continentur nihil est notins nihil certius vt stultissimum esse necesse sit qui illis fidem esse habendam neget There is nothing more knowen nothing more certaine then the holy Scriptures which are contayned in the wrytiâ—ges of the Prophets Apostles in so much that it were a most foolishe thing for any man to deny them Here first to make Bellarmine insinuate that he houldeth the authority of the Church in any thing to be doubtfull and vncertaine our minister of his owne brayne haith added these wordes other meanes may deceane me whereas there is not a fillable thereof in Bellarmine Secondly this place as we see is produced by him against the authority of the Church whereas indeede it is directed against the Swink feldians who denying the Scriptures relyed vpon their priuate illuminations as hereafter shall appeare by displaying a strang corruption and wresting of Bellarmines saying practised by M. Whyte in pag. 17. at the letter q. of which place of Bellarmine this here alledged is a parcell Thus our minister extremely strayneth euery Authority that he setteth downe till at the length it burst out into an open and inexcusable corruption The 2 Paragraph Bellarmine corrupted in proofe that the Scriptures are the onely rule of Faith Againe pag 17. to proue that all poyntes in controuersy must definitiuely be determined by the writen word alone without any respect to the Churches Authority in the explication thereof he marcheth owte once againe making Bellarmine his buckler thereupon alledgeth these wordes of his The rule of Faith must be certaine and knowen for if it be not certaine it is no rule at all If it be not knowen it is no rule to vs but but nothing is more certaine nothing better knowen then the sacred Scriptures contayned in the writinges of the Prophets and Apostles wherefore the sacred Scripture is the rule of Faith most certaine and most saife and God haith taught by corporall letters which we might see read what he would haue vs beleue concerning him Obserue here the refractory and incorrigible frowardnes of our minister and how artificiall and exact he sheweth him self in his art of corrupting For Bellarmine in this Chapter as is aboue touched writeth against the Swinkfeldians who denyed the Scripture to be the worde of God and rested onely vpon their priuate and hiddeÌ„ reuelations and answearably hereto the Tytle of this Chapter is Libris qui Canonicâ— appellaâ—tur verbum dei contineri That the word of God is contayned in those bookes which are called Canonicall Now the wordes at large are thus in Bellarmine Regula fides certa notaque c. The Rule of faith ought to be certaine and knowen for if it be not knowen it can be no Rule to vs and if it be not certaine it can be no Rule at all But the reuelation of the priuate spirit although in it self it might be certayne yet to vs it can no way be certaine except haply it be warraÌ„ted with diuyne testimonies to wit true miracles And then some sixe lynes after At sacris Scripturis c. But nothing is more knowen nothing more certaine then the sacred Scriptures which are contayned in the bookes of the Prophets Apostles And some fourtie or fiftie lynes after Quare cum sacra Scriptura Regula crodendi c. Wherefore seing the holy Scripture is a most certaine and a most secure rule of beleefe doubtlesse he can not be wyse who neglecting the same committeth him self to the iudgment of the priuate spirit which is often deceiptfull but euer vncertayne And againe some twenty lynes after Non igitur omnes vulgó c. Teerefore God teacheth not all men by internall inspirations what he wonld haue the faithfull to beleue of him or what they are to doe but it is his pleasure to instruct vs by corporall letters which we might see and reade Here now I referre this point to the most earneste protestant in England if he be Candid and ingenious with what face M. Whyte could alledg Bellarmine in this place to proue from him that the Scripture onely is the Iudg Rule of Faith for so doth the minister entytle that page thereby to make Bellarmine to reiect all Authority of the Church in exposition thereof all Apostolicall Traditions where we see vpon what different occasion from that he writeth in this Chapter against the Swinkfeldians Now here let vs note the particuler sleightes vsed in this corruption First M. Whyte you tye together without any c. or other word or note signifying the contrary seuerall sentences of Bellarmine for your greater aduantage as though one did immediatly folow the other though they lye in Bellarmine distinct by interposition of many lynes Secondly you haue concealed three seuerall parcels of different sentences expressing Bel. true mynde herein and all these parcels are euen partes and therefore the fowler fault of the sentences alledged by you Your concealemeÌ„ts are these Porro priuati Spiritus reuelatio et si in se certa sit nobis tamen nota nullo modo potest nisi forte diuinis testimoniis id est veris miraculis confirmetur And againe Sanus profecto non erit qui ea neglecta vz. the Scripture spiritus interui saepe fallacis semper incerti iudicio se coÌ„miserit And finally Non igitur omnes vulgoó per internum afflatum Deus docet All which your omissions are impaled and marked in the said english authority O how happy M. Whyte were you if you neuer had bene scholler since the tyme will come that you shall say with the Romane Emprour after he had subscribed to an vniust cause Vtinam literas nescirem For good thinges as learning are most perniceous to him who declyneth the true vse of them as you doe And in this respect you are to remember that the Arcke which was a blessing to the Israelites was yet a curse and hurt to the Philistians that abused it The 3. Paragraph Eckius fouly abused concerning the Authority of the Church and Traditions As heretofore he laboured to ouerthrow the doctrine of traditions from the corrupted testimonies of Catholicks and auncient Fathers so heare he endeuoreth from their lyke abused testimonies to intimate that we ascribe to them a greater perfection then we doe And to this end pag. 145. thereby the rather to cast vpon vs an vnworthy aspersion of vnderualewing the Scriptures he bringeth in Eckius in Enchirid. ca. 1. saying The Scripture receaueth all the authority it haith from the Church and from Tradition The wordes of this Author are these Scriptura non est authentica sine authoritate Ecclesiae whereby we see the wordes and from Tradition are falsly inserted by our deprauing minister making vs thereby to geue with we doe not a greater prerogatiue to Tradition then to Scripture And though perhaps he could light vpon those wordes and from Tradition in some other place or Chapter in Ecckius though in a different
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
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
24. for proh dolor read proh pudor Ibid. lin 27. for clausure read closure Pag. 118. lin 33. for entertaine read enteruaine Pag. 125. lin 12. for concurre read recurre For ingenious read in sundry places ingenuous WHITE DYED BLACK THE FIRST PARTE WHEAREIN are discouered Fourty most foule vniustifiable corruptions and deprauations of Authors vsed by Doctor Whyte in his Treatise of the way to the true Church Chapter 1. Conteyning Corruptions concerning workes Iustification Paragr I. Premonitions geuen to M. W. if he intende to reply vpon this present Treatise WE reade Exod. 13 that the first borne of the people of Israell was euer consecrated vnto god in regard of a gratefull acknowledgment of his innumerable benefites shewed vnto them and by reason of such his tytle thereto god who had a supreme interest in all theire issue peculierly pronounced This is myne I feare that M. Whyte who vaunteth him selfe for a true Israelite haith not sanctified vnto his diuyne Maiesty this his child the first borne of the wombe of his braine for bookes are faetus ingenii carying in them selues an inward resemblance to theire parentes and withall as perpetuating their remembrance doe extende their lynes beyond their liues Nay I am rather perswaded that he haith particulerly deuoted it to Gods and mans ghostly enemy For to whom rather are lyes and impostures the very burden of his Treatise to be ascribed then to him who is the father of lyes And sure I am that God who is the truth it selfe can not be found herein since no man vseth to gather grapes of thornes or figgs of thistles Mat. 7. And M. Whyte him selfe confesseth that we can not learne truth in the schoole of lyes Now to discouer that this worke of his is euen loaded with many most foule vntruthes corruptions and deceiptes is my taske voluntarily imposed by my selfe and I hope with thy good patience gentle reader to performe the same And first according to my former prescribed Methode his perfidious corruptions of fathers Catholique Authoures thereby to force them to speake in a language and dialect of which they were merely ignorant shall begin the Scene But because as M. Whyte is pregnant in deprauing of mens writinges so also he will no doubt shew him selfe ingenious in fynding some sleighty euasions and answeares vnder the tecture whereof to shrewde him selfe Therefore I thinke good now in the front and beginning of this my labour to set downe by way of preuention all what may be imagined that he can pretende for his defence and Apology and to discouer the weaknes thereof that so his impostures may be obserued and perused with greater benefite to the reader and more shamefull guiltinesse to him selfe First then M. Whyte can not transferr the fault vpon the printer for heare he standes for the most part chargeable either with adding too or detracting frō the authority alledged so abastarding it by this meane that the true father thereof would not acknowledg it for his owne whereas the printers errour comonly resteth in quotations made by figures or by mistaking of some letter in placing one woord for another ouer-sightes heare forborne and indeede vnworthy to be insisted vpon by any iuditious penne Secondly he can not say that his intention in alledging such authorities was onely to alledg the sense of the Authour not tying him selfe to the authoures perticuler wordes Of this euasion he preuenteth him selfe in that he euer vndertaketh to alledg the perticuler sayings of the Authour and for that reason doth distinguish them in a different letter from that wherin his owne wordes are printed a course amongst writers most certaine and vsuall to know when a man deliuereth the precise wordes or sentences of an other and which is more for the most part he thus vshereth his testimonies Bellarmine saith Thomas Aquinas saith Austine saith c. or putteth their names in the mergent whereby it is not to be doubted but that he would haue his reader thinke that the Authorities set downe are the very wordes of the Authoures them selues without any variation or chang whatsoeuer Now if he will iustify them to be the precise words of the Authoures without any chang either of adding or detracting then is he to name the perticuler Editions of such bookes which he foloweth and wherein the testimonies as they are alledged by him are to be found Thirdly where he is charged to corrupt any Authority by concealing for his owne aduantage any part thereof he can not iustify it by replyinge that he is not tyed to set downe all which his Authour saith of that poynt since so his Authorities would grow ouer longe and tedious this is no sufficient answeare For although a writer is not bound to set downe all that his alledged Authour saith of such a point yet is he bound not purposly to omitt any part of the beginning of the middest or of the ending of the said sentences which he produceth especially when the wordes concealed make for his aduersary and against the drifte and scope of that meaning wherein the reste of the sentence is by him deliuered And this kind of omission wherevnto M. Whyte standeth extremely obnoxious and is in this part folowing so by me charged is in the iudgment of all writers a wilfull vnpardonable vniustifiable corrupting of mens bookes Fourthly it is no excuse to say touching such authorities as M. Whyte truly alledgeth without adding or detracting of which kind there are very few if any that his meaning is onely to set downe the wordes of Catholick Authoures without restrayning them to any perticuler sence which he leaueth to that daungerous and inconuenient exposition which the wordes in the readers eye may best seme to afford This is most false for there is no Catholick which he iustifyeth but he perticularly restraineth the sence of his testimony either to the supporting of some point of protestācy or els to the manteyning of some absurde and scandalous opinion which he obtrudeth vpon vs. And thus much besides the often answearable entituling of the pages his owne precedent or subsequent wordes do for the most part imply Fyftly if his pryde would suffer him to descende so low he can not plaster the marter in acknowledginge that the testimonies heare corrupted are not of his owne reading but that he relyed therein vpon the annotations and note-bokes of others of the ministery a refuge wherunto some of his profession haue bene heretofore driuen and so as being ouer credulous and confident of his frendes supposed allegations he was by them mistaken Of this sily poore euasion he haith already precluded him selfe For in his first Edition which I here folow after his Alphabeticall Table in the end of his booke he haith made an ambitious note to the reader that he will to vse his owne wordes mantaine the quotations for substance to be true c. And againe it is one thing if I haue wilfully falsifyed or
he wrongeth the Cardinall who saith that a man onely of outward profession is but aliquo modo pars Ecclesia meaniÌ„g onely in aÌ„ imperfect equiuocall manner of being whereas our minister concealing the wordes aliquo modo maketh Bellarmine to asscribe to such a one as perfect a being a member of the Church as to any other man endewed with all the Theologicall vertues But M. Whyte as we haue seene in others of his corruptions so also in this haith a great facility in passing ouer and concealing diuters such wordes as si ferme aliquo modo and the lyke in any Author that he alledgeth though they mightely alter the meaning of the sentence It may be perhaps he haith framed to him self a new Accidence houlding such poore particles but as imperfect partes of speach be accomptes them as vnworthy to be traÌ„slated or set downe by his learned pen. The 2. Paragraph Bellarmine corrupted against the kuowledg of misteries of our Faith in preferring of ignorance Againe to our more depressing of faith our supposed aduancing of ignorance the Doctor telleth his Reader how among vs the lay people are not bound to know what the matters of their faith be but that ignorance is better and thereupon in his mergent he fortifyeth him self with a sentence of Bellarmine de Inst. l. 1. ca. 7. in these wordes Fides melins per ignorantiaÌ„ quam per notitiam definitur Faith is better defyned by ignorance then by knowledg I think the minister euen for feare of breach of his oath taken as it should seme to the contrary is loth to alledg any one sentence entyrely ingeniously and truly For mark here how vntruly he diuorceth Bellarmines wordes from his owne drift and mynde For the Cardinall entytuling that Chapiter Fidem iustificantem non tam esse notitiam quaÌ„ assensum Iustifying Faith rather to be assent then knowledg there proueth that faith euen according to the Apostles definition thereof can not be demoÌ„strated and that the assent which we geue thereunto saith he followeth not rationem euidentiam rei a cleare euideÌ„ce of the poynt beleued which is property called notitiaÌ„ but it followeth authoritatem proponentia the authority of the proposer and therfore it is more properly called fides And then some three lynes after he thus sayeth Igitur misteria fides quae rationem superant credivius non intelligimus ac per hoc fides distinguitur contra scientiam melius per ignorantiam quam per notitiam definitur Therefore we beleue the misteries of faith which are aboue reason we vnderstand them not and in this respect Faith it distinguished against science of knowledg and iâ— better defyned by ignorance then by euidency of knowledg Now here I doe demaund euen in sincerity whether these wordes with any tecture of colour of possibility can be wrasted to the supporting of a supine and an affected ignorance of the articles of our Faith as here our minister seeketh to strayne them Wherefore I say that M. Whyte dealeth vnchristianlyke and most irreligiously with Bellarmine herein For first he inuesteth his wordes which are spoken onely of the nature of faith with a new construction neuer dreamed of and therefore you see the minister besides his passing ouer the ground and reason of his sentence purposly omitteth in his translation the beginning of the seÌ„tence alledged though it doth expound the wordes following to wit Therefore we beleue the misteries of Faith which are aboue reason we vnderstand them not and in this respect Faith is distinguished against science Secondly he taketh aduauntage in translating the word notitia which though it signifyeth in large construction knowledg in generall in which sence he forsaw the ignorant reader would take it yet with the schoolemen it is restrayned as Bellarmine here expresly noteth to that kynd of knowledg which is properly Scientia which procedeth out of a demonstrable euidency of the thing knowen and consequently it is incompatible with Faith For shame of your owne credit M. Whyte and for the feare that you owe to God forbeare to seduce any longer the ignorant by these deceauable meanes and making your benesyte of these my trendly admonitions which indeede procede from Christian Charity remember that meliora sunt vulnera diligentis quaÌ„ fraudulente oscula prou 27. The 3 Paragraph Nauar corrupted concerning the sinne committed by the Laity in disputing of matters of Faith Now next let vs come to one or two deprauations consisting of the word heresy where pag. 6. to intimate that we hould it no lesser offence then heresy for a Lay man to argue of matters of Religion as though the Church barred them in any sort whatsoeuer not to speake thereof he alledgeth Nauar Manual ea 11. nu 26. It is heresy for a Lay man to dispute in a point of Faith Nauars wordes are these Quinto qui disputat de fide cum sit Laicus sciens Laicis esse prohibitum sub excommunicationis paena de tlla disputare Fiftly who being a Lay man disputeth of Faith knowing that Lay men are forbidden vnder payne of excommunication to dispute thereof Here you see there is no mention of heresy and indeede without reference to some other wordes the sense is here imperfect therefore the Reader is to vnderstand that the Tytle of this Chapiter in Nauar is this Modivsitatiores peccandi mortaliter contra praeceptum de rectè colendo honorando Deo c. The seuerall more accustomed kindes of sinning mortally against the precept of worshiping and honoring God aright c. and so answearably to this tytle he setteth downe dyuers wayes of sinninge mortally in that sort keping the methode of primo secundo c. and so comming to quinto he sheweth in what manner a man sinneth thereinâ— therefore the offence here committed is not heresy as our minister falsly saith but it is a mortall sinne which yet is so to be vnderstoode as when a Lay person pertinaceously without subiecting his Iudgment to the Church wauereth in disputatioÌ„ in any point of the Catholick faith and thus much of M. Whytes fynding the word heresy in Nauar. But I may well say he is a man of a very strange and as I may terme it imperfect perfect eye-sight since he can not see wordes in testimonies which euery other man doth see and yet seeth other wordes in them which no man els can see Chapter 6. Concerning mariage of Preâ—stes Fasting and Miracles The 1 Paragraph Sinesius impudently abused concerning his owne mariage The next corruption shall be touching mariage of Preistes the lawfulnes whereof this our yoked minister is more willing to iustify in that such as professe voluntary Chastity are according to the principles of his faith accompted noe better then superstitious wilfull Eunuches Now then for the warranting thereof page 343. he produceth a testimony from Sinesitus Bishop of Ptolemais who in his Epistle to a frend called Euopius thus writeth of
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
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
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
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