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
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
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
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
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
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
Religionâ— and this he doth by nakedly setting downe one lyne which is the middest of the periode but subtily according to his maner omitting both the wordes precedent wherein the instance is geuen and whereunto the sence of the former sentence is peculierly tyed as also the wordes subsequeÌ„t contayning the reason thereof But it semeth he haith vowed with him self neuer to alledg any one testimony ingeniously and plainely seing his true quotations iâ— any such be may for their quantity be engrauen within a ring whereas his wilfull deprauations doe stretch beyond all reasonable dimension The 12 Paragraph The Canon Law corrupted concerning the Pope In nothing more doth M. Whyte manifest or continue his implacable hatred or his dexterity in falsification then against the Church and Pope of Rome amongest many take this example folowing pag. 433. I am affrayd saih he I haue bene to bold in medling with these matters for the Church of Rome haith a Law within her self that it is and then foloweth in a different letter as though they were the wordes of the Canon law sacriledg to reason about the Popes doinges whose murders are excused lyke Sampsons and theftes lyke the Hebrues Adultries lyke Iacobs But here I must charg you with much fowle demeanour for first you affirme that the wordes cyted are a Law of the Romane Church whereas they are onely taken out of the glosse or comment which is a thing much different and of incomparable lesse authority then the Law it self Secondly whereas in the Law it is disputed what censure is to be geuen when the case is doubtfull whether the Pope haith sinned or noe as by committing adultry or murder to which it is answeared that in that case it is to be presumed in the Popes behalf yea saith the glosser in this case sacrilegii instar esset disputare de facto suo Vel dic quod facta Papae accusantur vt homicidia Samsonis surta Hehraeorum adulterium Iacob It were lyke Sacriledg in that doubtfull case to dispute of his fact Or say that the deedes of the Pope are accused as the murders of Samson the thefts of the Hehrues the Adultery of Iacob What is here spoken in defence of the pope which euery Christian ought not to performe in defence of his neighbour to wit in a case doubtfull to think and speake the best Are not those factes of Samson the Hebrues and Iacob piously censured by the learnedst Doctors But with what front do you auouch so absolutely and in generall that according to the law of the Romane Church it is sacriledg to reason about the Popes doinges whereas the glosser saith onely In dubiis c. when the case is doubtfull of the Popes fact instar sacrilegii c. It were lyke Sacriledg to dispute of his fact Will you of doubtfull premisses inferre an absolute conclusion Would you take it kindly if in a case admitting it but doubtfull whether a certaine minister had beene drunke should absolutely affirme that the protestants Church haith a Law within her self that it is Sacriledg to reason about ministers doinges whose drunkenes is excused as Noes c. The 13. Paragraph Bellarmine corrupted against theâ— Popes Authority As the former deprauations were practised in ouermuch aduauncing and extolling the Authority of the Church and Pope so here on the contrary part he falsly alledgeth Bellarmine extenuating and lesning the said power For thus entytling the page 167. The papistes them selues refuse the Popes Iudgment he laboureth to make good this assertion from the confession of Bellarmine who de Rom. Pon. lib. 4. ca. 7. speaking of S. Ciprian withstanding Pope Stephen touchinge rebaptisation writeth as M. Whyte saith that after the Popes definitioÌ„ it was free for Ciprian to think otherwise our minister intimating hereby to the Reader that Bellarmine mantayneth that it is lawfull to beleue contrary to that which is once defyned as a matter of faith by the Pope Here againe he bestowes on his Reader a broken sentence leauing of in the middest thereby to auoyde the setting downe of what is most materiall for Bellarmines wordes are these Fuit enimpost Pontificis definitionem c. It was lawfull after the definition of the Pope to think otherwyse as Augustine affirmeth beoause the Pope noluit rem ipsam de fide facere sine generaliconcilio would not make it as a matter of Faith without a generall Councell but onely in the meane tyme willed the auncient custome to be obserued And then after Stephanus noÌ„ defiuiuis rem illam tanquam de fide P. Stephen did not defyne the matter as a poynt of Faith yet he commaunded earnestly that heritykes should not be rebaptysed See here now the integrity of our minister who purpoâ—ly concealeth that part of the sentence which isexpresly contrary to that sence in the which he alledgeth the former wordes thereof For Bellarmine vnderstandeth by the wordes post definitionem after it was commanded that rebaptisation should not be vsed and not after it was sententially defined as an article of faith as M. Wayte semeth to force Now Catholickes do graunt that it is lawfull to hould or beleue contrary to the practise of what the Pope commandeth so that we doâ— according to his commandement and as long as the matter it self is not definitiuely decreed by the Pope for a dogmaticall poynt of our beleefe thus much thereof from whence we may discerne the Ministers inueterate hatred against the head of Gods Church who aÌ„swerably thereto speaking of the words of our Sauiour Pasce oues meas thus styleth some of his pages in his Lucian and scornfull phraze Feede my sheepe is not poping But howsoeuer to feede in this place be to pope it I am sure most egregiously and impudently to corrupt Authors is to Whyte it Chapter 4. Wherein are discouered sundry corruptions concerning the sacred Scriptures and Traditions The 1. Paragraph Bellarmine corrupted in behalf of the Scripture prouing it self to be the word of God THE next poynt we are to come to are such his corruptions wherein he pretendeth that the Catholickes doe acknowledge all sufficiency of Scripture both for the interpreting of it self without any needefull explication of the Church thereof as also for it fulnesse in contayning expresly all thinges necessary to mans saluation excluding thereby all Apostolicall Traditions whatsoeuer And first pag. 59. shewing that the Scripture is knowen to be the word of God without the attestation of the Church which as he houldeth may be deceatfull he alledgeth Bellarmine de verb. des li. 2. ca. 2. thus confessing other meanes may deceaue me but nothing is more knowen nothing more certayne then the Scriptures that it were the greatest madnes in the world not to beleue them c. See how loth our minister is to cease to be him self I meane to cease his notorious corrupting for the wordes of Bellarmine are these Sacris Scripturis quae Prophetieis Apostolicis literis
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
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