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
meaning of S. Augustine in this place he is to conceaue that the drift of that father here is to shâ—w that a man can not liue in this lyfe in that perfect and true peace of mynde as to exercyse vertue and flee vice without all sodain reluctatioÌ„ of our sensualitie though we geue no assent thereunto and therefore the tytle of that Chapiter is De pace seruientium deo c. Of the peace of such as serue God whose perfect tranquillity can not be enioyed in this temporall lyfe And according to this his tytle some fewe lynes after the sentence alledged by M. Whyte he thus writeth Nam profecto quanquam imperetur c. For although reason doth ouerule vyce yet it doth not ouerrule without some conflict of vyce And therefore as longe as it is exercysed in commaunding and ouerruling vyce man haith not perfect peace But to ende this subiect of Iustification here you see how dexterously our minister haith borne him selfe who for the impugning of the same haith seuerall wayes abused the sentences of his Authors somtimes by insertions of his owne as if they were the Authors wordes somtimes by taking away and concealing what is there plainely set downe othertimes though the Authority be truly alledged yet by violent detortinge and wresting the place from the true intended sence yea often when the very place strongly fortifyeth that Catholick point or doctrime against which it is theare brought Thus though M. Whyte in his deprauations vseth seuerall shewes and coloures yet they all retaine in them one generall countenance and looke of deceipt and falshoode so as the Poets sentence here houldeth Facies non omnibus vna nec diuersa tamen Chapiter 2. Concerning the reading of the Scriptures The 1 Paragraph S. Ierome corrupted for the reading of the scriptures by the vulgare people where also vpon occasion geuen by M. Whyte it is examined whether S. Ierome was a papiste IT being a certaine truth that from Scriptures euill vnderstoode procede most heresies M. Whyte a faithfull frend thereof well knowing by dayly experience that no one thing in truth is more auaileable either for the first beginninge or propagation of heresy then generall libertie graunted to the vulgar people of reading and expounding the sacred Scriptures doth thereupon much labour in sundry places in profe of his supposed commodity and necessitie thereof amongst which he grosly abuseth the authority person of that great and most Catholick Doctor S. Hierome in these wordes pag. 22. Hierome writes of Paula a gentlewoman how shee set her maides to learne the Scripture and many of his wrytinges saith Whyte are directed to women commending theire labour in the Scripture encouraging them thereunto c. which he would not haue done if he had bene a papist Heare Christian reader I must confesse I reste verie doubtfull whether the malice of this minister is more to be detested or his greate folly to be admyred pityed for not contenting him self to corrupt S. Hieromes wordes and meaning he will needes inferre hereof that S. Hierome was noe papiste which how true it is I will onely for this present appeale vnto this Epitaph of S. Paula writen by this holy Doctor to the Virgin Eustochium and here cyted by our protestant minister whereby if it do not plainely appeare by sundry pointes of religion there mentioned and practised that S. Hierome S. Paula and the Bishops Preistes and people of those tymes were of the same Religion or beleefe which Catholickes now professe and protestantes impugne that then let me be enrolled in the black bill of lying ministers or coopled in brotherhood with Whyte as a legitimate sonne of the father of lyes First then S. Hierome vndertaking to set downe the blessed lyfe and death of the holy woman S. Paula in proofe of his sincere proceding therein maketh this protestation I call Iesus to witnes and his Sainctes yea that very Angell who was keeper and companion of this admirable woman that I will speake nothing in her fauour or after the maner of flaterers but for a testimony and that which is lesse then her merites whom the whole worlde doth praise preistes admyre quiers of virgins desyre and troupes of Monkes and poore people bewayle Is the inuocation of Sainctes and Angells which of necessity supposeth their knowledg is the beleefe of euery mannes proper Angell to guard him and quiers or companies of Virgins and Monkes plaine proofes of Catholick or protestant religiou To procede S. Hierome describing in perticuler her pilgrimage to the holy lande whereunto he affirmeth that men of all Nations did come sheweth how that prostrating her selfe before the Crosse she adored at though she had seene our Lord harging thereupon Entring the Sepulchre she kissed the stone of the Resurrection c. at one thirsting desyreth waters she licked with her faithfull mouth the very place of the body wheare our Lord had laid Then hauing visited the pillour at the which our Lorde was bound and whipped and the place where the holy Ghost did descend vpon the faithfull she went to Bethelem where entring our Sauiours caue and looking at the holy Iune of the Virgin and the stable after many other deuout speaches she vttered these wordes And I wretch and sinner am thought worthy to kisse the manger in which our Lord a litle babe cryed and to pray in the caue in which the Virgin brought forth our Lord an infant After this amongst sundry other holy places she went vnto the Sepulchres of the 12 Patriarches where she trembled beinge affrighted with many wonders for she saw the diuells roare being dyuersly tormented and before the sepulchres of the Sainctes she saw men howling lyke wolues barking lyke dogs roaringe lyke lyons hissing lyke serpentes and belowing lyke buls c. And is not all this with a protestant papisticall superstition Will our Whyte allow of pilgrimage to holy places or will he with S. Paula prostrate him selfe before the Crosse and worshipe will he kisse sacred Reliques or will he attribute such sanctity to the Sepulchres of Sainctes that in presence thereof diuells are tormented I perswade my self he will not And yet S. Hierome with him noe papist relateth the promisses to the commendation of Paula But to come nearer the maner of lyfe which S. Paula led her daily practise being best witnes of her beleefe hauing visited with greate deuotion all the places of the holy land intending to spend her lyfe in holy Bethelem she stayed there in a straite lodging for the space of three yeres vntill she had built Cells and Monasteries Mansions for diuers pilgrimes where she liued in such humility as being attended with many virgins in her apparell speach habit and going she was the least or basestâ— of all After her husbands death vntill her owne slenever with any man though she knew him to be holy and a Bishope Bathes she went not to but in daunger In her greatest agues she vsed not soft
the said booke being to coÌ„fute the Protestants notes by the said Doctors wordes also concealed by M. Whyte which doe immediatly precede the sentence vrged by him For there speaking of the preaching of the Gospell and of the ministration of the Sacraments he saith Adâ—menta ornamenta These are furthere â—â—â—es ornaments of the true Church non ipsius nota insignia but not markes or signes therof Here you see how Ieweshsly M. Whyte haith circumcysed this poore Authority in paring away both the first and latter part thereof But seing his inexcusable faultines not onely in this place but in most of his deprauationes is to set downe one part of a testimony and fraudulently to hyde an other part let him remember the greouous punishment inflicted by the Apostle vpon Ananias for bringing halfe and concealing the other halfe Act. 5 The 5. Paragraph Gregory Valentia corrupted in behalf of the Protestantes markes of the Church In proofe of the Protestantes markes of the Church to wit Truth of doctrine and administration of the Sacraments M. Whyte pag. 137. alledgeth Valentia Com. Theol. Tom. 3. disp 1.9.1 punct 7. parag 18. saying Among whomsoeuer the truth of Doctrine and Sacraments are houlden thereby it is knowne the Church is there But for the true displaying of this baise iugling minister I will set downe the wordes at large as that learned Author deliuered them him self Nos autem fatemur saith he neque veritate dâ—ctrinae neque legitimo sacramentorum vsu Ecclesiam Christi carere posse apud quos haec omninó sint salua exiis constare veram EcclesiaÌ„ Sed negamus tamen veritatem doctrinae legitimum sacramentorum vsum idoneas notas esse discernendae Ecclesiae ' But we confesse that the Church of Christ can neither wante truth of doctrine nor lawfull vse of Sacramentes and amongst whom these are altogether saife or sincere of them to consist the true Church But yet we deny the truth of doctrine and lawfull vse of Sacramentes to be fit markes of discerning the Church Here M. Doctor first I must admire the profundity of your indgment producing by an vnknown kind of pollicy a most famous learned man contradicting him self in one and the same sentence yea not onely contradictinge the tytle of his disputation which is the Marckes of the Church which the sectaries assigne are euidently confuted but euen the many and different profes which for sixe pages he continueth against the said markes assigned by protestantes But because this so great an ouersight is more then probable let vs examine brefely your demeanour towardes him You alledg in a different letter as though they were the Authors expresse wordes these folowing Among whomsoeuer the truth of doctrine and Sacraments are houlden thereby it is knowne the Church is there Him self sayeth Apud quos haec omuino sint salna ex iis constare veram Ecclesiam Amongst whom these are altogether sincere of them to consist the true Church That which Valentia speaketh of the persons of whom the Church consisteth your worship pleaseth to apply to the markes by which it is to be knowne as though there weare no difference betwixt the members of the Church the externall badges tokens whereby the said church is discerned But peraduâ—nture you will pretend for your excuse the alledging in the mergeÌ„t of your boke these latin wordes ex us constare veram Ecclesiâ—m But the truth is this doth rather plead you guilty of grosse ignorance in not knowing how to translate aright or as I rather think of laboured and affected malice who hauing sene and perused the place would so desperatly produce it against the manifeste sence of the wordes and the direct intention of the Author And though the word constare doth not onely signify to consist or stande but som-tymes likewise to be manifest or knowne yet in the place cyted neither the wordes precedent nor subsequent nor the scope or â—rift of the Author will permitt it yea they all conuince and conclude the contrary But if it were lawfull for me M. Whyte in wordes Amphibologicall which haue a double sence without all respect either to the subiect or matter treated the intention of the speaker or other circumstance to translate or apply the worde onely for myne owne aduauntage I would easely defend against your learneâ—st Doctor-ship sundâ—y of the celestiall signes to be liuing and sensible creatures and so much more to be esteeâ—ed tâ—en your self for I would likewise vpon the same â—round defend your self to be no substance but a mere accident Into such grosse absurdities doth your beggerly heresâ—e euer plunge you The 6 Paragraph Bellarmine egregiously corrupted against the Markes of the Church M. Whyte desiring to extenuate the worth and to obscure the splendor of those glorious markes which the Catholick Church as so many cleare rayes moste plentifully affordeth produceth pag. 137. Cardinal Bellarmine as saying They make it not euidently true that is the Church but euidently probable Here M. D. as it semes wanted lantorne and candle light but most certainely he wanted either honesty or knowledg or both in best confirmation whereof I will onely set downe the wordes of Bellarmine him selfe de notes eccl lib. 4. ca. 3. Est autem initio obseruandum Ecclesiam Catholicam esse c. It is in the beginning to be obserued that the Catholick Church is a Soon which on euery side powreth out the clearest beames of light so that by them she may most easely be knowne For she haith many Markes or testimonies and signes which discerneth her from all false religions of Paganes Iewes Heritykes And they do not make it euidently true that she is the true Church of God but yea they make it euidently `credible for that is said euidently true that is seene either in it self or in it principles that is said euidently credible which is not seene either in it selfe or in it principles yet which haith so many and so graue Testimonies as that euery wyse man deseruedly ought to beleue it Here the minister all excuses set apart must nedes confesse that he haith falsly corrupted the text of Bellarmine changing this parcell euidently credible into euidently probable betwene which two there is no lesse difference then betwixt him self and an honest man which is not small For example if but one hundreth of learned and sincere writers should confesse that D. Whyte had corrupted thâ—â— bookes in sundry places this confession would make it euidently credible that D. Whyte were an impostor or deceauer a mercionary minister and the lyke but if onely two or three should auouch it as many of equall authority deny it then it were but euidently probable If the matter were brought to this issue him self would plainely see the greateste difference betwixt these two And I dare bouldly say that with lesser labour I will â—â—panell an hundreth who will all geue their verdictes against his soulest forgeries then
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
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
Councell consisting of many scores of Fathers so happy a progresse M. Whyte haith made in his profession of corrupting Now for the conueyance though it be not to be paralleled with diuers of the former extensiué as the schoole-men speake in multitude and stoare of wordes corrupted it lying onely in slye transposition of one or two wordes yet intensiué for the art thereof it may be equalled with any This then it is Our minister there pag 344. to ouerthrow the religious vse of Images produceth the 36. Canon of the Councell of Eliberis to wit No picture is to be made in the Church lest that be adored which is paynted on wales The wordes of the Canon are these Placuit picturas in Ecclesia non debere ne quod colitur adoratur in partetibus depingatur It pleased the Councell that pictures should not be in the Church leste that which is worshipped and adored be painted on the wales Be obseruant here Reader and marke the difference which is made of the same wordes by a witty interchange of their place in their translation thou shalt see that my delicate minister here euen transcends him self The Councell saith Images are not to be in the Church lest that be painted on the wales which is worshipped M. Whyte translateth lest that be worshipped which is painted on the wales Thus the difference breefely resteth in this lest that which is worshiped be painted And lest that which is painted be worshipped A small difference in shew of wordes but great in sence For the wordes of the Councell acknowledging the worship of Images maketh the worship due to them to be the cause why they are not to be painted on wales But M. Whyte saith that they are not to be painted on wales because they are not to be worshiped and so maketh the Councell to speake lyke good protestantes Now the reason why the Councell would not haue the wales of Churches to be painted with Images was in reguard of the due respect they bare to them not as M. Whyte falsly suggesteth For being so painted they were subiect to be defaced either by the inuasioÌ„ of the enemies in those tymes or els by the rayne and bad wether whereas Images drawne in Tables of which the former Councell maketh no restraint in that they are portable and remoueable do not lye open to the same daunger Therefore the intention of the CouÌ„cell herein was the same with the intention of that decree by the which it was ordained that in reuerence to the Crucifix no Crosse should be made vpon the plaine ground because it being so made must needes be often irreuerently be tramped with the feete of meÌ„ Thus is M. Whyte in seking to disproue the lawfull vse of an Image become him self a perfect Image of deceate fraude and collusion But here now I make an ende of his corruptions deprauations hasting my self to the second Part of his scene which is his lyes and falshoods Onely I must say that in reguard of the impurity and conse onlesse deportment of him in his whole Treatise I can not but commiserate all such poore credulous soules as do highly Preiudge of his booke as beiug writen in all sincerity and plainesse and free from the least touch or aspersion of any wilfull deprauation And therefore I hould it most strange that M. Purchase a scholer and ingenious though extremely maliuolent should in his owne booke pag. 100. entytle M. Whyte Via Lactea alludinge perhaps both to his name and his supposed candor in wrytinge But since his mistakinge is not iustifiable I will allow to M. Whyte the same tytle though through a differeut reason For as the Via Lactea appeareth to a vulgar sight to be a part of heauen and yet indeede is not being if we follow the iudgment of the auncient Philosophers far lower then the heauens as it is necessarily euicted from the different parallayes and variations thereof taken from seuerall places So is M. Whyte reputed in the comon eye and censure of vnlearned protestantes as a man which in all truth haith much laboured in that heauenly course of dilating the Gospell and faith of Christ whereas we fynd that the contrary is most true as haith fully appeared from his seuerall exorbitant deprauations of so many Catholick Authors and others Wherefore to be short I greatly feare that except hereafter there follow a feeling remorse of this foule and vnchristianlike dealing the wordes of S. Iohn the Euangelist may be more truly applyed to our Sir Iohn the minister Nomen habes quo viuis mortuus es Apoc. 3. The ende of the first part WHYTE DYED BLACK THE SECOND PART Contayning sundry notorious vntruthes or Lyes proued to be such euen by the confession of the most learned Protestantes And first is preuented a weake euation which may be vsed by M. Whyte against this second parte FROM Corruptions good Reader we are next to descend to vntruthes for lying indeede is the second piller which supporteth the whole weight frame of M. Whytes worke This passage I here make distinct from the former For although all the precedent deprauations of the first part do potentially include vutruthes and falshoodes yet our Doctors proteruity therein doth cheifly rest either in corrupting other mens wordes or in alledging them directly against the knowne intention of the Authors whereas here the reduplicatiue formality as I may terme it of his hereticall deportment consisteth in plaine lying to wit in setting downe and instifying certaine most false assertions and positions a course little sorting to one who styleth him self a minister of gods word in that his sacred word is altogether incompatible with falshood The floate of these his vntruthes is so greate as that our Doctor assordeth vnto vs many scoares of this nature yet because he would make shew to mantaine diuers of them vnder some prâ—text either of much reading or in wrasting the sence of such produced authorities if I should fortify the contrary truth from their particuler testimonies of Scripture Fathers Histories c. being a kynd of proofe in reguard of the often suggested doubtfulnes of the true sense directed by many wheeles of inferences and deductions Therefore to the end that I may euâ—n chokingly and irreplyably conuince him of such notorious miscariage I haue thought good to supererogate with him in disprouing his said falshoodes I meane in restrayning my self precysely to such his lyes as the contrary thereto is acknowledged for true euen by his own brethren and these not mâ—n obscure or vulgar but the most eminent and learned protestantes of Christendome and such as haue euer bene accompted starres of the greatest magnitude in their euangelicall Spheare Neither will I alledge so many of them as I could but for the greater expedition I will content my self for the most part with the testimonies of two or three of our learnedst aduersaries Now here I would haue the iudiceous reader to obserue
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
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