucharist otherwise then was agreeing to the Institution of Christ for their Lordes Supper doth make shew and representation of I can not tell what reiterated and renewed Sacrifice They haue more nearely imitated the Iudaicall manner of Sacrificing then either Christ did ordaine or the nature of the Gospell did suffer Tnus Caluin Add hereunto for the greater Antiquity of the doctrine of the Sacrifice of the Masse that the protestantes them selues do confesse the faith thereof to be vniuersall euen in the first age or Century after Christ. For we fynde that Hospmian a famous protestant doth thus write I am tum primo c. Euen in the first age the Apostles being yet liuing the deuill did deceaue men more about this Sacrament then about Baptisme
what end he mustereth all these sentences of Scripture god him self knoweth for neither do they derogate any thing froÌ„ the Churches Authority since indeede they do not concerne it neither do they ascribe any more to Christ then all Catholickes doe acknowledg and beleue But it semeth M. Whyte thought it good pollicy thus to lead serth in triumph whole squadrons of textes and other humaine testimonies that so they might seeme powerfull and terrible how weake soeuer otherwise through his misapplications they were against the Churches Authority the eye of the vnlearned But to end this Paragraph here the Reader may see in how many impertinent allegatioÌ„s M. Whyte haith insisted euen within the reading of two leaues together and all implicitly directed to charg the Catholickes with their disualuing the Scriptures through their acknowledging the Churches lawfull authority as if to contemne the church of God were an argument with him the more to admire the word of god Thus he semeth to pertake though in a different example â— with a certaine man recorded by Sulpitius with whom euery one studious of vertue or abstinence was suspected with the heresy of the Priscilianistes The 3. Paragraph Wherein are examined some of M. Whytes preofes against the Churches visibility An other passage whereupon our minister spendeth his frothy and immateriall proofes is touching the inuisiblenes of the Church first bearing the Reader in hand that by inuisibility he meaneth not an vtter extinction or disparition of the true Church and faith yet after in effect he recalleth the same and thus writeth pag. 87. When we say the Church is inuisible we meane that all the externall gouernment thereof may come to decay in that the locall and personall succession of pastors may be interrupted the discipline hindred the preachers scattered and all the outward exercise and gouernment of religion suspended whereby it shall come to passe that in all the world you can not see any one particuler Church professing the true faith whereunto you may saâ—fly ioyne your self by reason persecution and heresyes shall haue ouerflowed all Churches as Noes flood did the world c. Thus you see how liberally and fully he here deliuereth though in the beginning of that Chapter he speaketh more mincingly thereof Now if the discipline may be hindred the preachers scattered c. then shall not the word be preached nor the Sacramentes ministred which are at least by our aduersaries principles inseperable markes of the true Church and consequently they being taken away the Church for the tyme must be vtterly extinct This being the true meaning of M. Whyte he vndertaketh to proue that the Catholickes do generally teach the like inuisibility of Gods Church and therefore he thus styleth those leaues The papistes say the Church is inuisible which inuisibility to be taught by the Catholickes that he may proue he haileth in all sayinges of any one Catholick Doctor or other which shew only that the Church of God is more coÌ„spicuous at one time then an other which we all grauÌ„t yet from thence it can not be enforced that therefore by the Catholick doctrine it may be somtimes so latent as that it can not be knowne where it is But to fortify this his false assertion he alledgeth Pererius in these wordes In the ryme of Antiehrist there shall be no Sacrament in publick places neither shall â—ay publick honour be geuen it but priuatly and priuily shall it be kept and honoured In the same manner he vrgeth Ouandus that the masse in the time of Antichrist shall be celebrated but in very few places so that it shall seeme to be ceased Now to omitt that if the masse shall be celebrated in few places then must it be in some places if in some places then is the Church visible euen in those places what illation is this The Eucharist or the masse shall not be publickly honoured or celebrated in Antichrists tyme but onely in priuate or in secret therefore then the Church shall be inuisible and unknowne The silynes of which argument is controuled euen by the wofull experience of our owne country at this present where the world seeth that the Masse and other Catholick Sacramentes are exercysed onely in priuate howses and not in publick Churches yet who will from hence conclude that the Catholick Church here in England is latent and inuisible since the immoueable constancy and perseuerance of English Catholickes haith made them knowne and remarkable to all the partes of Christendome He next alledgeth diuers Catholickes ioyntly teaching that in the tyme of Antichrist The Sacrifice of the Eucharist shall be taken away which point being graunted yet proueth not that the true faith of Christ shall so fall away that none can then be named who shall professe the same For seing that the celebrating of the Eucharist is an externall worshippe of god which though it be suspended for the time yet it is not necessarily accompanied with an inuisibility of the Church and a vanishing away of the true Faith of Christ euen in reguard of the persons who should performe the same For this point is likwise made manifest by the imprisoÌ„ed Preistes here in England whose publick exercise of their Religion though it be prohibited and restrained yet are they well knowne to the state by professing them selues in these times of pressures through a true heroicall and spirituall fortitude members of the Catholick Church Next to the former testimonies he marshalleth Gregory De Valentia thus writing When we say the Church is alwaies conspicuous this must not be taken as if we thought it might at euery season be discerned alike easily For we know that it is som-times tossed with the waues of erroures schismes and persecutions that to such as are vnskilfull and do not discreetly euough weygh the circumstances of tymes and thinges it shall be very hard to be knowne c. Therefore we deny not but that it will be harder to discerne the Church at some tymes then at other some yet this we auouch that it alwaies migt be discerned by such as could wisly esteeme thinges Thus this Catholick Author wirh whom D. Stapleton is alledged by M. Whyte to conspire herein Now what doth this testimony make against vs since it chiefly proueth that the splendour of Gods Church is more radiant and shyning at one tyme then at an other which we willingly graunt but it is impertinently vrged to proue that it should be absolutly eclipsed the point that ought to be euicted nay it clearly conuinceth the contrary For first the former wordes say that the Church is alwaies conspicuous Secondly that the Church is alwaies discerned by those who wysely esteeme of thinges therefore to such it is alwaies visible And thus doth M. Whytes owne testimony recoyle with great force vpon him self After our Doctor haith ended with Catholick moderne wrvters he beginneth to proue the inuisibility of the Church from the authority of
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
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