doth charge condemne the protestant for teaching that God is the author of sinne But as in the former vntruthes so particulerly in this we see how Antipodes-lyke oppositly our Doctor treadeth to the feete of his owne brethren The 16. Vntruth In proofe that S. Bernard was no papist Page 298. He is not affrayd to publish by his pen that Bernard was a papist in none of the principall poyntes of their religion And then he addeth He stoode against the pryde of the Pope c. Good Reader here is no lying for whosoeuer will but obserue what is confessed by the protestantes must acknowledg that impudency it self would be ashamed to haue mantained such a groundlesse vntruth For first it is graunted by Symond de Voyon a protestant that he was Abbot of Clareiuaux And Osiander saith of Bernard that Centum et quadraginta Monasteriorum author fuisse creditur He was thought to be the Author of a hundreth 40 Monasteries In lyke sort S. Bernard was so great a Patron of the Popes Primacy that the Centuristes wryte of him Coluit deum Maozim c. Bernard did worshipp euen to the last end of his lyfe the god Maozim he was a most eager defender of the seate of Antichrist Apoint so cleare that he is charged by D. Fulke and D. Whytaker for defending the Popes Ecclesiasticall Authority and yet if we beleeue M. Whyte he stoode against the pryde of the Pope so euident you see is this made by the free acknowledgment of the protestantes whose censures are passed vpon S. Bernardes Religion and faith in generall And therefore we may well inferr that if they had thought S. Bernard to haue bene but in part a catholick or as the terme is a papist and in other poyntes a protestant they would haue bene glad to haue chalenged him to them selues in the supposed pointes of his protestancy Thus M. Whyte we still obserue that the Reader is euer entertayned by you with nought but falshoods but no meruell for it is your owne position that a man can not hope to learne truth in the schoole of lyes The 17. Vntruth Against the miracles wrought by S. Bernard S. Francis Page 299 Talking of the miracles of the former S. Bernard of S. Francis and others he thus concludeth What is reported of Bernard and Francis c. are lyes and deuyses This is spoken to dishonour the Romane Faith diuers of whose professours through Gods omnipotency and for the manifestation and strengthning of his truth haue in all tymes bene able to exhibite diuers great miracles the remeÌ„brance of which prerogatiue resting onely in our Church is most displeasing to our minister in whose nyce nosethrilles nothing well sauoreth that tasteth of the praise of our Catholick Religion But now let vs see whether the miracles recordâ—d of the former Sainctes be lyes or no as the D. fondly suggesteth One most remarkable miracle of S. Bernard is recorded by Godfridus in the lyfe of S. Bernard It was wrought in proofe of certaine Catholick Articles denied in those dayes by the heritykes Apostolici or Henriciani as at this instant they are denyed by the protestantes The miracle was done in the Country of Tolousa in France and consisted in S. Bernardes blessing of certaine loaues of bread of which loaues for proofe of the truth of our Catholick doctrine then preached by S. Bernard whosoeuer being in any sort diseased of body should eate should be healed of their sicknes whereupon infinite people eating of the same were cured most miraculously of all kind of diseases This miracle was so illustrious and markable that Osiander one of the Century writers doth not say it is a lye and forged as M. Whyte doth but graunting the thing as true doth ascribe it to the power and working of the deuill as the wicked Iewes did the miracles of our blessed Sauiour vnto Belzabub In lyke sort Mathew Paris in his history which is printed by the protestantes at Tigur 1589. whose booke is by the said protestantes highly commended in their Preface annexed thereunto and who him self is reckoned for his defence of certaine poyntes of protestancy in the number of protestantes by Illiricus This man now most seriously recordeth that before S. Francis death there appeared certainâ— woundes in his handes and feete and his syde freshly bleeding such as were seene in our Sauiour when he suffered on the Crosse. The reason of which appearance was as S. Francis said to shew that he did truly preach the mistery of the Crosse and that in further demonstration of the same he tould them before that presently after death the former woundes should be healed coherent lyke to the rest of his flesh the which accordingly did fall forth And thus much but of these for breuity sake instanced in these two Sainctes from whence we may confidently affirme that it is a lye to say with M. Whyte that these Sainctes Mirakles are but lyes The 18. Vntruth In proofe of the protestantes Churches euer visibility Page 225. and 226. In defence of the continuance of his owne Church he thus saith The learned among vs confesse and proue against all that contradict it that euer since Christes tyme 〈…〉 there haith bene a company of men visibly professing the same faith that we do though the Church of Rome a generating into the seate of Antichrist persâ—cutâ—d them and so many tymes draue them â—wt of the sight of the world that to it they were not visible Thus he But before we conuince this I would demaunde where our ministers head peece was when he thus wrote since these few lynes do inuolue an irreconciliable contradiction A company of men visibly professing c. yet to the world not visible O strang neuer before heard of Inuisible-uisible aswell he might mantaine whyte remayning whyte to be black or the moone in her greatest eclipse to shyne as the Church euer to be visible and yet latent and latent to whoÌ„ to the world still good as if it were to be seene only by some who are out of the world But now to the falshood the lyke whereof he ventilated before and haith accordingly bene before refelled Yet because for the honour of his Church he insisteth much in the visibility and want of all interruption of his faith it will not be amisse to repell such an idle suggestion with the testimonies and acknowledgmentes of seuerall learned protestantes And first Napper wryteth that betwene the yere of Christ 300 and 1316. the Antichristian and Papisticall reigne began reigning vniuersally and without any debateable contradiction 1260 yeares gods true Church most certainly abyding latent and inuisible Sebastianus Francus a famous protestant in lyke sort saith For certaine through the worke of Antichrist the externall Church together with the faith and Sacramentes uanished away presently after the Apostles departure and that for these thousand four hundreth yeres the Church
the auncient Fathers and among others whom for breuity I pretermit he alledgeth S. Chrisostome and vshereth his authority with this preface And that Chrisostome thought the Church might be somtimes inuisible appeareth by the 49. homily vpon Mathew where he saith Since the tyme that heresy haith inuaded the Church it can no way be knowne which is the true Church of Christ but by the Scriptures onely in this confusion it can no wayes els be knowne From which wordes I do collect a continuall visiblenes of the Church for if the Scriptures be euer able to make the Church knowne then by them it is euer made visible and consequently since the scriptures haue euer hitherto bene preserued and through Gods good prouidence no doubt shall be euen to the end of the world the Church haith bene and shall be at all times made knowne and visible through the meanes of the Scripture And thus disputing onely ad hominem do I turne the point of M. Whytes reason vpon himself And this may suffice touching M. Whytes weake prouing of the latency of Christes Church where the Reader may behould a longe teame as it were of his lame feeble and impotent authorities one still following an other taken from the writinges of Catholick Doctors and the Fathers whereof some do neither fortify nor hurt his cause and others do proue euen contrary to that for which he alledgeth them In reguard of which his dull grosse and absurd kind of reasoning and arguing if it be true in Philosophy that the vnderstanding doth work better or worse as the spirits are more or lesse pure and that the spirits are become more or lesse pure according to the quality of the nutriment that the body taketh I must then conclude that when M. Whyte penned this his Treatise particulerly for his deare Countrymen of Lancashyre as himself saith it semeth he then remayning there did vse to feede much on his Lancashire dish the Goose. The 4. Paragraph Wherein are discussed certaine proofes of M. W. in behalf of the protestantes markes of the Church M. Whyte in page 104. and some few leaues after discoursing of the notes of the Church vndertaketh to proue that The true doctrine of faith and lawfull vse of the Sacramentes are the proper and infallible markes wherby it must be iudged which is the true Church In proofe hereof he produceth diuers passages of Scripture where our Sauiour said My sheepe here my voice And againe Where two or three are gathered together in my name there am I in the middest of them In lyke sort those wordes of S. Mathew You shall know the false prophets by their frutes And finally that saying of S. Paule As many as walk according to this rule meaning according to the rule of a true Faith peace vpon them and mercy and vpon the Israell of God Againe those wordes of the Apostle touching the Church that It is the howshold of God built vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets As also where it is said that the Scripture is a shyning light Now what Alcumist in the world can abstract out of any of these textes that sense or meaning which shall prooue that true doctrine is a sufficient mark to vs whereby we may infallibly discerne which is the true Church of God He may as easely draw fyre out of water or earth out of ayre betwene which there are no symbolizing qualities For let vs see how probably we can inferre what is intended out of the said Scriptures as thus Christ saith My shepe here my voice Therefore true doctrine is to vs a signe of the true Church Againe Where two or three are gathered together in my name there am I in the middest of them Therfore we are to learne the true Church from the true doctrine Strangely inferred for how shall we know euer abstracting the Authority of the Church who are Christes sheepe or who are they which are gathered together in his name If it be replyed they are those who haue true doctrine then I demaund how can we be assured who haue true doctrine If it be answeared they haue true doctrine who heare the word truly preached enioy a perfect ministration of the Sacraments then I aske how shall I be acertained that such do heare the word truly preached and enioy a perfect ministration of the Sacramentes But here my answear is at a stand and flieth for sanctuary to his Apocalypticall and reuealing spirit Thus it is cleare in what circles mazes M. Whyte or any other walketh through the vaine suggestions and imaginations of a light vaperous giddy braine The like connexion with the former conclusion haue the other places of Scripture aboue cyted The which after he haith set downe then page 107. he descendeth to the Authorities of Fathers and Catholick Authors labouring though most weakly to hayle from their wordes his former Illation To this end he bringeth in S. Epiphanius saying of an heritike This man is found altogether different from the holy Scriptures c. If then he be dissenting from them he is altogether an alyen from the holy Catholick Church Here we graunt that in the true nature of faith who dissenteth from the Scriptures dissenteth from the Church but yet this proueth not that the doctrine of faith or administration of the Sacramentes may serue to vs as markes to demonstrate out the Church Againe he produceth M. Raynouldes affirming that 13 The true Church and the true faith are so knitt together that the one inferreth and concludeth the other for from the true Church is concluded the true faith and from the true faith the true Church All this is true yet it followeth not from hence that faith is more knowne to vs then the Church and couseqnently that it ought to serue to vs as a cleare and euident mark to point out aswell to the vnlearned as learned which is the true Church Adde hereto that these wordes euen in M. Whytes sense asmuch impugne him as vs for if they imply faith to be a marke of the Church they also reciprocally imply the Church to be a marke of the true Faith Finally to omitte many other testimonies of Catholickes produced to the lyke end whose particuler answeares do ryse from the circumstances of the places and thâ—refore here omitted he labouring to shew that Faith is knowne before the Church and consequently that it is a note thereof bringeth in Picus Mirandula thus speaking of the Scriptures They do not moue they do not perswade but they enforce vs they dryâ—e vs forward they violently constraine vs. Thou readest wordes rudely and homely but such as are quick liuely flaming shyning pearcing to the bottome of the spirit and by their admirable power transforming the whole man Now who can inferr out of these wordes that the Scripture is knowne to vs before the Church seeing indeede the priority of the one or the other is not so
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
superstitious and blynd as it pleaseth M. Whyre others to terme vs for how can they be blind who behould the articles of there faith with the eyes of all antiquity Examine it by the rules of Gods sacred word for the true sence of his written word as following euen the iugments of the most dispassionat and sobeâ— Protestants recur to the ioynt expositions of the primitiue fathers who liued when the church was most florishing and in her full orbâ— and know that the leaues of scripture without the intended sence of the holy Ghost are but leaues without frute as touching his vnwritten word call to mind that saying of Tertulian Id uerius quod prius id prius quod ab initio id ab initio quod ab Apostolis Remember that the most markable Protestants for learninge do confesse that those doctors are patrons of our Catholicke fayth who liued when the Spouse of Christ was most spotles chast and intemerat Apoynt indeed so euident as that from their learned monuments we are able to delineat and draw the very Image and face of the present Romane religion as for the more obscure passages occurring in them your ingenuityes may suppose them to be the sad colours or darke groundes seruing onely to giue greater luster and life to the whole portrayture Be neuer perswaded since it is graunted that the Romane Church was once the true church and the time of her supposed reuolt cannot be knowne that the daughter of Sion could euer so vnespiedly become a Babilonian strumpet Deuide not your selues froÌ„ that most conspicuous church of Christ which haith bene promised that in all ages it should gloriously appeare to the eye of the world lest so in sew thereof as for the last refuge you be forced to forge a Mathematicall and aery Church consisting of certainâ— imaginary inuisibilites impugned by the fathers and your more iudicious wryters since it being mearly consisteth in a not being Suffer not a Heteroclyte sectary who reiecteth though contrary to gods word and his owne brethren all regular ordinary and mediate vocation like an other Melchisadech borne without father or mother to plant in your soules a new kind of religion neuer heard of before till a libidenous Monke by mutuall breach of vowes had yoked him selfe with a lapsed Nunn and be a certained that such a nouelist must needs be one of those who say they are Apostles and are not but are found liars Finally relinquishe and abandon that supreame soueraignty of the priuat reauealing spirit condemned euen by Christs owne Apostles it being first cheefly erected therby to decline the weighty authorityes of the auncient fathers in the exposition of Gods sacred wryt to reduce all thinges to the most graue for-sooth and inappealable tribunall of each illiteterate mans empty scull and braines Thus do the gospellers of these dayes hould the fanaticall reuealing Spirit as their mount Sinay from whence they receue their new euangelicall lawe it being in deed shadowed with a cloud not wherewith to couer it owne ouer glorious infallibility but with a cloud or mist of pride ignorance and vncertainty And thus worthy Academians leauing you to the censure of your vnworthy sonn I take my leaue expecting that my good meaning herein shall ouer-ballance with you my bouldnes and wishing euen in the bowels of Christiane charity that euery one of you weare strong armed with our most auncieÌ„t Catholicke Roman faith for then you would easely learne to contemne those poore and weake assaults which euery first appearance of new doctrine doth threaten it being an acknowledged experienced truth that Hareses apud cos multum valent qui in fide non valent Your well willer in Christ Iesus T. W. P. THE PREFACE TO THE READER Good Reader before I remit thee to the perusall of this ensuing discourse I here thinke it good to acquaint thee with the occasion inducing me to wryte it and with my methode houlden therein And as touching the first thou art to conceaue that the worthles esteeme which we haue had of M. Whyte his booke how soeuer his owne followers do magnify it as seeing it fraught with such impurity of stuffe haith for theese yeares past preuailed with most of vs so far that we weare determined to forbeare the answearing thereof houlding it altogether vnworthy of such labour yet seing in diuerse passages of his late second worke he vaunteth in great exultation and iolity of words that this his first booke doth not stand chargeable with any wilfull corruption falsification or other such imposture and that he confidently prouoketh his aduersary if any such be to set them downe Therefore to controule this mans most shamelesse asseueration as being one of an obdurat conscience not caring how falsly he wryteth or how impudently he iustifieth it being wrytten I do here charge his said first treatise with most fowle abuses falsifications other such fraudulent dealing will in theese few sheetes following particularize to thee diuerse of them whereby thou shalt haue reason to assure thy selfe that M. Whyte in reguarde of his calling in his new Ministery and his exercise therein may truly be numbred amongest them Qui Commutauerunt veritatem Dei in mendacium who changed the truth of God onto a lye Now concerning my methode taken in displaying of his falshood and deceate thou art to be aduertised that my cheefe proiect in this treatise being to proue M. Whyte in his wrytings a most dishonest conscionles and faithles man therfore forbearing to confute the whole course of his booke in respect of doctrine which is already learnedly performed by my fellowe A. D. in his reply to M. W. said worke I do here restraine my selfe to three heads reduâ—ing all theese impostures in which hereafter I intend to insist to some of them The heads are these Corruptions Lyes and ImpertineÌ„cyes By CorruptioÌ„s I meane those depraued authorityes of the auncient Fathers and our own moderne Catholicke authours which this our Minister thereby to make theÌ„ to speake in his protestant language and dialect haith most shamelesly altered either by inserting or adding some words of his owne as part of their sentences or by concealing of some part of their words which do expound the rest of the testimonyes in a far different sence froÌ„ that in which M. Whyte doth vrge them or lastly though setting downe their words truly by strangely detorting and wresting them from the intended sence of the authors By Lyes I vnderstand false assertions and vast vntruthes mantained by M. White whom the more fully and irrepliably and for the greater compendiousnes to coÌ„uince therein I haue made choice of those vntruthes as are acknowledged for such by the most learned Protestants thus making his mother to wit the Vniuersity the iudg and his owne Brethren the plaintifs betwene himselfe and me herein By ImpertineÌ„ces
at all and lying vpon the ground in steed of a bed 11 Abstinence from flesh wyne other dainty meates vpon deuotion 12 Keping set houres of prayer as in the morning at the Third the Sixt the Ninth Evensong and a Midnight 13 The difference of litle and greate sinnes 14 The vnlearned reading the Scriptures hauing a learned maÌ„ for their Maister 15 The learnedst confessing their doubtinge and ignorance in their explication of the Scriptures 16 Bishopes and Preistâ— a singing carying of Candles in the day tyme at the burials of the dead 17 Church seruice song vsed in the Hebrew Greeke Latin and Syrian languageâ— And for the Conclusion as including many thinges in one remember S. Ieromes prayer made to S. Paula after her death Vale o Paula Cultoris tui vltâ—â—am senectuâ—â—â— orationibus iuua fides opera tua Christo te sociant praesens facilius quod postulas impâ—trabis And now let any man iudge whether S. Ierome was a papist as also what wisdome learning or honesty M. Whyte sheweth in objecting that which but truly seene and considered doth manifestly confound and condemne himselfe The 2. Paragraph S. Cyrill of Alexandria abused for the same purpose It was the reproch saith Whyte pag. 22 that Iulian the Tpostatalaide on Christians that their women were medlers with the Scriptures and from him the papistes haue borrowed it for which he cyteth Cyril Alex. Iul. l. 6 If our Minister had cyted Iulian reprehending the auncient Christians of his tyme for not Adoring Iubiter adoring the Crosse and making the signe thereof in their forheades and vpon houses the lawfulnes and profit wherof S. Cyrill defendeth he might haue truly shewed what him self other heritikes had borrowed from Iulian in impugning the worship of the Crosse and signing therwith but in that which he obiecteth in the behalf of women medling with Scriptures him selfe borroweth from Iulian the libertie of lyinge for Iulian onely reprehendeth Christ and his Apostles for that for that they propouÌ„ded the heaueÌ„ly preaching vnto all calling vnto their doctrine men and women of baifer sorte which S Cyrill defendeth shewing thereby the benignity of our Sauiour but as for mention of the Scriptures or women medling therewith he haith no word at all our black-whyte haith only inuented it to proue him self a true Apostata Chapter 3. Concerning the Church the Pope The 1. Paragraph Vincentius Liâ—inensis wilfully corrupted in proofe that the true Church may erre WE will now take into our consideration his corrupt proceding concerning the supposed generall erring of the whole Church not remembring that in regard of Christes solicitude care affection to his Spouse it is said Cant. 1. My welbeloued is a cluster of Cypre vnto me in the vyneyardes of Engaddi That the vniuersall Church may erre he laboreth to euict from the testimony of old Vincentius Lirinensis whom our minister pag. 83. maketh thus to speake Aduers proph nouit ca. 4. Not onely some portion of the Church but the whole Church it selfe is blotted with some new contagion Obserue the true wordes of this Father and then you can not but admyre to fynd such Blacknes in Whyte and such perfidiousnes in him who styleth him self a minister of Gods word for thus the wordes doe lye in latin Quod si nouella aliqua contagio non iam portiunculam tantum sed toram pariter ecclesiam commaculare conetur What is to be done if some contagion shall endeuour to blot not any one parte but the whole Church then saith he further must a maÌ„ be carefull to cleeue to antiquity Now here our D. abuseth his reader in two sortes one way in concealing the word Conetur and so commaculare conetur he translateth is blotted and consequently making Vincentius to confesse for our minister most impudently saith that the whole Church is actually blotted with some contagion of heresy whereas at the most he saith that heresy may endeuour to blott the whole Church But who knoweth not that euery thing which is endeuored to be effected is not actually effected Another way in deliuering these wordes in a Categoricall and absolute Ennuntiation which are Hypotheticall or spoken merely of a supposal as appeareth by the first wordes Quid si which M. Whyte thought good not to translate The difference of which two kind of propositions is very markable as euery yong Sophister knoweth as for example if a man do say what if diuers of Suffolk do report that M. Whyte is extremely geuen to his bely to Epicurisme and to say Diuers of Suffolke reporte that M. Whyte is extremely geuen to his bely and to Eicurisme where we see the first is merely of a doubtfull surmise and supposition the second is a peremptory and absolute proposition that they do so reporteâ— the truth or falshode whereof notwithstanding any intelligence whatsoeuer I here quietly passe ouer The 2. Paragraph The Rhemistes corrupted for the Churches inuisibility Now to the next point which consisteth in the mantayning of a Mathematicall aety inuisible Church for the vphoulding whereof among others he strengthneth his cause with the supposed confession of the Rhemistes thus bringing the whole Colledg of Rhemes vpon the stage to speake in the dialect of protestantes and so sorteably thereto he styleth that page 88. and some other pages in this maner The Papists also say the Church it inuisible The words wherwith he chargeth theÌ„ in this point are these vpon the 2. Thes. ca. 2. It is very lyke be it spoken vnder the correction of Gods Church and all learned Catholickes that this great defection or reuolt shall not be onely from the Romane Empyre but especially from the Romane Church and withall from most pointes of Christian Religion for that neare to the tyme of Antichrist and the consummation of the worlde there is lyke to be a great reuolt of Kingdomes People and Prouinces from the externall open obedience and communion thereof For the few dayes of Antichrists reigne the externall state of the Romane Church and the publick entercourse of the faithfull with the same may cease Here good Reader let me entreate thee to arest stay thyne eye and iudgment a whyle to obserue what strange corruptions he is forced to practise before he 〈◊〉 make an Israelite to speake a Babilonians language This place as you fynd it here vrged beareth a faire show to proue by the Rhemistes confession that the Church may somtymes be inuisible and yet in this very place being truly set downe in their owne wordes they doe affirme that the Church shall at no tyme be inuisible Theire true wordes are these It is very lyke be it spoken vnder correction of Gods Church and all learned Catholickes that this great defection and reuolt shall not be onely from the Romane Empyre but especially from the Romane Church and withall from most pointes of Christian religion not that the Catholick Christians either in the tyme of Antichrist
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
WHereas according to Catholick doctrine different degrees of honour are to be exhibited to god and his blessed Angels and Sainctes as to the first Adoration and to the other in a far lower degree not onely damned spirites but damnable beritykes their painefull schollers as enuious emulators of glorious Sainctes do euer labour by many subtiltyes to rob them quyte of all deserued veneration In which kynd M. Whyte willing to acte his part euen against the B. Virgin the Mother of God modele of all piety for better shadowing of his enuy pag. 344 he alledgeth Epiphanius c. her l. 3. haer 79. c. Collyridianos saying The Virgin Mary was a virgin and honorable but not geuen for vs to worship but her self worshipped him that tooke flesh of her But for the cleares reuealing of this illusion it is to be obserued that Epiphanius wryteth here purposly against certaine women who adoring a Chariot or foure squared seate and couering the same with linnen cloath did at one solemne tyme of the yeare bring forth bread and offer the same vp in the name of Mary which he proueth at large to be vnlawfull in that it was neuer permitted to women to offer vp sacrifice as also in that sacrfice is an honour onely peculiar to god yea he maketh an expresse difference betwene adoration and honour or woorship attributing the first onely to god and the second with vs Catholickes to the blessed Virgin and Sainctes which is further manifest euen by the wordes obiected being truly translated which are these Verily the body of Mary was holy but yet not God Verily the Virgin was a Virgin and honorable but not geuen vnto vs for adoration but her self adored him who was borne of her flesh As also Let Mary be honoured and the Father and Sōne and the holy Ghost adored Let no man adore Mary c. This mistery is due to God And againe Though Mary be must excellent and holy and honourable yet not for adoration And sundry other such lyke all which do euidently conuince that S. Epiphanius alloweth woorship and honour to be geuen to the B. Virgin but not adoration to wit with sacrifice which is an honour Peculiar onely to God The 2. Paragraph S. Gregory notoriously corrupted against the woorshiping of Images Speaking against Images pag. 152. he affirmeth that the Church of Rome forbade the woorship of them us appeareth saith he by the Epistle of Gregory to Serenus which he noteth in the margent to be Epist 109. li. 7. It is this ministers euill hap by most of his citatations to manifest to the world his foly and falshood For who not distracted would vrge that against his aduersary which impugneth him self and that in such a maner as will easely conuince him of fraude and wilfull malice For fiirst S. Gregory in the place cyted reproueth Serenus for breaking casting downe of Images which were set vp in Churches though the said Serenus did the same through zeale by reason of some who committed Idolatry thereby affirming further that therefore Pictures are vsed in Churches that those which know not letters at least should reade by seeing in the wales those thinges which they could not reade in bookes And then he concludeth Thy brotherhood therefore ought to haue preserued the pictures and to haue hindred the people from their adoration that so the ignorant might haue from whence to gather knowledg of the history and the people not sinne in adoration of the picture Here S. Gregory alloweth the vse of pictures in Churches shewing the commodity arrisinge thereby and withall reprehendeth Serenus though through zeale for breaking and casting them downe what may we thinke then he would haue said against Whyte and other his brethren who through heresy and malice prohibite all vse or place thereof in Churches if they had bene then extant and made knowen vnto him But though with Catholickes he allow the placing of them in Churches yet M. Whyte will vrge that he forbiddeth their woorship The woorship which he forbiddeth according to his owne wordes is adoration which word the Fathers frequently vse for that honour which is onely proper to God And that S. Gregory ment no other is manifest by an other Epistle writen to the said Serenus Ep. 9. l. 9. vpon the self same occasion where hauing repeated the forsaid vtility of pictures and adding that not without cause antiquity admitted Histories to be painted in the venerable places or Churches of Sainctes he directethe Serenus in him all pastors how to instruct the people in theire lawfull vse as shewing them by testimonies of sacred scriptures that nothing made with hand ought to be adored seing it is writen Luc. 4. The Lord thy god thou shalt adore c. As also By sight of the thing done or the history let them conceaue the feruour of compunction and let them be humbly prostrated in the adoration of the onely omnipotent holy Trinity By which it is most manifest that the woorship here forbidden by S. Gregory to Images is onely that adoration which is proper to god And that otherwise he thought Images duly to be worshipped appeareth by his 7. booke and 5. Epistle wheare wryting to Bishop Ianuarius concerning one Peter lately conuerted from Iudaisine to Christianity who violently had taken a Sinagoug from the Iewes and placed therein the Image of the Mother of God and our Lord and the venerable Crosse c. In redresse whereof he exhortethe the said Bishope that the Image and the Crosse taken away againe from thence with that veneration or reuerence which it meete to restore that which was violently taken away to wit the Sinagouge So that in steed of impugning due worship to Images these poyntes folowing may all heritikes learne of S. Gregory First that he proueth the vse thereof from antiquity Secondly that he alloweth the placing thereof in Churches and impugneth the breakers or pullers of them downe though their excuse or pretence be feare of Idolatry in the People Thirdly that the same in steed of hurt do much profit the ignorant that can not reade And lastly that in plaine tearmes he calleth the Crosse Crucem veneran dam Venerable And directeth that both the Image of our B. Lady and the Crosse should be remoued cum ea qua dignum est veneratione with that worship which is meete or they deserue So that I could wish our needy minister to be better aduysed hereafter in his citinge of S. Gregory against Catholick religion The 5 Paragraph The Councell of Eliberis corrupted against Images Here now I am come to the last corruption which I intende to display the which I haue purposly reserued therewith to close vp the taist of my Reader so notorious it is for the Authors depraued and so pregnant and dextrous in the conueyance As touching the first whearas euery one of the former deprauations those of the Rhemistes onely excepted resteth in abusing the authority of some one particuler man this stryketh at a whole
haith bene no where externall and visible Now during all these ages when was M. W. company of men visibly professing the same faith that he doth Finally D. Fulke though not acknowledging so great an inuisibility yet wryteth that in the tyme of Boniface the third which was Anno 607. the Church was inuisible and fled into wildernesse there to remaine a long season To these testimonies we may adde the former heretofore alledged touching their Churches not being vpon the first reuolt of Luther From all which it is ineuitably concluded against this our Architect of lyes that the protestants imaginary Church consisting of aery supposales of certaine inuisibilistes had no subsisting or being in the world for these laste thousand yeres at the least before the Apostacy of that vnfortunate wicked Monke The 19 Vntruth In defence of Preistes mariage Page 343. The Doctor much Apologizing defending the mariage of the Cleargy affirmeth that the Church of Rome houldeth contrary herein to that which was taught in the Primitiue Church Now for the triall of this falshood let vs concurr to that which is confessed by our learned aduersaties concerning the same First then Cartwright confesseth of the first Councell of Nyce which was celebrated in the 3. Century or age after Christ that it taught that vnto those which were chosen into the ministery it was not lawfull to take a wyfe afterwardes only being maried before entrance into the ministery it was lawfull for them to vse the benefyte of the precedent mariage In lyke sort M. Iewell in the defence of the Apology page 195. after the editioÌ„ of Anno 1571. speaking of preistes mariages thus acknowledgeth Here I graunt M. Harding it lyke to find some good aduantage as hauing vndoubtedly a great number of holy Fathers on his side Lastly Chemniâ—ius graunteth that this doctryne that preistes can not mary is taught by Origen Ierome Ambrose Innocentius Ciritius Epiphanius Now here I referr to the iudgment of any indifferent reader whether we are to beleue these former learned protestantes ingeniously confessing the practise of this our Catholick doctrine in the primitiue Church to the preiudice and endangering of theire owne cause or M. Whyte denying the same for the better tecture and pretext of his owne sociable lyfe and his ministeriall copulation The 20 Vntruth Against Images page 344. Inueighing much against the religious vse of Images among other thinges he saith according to the tytle of that his digression that touching Images the Church of Rome houldeth contrary to that formerly was houlden And after alledgeth that the auncient Christians of the Primitiue Church had no Images But the contrary hereto is most true For first we finde that the Centuristes do wryte that Lactantius who lyued in the fourth Century or age affirmeth many superstitious thinges concerning the efficacy of Christes Image Doctor Fulke affirmeth that Paulinus a very auncient Author caused Images to be painted on Church wales In lyke sort touching the signe of the Crosse of which there is the same reason and ground the Centuristes teach that Ambrosius multa commâ—morat superstitiosâ— de cruce inuâ—nta The said Centuristes also affirme of the third age after Christ that Crucis Imaginem c. Tertulian is thought to affirme that Christians had the Image of the Crosse in the places of their publike meetinges as also priuatly in their owne houses So farâ— did M. W. erre from the truth in affirming that touching Images The Church of Rome bouldeth contrary to that which was formerly houlden But I see if it be proofe enough for M. Whyte onely to condemne the Church of Rome must not be innocent The 21. Vntruth Against Transubstantiation Page 346. The D. thus writeth Lastly I name Transubstantiation c. wherein it is plaine that they meaning the Catholickes haue altered the Faith of the auncient Fathers Here for the tryall hereof we are to appeale to the sayinges and confessions of his owne syde where we shall fynd that M. Whytes credit and estimation is particulerly in this as in the former most daungerously wonnded euen by the handes of his owne breethren For we fynd it confessed by the Centuristes that Chrisostomus transubstantiatiorem vid tur confirmare Chrisostem is thought to confirme transubstantiation In lyke sort by the Iudgment of other protestantes Theophilactus Dama ceâ—us plane inclinant ad transubstantiatiorem Theophilact D. mascen do euidently inclâ—ne to Transubstantiation Answearable hereto Occolampadius doth charge Damascen with the said doctrine Finally D. Hâ—mfrey writeth that Gregory the great brought in Transâ—bstantiation In Ecclsiam verò saith he speaking of our conuersion quid inuexerunt Gregorius et Augustinus Intâ—lâ—runt c. Transubstantiationem Now I would demaund of our minister with what countenance he can auâ—rre that in the doctrine of TraÌ„substantiation we haue altered the faith of the auncient fathers if he obserue what is taught to the contrary by his owne brethren who not beleuing the doctrine it self yet do confesse the great antiquity thereof May we thinke that M. W. was ignorant of these Fathers myndes therein If so then are his followers much deceaued in ouerualâ—ing his good partes and literature and withall the obscurity of his owne iudgment touching the said fathers in this poynt haith thus farr preuailed that it haith ministred fitâ— opportunity to the Reader to take notice how cleare perspicuous shyning our Catholick faith of Transubstantiation was euen in those primitiue tymes So the Opacity and darknes of the earth is occasionally the cause of the dayes light The 22. Vntruth Against the conuersion of England by S. Augustine the Monke Page 354. and 355. to depriue S. Augustine the Monke of the honour and reuerence due vnto him by vs English for our conuersion the M. thus wryteth Touching the conuersion of England by Augustine the Monk in which our aduersaries make so much a doe I answeare two thinges fiâ—st that supposing he dâ—d conuert it it was not to the present Romane faith c. Secondly I say he conuerted not our Country at all excepting the planning of some tryfling Ceremonies Here you see that the first poynt of this passagâ— to wit touching Augustines connâ—rsion and his faith is Hipotheticall and deliuered with som hesitation and doubting the other recalling the first Categoricall absolute and peremptory Now in my reprouall of this his falshood I will vnyte together the two former disioynted parcels and directly proue from our aduersaries penaes that S. Augustine did conuert our Country to the present Catholick Romane faith in the euicting whereof I will content my self with the confessions of the Centuristes and of D. Humfrey For if we peruse the history of those Censorions Magdeburgians who reproue and controule at their pleasure all the Fathers of all ages we shall fynd that these Centuristes acknowledging S. Augustines conuersion of vs in their Alphabeticall Table of the 6. Century at
did withdraw men from the first forme thereof In lyke sort Sebastianus Francus an other learned protestant thus plainely writeth Statimpost Apostolos c. Presently after the Apostles all thinges were turned upside downe cana domini in sacrificium transformata c. The Lordes supper is turned into a Sacrifice To conclude M. Bacon a great protâ—stant here in England thus confesseth The Masse was conceaued begoten and borne anone after the Apostles tymes if all be true that Historiographers do write Thus much of the antiquity of the Masse which poynt thus acknowledged who seeth not that the testimonies of the former protestantes do vtterly ouerthrow the supposed truth of the D. Wordes affirming that the Masse came in by degrees and intimating to the credulous Reader that it was brought in by litle litle in these latter ages But M. Whyte if in the defending of your former vntruthes you can not blush for shame yet here grow pale through feare for your sinne is not ordinary seeing your mendaceous assertion doth obtrude an innouation vpon no lesser Article then the immolation and offering vp of the most sacred body and bloud of our Sauiour and Redeemer to his heauenly Father for the expiation of our sinnes first instituted out of the bowels of his mercy euen by Christ so as him self being the Preist did the sacrifice him self Quid gâ—atius offerri faith one Fa. aut daripotest quam caro sacrificiâ— nostri corpus effectuÌ„ sacerdotis nostri The 27. Vntruth Concerning wafer Cakes Page 389. the Doctor inueighing further against the Masse that wafer-cakes were first brought into the Sacrament in the eleuenth age or Century after Christ and answearably thereunto he haith made a reference to this place in his Alphabeticall Table at the latter end of his booke at the word wafer thus setting down wafers when brought in Sect. 5. nâ—m 31. Now that this procedeth from the same sirayne to wit a spiritu mendacit from whence all his former assertions had their origine is proued in that it is confessed by D. Bilson that in the dayes of Epiphanius it was rownd in figure Cartwright though he will needes find a beginning thereof after the Apostles yet thus writeth of the bread of the Sacrament It was a wafer-cake brought in by Pope Alexander which Pope euen by the testimony of Osiaâ—der liued fifteene hundreth yeres since And yet contrary to all these authorities we mightily wrong our minister if we will not beleue him affirming that wafers were brought in about a thousand yeares after Christ. The 28. Vntruth Against the adoration of the B. Sacrament Page 399. The minister persâ—sting in his serpentyne and vâ—nemous disposition against the most B. Sacrament touching the Adoration thereof thus lyingly forgeth The Adoration of the Sacrament is a late inuention folowing vpon the conceit of the Reall presence and prescribed 1220 yeres fâ—â—â— Christ by Honorius the third c That Adoration followeth vpon the beleefe of the reall presence it is graâ—â—ied but that it is a late inuention begon in the tyme of Honorius is false Thus the Doctor for the letter countenancing of this lye doth calumniously coople with it a truth that the one might be shrouded vnder the winges of the other Now that there was no innouation touching the Adoration of the Sacrament at that tyme is euinced from two reasons First because no Historiographer doth geue the least intimation of any such institution as then but newly brought into the Church onely Honorius decreed that the preist should more diligently admonish the people thereof in reguarde of some former negligence crept in concerning the same And this is all which can be truly collected from the Decree of the said Honorius Secondly the former poynt is proued from the abundant testimonies of our aduersaries charging the tymes precedent to Honorius with the said doctrine of Adoration For first we reade that Auerroes a hea then Philosopher who liued aboue 80. yeres before the prescribed time of Honorius his former supposed innouation did perticulerly deride the Christians of his dayes for the Adoring of the Sacrament This is acknowledged by D. Fulke and D. Saâ—liffe But to ascend to higher times the Centuristes speaking of the prayers of S. Ambrose in his booke entituled Orat. praeparat ad Massam do thus write Continent adorationem panis in Sacramento Those prayers do conteâ—ne the Adoration of the bread in the sacrament Chemâ—â—tius produceth diuers sentences of Augustine Ambrose and Nazâ—anzen which sentences in Chemâ—â—tius his Iudgment do affirme the Adoration of the Sacrament Now all these authorities do demonstratiuely conuince that the Adoration of the Sacrament was not introduced in the Church as an innouation in the time of Honorius From all which it is manifest that as in any other poynt of Catholick Religion so also in this of Adoration we altogether do conspire and agree with the venerable Fathers of Gods Church And therefore as Aristotle and other auncient Philosophers did teach that this our inferiour world was ioyned to the Superiour and Celestiall world that by the helpe of this coniunction we might more perfectly participate of the influences and vertues of those heauenly bodies So we may say that these our latter tymes through a continuall and vninterrupted current of beleeuing God and practising the same poyntes of Faith with the Auncient Doctors are indissolubly and nearely tyed to those primitiue dayes so as nothing is found in those reuerent dayes instituted either by Christ or his Apostles which by this meanes is not securely deryued to the Catholick Church of these moderne tymes The 29. Vntruth Against the Succession of Catholick Pastors Page 412. After the D. haith Trasonically boasted of the succession of the protestantes in his owne Church he procedeth further affirming that Succession of the pastors and Bishops in the Church of Rome haith bene interrupted And answearably hereto in the Table in the end of his booke at the word Succession with reference to this place he thus saith The Romane Church haith no true outward Succession Where you see by his owne wordes that the question here intended by this minister is not of succession of doctrine by which sleight and euasion diuers of our aduersaries vse to decline the testimonies of the auncient Fathers alledged by vs for strengthning the argument drawne from Succession but onely of externall succession of Bishops and Pastors which the minister falsly challenging heretofore to his owne church doth now as falsly take away from ours How maliceous a lye this is shall appeare from the mouthes of his owne brethren And â—iâ—st we finde that the Centuristes do very diligently and elaboratly set downe the succession particulerly of the Bishops of Rome in the 10. Chapiter of euery Century And this Methode they precisely obserue in all ages of the Church euen from S. Peter to their owne tyme entituling the said Chapiter de Episcopis
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
or before shall refuse to obey the same but for that neare to the tyme of Antichrist and consummation of the worlde there is lyke to be a greate reuolt of Kingdomes people and Prouinces from the open externall obedience communion thereof c. when for the few dayes of Antichristes reigne the externall state of the Romane Church and publick entercourse of the faithfull with the same way cease yet the due honour and obedience of Christians towardes it and Communion in heart with it and practise thereof in secret and open confession thereof if occasion requyre shall not cease no more then it doth now in the Christians of Cyprus and other places where open entercourse is forbidden Here now the parcels of this testimony which are purposly omitted do show that the Rhemistes do euen peremptorily affirme that gods Church shall neuer no not in the tyme of Antichristes greatest persecutions be latent and inuisible Thus doth our M. you see vpon a sudaine breake of with the Rhemistes in alledging their wordes yet after some lyne or two curteously ioyneth with them againe and then after that once more vnkindly leaues them to them selues all this in one poore testimony And here good reader thou art to take notice of an other sleight of our minister touching this particuler place For whereas he in the first Edition of his booke which I here folow setteth downe the Rhemistes wordes as thou seest aboue in no sorte intimating that any one word of their said testimony is pretermitted he in some other of his Editions as it should seme being aduertised that this his egregious corruption was espyed by his aduersaries thought therefore in some sort to salue the matter haith at the last wordes where he breaketh of from the rest of the whole sentence added a virgula or lyne as this ingeniously forsoth to acknowledge that he omitteth some part of the sentence But this I say auaileth him nothing for first it doth not warrant his sincerity in his first Edition Againe though in alledging of a testimony we are not bound to set down euery word thereof yet as I haue before premonished that which is omitted ought to be impertinent to the mayne point for which the testimony is produced But subtily to pretermit with an c. or some such like marck that which punctually doth touch or explicate the true sence of the sentence alledged that directly contrary to that construction there pretended as here it falleth out it is no lesse then most impious corrupting and corrading of other mens writinges And therfore I say M. Whyte is nothing aduantaged hereby but doth for the tyme plaster one euill with an other euill but no meruell for it is a high mistery amongst heritikes to support deceipt with deceipt till at the length all do tumble downe with it owne weight and so erit nouissimus error petor priori Mat. 7. Thr 3 Paragraph S. Augustine corrupted concerning the same subiect of the Churches inuisibility In lyke sort pag. 103. he alledgeth S. Augustine de bap con Don. li. 6. ca. 4. thus to say The Church may be so obscured that the members thereof shall not know one an other S. Augustines wordes are these none other Idem spiritus Sanctus ea dimitit qui datus est omnibus sanctis sibi Charitate cohaerentibus siue se nouerint corporaliter siue non nouerint The same holy Ghost which it geuen to all the Sainctes or holy men agreing together in Charity whether they know one an other or not remitteth the sinnes But what is this to the inuisibility of the Church or by what Sintax or Grammar can M. W. translate thus the former latin lynes Finally by what sublimation or art can he extract such a refyned sence from the bare minerals of the former wordes Neither can he slubber the mater ouer in saying that he here gathereth onely some necessary Illation prouing the Churches latency for the sentence alledged by him is set downe in a different letter of caracter froÌ„ his owne and he there perticularly geueth them as the very wordes Now S. Augustine in that place doth not so much as glance at the Churches visibility or inuisibility but there showing how sinnes are remitted as effectually by the bad preistes as the vertuous proueth it by Anology of reason to wit that the power of the holy Ghost may aswell be geuen to a wicked Preist as to a good and vertuous as it is geuen alyke to all the godly though they know not one an other But M. Whyte fynding that parcell of the seÌ„tence sine nouerint se corporaliter siue non nouerint to be ment of the faithfull and vertuous thought presently that he lighted vpon a bootie and so hoping thereby to entrappe the incautelous reader was the more easely induced to create the world of this his deprauation out of a mere nothing of a sound of wordes And thus farre of his corruptions touching the Churches inuisibility from the mantayning whereof we Catholickes do so far disclame as that euen in the most tempesteous and raging tymes of persecution that either haue or shall happen we acknowledg innumerable members thereof to be euer visible and in faith permanent and vnmoueable for we reade that the beames of the house of Christ his Spouse are Cedars the rafiens are of firre Can. â— The 4. Paragraph Doctor Stapleton abused in behalfe of the Protestantes markes of the Church The next corruption which I here will shew shall be concerning the markes of the Church whearâ— he to proue that we absolutely embrace the markes thereof deliuered by the Protestantes to wit the proaching of the word as acknowledging it to be a more infallible marke to euery Christian then our Catholicke markes are Antiquity Succession Vniuersality c. all which notes he after endeuoreth to confute To this end I say pag. 105. he produceth Doctor Stapleton thus wryting princip doctrinal li 1. ca. 22. The preaching of the Gospell is the proper and a very cleare note of the Catholick Church so it be done by lawfull Ministers Mark heare how he declareth this authors meaning by concealing the wordes in him that there are immediatly subioyned for thus that Catholick Doctor Praedicationem Euangelii We graunt that the preaching of the Gospell by lawfull Ministers is a very cleare and proper note of the Catholick Church Hâ—c est enim ordinaria c for by this is that ordinary and perpetuall Succession of Bishops Preistes and Pastors dâ—ryued in a continued order euen from the Apostles them selues to vs. From which latter part of the sentence purposly omitted by M. W. it is euident that D. Stapleton doth allow the preaching of the Gospell by lawfull pastors so far forth onely to be a note of the Church as it is included in the Catholick note of Succession and in no other sence which point is made more cleare besides his mayne drift in that Chapter diuers others of