Whyte dyed black. Or A discouery of many most foule blemishes, impostures, and deceiptes, which D. Whyte haith practysed in his book entituled The way to the true Church Deuyded into 3 sortes Corruptions, or deprauations. Lyes. Impertinencies, or absurd reasoninges. Writen by T.W. p. And dedicated to the Vniuersity of Cambridge. Cum priuilegio.

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 from 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 protestancy , 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 forged a place , and an other thing if the printer onely haith mistaken the quotation : the latter may be , but the former is not , as I will be ready to satisfy any that will charge me with it . Thus he . But how mantaineth he the point , or what satisfaction geueth he , if in answere to the corruptions and deprauations wherewith he is heare charged , he reply , that in good sooth so it is that he did not read the testimonies of the Authoures them selues , but onely tooke them vpon the credit and affiance of such of his owne brother-hood as he thought would not haue deceiued him ? A graue & sufficient answeare .

And heare I am to preadmonishe M. Whyte , that I doe expect in his answeare ( if he doe intende sincerely and truly to free him selfe from these imputations ) to answeare all the corruptions and deprauations by them selues as heare they are gathered , and so the lyes and falshoodes seuerally by them selues ; as as also the impertinences in like sort , and not promiscuously to iumble and shuffle them together , now seeking to salue a corruption , next a lye , and so by affecting an obscurity , in methode , to bleare the eye of the reader that he shall not discerne what corruptions in his reply he omitteth , and what he maketh shew to iustify ; wherefore I say if he make choice of this obscure course after this premonition , he but bewrayes his owne guiltinesse . And though I can not by the lawes of writing impose a methode vpon my aduersaries pen : yet seing the reason why M. Whyte should affect an other course then I heare wish him , is seene aforehand , and so him self hereby aduertised thereof , to be onely ( by answearing so confusedly ) to delude and wrong his reader : therefore euen for his owne honour and credit sake , he can not refuse this desyred methode which heare I requyre , especially seing it is wished onely for manifestation of the truth , as being in it selfe most obuious , facile , & perspicuous .

Thus much I haue thought good ( for his greater caution ) to instruct the reader with afore-hand ; and therefore now I will remitt him to the ensuing deprauations , still wishing him to haue his eye ( whensoeuer M. Whyte shall vouchsaife to make answeare hereto ) intent and fixed vpon the corruption obiected : neither suffer him to turne the question ( as before I touched ) from the corruption , to the sence & meaning of the Authour ( a sleight vpon the lyke occasion vsed by Plessis against the Bishoppe of Fureux ) & so to entertaine the reader with long discourses thereby to diuert his myud from the point in question : but let the reader alwayes remember , that the question heare for the most part immediatly is , whether such a sentence or testimony is truly and faithfully alledged as it is to be found in the Authour him selfe , without any addition or concealement of wordes in M. White his behalfe , and so breefely whether M. Whyte corrupteth the place or not , still obseruing that whatsoeuer M. Whyte saith , if it do not conclude that the testimony is in noe sort altered and changed from the wordes of the Authour him selfe , is ( in respecte of the point here handled ) but idly , extrauagantly , & impertinently spoken .

Paragr. 2. The Rhemistes corrupted concerning merite of workes .

BVT now at the last to come to M. Whytes deprauations the which ( for more perspicuity ) I will range to certaine heades : the first whereof shall be such as concerne the doctrine of workes and iustification And to begin with one which as it conteyneth in it self many foule and strang corruptions : so the iniury thereby offered is not to one but to many and those men for their learning and vertue , of worthiest memory , to wit , the english Doctors of Rhemes who ( if we may beleue M. Whyte pag. 238. ) feare not to affirme that our workes of their very nature , deserue eternall lyfe , the reward whereof is a thing equally & iustly answearing to the tyme and weight of the worke rather then a free guift , so that God should be vniust if he gaue it not . And for this he quoteth in his mergent . Rhem. Annot. vpon 1. Cor. 3. 8. & Hebr. 6. 10. But for the plainest and most certaine discouery of this brasen faced minister , I will set downe the true wordes of the Rhemistes , who commenting vpon those of S. Paule ( 1. Cor. 3. 8 ) And euery one shall receaue his owne reward according to his owne labour , wryte as foloweth . A most plaine text to proue that men by their laboures & by the diuersities thereof shall be diuersly rewarded in heauen : and therefore that by their workes proceding of GRACE , they deserue or merit heauen . Here before I procede any further , I must charge M. Doctor with a dooble corruption , first for omitting the word Grace , the true wordes being workes proceding of Grace , do deserue or merit heauen : secondly , which maketh it more inexcusable and damnable , for inserting in steed of the word Grace , the word Nature , the which was not so much as dreamed of by the Rhemistes , or by any Catholick Author , yea to defend that workes of their owne nature do merite , were to renew the heresy long since condemned in the Pelagians by the Romane Church .

But to goe forward , the Rhemistes in this ministers mouth affirme , that the reward is a thing equally & iustly answearing to the tyme and weight of the worke , rather then a free guifte . But in their owne wordes they auouch the contrary . And indeede ( say they ) this word Reward which in our english tongue may signify a voluntary or bountifull guift , doth not so well expresse the nature of the latin word , or the greeke , which are rather the very stipend that the hyred workman or iournay man couenanteth to haue of him whose worke he doth , and is a thing equally and iustly answearing to the tyme and weight of his trauels and workes ( in which sence the Scripture saith The worke-man is worthy of his hyre ) rather then a free guift : though because faithfull men must acknowledg that their merites be the guiftes and graces of god , they rather vse the word Reward , then hyre , stipend , or repayment . &c. Now all that from hence can be gathered are two thinges , first that the Rhemists affirme that the word Reward , in latin and greeke , doth rather signify a stipend or hyre then a free guift . Secondly that because faithfull men must acknowledg that their merites be the guiftes and graces of god , they rather vse the word Reward then hyre . But now all this whyle I can not fynde this sentence cyted by M. Wh. that the reward of workes is a thing equally & iustly answearing to the tyme and weight of the worke rather then a free guift . Indeede I fynd most of the wordes , but many of them in seuerall lynes , and vttered vpon seuerall occasions , all which to ioyne and chaine together in one continued lyne or sentence , and thereby to make the Authour speake contrary to him selfe , is a thing easy to performe , but the performance is wicked , shamelesse , and execrable .

And geue but this libertie of omitting , inserting , & coopling to the Atheist ( which your self M. Wayte haue heare assumed and practised ) and you shall finde strange positions well manteined by him . For example , the Psalmi●t speaking of your self and other such like saith , T●s foole haith said in his heart , there is no god . Now kindly allow him to blott out the word foole , ( as you more than folishly did the woord Grace ) & to insert in steed thereof , the wordes wyse man ( as you according to the wisdome of the world inserted the word Nature ) and then obserue how easely he will defende from the scriptures that there is no god , seing according to your scriptures The wyse man said in his heart there is no god . But to conclude this knowingly and deliberately to corrupt to the dishonour of your owne & Catholick Religion , and to the ruyne of your owne & other ignorant soules , is to me an argument most conuincing , that you are one of those fooles who said in his heart there is noe god .

Paragr. 3. Cardinall Bellarmine corrupted concerning Iustification .

IN the verie first page of his preface to the Reader ( so loth it semed he was to loose any tyme ) he sheweth vs an other trick somwhat like vnto the former . Where by the way I must aduertise him that I hould him a man herein impolitick and incautelous , that would not suffer the verie face or front of his Treatise to passe vnblemished , since the first he rather should haue coueted to winne the eare of credulity with pleasing insinuations of truth : and then ( the iudgment of his Reader being once possessed ) after to haue vented forth his more impure d●egs : for we are taught ( Io. 2. ) that omnis homo primum bonum vinum apponit , & cum inebriati sunt , tum id quod est deterius . But to the deprauation pag. 1. of his preface , M. Whyte falsly to intimate to his reader how much the Catholicks do disualew the passion of Christ , thus wryteth . The Church of Rome teacheth that iust●fication is wrought by the habite of our owne righteousnes & not by Christes . Thus you see how peremptorily he affirmeth without any reseruation , that we reiect the righteousnes of Christ to concurre to our Iustification . Now this he laboureth to proue from a testimony of Bellarmine de iustificat . li. 2. ca. 2. which he thus setteth downe . Our owne inherent iustice is the formall cause of absolute iustification , not the iustice of Christ imputed vnto vs . That we may conceaue the true meaning of that learned Cardinall in this place , I will set downe his owne wordes in latine , who there discoursinge of the causes of our Iustification thus saith . Ad quaestionem , an vid. iustificamur propter meritum Filii dei , an propter in ch●atam renouatio●em nostram ? Respondemus . Si illud propter significet causam formalem , nos iustificari propter noui tatem nobis inhaerentem , non propter meritum Christi quod iuhae●e●e non potest : si veró significet causam meritoriam , nos iustificari dicemus propter meritum Filii des non propter nouitatem in nobis haerentem . That is . In this question whether we be iustified propter meritum , for the merit of the Sonne of God , or for our owne renouation of lyfe ? I answeare . If the word propter , doe signify the formall cause , then are we iustifyed through our owne newnesse of lyfe inherent in vs and not through the merites of Christ , because they can not inhere in vs : ( and these are the wordes alledged by M. Whyte ) but if the worde propter , do here signify the meritorious cause , then are we iustifyed propter meritum Filii de● , through the merites of the Sonne of God , & not through any inherent newnes or iustice in vs : And then presently concludeth , ita iustificamur propter v●rumque &c. So we are iustifyed by reason or through them both , to wit , through the merites of the Sonne of God , meritorié , meritoriously , and through an inherent iustice in vs formaliter , formally . Thus Bellarmine . Where you see the question is not , as M. Whyte suggesteth , whether Christes iustice doth concurre to mannes iustification ( which were a horrible blasphemy to deny ) but onely in what kynd of cause it concurreth : the Catholickes teaching that it concurres as the meritorious cause , not as the formall cause , since if it did as the formall cause , then , euen according to philosophy , it should really inhere in vs , but so it doth not .

But now to obserue M. Whytes calumny & fraude in alledging this testimony . First he purposly concealeth the latter part of the sentence which sheweth how we ascribe our iustification to Christ , as vnwilling that the reader should heare that in any sence we rely thereon . Secondly that whereas this testimony of the Cardinales , euen as it is set downe by M. Whyte him self , excludeth onely Christes merites as the formall cause of our iustification and in none other sence : yet our minister alledgeth it to proue that it is no cause thereof at all , & in this respect it is impertinently vrged , for in his owne wordes immediatly before , without any limitation of the cause , he saith , The Church of Rome teacheth that iustification of a sinner is done by the habite of our owne righteousnes & not by Christes . And then as I said , alledgeth for proofe thereof such wordes of Bellarmine as excludeth onely the formall cause thereof . But his sleight here was , that perswading him self that the ignorant reader not knowing what the word formall cause is , or how it is distinguished from other kinde of causes , but thinking that it did signify any cause in generall , should no sooner see the wordes of Bellarmine , but then should instantly conclude with him self , here Bellarmine & the Church of Rome teacheth that mans iustification is in no sort or maner wrought by the iustice of Christ . And thus much of our Doctors deportement herein , who through his subtill feaninge ( at his pleasure ) what we are supposed to mantaine , doth in the meane tyme endanger and wrong the honour of the worthy and illustrious Cardinall till more full search and disquisition of the truth be made . And thus our poetizing minister ( I meane our lyinge M. Whyte ) doth interest him self in the censure of the poet ( Ouid. li. 2. fast . ) fraude perit virtus . Heare now I end this deprauation , assuring my reader that Bellarmine is so farre of from teaching that Christes iustice doth not necessarily concurre to our iustification , that in the former alledged Chapter he thus writeth . Iustitia homini a deo per Christi mer●ta donata est . &c. That is . Iustice is geuen by god to man through the merites of Christ . And then presently thus repi●hendeth Kemnitius for his deceipte vsed in this question . Kemnitius fraudulenter egit . &c. kemnitius dealeth fraudulently herein , in that to precure malice against vs , he opposeth on the contrary side our late begon renouation , or newnes of lyfe , to the merites of the Sonne of God , as if we prized more our owne change or newnes of lyfe , though imperfect and late begon , then the moste perfect and the most absolute merites of the Sonne of God .

The 4. Paragraph . Bellarmine againe abused against Merite of workes .

A Gaine to take away the doctrine of the merite of workes , M Whyte pag. 236 , thus writeth . Howsoeuer our aduersaries contend for their merites , yet the learnedest and most iudicious men disalow them &c. houlding that which I haue said to be the sounder doctrine ; and so answearably entitleth that page , merite of workes reiected by papistes them selues . Now in proofe that the Catholick Doctors condemne all merite of works , he alledgeth among others the foresaid Cardinall thus writing . By reason of the vncertainty of mans owne rightousnes , & for feare of vaine glory , it is the saifest way to repose our whole confidence in the sole mercy & goodnes of god . But why think you stayeth the man in that place & passeth no further ? You shall knowe , for the immediate wordes folowing in Bellarmine are these . Explico propositionem . Non enim ita accipienda est &c. I explaine this proposition ( meaning his former sentence ) which is not so to be taken as that a man should not laboure with all his endeuoure to do good workes , and that there were no trust to be put in them , or as if they were not to be accompted as true iustice , or could not endure the iudgment of god : but onely this we say , that it is more saife to forgeate after a sort our good workes , & to cast our eye vpon the sole mercy of god . Thus we see how greedily our minister takes hould of the texte and yet concealeth the comment though geuen by the Author him self . And therefore I appeale to the censure of the iudicious if the whole contexture of this testimony , which is vrged for the ouerthrowing of me rites , doth not euen depose the contrary , in positiuely confirming and mantaininge the doctrine of merits . Againe what impudency is it in M. Whyte to produce Bellarmine as denying the doctrine of works , when as the subiect of this very booke ( from whence the former wordes are taken as also of diuers other bookes in that tome ) is onely to proue that works do merit● . Therefore I will onely say that this our Doctor in all dging his proofes and Authorities , carieth him self perfectly minister-like : I neede not further to expresse my meaninge , since among some thinges there is such an inwarde and inseperable association and nearenes , as that but naminge the one , we are supposed withall implicitly to vnderstand the other .

The 5 Paragraph . S. Thomas notoriously corrupted against iustification by work .

TO the lyke effect he depraueth a saying of S. Thomas Aquinas . For pag. 26● . we thus find . Workes he not the cause why a man is iust before god , but rather the execution and manif●station of his Iust●ce , for no man is iustifyed by workes , but by the habi●e of faith infused , yea Iustification is done by faith onely . ( Aquin. Ro. 3. lect. 4. & Gal. 2. Lect. 4. ) Wheare the reader is to know that the place to the Romanes is onely spent by S. Thomas against the Iewes , in coufuting that Iustification is wrought by performinge the ceremoniall workes of the law , or morall preceptes : & therefore he there immediatly before the wordes alledged thus saith ( which M. Whyte thought good to conceale ) Apostolus loquitur &c. The Apostle doth speake in this Chapiter both of all ce●emoniall and morall workes , for workes be not the cause &c. to neither of which the Catholickes ascribe any iustification , but onely to work●s done in state of grace , and receauing their vertue from the passion of our Sauiour . In lyke sort in his seconde reference of S. Thomas which is Gal. 3. Lect. 4. , we fynde the lyke wordes in sence which our doctor here alledgeth : for there S. Thomas commentinge vpon that of the Apostle , I doe think that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the law , thus writeth , Non au●em solum sine operibus caerimonialibus &c Man is iustifyed not onely without the ceremoniall workes which did not confer grace , but onely signifyed it : but also he is iustifyed without the workes of morall precep●es , according to that to Titus , &c , and then presently foloweth in S. Thomas , ita tamen qnod hoc intelligat &c. yet so that the Apostle here meaneth , sine operibus praecedentibus iustitiam , non autem sine operibus consequentibus , without workes which goe before iustice , & not without workes folowing iustice , which is the doctrine of all Catholickes , who teach that workes done out of the state of grace ( which are those that doe praecedere iustitiam ) can not iustify , but onely such as are consequentia , to wit performed after oure first iustification , and so in state of grace . Thus if M. Whyte had vouchsaifed to hau set downe this laste parte of S. Thomas his sentence ( which he moste calumniously concealed ) , the reader would haue easely discerned how impertinently these tes●imonies are alledged against the Catholick doctrine of Iustification .

The 6. Paragraph . S. Augustine corrupted against Iustification .

The doctor not content to depraue and corrupte moderne and more late writers , exerciseth his faculty euen in the monumentes of the auntiente fathers . For pag. 245. the more to depresse mans iustice , he produceth S. Augustine de Ciuitate dei le . 19. ● . 27. thus writing . All our righteousnes standeth rather in the remission of our sinnes , then in any perfection of Iustice .

The Fathers wordes are these , which I will relate at large in latin for the more full discouery of M. Whites demeanour therein . Ista nostra iustitia ( quamnis vera sit propter veri boni finem ad quem refertur ) tamen tauta est in hac vita vt potius peccatorum remissione constet , quam perfectione virtutum . This our iustice ( though it be true by reason of the end of the true good to which it is referred ) yet it is such in this life as that it rather consisteth of the remission of our sinnes then of the perfection of vertues . Here first our minister addeth the word , all , for greater swelling and fulnes of speach against our doctrine , which is not in S. Augustine : but this we let passe as a smaller fault . Secondly he leaueth owt a parcell of the same sentence , to wit ( although our Iustice be true by reason of the end of the true good whereunto it is referred ) in which wordes S. Augustine acknowledgeth the very Catholick doctrine of iustification , to witt , that our Iustice is true Iustice , against which this very place is vrged . Thirdly he falsly translateth ( for his owne aduantage ) those wordes , quam perfectione virtutum , then in any perfection of Iustice , where it shoud be , then in any perfection of vertues . This he did to make S. Augustines wordes sound in an ignorant eare more clearely against Iustice & Iustification mantayned by Catholickes . For he can not but know that a man may be truly iust , and yet not exercise all vertues in theire highest perfection .

Now that the reader may learne what is the true meaning of S. Augustine in this place : he is to conceaue that the drift of that father here is , to sh●w that a man can not liue in this lyfe in that perfect and true peace of mynde as to exercyse vertue and flee vice without all sodain reluctation of our sensualitie though we geue no assent thereunto : and therefore the tytle of that Chapiter is . De pace seruientium deo &c. Of the peace of such as serue God , whose perfect tranquillity can not be enioyed in this temporall lyfe . And according to this his tytle , some fewe lynes after the sentence alledged by M. Whyte , he thus writeth . Nam profecto quanquam imperetur &c. For although reason doth ouerule vyce : yet it doth not ouerrule without some conflict of vyce . And therefore as longe as it is exercysed in commaunding and ouerruling vyce , man haith not perfect peace . But to ende this subiect of Iustification , here you see how dexterously our minister haith borne him selfe , who for the impugning of the same , haith seuerall wayes abused the sentences of his Authors , somtimes by insertions of his owne as if they were the Authors wordes : somtimes by taking away and concealing what is there plainely set downe : othertimes , though the Authority be truly alledged , yet by violent detortinge and wresting the place from the true intended sence , yea often when the very place strongly fortifyeth that Catholick point or doctrime against which it is theare brought . Thus though M. Whyte in his deprauations vseth seuerall shewes and coloures : yet they all retaine in them one generall countenance and looke of deceipt and falshoode , so as the Poets sentence here houldeth Facies non omnibus vna , nec diuersa tamen .

Chapiter 2. Concerning the reading of the Scriptures .

The 1 Paragraph . S. Ierome corrupted for the reading of the scriptures by the vulgare people : where also vpon occasion geuen by M. Whyte , it is examined whether S. Ierome was a papiste .

IT being a certaine truth that from Scriptures euill vnderstoode procede most heresies , M. Whyte ( a faithfull frend thereof ) well knowing by dayly experience that no one thing in truth is more auaileable either for the first beginninge or propagation of heresy then generall libertie graunted to the vulgar people of reading , and expounding the sacred Scriptures , doth thereupon much labour in sundry places in profe of his supposed commodity and necessitie thereof : amongst which he grosly abuseth the authority & person of that great and most Catholick Doctor S. Hierome in these wordes . pag. 22. Hierome writes of Paula a gentlewoman how shee set her maides to learne the Scripture , and many of his wrytinges ( saith Whyte ) are directed to women , commending theire labour in the Scripture , & encouraging them thereunto &c. which he would not haue done if he had bene a papist .

Heare Christian reader I must confesse I reste verie doubtfull whether the malice of this minister is more to be detested , or his greate folly to be admyred & pityed : for not contenting him self to corrupt S. Hieromes wordes and meaning , he will needes inferre hereof that S. Hierome was noe papiste , which how true it is , I will onely for this present appeale vnto this Epitaph of S. Paula writen by this holy Doctor to the Virgin Eustochium and here cyted by our protestant minister : whereby if it do not plainely appeare by sundry pointes of religion there mentioned and practised that S. Hierome , S. Paula , and the Bishops , Preistes , and people of those tymes were of the same Religion or beleefe which Catholickes now professe , and protestantes impugne : that then let me be enrolled in the black bill of lying ministers , or coopled in brotherhood with Whyte , as a legitimate sonne of the father of lyes .

First then S. Hierome vndertaking to set downe the blessed lyfe and death of the holy woman S. Paula , in proofe of his sincere proceding therein , maketh this protestation . I call Iesus to witnes and his Sainctes , yea that very Angell who was keeper and companion of this admirable woman , that I will speake nothing in her fauour , or after the maner of flaterers , but for a testimony , and that which is lesse then her merites , whom the whole worlde doth praise , preistes admyre , quiers of virgins desyre , and troupes of Monkes and poore people bewayle . Is the inuocation of Sainctes and Angells which of necessity supposeth their knowledg ? is the beleefe of euery mannes proper Angell to guard him ? and quiers or companies of Virgins and Monkes , plaine proofes of Catholick or protestant religiou ?

To procede , S. Hierome describing in perticuler her pilgrimage to the holy lande whereunto he affirmeth that men of all Nations did come ; sheweth how that prostrating her selfe before the Crosse , she adored at though she had seene our Lord harging thereupon . Entring the Sepulchre , she kissed the stone of the Resurrection &c. & at one thirsting desyreth waters , she licked with her faithfull mouth the very place of the body wheare our Lord had laid . Then hauing visited the pillour at the which our Lorde was bound and whipped , and the place where the holy Ghost did descend vpon the faithfull : she went to Bethelem , where entring our Sauiours caue , and looking at the holy Iune of the Virgin , and the stable , after many other deuout speaches she vttered these wordes . And I wretch and sinner am thought worthy to kisse the manger in which our Lord a litle babe cryed , and to pray in the caue in which the Virgin brought forth our Lord an infant . After this amongst sundry other holy places , she went vnto the Sepulchres of the 12 Patriarches where she trembled beinge affrighted with many wonders , for she saw the diuells roare being dyuersly tormented : and before the sepulchres of the Sainctes she saw men howling lyke wolues , barking lyke dogs , roaringe lyke lyons , hissing lyke serpentes , and belowing lyke buls &c. And is not all this with a protestant papisticall superstition ? Will our Whyte allow of pilgrimage to holy places ? or will he with S. Paula prostrate him selfe before the Crosse and worshipe ? will he kisse sacred Reliques ? or will he attribute such sanctity to the Sepulchres of Sainctes that in presence thereof diuells are tormented ? I perswade my self he will not . And yet S. Hierome ( with him noe papist ) relateth the promisses to the commendation of Paula .

But to come nearer the maner of lyfe which S. Paula led , her daily practise being best witnes of her beleefe , hauing visited with greate deuotion all the places of the holy land , intending to spend her lyfe in holy Bethelem she stayed there in a straite lodging for the space of three yeres vntill she had built Cells , and Monasteries , & Mansions for diuers pilgrimes : where she liued in such humility as , being attended with many virgins , in her apparell , speach , habit , and going , she was the least or basest● of all . After her husbands death , vntill her owne , slenever with any man though she knew him to be holy and a Bishope . Bathes she went not to but in daunger . In her greatest agues she vsed not soft beds , but reposed on the hard grounde couered with hayre clothes &c. Thou wouldest haue thought fountaines of teares to haue proceded from her : yea she so bewayled litle sinnes as that thou wouldest haue iudged her guilty of greatest crimes &c. Soft linnens & pretious silkes she changed with a sharpe hayre cloth &c. Her loue of pouerty was such , as that she desyred she might dye a begger , and not to leaue one peny to her daughter , yea her selfe at her death to be wrapped in an others sheete . And as for her dyet , her abstinence was such , as that ( festiuall dayes excepted ) she scarce tooke oyle in her meate , by which may be iudged ( saith S. Ierome ) what she thought of wyne , of any thinges molted , of fish , milke , hony , egs , and the rest which are pleasant to tast . If I should now aske Maister Whyte whether his wyfe for example being no doubt an Euangelicall sister of highest perfection , him self being often absent about preaching of the worde , whether , I say , in his conscience he thinketh her modesty such , as that at such tymes ( to speake sparingly ) shee doth not often both eate and drinke with his Clarcke and other neighboures : as also whether for the mortifying of the flesh and the quickning of the spirit , she changeth a soft bed into the hard ground , or fyne linnens into hayre-cloth : and in breife whether without all exceptions of dayes , not fish , milke , or egs , but the daintiest flesh and most delicate wyne , be meates most welcome to him and her ? I doubt not but he will answeare me that none of these agreeth with the fashion of these tymes . But thereto then must I needes reply , that therefore neither must he be much greued if his foresaid yokefelow grow wanton in the lord , hard bed , hayre cloth , and fasting ( the best externall preseruatiues against such impurities ) being vtterly abandoned . And yet if the lyke question should be proposed vnto me in regard of Catholickes , all Christian Countries would answeare with me , that the said austerities of B. Paula are not onely imitated & practised by Religious persons , but euen by wiues , widowes , & Virgins which liue in the world .

But to touch yet one point further , wherein I suppose all protestantes will disclaime as being incompatible with theire new gospels libertie , which was S. Paula her Monasticall lyfe , whereof S. Hierome saith , I will speake of the order of her Monastery &c. Besydes the Monastery of men which she had geuen to men to be gouerned , she deuyded the Virgins &c. aswell noble , as of the meanest and lowest degree , into three companies and Monasteries &c. After Alleluia song or sounded , ( by which signe they were called to Collect or prayer ) it was not lawfull for any of them to stay &c. In the morning , at the Third houre , at the Sixt , the Ninth , Euen song , and Midnight , they song the Psalter by order or course .

And now foloweth Whytes proofe of theire protestancy , neither was it lawfull for any of the Sisters to be ignorant of the Psalmes , or not to learne somthing daily out of the sacred Scriptures . But what is this against vs , who allow not onely Religious women such as these weare , ( Whom M. Whyte most fraudulently calleth Paules maydes ) but euen the laity to reade the Scriptures , supposing they be knowne to be humble , discreete , and vertuous . And yet in what maner S. Paula her self , & her daughter Eustochium being both well learned , did it , S. Hierome a litle after expresseth in these wordes . She forced me that together with her Daughter , she might read the old and new Testament , I declaring it : ( me disserente ) which in modesty denying , yet through her importunities and often intreaties , I performed , that so I might teach what I had learned , not of my self , that is presumption the worste maister , but of the famous men of the Church . And when in any poynt I doubted and ingeniously confessed my self to be ignorant , yet she would not rest but with dayly intreaty enforced me out of many and diuers sences , to shew that which to me semed most probable .

Would not any man think this minister distracted , thus producing against vs that which confoundeth him self ? Do not these Religious women in reading of the Scriptures requyre S. Hierome a Preist for their maister ? Doth not he professe to teach them , not what he had learned himself , or from many imaginary spirit , but from the famous men or Doctors of the Church ? Yea doth not he plainely and humbly acknowledg his doubting and ignorance in his explication thereof ; none of which I am sure is orthodoxall with protestants .

But to returne to S. Paula and her Virgins in the monastery . They had all one habite alyke ; Lynnens they vsed onely for wyping of their handes . Their seperation from men was such , as she seuered them euen from Eunuches . Besides sustenance and apparel , she suffered them not to possesse any thing . Such as were talkatyue & vnquiet , she caused ( in penance ) to pray at the doare of the refectory & to eate alone .

I might recyte many other lyke , but these abundantly proue that M. Whytes maides were indeede Nonnes or Religious women , whereof good store to gods greater glory euen our Counrtie doth as yet daily afforde .

Now for a conclusion I will breefely note what S. Hierome relateth of her death . As first hauing offered vp many deuout prayers vnto god almighty , beinge almost speachlesse , she signed her lippes with the signe of the Crosse , a deuotion also vsed in her lyfe tyme , as imputing much vertue thereunto , which S. Hierome before , mentioned in these wordes . When she had signed her mouth and her stomake , endeuoring by the impression of of the Crosse to mitigate her greife . &c. At her deathe were present the Bishopes of Hierusalem , and of other Cities , and an innumerable multitude of Preistes & Leuits , yea all the Monastery was filled with Virgins and Monks , Some of the Bishops caried the Coffin , and the rest goinge before caried Lampes and CANDLES , and Led the Singers . &c. In the Hebrew , Greeke , Latin , and Syrian Language Psalmes were songe , not onely for three dayes , but euen for a whole weeke . And in the end of all , this blessed Doctor as supposing her in heauen , inuocateth saying . a Farewel o Paula , Vale o Paula & Cultoris tui vltimam se nectutem ora tionibus iuua fides & opera ●●ate Christo sociant : praesens facilius quod pos tulas impe●rabis . and help with thy prayers the old age of him who worshippeth thee : thy faith and workes doe ioyne thee with Christ , being present thou shalt obtaine more easely what thou askest .

Out of these premisses I may easely inferre that not onely S. Ierome , but euen th Bishopes , Preistes , & people of his tyme , did wholly agree with vs Catholickes in the pointes folowing . viz , ( 1 ) Worshipping and Inuocation of Sainctes . ( 2 ) That euery one haith an Angell guardian or keeper . ( 3 ) Pilgrimage to holy places . ( 4 ) Adoration of the Crosse : ( 5 ) and signing the body with the signe thereof . ( 6 ) Kissing and reuerencing of Relickes . ( 7 ) Tormenting of deuils at the Sepulchres of Sainctes ( 8 ) Building of Monasteries and profession of Monasticall lyfe . ( 9 ) Voluntary pouerty . ( 10 ) Wearing of hair-cloth and no linnens 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 man for their Maister . ( 15 ) The learnedst confessing their doubtinge and ignorance in their explication of the Scriptures . ( 16 ) Bishopes and Preist● 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 language● . 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 vlt●●am senectu●●● orationibus iuua : fides & opera tua Christo te sociant , praesens facilius quod postulas imp●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 propounded the heauenvly 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 Li●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 man 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 reporte● 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 them 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 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 from 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 sentence , 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. ● .

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 , whear● 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 ( H●c est enim ordinaria &c for by this is that ordinary and perpetuall Succession of Bishops , Preistes , and Pastors d●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 the said booke being to confute the Protestants notes ) by the said Doctors wordes also concealed by M. Whyte , which doe immediatly precede the sentence vrged by him . For there speaking of the preaching of the Gospell , and of the ministration of the Sacraments , he saith . Ad●menta & ornamenta . These are furthere ●●●es & ornaments of the true Church , non ipsius nota & insignia , but not markes or signes therof . Here you see how Ieweshsly M. Whyte haith circumcysed this poore Authority in paring away both the first and latter part thereof . But seing his inexcusable faultines not onely in this place but in most of his deprauationes , is to set downe one part of a testimony and fraudulently to hyde an other part : let him remember the greouous punishment inflicted by the Apostle vpon Ananias for bringing halfe , and concealing the other halfe . Act. 5 .

The 5. Paragraph . Gregory Valentia corrupted in behalf of the Protestantes markes of the Church .

In proofe of the Protestantes markes of the Church , to wit . Truth of doctrine and administration of the Sacraments , M. Whyte pag. 137. alledgeth Valentia Com. Theol. Tom. 3. disp. 1.9.1 . punct. 7. parag. 18. saying . Among whomsoeuer the truth of Doctrine and Sacraments are houlden : thereby it is knowne the Church is there . But for the true displaying of this baise iugling minister , I will set downe the wordes at large as that learned Author deliuered them him self . Nos autem fatemur ( saith he ) neque veritate d●ctrinae neque legitimo sacramentorum vsu Ecclesiam Christi carere posse : & apud quos haec omninó sint salua , exiis constare veram Ecclesiam . Sed negamus tamen veritatem doctrinae , & legitimum sacramentorum vsum , idoneas notas esse discernendae Ecclesiae' . But we confesse that the Church of Christ can neither wante truth of doctrine , nor lawfull vse of Sacramentes , and amongst whom these are altogether saife ( or sincere ) of them to consist the true Church . But yet we deny the truth of doctrine and lawfull vse of Sacramentes , to be fit markes of discerning the Church .

Here M. Doctor first I must admire the profundity of your indgment , producing , by an vnknown kind of pollicy , a most famous learned man contradicting him self in one and the same sentence , yea not onely contradictinge the tytle of his disputation which is the Marckes of the Church which the sectaries assigne are euidently confuted , but euen the many and different profes which for sixe pages he continueth against the said markes assigned by protestantes . But because this so great an ouersight is more then probable , let vs examine brefely your demeanour towardes him . You alledg in a different letter as though they were the Authors expresse wordes , these folowing . Among whomsoeuer the truth of doctrine and Sacraments are houlden : thereby it is knowne the Church is there . Him self sayeth Apud quos haec omuino sint salna : ex iis constare veram Ecclesiam . Amongst whom these are altogether sincere : of them to consist the true Church . That which Valentia speaketh of the persons of whom the Church consisteth : your worship pleaseth to apply to the markes by which it is to be knowne , as though there weare no difference betwixt the members of the Church , & the externall badges & tokens whereby the said church is discerned . But peradu●nture you will pretend for your excuse , the alledging in the mergent of your boke these latin wordes , ex us constare veram Ecclesi●m . But the truth is this doth rather plead you guilty of grosse ignorance in not knowing how to translate aright , or as I rather think , of laboured and affected malice , who hauing sene and perused the place , would so desperatly produce it against the manifeste sence of the wordes and the direct intention of the Author . And though the word constare , doth not onely signify to consist or stande , but som-tymes likewise to be manifest or knowne , yet in the place cyted neither the wordes precedent nor subsequent , nor the scope or ●rift of the Author will permitt it , yea they all conuince and conclude the contrary . But if it were lawfull for me M. Whyte in wordes Amphibologicall which haue a double sence , without all respect either to the subiect or matter treated , the intention of the speaker , or other circumstance , to translate or apply the worde onely for myne owne aduauntage : I would easely defend against your learne●st Doctor-ship , sund●y of the celestiall signes to be liuing and sensible creatures , and so much more to be estee●ed t●en your self : for I would likewise , vpon the same ●round , defend your self to be no substance , but a mere accident : Into such grosse absurdities doth your beggerly heres●e euer plunge you .

The 6 Paragraph . Bellarmine egregiously corrupted against the Markes of the Church .

M. Whyte desiring to extenuate the worth , and to obscure the splendor of those glorious markes which the Catholick Church as so many cleare rayes moste plentifully affordeth , produceth pag. 137. Cardinal Bellarmine as saying . They make it not euidently true , that is the Church , but euidently probable . Here M. D. as it semes wanted lantorne and candle light : but most certainely he wanted either honesty , or knowledg , or both : in best confirmation whereof , I will onely set downe the wordes of Bellarmine him selfe de notes eccl. lib. 4. ca. 3. Est autem initio obseruandum , Ecclesiam Catholicam esse &c. It is in the beginning to be obserued that the Catholick Church is a Soon which on euery side powreth out the clearest beames of light , so that by them she may most easely be knowne . For she haith many Markes or testimonies , and signes which discerneth her from all false religions of Paganes , Iewes , Heritykes . And they do not make it euidently true that she is the true Church of God , but yea they make it euidently `credible : for that is said euidently true that is seene either in it self or in it principles : that is said euidently credible which is not seene either in it selfe or in it principles , yet ( which ) haith so many , and so graue Testimonies , as that euery wyse man deseruedly ought to beleue it .

Here the minister , all excuses set apart , must nedes confesse that he haith falsly corrupted the text of Bellarmine , changing this parcell euidently credible , into euidently probable , betwene which two there is no lesse difference , then betwixt him self and an honest man , which is not small . For example , if but one hundreth of learned and sincere writers , should confesse that D. Whyte had corrupted th●● bookes in sundry places , this confession would make it euidently credible that D. Whyte were an impostor , or deceauer , a mercionary minister and the lyke : but if onely two or three should auouch it & as many of equall authority deny it , then it were but euidently probable : If the matter were brought to this issue , him self would plainely see the greateste difference betwixt these two . And I dare bouldly say that with lesser labour I will ●●panell an hundreth , who will all geue their verdictes against his foulest forgeries , then him self a coople to answeare in his behalf .

But speake M. Whyte ( once ) in good sincerity , why did you translate it euidently probable ? was it to make the Cardinall for his learning and sanctity most Illustrious , to speake as ignorantly as a protestant minister ? Do not your so foule and frequent corrupting of his writinges , make it more then probable , yea euidently credible , that no other meanes is left you to euade the force of his Argumentes ? Wel my wholesome aduyse is this , if you presume to reade Bellarmine , be lesse conuersant with Bacchus .

The 7. paragraph . S. Thomas fouly corrupted concerning the popes authority .

M. Whyte is not ashamed to affirme that we take all authority and sufficiency from the Scripture , & geue it to the Church , & finally the Churches authority to the Pope . and thereupon insinuateth that we houlde that the Pope at his pleasure is able euen to stampe or create a new faith or Crede neuer afore heard of . To this end he alledgeth pag. 68. this saying out of S. Thomas . 2. ●● . quest 1. ar. 10. The making of a new Crede belongeth to the Pope as all other thinges doe which belong to the whole Church , thus insimulating all Catholickes within this errour as houlding that the chang of the articles of our Crede , resteth vpon the change of the Popes mynde therein .

For the fuller discouery of this diabolicall deprauation ( for I can terme it no better ) I will here set downe at large the wordes of S. Thomas . Thus then he saith . Ad solam authoritatem Summi Pontificis pertinet noua Editio Symbols &c. A new Edition of the Crede , belongeth to the Pope , as all other thinges doe which concerne the whole Church . And then some few lynes after foloweth ( which belyke the Doctors hand would haue aked to haue writen downe . Haec noua Editio Symboli , non quidem aliam fidem continet , sed eandem magis expositam . This new Edition of the Crede conteyneth not an other faith but the former more fully explicated . Here our minister haith practised his profession of corrupting two wayes , first in translating noua Editio Symboli , The making of a new Crede , whereas it should be The new Edition of the Crede thus causing the newnes to consist in the newnes of our beleefe or Crede , and yet as you see in S. Thomas the worde new , is ioyned onely with the Edition or explication of the Crede . Secondly in retayning from the Reader those other latter wordes which doe expresse S. Thomas his meaning therein , to wit , that no new faith or Crede contrary to the first is decreed thereby , but the former onely is more fully explicated , the reason whereof he thus deliuereth euen in the same paragraph . In doctrina Christi & Apostoloris &c. The truth of faith is sufficiently explicated in the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles : but because wilfull men do peruert , to their owne destruction , the doctrine of the Apostles and Scriptures : therefore it was necessary that there should be in processe of tyme , an explication of faith against all ensuing erroures . Here you haue manifested the true reason of S. Thomas his former wordes : and consequently here is discouered che vncharitable impudency of our minister , to diuorce the said wordes from their legitimate and maine sence : but it semeth that he professing him self a publick aduersary to the catholick Religion , thinketh it iustifiable to impugne the same by any deceitfull or indir●ct stratagems whatsoeuer . Dolus an virtus quis in hoste requirat . Virg.

The 8 Paragraph . Doctor Stapleton corrupted concerning the same subiect .

In lyke sort to shew to his Reader what s●pposed transcendency of soueraignty and power the Catholickes geue to the Pope : he , pag. 68. thus writeth . Stapleton Praefat. princip. fidei doctrinal . saith . The foundation of our Religion is of necessity placed vpon the authority of this mans teaching ( meaning of the Pope ) in which we heare god h●m self speaking . In all that Preface I assure thee good Reader , there is no such saying at al ; and therefore it is merely forged by our calumnious minister , thereby first to suggest that we make the Pope the foundation of our faith which we asscribe to Christ Iesus onely . Secondly that we beare the ignorant in hand that we accompt the Pope as an other God : the nearest wordes in that Preface that can beare any resemblance at all to these , I will here set downe . Quae prima sunt fidei nostrae elementa &c. Such pointes as are the first elements or principles of our faith , and yet the baises or foundation thereof as the true Catholick and Apostolick Church of God , the necessary and infallible power of the Church to teach and Iudg matters of faith , the persons in whom this power remayneth , the meanes which the said persons , ought and are accustomed to vse in iudging and teaching , the cheif heades or branches about which this power is exercysed , as to determine some certaine and authenticall Canon of Scripture , to geue the vndoubted and au●henticall interpreta●ion thereof , and finally ( besydes the decreeing of the Canon of the Scripture ) to deliuer and command the vnwriten . Articles of faith : all these I say , which are principia doctrinalia , doctrinall principles of our faith , and which do teach , confirme , and explaine , the same , the heritikes of our vnfortunate tyme , haue most fowly denyed , contaminated , and depraued .

How many wheeles and deductions of inferences here neede we before we can draw out M. Whytes alledged sence , and yet he deliuereth it in a different letter with the vshering wordes of , Stapleton saith , as though they were the very precise wordes of the said Authour ; or what is geuen more to the Pope then to the reste heare specifyed ? Yet our minister blushed not to particularyze , what here is spoken in respect of the principles of faith in generall , onely to the pope . Againe , his sleight further appeareth in taking the word foundation , in an equiuocall and dooble sence , for he will needes accept it ( to make the saying more odious ) for that which is an essentiall and primatiue foundation of faith , ( which is Christ Iesus ) whereas D. Stapleton here meaneth ( according to the tytle of his booke ) Principia fidei doctrinalia , onely Doctrinall principles or Secondary foundations , which as him self saith fidem docent , confirmant , explicant , doe teach , confirme , and explaine our faith . Thus the further we dog him in his allegations , the more we shall be assured that deprauing and strangely detorting the wrytinges of Catholick Doctors , and the Fathers , is ( among the rest ) those feble supportes whereupon his cause leaneth .

The 9 paragraph . S. Ciprian strangely handled against Appeales to Rome .

It haith euer bene the course of former heritikes not onely with contumelies to disgrace the deserued renowne of the Popes and Church of Rome , but also with their subtilty and corruption falsely to detracte from theire iust authority and prerogatiues . In which kynd our minister ( to shew him self lawfully descended ) in proofe of his dislyke of Appeales from other Bishopes to the Bishopes 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 reprehendeth certaine heritikes , who being iudicially conuicted 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 conuince 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 chang 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 Religion● 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 subsequent 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 ( i● 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 the● 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 definition , 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 non 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 purpo●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 do● 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 answerably thereto speaking of the words of our Sauiour Pasce oues meas , thus styleth some of his pages in his Lucian and scornfull phraze , Feede my sheepe is not poping . But howsoeuer to feede in this place be to pope it : I am sure most egregiously and impudently to corrupt Authors is to Whyte it .

Chapter . 4. Wherein are discouered sundry corruptions concerning the sacred Scriptures and Traditions .

The 1. Paragraph . Bellarmine corrupted , in behalf of the Scripture prouing it self to be the word of God .

THE next poynt we are to come to are such his corruptions wherein he pretendeth that the Catholickes doe acknowledge all sufficiency of Scripture both for the interpreting of it self without any needefull explication of the Church thereof , as also for it fulnesse in contayning expresly all thinges necessary to mans saluation , excluding thereby all Apostolicall Traditions whatsoeuer .

And first pag. 59. shewing that the Scripture is knowen to be the word of God without the attestation of the Church which as he houldeth may be deceatfull , he alledgeth Bellarmine de verb. des li. 2. ca. 2. thus confessing , ( other meanes may deceaue me ) but nothing is more knowen , nothing more certayne then the Scriptures , that it were the greatest madnes in the world not to beleue them &c. See how loth our minister is to cease to be him self , I meane to cease his notorious corrupting , for the wordes of Bellarmine are these . Sacris Scripturis quae Prophetieis & Apostolicis literis continentur , nihil est notins , nihil certius , vt stultissimum esse necesse sit , qui illis fidem esse habendam neget . There is nothing more knowen , nothing more certaine , then the holy Scriptures which are contayned in the wryti●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 hidden reuelations , and answearably hereto the Tytle of this Chapter is , Libris qui Canonic● appella●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 warranted 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 concealements 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 commiserit . 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 sence ( which hitherto I can not find ) yet it is no small dishonesty in M. Whyte thus vnkindly to match and ioyne together such disopting sentences without the parents consent . Againe what a strange construction or translation is this ? Scriptura non est authentica sine authoritate Ecclesiae . The Scripture receaueth all the authority it haith from the Church , and from Tradition . If this liberty be Iustifiable , what errour so grosse may not easely be iustifyed against all Scripture , thongh neuer so plentifull , though neuer so manifest .

The 4. Paragraph . Canus corrupted concerning Traditions .

Againe perusing his former proiect , he ( pag. 2. ) fortifyeth him self with a wrest d authority of Canus , whom li. 3. ca. 3. he bringeth in thus teaching . There is more strength to confute heritykes in Traditions , then in the Scripture , yea all disputations with them , must be determined by Traditions . Here againe the proteruity of our Doctor more and more discouereth it self : For thus Canus speaketh . Non modo aduersum haereticos &c. Not onely against heritykes Tradition is of more force then Scripture , but also omnis ( fermè ) disputatio ( almost ) all disputation with them is to be reduced to Traditions receaued from our Auncestors . ( For seing both Catholickes & heritikes doe alledg Scripture for them selues , the difference betwene them is in the sence and interpretation thereof . Now which is the true and lawfull sence of it can not otherwise certainly be knowen , then by the tradition of the Church )

Here now our ministers sleight is three-fould ; for first Canus borroweth this saying from Tertulian of whom twenty lynes before this place Canus thus us writeth . Tertulianus monet vt aduersus hareticos , magis Traditionibus quam Scripturis disseramus : Scripturae enim varios sensus tr●huntur , Traditiones non item . Tertulian counseleth vs that we hould dispute against heritikes rather with Tradition then with Scripture , since the Scriptures are drawen into seuerall constructions , whereas Traditions are not so . Thus it appeareth that the opinion is Tertulians , and borrowed onely from him by Canus : yet M. Whyte thought it more conuenient to deliuer it , as proceding onely from Canus , so concealing Tertulian as vnwilling to haue it graced and countenanced with the Authority of so auncient a Doctor .

The second deceipt here , lyeth in not translating , but concealing the reason of Canus his Iudgment therein though it be expressed by Canus in the wordes immediatly folowing the place alledged , which shew that the cause why we are to dispute with heritykes with Traditions rather then with Scriptures , is not ( as our minister falsly pretendeth ) our distrust in the Scripture or want thereof to proue our Catholick Faith , but ( as Canus saith ) because the true sence of it is cheifely to be taken from Tradition warranted by the Church .

Thirdly and lastly he abuseth his Reader in concealing the aduerbe ferme , in those words aboue , om●is ferme disputatio , almost all disputation , whereas he translateth all disputations . Thus Canus by vsing the worde fermè , exempteth some points from being decyded onely by traditions , whereas by our ministers translation , not any one is excepted . Thus haue we seene how our Doctor by his fowle collusions haith laboured seuerall wayes , to depresse and obscure the worthines of gods Catholick Church , as by making her become somtimes inuisible , by falsly ascribing to her and her head ( in the catholickes name ) an vsurping soueraignty , thereby to make her due Authority the more contemned , & to conclude by depryuing her of all Apostolicall Traditions and of all preheminency in explayning and expounding the Scriptures , whereas she ( especially now in the tyme of the Gospell ) euer sendeth from her self most glorious beames and splendor of truth and perpetuitie , according to that of the princely psalmist , In sole pos uit Tabernaculum suum : for indeede she is that Soon which ( contrary to our inuisibilistes ) for these sixteene hundreth yeres , did neuer once set vnder the horizon of an vniuersall latency , that Soon which neuer expatiates beyond the tropickes of Gods Traditionary or writen word , that Soon which with it defyning and infallible authority in explicating the true sense of Gods word , dissipates and dissolues all cloudes of errour exhaled through the weake influence of the reuealing spirit , finally that Soon whose concentrous vniformity could yet neuer broke any Phaniomena , or apparances of innouation and nouelty , whereas all other sectes professing the name of Christians , are ( in regard of it ) but as Planetary and wandring starrs , producing many Anomalous irregularities of vncertainty , dissention , and confusion .

Chapiter . 5. Concerning Faith & heresy .

The 1. Paragraph . Bellarmine verrupted against the necessity of true Faith .

BVT to returne to our Doctor , from Traditions we will descend to such other his deprauations , as concerne Faith in generall , as pag. 212. suggesting that we exact not ( besides other vertues ) any true or inward Faith to denominate or make one a perfect member of Gods Church , but onely an outward show hereof , he introduceth Bellarmine thus speaking . de Eccl. mil. lib. 3. ca. 2. Noe inward vertue is required to make one a part of the true Church , but onely the externall profession of Faith . And then M. Whyte ryoteth in great profusion of wordes , that vpon this grounde in the papistes Iudgment , all holines of lyfe and conuersation is superfluous and needelesse . But let vs recurre to Bellarmines wordes them selues . Not credimus in Ecclesia inueniri &c. ( We doe beleue , that in the Church are found all vertues , at Faith , Hope , Charity , & the rest ) ver , vr aliquis ( aliquo modo ) dic● possi● pars verae Ecclesiae &c. That any one may be called ( in some sort or manner ) a part of that true Church whereof the Scripture speaketh : we doe not think any inward vertue to be requyred , but onely an externall profession of faith &c. And in the folowing paragraph he saith , that those who ( wanting all vertue ) haue onely an externall profession of Faith & c● are as it were de corpore , but not de anima Ecclesiae , of the body , not of the soule of the Church , &c. He but sicut capilli , an t mali humores in corpore humano . So wrongfully here we see is Bellarmine traduced by our Doctor : First in concealing the beginning of the sentence , wherein he acknowledgeth all theologicall vertues euer to be found in Gods Church . Secondly in suggesting to the Reader , that Bellarmine requyreth no true inward vertues as necessary for a Christian soule , but onely an externall faith : this is a false and selanderous contumely , for pulchra es & decora ●●lia Hierusalem . Ca● . 6. And Bellarmine is so farre from teaching that such doe take any benefite by this theire outward profession , that he saith ( as we see ) they are but onely of the body of the Church , & not of the soule ( to which kynd of members internall vertues at least are necessary ) and that they are to be resembled to the lesse profitable and but excrementall partes of mans body , as the hayres of the head , the nayles , and other such bad humors . Thirdly he wrongeth the Cardinall who saith , that a man onely of outward profession , is but aliquo modo pars Ecclesia , meaning onely in Turrian 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 translated 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 ignorantiam , 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 , quam assensum . Iustifying Faith , rather to be assent then knowledg , there proueth , that faith ( euen according to the Apostles definition thereof ) can not be demonstrated , and that the assent which we geue thereunto ( saith he ) followeth not rationem & euidentiam rei , a cleare euidence of the poynt beleued , which is property called notitiam , 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 i● 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 sentence 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 , quam 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 therein● 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 disputation 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 Pre●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 him self . The sacred hand of Theophilus haith geuen me a wyse , and hereupon I testify to all men , that I will neither for sake her , nor yet priuily as an adulterer kepe her company , but I will pray to God to send me by her many & good children . This Authority , as you see , maketh a speceous show , but examine it truly , & you shall confesse , that it is M. Whytes proper scene to acte the falsary and corrupter , so notoriously haith he behaued him self herein . For the better vnderstanding therefore of this soule imposture , thou art to conceaue ( good Reader ) that this Epistle of Sinesius , out of which our M. taketh this Authority , is set downe at large by Nicephorus Eccl. his . lib. 14. ca. 55. And that at the tyme when it was writen , Sinesius was but a Lay man , yet very eminent for diuers kyndes of good literature , and in reguard of such his partes , he was much solicited by many to vndertake the function of Preisthood : he a longe tyme yelded not to their perswasions , and did wryte this very Epistle to Euopius , ( who was one that wished him to that course ) to iustify hereby his resolution not to make him self Preist . And in this Epistle amonge other of his reasons , as his loue to humane studies , and his temporall pleasures diuerting him from that course , he alledgeth the wordes here set downe by M. Whyte , to wit , that in reguard he was a maried man , and intending to continue and liue in a wedlock state with his wyfe , he was not to enter into that sacred function . Thus doth Sinesius acknowledg euen in this Epistle ( which by our minister is wrested to the mantaining of the contrary ) that mariage ( with a determination not to leaue the company of his wyfe ) is a sufficient barre or let to Preisthood .

Now it hapned that some reasonable tyme after the wryting of his former Epistle , he was ouer-perswaded , and so assenting to his frendes importunity , was made Preist , and then after created Bishop of Ptolemais , & liued for all the tyme after , euer seperated from the company of his wyfe . Here then our ministers incredible deceipt ( of which he is to him self most conscious ) lyeth in applying the wordes spoken by Sinesius when he was a lay man , to him as he was after Proist and Bishop , and so by the wilfull confusion of these two seuerall tymes , doubted not but to bleare the weake iudgment of his ignorant reader . Good Reader , if thou vnderstandest latin , I could wish thee to see the Epistle of Sinesius , in the aboue noted place of Nicephorus , wherein thou shalt fynd it most euident , that at that tyme , Sinesius was not Preist , for euen there ( besides many other passages ) he saith of him self . Ego sanè qui meipsum noui , ineptiorem comperio , quam vt sacerdotali dignitati gerende idoneus sin● . I who am priuie to mine owne weakenes , doe fynde that I am not fit to vndertake the dignity of Preisthood . In lyke sort euen at the end of this Epistle , Nicephorus him self thus concludeth . Sinesius haec scribens , apertè sacerdotalem dignitatem auersatus est &c. Sinesius wryting these thinges , was clearely vnwilling of the dignity of Preisthood : So as it is most vndoubted and perspicuous , that at the wryting of this Epistle ( out of which M. Whyte did take the former wordes ) he was not then Preist , much lesse Bishop of Ptolemais , as our . M. subtlly styleth him .

Now what do you say to this M. Whyte , do you not think that this your persidious dealing being once made knowen , will becom odious , not onely to Catholickes , but euen to all ingenious and welmeaninge protestantes , though hitherto with extraordinary applause and allowance , they haue much admyred you ? no doubt it will : and therefore seing you can not otherwise warrant ( for your owne interest ) the mariage of the Cleargy , but onely by such dishonest meanes : I hope that the fortune of Acteon , before your deathe , will happen vnto you , ( feare not man , I presse not the word in any disloyall sence ) in being maligned , afflicted , and bayted , euen by your owne frendes and followers .

The 2. Paragraph . Paphnutius acused concerning the mariage of Preistes .

For his further patronizing of Preistes mariage , he pag. 343. vrgeth that often obtruded place of Sainct Paule Heb. 13. Mariage is honourable among all men . and at these wordes cyteth in the mergent Sozomen . li. 1. ca. 22. as wryting that Paphnutius mantayned the protestantes construction of that place , so as that Preistes might absolutely at any tyme mary . In the discouery of his deprauation here vsed , I will not much insist in displaying his corruption of this text of Scripture , by adding the wordes , is , and , men , ( the which he borroweth from the english false translation ) for neither in the Geeke text can we fynd the verbe , is , of the Indicatiue moode , neither the worde , men , that place being thus according to the greeke , mariage is honourable in all : which worde , all , may aswell haue reference to all respectes or endes of mariage , as to all men . But I will cheifely relye , in shewing how small reason he haith to alledg Sozomen or Paphnutius in this poynt , and how litle their true meaning doth sort to our ministers drift : for M. Whyte vndertaketh in this place to proue , that Preistes may take wyues at any tyme , ( meaning aswell after their consecration as before ) , and so answearably in generall styleth the former page Preistes mariage , and lyke wise thus beginneth that very Paragraph , wherein the former wordes of S. Paule are alledged , Fourthly touching the mariage of ministers , &c. Now if we looke into the former quotation of Sozomene touching Paphnutius , we shall fynde that he recordeth , how the Councell of Nyce , did onely tollerate and permit the mariage of Preistes , before theire entrance into preisthood , but not after their consecration : which doth absolutely crosse the scope of M. W. intention in this place . For first this is the tytle of the quoted Chapiter of Sozomen . De Canonibus quas Concilium posuit : & quod cum Ca●onem statuere voluerat , vt quicunque ad sacerdori● dignitatem euecti essent , ●um ●xori●us , quas antequam sacris in●tiati eram , duxarant , non dor ●●irent : in medium preferens Paphnutius quidem Confessor intercede●at . Of the Carrons of the Councell ( meaning of Nyce ) and their whereas the Councell determined to decree , that euen those who were called to the dignity of preisthood , should not liue with those their wyues , whom they had maried before they were ordeyned Preistes : one Paphnutius a Confessour being amonge the Councell , began to plead the contrary . But if the Councell thought it once conuenient to decree , that such Preistes as were maried before theire entrance into Preisthood , should not liue together with their wyues in state of matrimony , then a fortiori , it did vtterly condemne the mariage of Preistes after they be made Preistes , which is the contrary whereunto is here che●fe●y defended by M. Whyte . This poynt is further confinned out of the wordes of Sozomen , euen in the foresaid quoted Chapiter , for there Sozomen doth thus wryte . Veterem Ec●lesiu ●●aeditionem esse , vt qu ? Cas●ties gradum sacerdo ●●em cons●euti fuisseur , postea minime vxores duderen● qui autem post nuptias , adteum or dinem vocati essent , hit ab vxoribus quas habeba●● minime separarentur , & ●ta quidem lice● Coniuglie p●rs , f●ant Paphnutius . It is an ancient Tradition of the Church , what such as be vnmaried when they enter the degree of preisthood , should not after ta●●e to them selues any wyues : But those who being afore maried , and after arcealled to that order , should not be therefore seperated from theire wyues , and this Paphnutius though him self vnmaried ) perswaded the Councell vnto : and thus far Sozomen of this poynt . Now I referre to the iudtecous reader how worthily and sincerely M. Whyte halth quoted Paphnutius out of Sozomen , for interpreting of S. Paules wordes in defence of Preistes mariage in generall , without any distinction of tymes , whereas in deede Sozomen Paphnutius , and the Councell of Nyce ; did absolutely forbid mariage of the Cleargy after their ordination of preisthood , directly opposite against the most generall , practise of our english ministers , who for the most part first seeke after a steeple , and then a woman : and thus with them , a fat benefyce , and a sister in the Lord ( for heresy euer lyes groueling in sensuality ) are become in our new euangelicall philosophy , the terminus ad quem , whereunto all other their motions , doe finally propend and are directed .

The 3. Paragraph . S. Augustine corrupted against fasting .

The Doctor ( through his great auersion which he haith of fasting , and of forbidden meates for certaine dayes ( pag. 307. wryteth , that the auncient Monkes made no distinction of meates , & alledgeth in the margent for proofe thereof , S. Augustine de mor. Eccl. li. 1. ca. 33. Now you shall see how truly he auoucheth the Father herein ; for in that very Chapiter ( not to insist of his speaking of the Monkes fasting in those wordes , Ieiunia prorsut incredibilia , mult●s exercere did●ci . I haue learned that many Monkes did practise euen incredible fastes ) he thus wryteth touching forbearance of the eating of flesh multi non vescuntur carnibus &c. Many Monkes do not feede vpon flesh , though they are not perswaded superstitiously , that flesh is an vncleane meate . & after againe . Continent se illi , qui possunt ( qu●●tamen sunt innumerabiles ) & a carnibus , & a vino &c. Such Monks as in body are hable ( who yet are innumerable ) do abstaine from flesh , and from wyne . Here it is euident what the custome of the ancient Monkes was in those tymes , & how different from the practise of the new gospellers , since infinite of them eating fish , neuer tasted of flesh , whereas to the contrary , I dare auouch in the behalf of this my sanctifyed minister , that euen out of conscience , he forbeares to feede of superstitious fish . But indeede M. Whyte doth well to shew himself so resolute an aduocate , as afore of venety in the mariage of Preisles , so now of Epicurisme , since he well knoweth that there is a secret reference , and mutuall dependency , betwene these two most spirituall and ghostly Characters of our late stamped gospell : a poynte so cleare , that euen the Poets do tell vs , that Venus was euer much befrended by Ceres and Bacchus .

The 4. Paragraph . Baronius notoriously corrupted , in proofe that heritykes can worke true miracles .

To depryue the Catholick Church of her glory , of most certaine and vndoubted miracles , wherewith god haith seuerall tymes sealed vp the truth of the faith professed by her Doctors : our minister laboureth to proue from the confession of Catholickes , that woorking of true miracles , are also common to heritikes , & therefore no peculiar note of the true Church or Faith .

Now to this end , pag. 301. he alledgeth Baronius Annal. An. 68. nu. 22. touching the miracles of Simon Magus . Simon made Images to walk , & would lye in the fyre without hurt , & flye in the ayre , & make bread of stones : he could open doares fast shut , & vnloose boundes of Iron &c. But doth out M. here leaue his accustomed trade of corrupting think you ? No , for he paireth the testimony round aboute , for euen both immediatly before and immediatly after the Authority alledged , he concealeth Baronius his owne wordes wherein he acknowledgeth , that these were no miracles , by impostures , and sleightes onely : For thus he wryteth before . Quaenam autem hat fuer●t , ●●m reue● á non essent , tament ab hominibus videri videbantur , referam &c. ( I will relate what prestigies or steightes those of Simons were , seeing indeed they were not true , yet semed to be in the sight of men ) and the mentioneth those reckned by M. Whyte . And after Baro. haith numbred the said supposed miracles , he thus instantly concludeth . Hueusque de Simonis imposturis , quibus haec per imaginem oste●debat , & visum , cum nulla verita●e consisterent . Thus farr of the impostures of Simon , which appeared but in show and in the eye , seing indeede they were not truly performed . Now I appeale to the iudiceous Reader , with what ●andor and sincerity M. Whyte could produce part of the sentence of Baronius ( omitting both the beginning and endinge ) ●● euict , that true and vndoubted miracles , are incident also to heritykes , and consequently are no competent marke of the true Faith or Church .

Chapiter 7. Concerning the Sacramentes of the Eucha●l● and Pennance .

The 1. Paragraph ●●●armine corrupted against Transubstantiation .

OVR Doctor pag. 24. haith a soule deprauation touching the doctrine of Transubstantiation , alledging Bellarmine saving , de Euch. lib 2. ca. 2.3 That it may iustly be doubted , whether the text be clea●e enough ●o infe● Transubsta●tiatio● , seing men sharpe & learned , such as Scotus was , ha●e thought the contrary . The Reader shall see the whole periode of Bellarmine at large , and so may discerne how strongly both he & Scotus impugne transubstantiation , as they are here by our M. traduced to doe . Thus then . Scotus dicit ●on ex●are &c. Scotus saith , that there is no place of Scripture so expresse , which ( fi●e Ecclesiae declaratiore ) without the ●●claration or interpretation of the Church , can euidently force transubstantiation . And this is not altogether in probable : ( for although the text of Scripture ; which aboue we haue alledged , s●me so cleare 〈◊〉 , that it is able to conuince hominem ●on pro●eru●● , a man not obstinate ) neuerthelesse whether it do so or no , i● may i●●l● be doubted of , seing that learned and sharp men ( such as Scotus was ) haue , thought the contrary . But Scotus ●dd●●h , that s●●g the Catholick Church haith expounded the said text of Scripture in a generall Councell , therefore saith he , from the said Scripture so declared by the Chu●ch , transu●st●●tiation is manifestly proued . Thus far● Bellarmine . Now I doe a●ke , that if we consider the whole contexture of this passage together , whether according to the mynds of Bellarmine & Scotus , it maketh against transubstantiation or no ? I say it euen fortifyeth the Doctrine thereof : For Bellarmine first teacheth , that the text is e●ident enough to conu●nce any man that is not froward or obstinate : and Scotus ( as we fynde here , grauntes , that transubstantiation is manifestly proued from the Scripture , being so already expounded by a generall Councell : wherefore our ministers sleight resteth , in nakedly settinge downe the former parcell of Bellarmine , and in concealing the wordes afore , sine declaratione Ecclesia , & againe , hominem non proteruum , to both which , the sentence alledged haith a necessary reference : So as if M. Whyte would haue deliuered Bellarmines true meaninge here , he must haue deliuered it in this sort : It may be iustly doubted , whether the Text without the declaration of the Church , be cleare enough to conuince an obstinate man in the poynt of transubstantiation , seing men sharp & learned , such at Scotus &c. But this deportment had bene ouer candid & sincere , and in no manner sortinge to the calumnious proiect of our deprauing minister , who by his perfidious dealinge throughout his whole booke , semeth to haue made ship-wrack of all morall honesty , reputation , religion , and shame . periere mores , ius , decus , pietas , fides : & quiredire nescit , cum perit pudor . Seneca . in Agam.

The 2. Paragraph . The Maister of sentences corrupted against confession to a Preist .

In this next place we will descend to the Sacrament of Penance , prophaned by this our Doctors deprauations : and first to beare the reader in hand , that by the acknowledgment of Catholickes , auricular Confession , and other partes of this Sacrament , are not necessary , he , pag. 254. produceth the M. of Sentences li 4. d. 17. saying . By contrition onely without Confession , or payment of outward punishment ( or liberality of the prelate , or paynes in purgatory ) I may goe straight to heauen . The wordes of this Author are these . Sanè dici potest , quod sine confessione oris , & solutione paenae exterioris , peccata delentur per contritionem & humilitatem . Verily it may be said , that sinnes are remitted by contrition & humility , without confession of the mouth , or payment of exteriour punishment . Where we fynde , first these wordes , or liberality of the prelate , or paynes in purgatory , to be added by M. Whyte , though set downe in a peculiar character , & letter of the Author : but this our minister did , to make the confession of this Author , more full & swellinge : neuerthelesse to passe ouer this , I affirme that the sentence is fraudulently alledged , to take away auriculer confession . And therefore the reader ought to conceaue , that though all Catholickes teach , that perfect contrition is of force to blot owt a mans sinnes● yet they houlde , that this contrition can not be without confession , at least in voto , as the schoole-men speake , that is , that the party haith a desire to coufesse his sinnes to a preist , when opportunity shall serue . And that this is the very meaning of the Maister of the sentences in this place , appeareth , first out of his owne wordes , euen in the said paragraph or distinction where he saith . Non est veré pe●●tens , qui confessionis v●tums non habes : he is not truly penitent , who haith not a desire to confesse his sinnes . Which poynt is also further made cleare by the tytle of the next paragraph sauinge one of this Author , which is this , quod non sufficit soli Deo coufiteri , si tempu● ad●it , si tamen homini possit . That it is not sufficient onely to confesse our sinne to God , if so we haue tyme or opportunity , to confesse to man . Thus it appeareth what reason our Doctor had , to alledg the Authority of the Maister of the sentences , for the absolute abolishing of the Sacrament of Confession : whereas he meaneth that onely in tyme of necessity , and when opportunity is not to confesse them to man , then with a true contrition , the sinnes may be remitted without Confession . Such you see is the proceding of our minister throughout his booke , euer inuesting his doctrine and assertions , with most foule and stained deprauations , wel discouering the spotted guiltines of his owne soule wherefore for the tyme hereafter , I could wish M. Whyte ( that so his mynde might be appareled answearably to his name ) to follow the admonition of the Euangelist , Get thee a whyte garment ( to wit , of repentance and future integrity ) that thou maist be clothed , and that thy thy filthy nakednes doe not ( further ) app●●●● . Apo● 3.

The 3 Paragraph . Bellarmine corrupted against Satisfaction .

Lastly touching the Sacrament of Penance , whereof Satisfaction is on part , to make the Catholick doctrine thereof become ●ame ●ngracefull , he , pag. 249. produceth Bellarmine , li. 1. depur . ca. 14. thus writing . Christer satisfaction it self , taketh not away the punishment due 〈◊〉 vs , but it removeth it so farr forth , as we haue grace from thence , to make our owne satisfaction of power . For the better apprehending of Bellarmines due meaning in this places , the Reader is to conceaue that the Cardinall here handleth a schoole poynte which being no meter of Faith , but a poynt of ●adi●ferency , is seuerally defended led by Catholick wryters . The poynt is this : th● seing all the force of our satisfaction , is originally ●i y●●d , and recoa●teth it fore , ( as all Catholickes do ground ) from the passion and satisfaction of Christ : whether therefore this satisfaction of Christes and ours , may be tearmed but one satisfaction or two satisfactions : Bellarmine houldeth that it is but one satisfaction , and that farmaliter , ours , and thereupon wryteth ●●the alledged place . Vna tantum est ●●tual is satisfactio &c. There is here but one actuall satisfaction , and the same ours : neither by this it excluded Christe or his satisfaction : for by his satisfaction , we haue grace from whence we doe s●tisfy & in this sense the satisfaction 〈◊〉 Christ is 〈◊〉 be appledr● vs , non quod 〈…〉 ipsa ti is satisfactio , tollan penam temp malem nobis 〈◊〉 sed quod mediat eam tollat , quate ius videlice● 〈◊〉 g●atiam● themes , sine qua , nihil valeret nostrae satisfactio . Not th●● his satisfaction immedeatly taketh away the punishment due vnto vs : but that it taketh it away mediatly , in so much as from his satisfaction , we receaue Grace , without the which our satisfaction would be of noe force .

Here all men may see , that Bellarmine doth in noe sort detract from the passion or satisfaction of Christ , for he saith , that Christes satisfaction is not excluded by our satisfaction : that by his satisfaction , we haue grace to satisfy : that our satisfaction applyeth Christes satisfaction to vs : Finally , that without Christes satisfaction , ours can be of no force . But before I ende , I will be the Readers remembrancer of two or three sleightes vsed by you M. Whyte , in this one testimony . First in these wordes , Not that Christes satisfaction ( immediatly ) taketh away the punishment due vnto vs , you conceale in your translation , the word , immediatly , and so makes vs to say , that Christes satisfaction doth not at all take away the punishment due vnto vs , which to affirme , is no lesse then a monstrous blasphemy . Secondly in those wordes , sed quod mediaté eam tollat , which you translate not in that naturall sense which the wordes import , but onely thus , but that Christes satisfaction remoueth the punishment : so by your feeble translation , making vs in an ignorant eare , to ascribe lesse to Christes satisfaction then we doe . Thirdly in that last parcell of the sentence , sine qua nihil valeret nostra satisfactio . Without which grace of Christ , our satisf . were of noe force . Which wordes as soundinge fully in our acknowledgment of the valew of Christes passion , you also haue fully translated in a more remisse phraze and tenour of speach , to wit , from which grace , our satisfaction is made of power . Thus well knowinge that ( according to the rules of Rhetorick ) different phrases bearing one and the same sence , doe make a different ( and so more or lesse ) impression in the hearers eares . But you doe well , and in one sense we will not much complaine of you , since this persideous deportment in your wrytinges ( as necessarily discoueringe that you are conscious and guilty of your owne bad cause ) doth much aduantage your aduersaries .

The 5. Paragraph . S. Thomas corrupted concerning the remission of veniall sinnes .

Touching veniall sinnes , pag. 246. and how they are remitted , our minister extremely corrupteth a saying in S. Thomas par. 3. q. 87 ar. 3. making him thus , without any further illustration of the poynte , to speake , Veniall sinnes may be forgeuen by knocking of the breast , going into the Church , receauing of holy water , or the Bishopes blessing , or crossing our self , or by any such work of Charity , though we do not think actually of them .

Tell me M. Wh. when must we expect at your handes one pertinent allegation without any deprauation or imposture ? I do think euen then ( and not before ) when , as the poet wrytes .

Terra feret stellas , calum scindetur ara●ro . Ouid. l. Vnda dabit slammas , & dabit ignis aquas . 1 de tre .

For , according to your accustomed vaine , you haue most fowly wronged S. Thomas , and so your self here ( by wilfully satisfying the doctrine of veniall sinnes ) haith committed a mortall sinne . For he in the place alledged showing how veniall sinnes are remitted , either by an act of detestation of sinne , or an act of reuerence towardes god , thus concludeth . Manifestum est generali confessione &c. It is manifest , that veniall sinnes are remitted by a generall confession , knocking of the breast , & saying of our Lordes prayer ( quatenus cum detestatione peccati siunt , as these actions are done with a detestation of sinne ) as also by the Bishopes blessing , by sprincling of holy water , and other such actions ( quatent●s cum dei reuerentia exercentur , as they are performed with a reuerence towards god . ) Here you see first , how you haue most fraudulently discarded these two parcels of the sentence , to wit , quatēus cum detestatione 〈◊〉 fius , & quatenus cum dei reuerentia exercentur , as they are done with a detestation of sinne , & as they are performed with reuerence to god , which parcels do enleuen and season the whole . For we do not hould that these actions , except they be accompanyed either with a detestation of sinne , or reuerence towardes god , do remitt veniall sinnes . But your intended calumny and deceipt here , was to make your credulous reader thinke , that the superstitious papists ( as you tearme them in your rayling and calumnious language ) do beleue that these externall actions of them selues alone , are as it were certaine spells or charmes to extinguish and dryue away all veniall sinnes whatsoeuer . Secondly touching the last part of the sentence as it is set downe by you , vz , or by any worke of Charity , though we doe not think actually of them , is not in this third article , but afore in the first article of 87. question , and is onely an obiection of S. Thomas , vrged for forme sake , ( according to his Methode ) and then afterwardes answeared by him self .

Chapiter 8. Concerning the author of sinne , & reprobation .

The 1 Paragraph . Bellarmine egregiously falsifyed , in proofe that god is the Author of sinne .

TO the iustifying that Catholicks are as far ingaged in defendinge that blasphemous and horrible doctrine , that god is the Author of sinne , as the protestantes are , pag. 271. he alledgeth Bellarmine de amis. gra. l. 2. ca. 13. thus wryting . God by a figure commendeth sinne , and excyteth men vnto it , as a huntsman setteth a dog vpon a hare , by letting goe the slippe that held the dog . God therefore doth not onely permit the wicked to do many euils , neither doth he onely forsake the godly , that they may be constrayned to suffer the thinges done against them by the wicked , but he also ouerseeth their euill willes , and ruleth & gouerneth them , & boweth & bendeth them , by working inuisibly in them . And not onely inclyneth euill willes to one euill rather then to an other , by permitting them to be caried into one euill , & not permitting them to be caried into an other : but also positiuely he bendeth them , by inclyning to one euill , & turning them from an other , occasionally & morally &c.

Thus our minister alledgeth Bellarmine , and then triumphantly thus concludeth . Let our aduersaries looke well into these speaches , & they shall fynde that we say in effect nomore . Your aduersaries , M. Whyte , haue loked well into these speaches , and they do fynde and say in effect , that you are a most faith-lesse , dishonest , and corrupt wryter , and indeede one of those whom the spanish phraze calls vnhombre de salmad● , a fellow without a soule , for if you either feared god , had a true conceate of any Religion , or thought that the soule were immortall , to answear for what it performes in this lyfe : you would neuer depraue this Author as you do , making the Catholickes to be patrones of that blasphemy which in their soules they damne to the pit of hell . Wherefore good Reader , I am to intreate thy patience , if I insist somwhat longe in the full discouering of this corruption . Well then Bellarmine in the Chapiter alledged , sheweth how that God may be said seuerall wayes to inclyne a man to euill : And there upon saith . Primus modus esset , si Dens per se & proprié &c. The first way should be , if god by him self and properly either physicé , phisically and naturally by mouing the will immediatly , or moraliter , to wit , by truly and properly commaunding the will , should impell it to euill : but this kind is manifestly false , impious and blasphemous against God . Therefore this kind as wicked being omitted , a second way as that we may vnderstand god to be said in the Scriptures , to excyte and prouoke some vnto euill , or to commaunde that they work wickedly , and to vse them as instrumentes because he permitteth them to do euill , although euery one that permitteth any thing , can not be rightly said to commaund it , that it may be done , neither to excite or prouoke an other thereto . Notwithstanding god ( without whose permission nothing can be done ) when as he suffereth any thing to be done , to the obtayning of some certayne ende of hit : may rightly be said by a certaine figure , to commaund that , and to incite one thereto : euen as vsually we say , the dog was set vpon the hare by the hunter , when as he onely loosed the slippe wherewith he was tyed . And then some three paragraphes after , deus non so●um permittit &c. god doth not onely permitte the wicked to doe much wickednesse , neither doth onely leaue the godly that they may be forced to suffer wronges of the wicked , but ouerseeth the euill willes , and doth gouerne and rule them , and bend them , working in them inuisibly : So as though theire willes be euill through their owne default , yet they are inclyned by diuine prouidence , rather to one euill then to an other ( non positiué , sed permissiué , not positiuely , but by permission . ) And then in an other paragraph after . Deum no●i solum inclinare &c. god doth not onely inclyne wicked willes to one euill rather then to an other , by suffering them that they shall be caried into one euill , and not suffering them that they shall be caried into an other ( as Hugo rightly teacheth ) but also by positiuely inclyning them to one euill , and auerting them from an other ( non quidem per se et physicé mouendo voluntatem ad vuum et remouendo ab alto , quod libertati arbitrii preiudicare videretur , not by him selfe and physically or naturally in mouing the will to one euill and remouing it from an other , which may seme to be againste the liberty of the will ) sed occasionaliter , et moraliter , but occasionally and morally , as S. . Thomas speaketh ( to wit , in sending some one good thought , from the which the wicked man ( though his owne fault may take occasion , that it is better to hurt this man , then that man , to yeld to this sinne rather then to that sinne .

Thus farre doth Bellarmine literally wryte . Now we will see what amount of imposlures and deceiptes our minister haith heaped vp in producing of this one Authority . First he omitteth altogether ( without the least intimation of it , or Bellarmines dislyke thereof ) the first kynde or manner how god may be said to impell man to sinne , to wit , properly and immediatly , which Bellarmine calleth impious and blasphemous , & yet M. Whyte endeuoreth throughout all the passage here vrged , to charge him therewith . Secondly for the more engaging of Bellarmine herein , he immediatly applyeth that example of a hunter letting● goe the slip , to gods commaundinge & excyting men to sin , which Bellarmine onely by illation , applyeth thereto . Thirdly where Bellarmine saith that wicked men by diuine prouidence , are inclyned to one euill rather then to an other , non positiuê , sed permissiué , not positiuely , but by permission : the minister haith left out these wordes , non positiue , sed permissiué , though in them lyeth all the solution of the doubt here controuerted . Fourthly when Bellarmine after saith , that god inclynes also the will of the wicked to one euill rather then to an other , positiué , non quidem per se et phisicé mouendo voluntatem ad vnum , et remouendo ab alio , quod libertati arbitru praeiudicare videtur : sed occasionaliter et moraliter , positiuely , yet not by him selfe and phisically , mouing the will of the wicked to one sinne , & withdrawing it from an other , which may seeme to be against the freedome of the will , but occasionally & morally &c. Our minister subtily taking hould of the word positiuê , doth leaue out all the rest , wherein is expressed how the word positiuè , is to be vnderstoode , and ioyneth it immediatly with the wordes occasionaliter , et moraliter . Fiftly he purposly forbeareth the example wher in Bellarmine immediatly doth interprete the wordes occasionaliter & moraliter , to wit , in sending a good thought , but not an euill thought , as M. Whyte by his wilfull omission thereof , would seme to pretende .

And thus far of this testimony , where you see I haue as it were dissected , all the perticular vaines & sinewes wherein lyeth the very lyfe and strength of the ministers fraude and collusion herein : onely good Reader I would wish thee for thy fuller satisfaction , to vew the place in Bellarmine him self , and then geue vp thy true iudgment , whether M. Whyte or I deale sincerely herein .

The 2. Paragraph . S. Augustine abused concerning reprobation .

Our minister to proue his blasphemous doctrine of reprobation or damnation pag. 9. doth shrowd him self vnder an abused testimony of S. Augustine Epist. 107. ad . Vital . med . whom he thus cyteth . It is a manifest truth , that many can not be saued , not because them selues will not , but because god will not . The wordes of S. Augustine are these . Multi salui non fiant , non quia ip fi , sed quia dens non vult , ( quod sine vlla caligine manifestatur in parnulis . Many are not saued , not because they will not , but because god will not : Which without all obscurity is manifested in infantes . These latter wordes , which without all obscurity is manifested in infantes , are fraudulently left out by the minister , because they expresse S. Augustines mynde herein : for S. Augustine here onely speaketh of the damnation of infantes , who dye before they receaue baptisme , which M. Whyte well knowing , thought good to omitt the latter Part of this sentence , and therefore this testimony is wrongfully stretched to such as be of capacity and type yeres . That this Place of S. Augustine is onely intended of infants not baptised before their death , is also manifested ( besides the proofe taken from the former wordes ) by that which this Father wryteth some two or three lines afore this place , where he maketh the question concerning reprobation and perticulerly restraineth this speach to infantes in these wordes , Quomod● deus vuls &c. How faleth it owt , that god would haue all men saued , seeing that infantes who haue no will contrary or repugning to their saluation , do not pertake of gods will in this poynt , in that diuers of them do dye without the grace geuen in baptisme ? Thus our Doctor after his vsuall manner abuseth this auncient father , by concealing a part of the sentence alledged , wherein his mynde is manifested . Neither can M. Whyte salue the matter in answearing , that in an other place after vpon the like occasion , he haith alledged this sentence without concealement : this I say aduauntageth him nothing . For though perhaps not in the other cytation , yet in this it is cleare that his intention was to deceaue the reader : but it is expected from the pen of a man of integrity , to deale sincerely not in one onely , but in all the passages of his wrytinges , since a wryters case herein , may seme , in some sort , to beare a resemblance to an acte morally vertuous , which is vitiated by any one bad circumstance , but perfected by the concurrency of all due circumstances .

Chapiter 9. Concerning the honour to be geuen to Sainctes and their Images .

The 1. Paragraph . S. Epiphanius corrupted in dishonour of the blessed Virgin Mary .

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 Sonne 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 inuasion 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 Councell 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 men . 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 pr●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 eu●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 m●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 that M. Whyte can not reply in answear hereto , that because there are some other protestantes that do mantaine the said positions with him against his former learned brethren , that therefore such his positions , are freed from all imputation of vntruth , and consequently him self of lying .

This his answeare is most insufficient : First because some of his vntruthes do rest , in affirming that not any one Father , or any one protestant , taught such or such a poynt or doctrine : against which generall assertion ( including all Fathers and prot●stantes ) if I can produce but any one Father or protestant ( as indeede I can for the most part , produce many ) it is enough to conuince him of lying . Secondly in that all Maister W. vntruthes , do make head against the Catholick Faith , and strengthen the protestantes religion ( in which respect they may be presumed to be the more wilfull ) it can not therefore with any shew of reason be otherwise conceaued , that such learned protestants ( for the most part mantaining against the Catholicks the poynt or conclusion of faith , out of which such assertions do ryse , and therefore are not become parties against M. Whyte therein ) would euer defend against the Doctor the contrary assertions , much weakning their owne cause thereby , were it not that the euidency of the truth on the Catholick side , doth force them thereunto . And therefore it followeth euen in reason , that the voluntary acknowledgment of any such one learned protestant , ought to ouer balance & weigh downe euen scoares of others not confessing so much : so true is the saying of Irenen ; li. 4. ca. 14. Illa est vera & sine contradiction probatio , quae etiam ab aduersariis ipsis , signa ●●sti●i●atioA●●s pros●rt .

But to make this poynt more perspicuous to the reader by example , our minister in one place ( which hereafter shall be alledged ) anouch●th , that the doctrine of Transubstantiation , was neuer heard of before the Councell of Lateran . ( for here he speaketh not of the definition of that Article , but of the doctrine onely ) To conuince this as a most notorious vntruth , I produce not Catholick authorities ( for they would seme to the readers eye ouer partiall ) but because all perfect differences are made vpon vnequall standinges , I insist in dyuers learned protestantes ( otherwyse our professed enemies ) who do not beleue our Catholick doctrine herein as true : neuerthelesse do confesse , that such & such Fathers , liuing in the primitiue Church ( and therefore many ages before the foresaide Councell ) did teach the said doctrine of Transubstantiation . Now here I say M. Whyte is not excused from lying , in that he is able to bring forth other particuler protestantes teaching with him the said innouation of Transubstantiation euen at the same tyme ( and not before ) in reguard of his former learned brethren confessing the further antiquity thereof , to the much disabling of their owne cause .

Now what can our Doctor obiect herein ? not their ignorance , for they are the most accomplished protestantes for their literature , that euer liued : not their partiality in the cause , for they here speake against them selues , and do conspyre in the fnndamentall and primitiue point of faith therein , with M. Whyte him self : Onely therefore it is to be said , that these protestantes th●s confessing to their owne preiudice , are more ingenious , vpright , and lesse impudent in their wrytinges , and M. Whyte and his compartners , are of a canterized and se●red conscience , not caring ( euen against their owne knowledg , by their shameles mantayning of lyes ) to suppresse Gods truth and Religion .

Now this Basis and groundwork being immoueaable , and this firmly , laid : let vs proceede to these his vntruthes .

The 1. Vntruth . The first vntruth : that Protestantes embrace that kinde of tryall which is by antiquity .

Therefore first in his preface to the Reader , pag. penul . ( thus you see the very front of his book is no lesse subiect to lying , then before , as I haue shewed , it was to corrupting ) our minister ( still forgeating , that a great sore in the body , is more tollerable , then a moale in the face ) there speaking of the Fathers of the primitiue tymes , and of their Iudgments in matters of Faith , betwene the protestantes & vs , thus writeth . We are so well assured ( meaning of the resolution of the Fathers ) that we embrace that kind of tryall which is by antiquity , and dayly fynde our aduersaries to be gauled thereby . A most vast vntruth , and acknowledged to be such euen by the most iudiceous protestantes . For we fynde , that wheareas M. Iewell with the lyke hipocrisy . did appeale to the auncient Fathers at Paules Crosse , euen his owne brethren did rebuke him greatly for those his inconsiderate speaches : in so much that D. Humfrey ( the half-arch of the English Church in his dayes ) affirmeth , In vita Iuelli . printed at London . pag. 212. that ( to vse his owne wordes ) M. Iewell gaue the papists therein too large a scope : that he was iniurious to him selfe : and after a manner spoyled him self , and his Church .

To the lyke ende D. Whitaker ( but with extraordinary scurrility ) wryteth that , The popish Religion , is but a patched couerlet of the Fathers errours sowed together . Cont. Dur. Lib. 6. pag. 423. From whence it followeth that D. Whytaker would be loth inappealably to stand to their determinations . Finally Luther him self ( the first mouer of our new Gospels Spheare ) so farr disclaymeth from the Fathers Iudgmentes , as that he thus insolently traduceth them . a a Tom. 2. Wittenberg . The Fathers of so many ages ( speaking of primitiue tymes ) haue bene blynd and most ignorant in the Scriptures : they haue erred all their lyfe tyme , & vnlesse they were amended before their deathes , they were neither Sainctes nor perteyning to the Church . Anno 1551. Lib. de seruo a●bitrio . pag. 434. Thus Luther . Here now is euident the vntruth of M. Whyte appealing to the Fathers , since we fynd that the most learned members of his owne Church , do reiect them with all contempt , charging them with flat papistry , which they would neuer haue done , if they could haue vsed any other conuenient euasion .

Be affrayd M. Whyte of Gods iust reuenge , for this your mantayning of euill by euill ( for thus you here do , first by impugning the true faith of Christ : & then for your better warranting thereof , in traducing the auncient and holy Fathers , as enemies to the said Faith .

And remember the sentence , b b Seneca , in Agam. Metum auget , qui scelere scelus obruit .

The second vntruth : Against Traditions .

But to procede to other vntruthes , pag. 2. our M. Whyte laboureth to proue , that the protestantes Church receaueth not n●cessarily any one Tradition , and answearably thereto in his first Table before his booke , he thus wryteth . No part of our faith standeth vpon Tradition .

Now here his owne brethren will charge him with falshood . For seing M. Whyte must and doth acknowledg , that to beleue , that such bookes ( as the wrytinges of the four Euangelistes , the Actes of the Apostles , the Epistles of S. Paule &c. ) are the sacred word of god , is a mayne article of both his and our Faith : The falshood of his former Assertion is euidently euicted from the wordes of learned protestantes , who teach , that not from our pryuate spirit , or scripture it self , or conference thereof : but from the tradition and Authority of the Church , such wrytinges are certainly knowne to be the vndoubted word of God , most contrary to M. Whyte , pag. 47. who saith , that The Scripture proueth it self to be the very word of god , & receaueth not authoritie from the Church .

To this end we fynde D. Whitakar first reiccting the testimony of the pryuate spirit , to say thus . e. e. Aduers . Stapl. pag. 298. Non nego Traditionem ecclesiasticam esse argumentum , quo argui et conuinci possit , qui libri Canonic● sunt , qui Canonic● non sunt . I do not deny , but that Ecclesiasticall tradition is an Argument from the which it may be proued which are the Canonicall bookes , and which are not .

In lyke sort M. Hooker assenteth hereto saying , f f Eccl. Pol. lib. 3. pag. 146. In thinges necessary , the very cheifest is to know , what bookes we are bound to esteeme holy : which poynt is confessed impossible for the Scripture it self to teach . But what the Scripture teacheth not , is by our aduersaries confession , a mere Tradition . Hookers iudgment in this poynt , is iustifyed by Doctor g g In his def. of Hookers 5. booke . pa. 31. Couell .

Now if these eminent protestantes do ascrybe onely to the Church , the Indgment of discerning which is Scripture , and which is not Scripture : then we know from the Authority and Tradition of the Church , & not from the Scripture it self , which is the true & vndoubted word of God , and what bookes are but spurious and adulterated , and consequently M. Whyte lyed most grosly in affirming that no part of their faith standes vpon Tradition , Hefler . ca. 16. thus ranging him self amonge those who ( according to the Scripture ) mendaciorum funiculis conantur subuertere . By the meanes of lyes , endeuour to ouerthrow .

The third vntruth . The Third vntruth in proofe of the continuance of the protestantes faith in all ages .

Our minister labouring to enamell and bewtify his deformed faith with the speceous tytle of antiquity & succession , pag. 86. vseth these swelling speaches .

Against all papistes whatsoeuer we make it good , that the very faith we now professe , haith successiuely continued in all ages since Christ , & was neuer interrupted so much as one yere , month , or day , and to confesse the contrary were sufficient to prooue vs no part of the Church of god .

Wordes of brasse , but ( if he be put to the proofe ) no doubt leaden performance . To set downe the Iudgmentes of the learned protestantes touching the interruption of their faith for many seuerall ages since Christes tyme , were laboursom , and withall needeles , since to conuince this bould assertion of falshood , it is sufficient to insist in any one age or tyme . Therefore I will content my self with the authorities of two learned protestants touching the very time of Luthers first Apostacy and departing from our Church ; they graunting that their faith before Luthers reuolt , was not to be found in any man liuing : which they neuer would haue done , if the euidency of the matter did not force them thereto , considering how much such a confession doth enaruate and weaken their cause .

First then we finde euen Luther himself to acknowledg this poynt , who thus wryteth hereof . i i Epist. ad Arguitinenses . Ego principio causae meae &c. In the beginning of this my cause ( speaking of his change of religion ) I had this guift graunted me euen from heauen : that I alone should vndertake so great a matter , and I did conceaue that it should be made good onely by me , neither did I put any confidence in the trust of others . Here we see that he graunteth him self to haue bene alone in this his supposed restauration of the Gospell . And hereupon it is , that Luther in an other place thus vaunteth . k k Loc. com . class. 4. p. 51. Christum a nobis primo vulgatum andemus gloriari . We dare glory , that Christ was first made knowne by vs .

In lyke sort M. Iewell ( no meane Rabbi in our English Sinagoge ) saith , l. l. In the Apology of the Church of Englande . par. 4. ca. 4. that the truth was vnknowne at that tyme and vnheard of , when Martin Luther , and Vldrick Zuinglius , first came vnto the knowledg and preaching of the Gospell .

The 4. Vntruth . In proofe of the vnity of faith & doctrine amongst protestantes .

Pag 138. For the more iustifying of the protestantes doctrine , he thus saith of the booke entituled The Harmony of confessions . The Harmony of confessions wherein the particuler Churches set downe and name the articles of their faith , if the Iesuite can shew to ●arr in Dogmaticall poyntes of faith : I am content you beleue him in all the rest . Here the reader haith a bould assertion , which as you see the more easely to winne a credulous eare , is steeped in muske : but I feare M. Doctor the note Diapason , which implieth an absolute and generall concord , and which is so much commended by all the most skilfull in that science , will here be wanting . And therefore for the more exact disquisition of that poynt , we will refer our selues to that very booke called the Harmony of confessions , englished & printed at Cambridg by Thomas Thomas . 1586. where ( for the greater expedition ) I will touch but some few stringes thereof onely , to heare how they sound .

First then we fynde this harmony to teach , that sinnes are ef● sons punished euen in this lyfe , at Dauids , Manasses , and the punishments may be mitigated by good woorkes , pag. 229. See here how fully it acknowledgeth the abstensiue nature of penance and satisfaction ? Againe , this obedience towardes the Law , is a kind of Iustice ( marke you this discord ) and deserueth rewarde . pag. 266. Like at the preaching of penance is generall , euen so the promise of grace is generall &c. Here needeth no disputation of Predestination , or such like , for the promise is generall . pag. 268. & 269.

As touching priuate Confession &c. we affirme , that the ceremony of pryuate absolution is to be retayned in the Church , and we do constantly retayne it . pag. 231.

In lyke sort it saith , that the Bishops haue inrisdiction to forgeue sinnes . pag. 366.

Finally not to rest vpon euery perticuler stop thereof , we thus fynde there , We do not speake of the Church as if we should speake of Platoes Idea , but of such a Church as may be seene and heard &c. The eternall Father will haue his Sonne to be heard amonge all mankinde . pag. 326. A note which must needes sound most harshe with our inuisibilistes . Now I referr the matter to M. Whyte him self , whether there be in these poyntes any concordance betwene the harmony of Confessions , & the doctryne of our English protestantes , of the Hugonots in France , and the Caluenistes in Germany : so assured I was that a diligent eare would easely obserue many iarring stringes in the Consort .

The 5. Vntruth . In proofe of the immutability of the present English Religion .

Page 138. He particulerly insisteth in his supposed constancy of religion here in England , and thus wryteth . If the Iesuite can shew the Church of England since papistry was first abolished , to haue altered one article of the present faith now professed , I am content &c ,

For the disproofe of this falshood , we will conuince the same by discouering the manifould & weightiest alterations of our publick English Lyturgy , since the first entrance of protestancy into England .

And first it is euident that the Lyturgy of the Church of England in King Edwardes tyme , ( at which tyme there was an euident bringing in of protestancy ) published by Crammer , Peter Martir , & Bucer : and approued by the authority of the Parleament , kept almost all the prayers and ceremonies of the Masse ( the reall presence onely reiected ) with crossing of both their Sacramentes , and the accustomed rites of Baptisme , as a formall consecration of the water of Baptisme with the signe of the Crosse , the vsing of Chrisme and the annoynting of the child .

Againe , it retayned prayer for the dead , and the offering of our prayers by the intercession of Angels .

But when Quen Elizabeth came to reigne , the said Lyturgy was so altered , as that it is needles to reste long in the discouery thereof : for it tooke away prayer for the dead , and prayer to Angels , besides most of the former Ceremonies vsed in King Edwards time . In lyke sort in the Communion booke of K. Edward we fynde confirmed , baptisme by lay persons in tyme of necessity , and grace geuen in that Sacrament , the Confirmation of children , and strength geuen thereby , the Preist blessing the Bryde grome and the bryde euen with the signe of the Crosse. The Preistes absolution of the sick penitent by these wordes . By the authority committed to me , I absolue thee of all thy sinnes . The speciall confession of the sick penitent , and finally the annoynting of the sick . Of all which particulers , see the Communion booke of K. Edward printed in fol. by Edward whitchurch cum priuilegio ad imprimendum solum . An. 1549. All which ( dyuers of them including poyntes of faith and doctrine ) are now vtterly left out in the Communion booke published in Q. Elizabeths tyme : In so much as Parker an english protestant , thus writeth thereof . m m Against Simbolizing . par. 2. ca. 5. The day starr was not risen so high in their dayes , when as yet Q. Elizabeth reformed the defects of K. Edwardes Communion booke . Answearably hereto wryteth Cartwright saying . m m Iesuit . par. 2. rat. 5. p. 5. & 627. The Church of England changed the booke of Common prayer twyce or thryce , after it had receaued the knowledg of the Gospell . Thus Cartwright in his 2. Reply , par. 1. pa. 41. who in that very booke laboureth yet for a fourth change . And thus is M. Whyte not affrayd to suggest to the world euen in printe ( fonde man that could not be idle enough in pryuate talke ) such vnwarrantable vntruthes : which course of his , if it proceded from his owne inaduertency and ouersight as not hauing seene the Common prayer booke of K. Edward declaring the contrary , then were it more pardonable , but this I think him self , out of his pryde and shew of much reading , will not acknowledge , & therefore we may probably ascribe it to his mere wilfull forgery , who to defend his owne heterogeneous and mongerell faith ( which mantayneth at different tymes different doctrines ) dare aduenture to broach falshoodes though neuer so eminent . But let him remember that by so doing , he ( with disauantage to his cause ) vainly spendeth his labour , for Qui nititur mendaci●● hic pascit ventos . Who trusteth to lyes , feedeth the wyndes .

The 6. Vntruth . In proofe of the Romane Churches mutability in matters of Faith .

Page 150 , he confidently auerreth , that The Church of Rome is varied from her self in matters of Faith , since she began to be the seate of Antichrist : Thus charging our Church with great mutability of beleefe , as before he laboured to grace and adorne his owne Sinagouge with all speceous constancy in the same .

Now for the better ouerthrowing of this vntruth , it is necessary to recurr to those first supposed tymes of Antichristes being , perusing the doctrine then taught , to see if the Church of Rome haith made at this day any change thereof in any matters of Faith , for euen so far doth the minister stretch out his lye .

First then the most receaued opinion of the protestantes touching Antichrist his coming ( for they are most various amonge them selues therein ) is , that S. Gregory the great , was the first Antichrist . Now to obserue what his Religion was , will be made euident by taking vew of the Religion which S. Augustine ( being a Monke of the Church of Rome , and sent by this S. Gregory ) did here plant in England .

For the tryall of which poynt , I will first produce D. Humfrey , who thus writeth hereof . n n Iesuit . par. 2. rat. 5. p. 5. & 627. In Ecclesiam verò &c. What did Gregory & Augustine bring into the Church ? &c. A burden of Ceremonies &c. They brought in the Pall for the Archbishop in celebrating of Masse , and purgatory &c. They brought in the oblation of the healthfull Hoast , and prayer for the deade &c. Relickes &c. Transubstantiation &c. A new consecration of Churches &c. From all the which , what other thing is gathered , then that Indulgences , Monachisme , the Papacy , and all the rest , confusion of the Popes superstition , was then erected : all which thinges , Augustine the greate Monk , and taught by Gregory a Monk , brought to vs English men . Thus farr D. Humfrey .

In lyke sort the Triumuiri of Magdeburg ( whose censuring pennes haue controuled more ages , then euer the Romanes Triumuiri gouerned Prouinces ) I meane the 3 Century wryters in the Index , or Alphabeticall Table of the 6. Century , after the first Edition thereof at the word Gregory , do relate the particuler doctrine of S. Gregory , as popish and erroneous : For thus they here note with particuler references to the places of S. Gregories writinges prouing the same Eiusdem error &c. The same ( Gregories ) errour of good workes , of Confession , of Wedlock , of the Inuocation of Sainctes , of hell , of Iustification , of Free will , of purgatory , of Penance , of Satisfaction .

Now this former doctrine contayning the cheife pointes wherein we differ from the sectaries of this tyme , being acknowledged to be the Faith of Gregory , who is supposed to be the first Antichrist , & most articulatly at this day beleued of all Romane Catholickes : I would aske M. Whyte with what forhead he can auouch his former wordes , to wit , that the Church of Rome is vari●d from her self in matters of faith , since she began to be the seate of Antichrist . But all this ryseth from an inward repugning of the Min. against our Church , in reguard of the vnchangeable certainty and constancy of faith professed by her : whereas the want thereof in our aduersaries religion is most notorious , as appeareth not onely from their seuerall confessions , one euer impugning an other ; but also from their different translations of their Bybles , still made to sort to the faith of their last Edition ; so as in respect of their wonderfull mutability , and variance among them selues , whereby indeede they indignify and wrong the nature of true faith ; we haue reason to demaund of any of the professors , of what thinking he is , rather then of what faith .

The 7. Vntruth . In proofe of the protestantes concord in matters of Religion .

Page . 139. To proue that protestantes haue true vnity , he sheweth , that the diuisions among them , are either falsly layd to their charge through ignorance & fury of their enemies &c. or els they are not iars of the Church , but the defectes of some few therein , whereof the Church is not guilty , or lastly , not dissertions in thi●ges of faith , but stryfe about Ceremonies &c. Thus doth the D. Apologize for his discording brethren . Now to conuince this , the Reader shall heare what some of their owne brethren do acknowledge therein .

First then Doctor Willet , rehearsing seuerall opinions of Hooker and D. Couell , of which Willet presuming that they can not stand with true protestancy thus wryteth . n n Willet in his medit. vpon the .122 . ps. From this fountaine haue sprong forth these and such other whirle-pointes , and bubles of new doctryne , as that Christ is not originally God . That Scriptures are not meanes concerning God , of all that profitably we know &c. That mannes will is apt naturally without Grace , to take any perticuler obiect whatsoeuer presented vnto it , and so consequently beleue , that mennes naeturall workes , or to do that Which nature telleth us ( without grace ) must needes be acceptable to God &c. Thus haue some bene bould to teach and wryte , as some Scismatikes ( meaning the puritanes ) haue disturbed the peace of the Church , one way , in externall matters concerning discipline : these haue troubled the Church an other way , in opposing them selues by new quirkes and deuyces to the soundnes of doctrine amongst protestantes . But if the position here ment be against the foundnes of doctrine , then can it not be restrained onely to ceremonies .

Doctor Whitaker speaking of the contentions among the protestantes , saith . o o de Eccl. con. Bellar. contr. 2. q. 5. pa. 327. Nostrae contentiones ( si quae sint ) sunt piae , et modestae , et propter fidem & religionem &c. Our contentions ( if there be any ) are pious , and modest , and for religion . From which wordes if followeth , that they are not personall , or onely about ceremonies , as M. Whyte pretendeth .

Now if we further take a vew of the intemperate speaches geuen by Luther against the Zuinglians , it may satisfy any one , that the differences were not in small points of gouernment or ceremonies . Thus then Luther speaketh . p p Con. Loua . Thes. 27. to . 2. Wittemb . fol 503. We censure in earnest the Zninglians , & all the Sacramentaries , for heritykes , and alienated from the Church of God , And in an other place . q q To. 7. Wittemb . fo. 381 & 382. Cursed be the Charity and concord of Sacramentaries for euer and euer , to all eternity . As also in the 3. place . r r de Caenado . To n. 2. Ger. fol. 174. I hauing now one of my feete in the graue , will carry this testimony and glory to the tribunall of God , that I will with all my heart condemne and eschew Carolostadius , Zuinglius , Oecolampadius , and their schollers , nor will haue with any of them familiarity , either by letters or writinges . &c. And thus farr of this point . From all which may be inferred , that dissentions among the protestantes are not merely personall , or but pointes adiaphorous , indifferent , being as it were but peccant humors , and not true or formed diseases in their church , but they do concerne most profound doubtes of their religion , since otherwaies they would neuer anathematize , or condemne one an other with such acerbity of wordes . Which irreuocable contentions among the protestants , ( being most preiudiceous to them selues ) is aduantageous to vs , for bellum haereticorum , est pax Ecclesiae . The warr of heritykes , is the peace of Gods Church , none otherwise then the reciprocall stryfe and reluctation of the 4. humors , kepes the whole body in a peaceable & healthfull state .

The 8. Vntruth . Against the vnity of Catholickes in matters of Faith .

Page . 153. The Doctor seing his owne sinagogue torne in sonder with diuisions and contentions ( howsoeuer he slubered the matter ouer before with his faire pretence of concord ) and well knowing how preiudiciall the want of vnity is to the true Religion of Christ . s s 1. Cor. 15. For God is not a God of dissention , but of peace ; doth maliceously endeuour , to cast the lyke aspersion vpon our Catholick Church in these wordes . These which know Rome and papistry , are sufficiently satisfyed in this matter , to wit , that the papistes liue not in that vnity which is pretended . & then p. 156. he telleth of what kynd these disagreementes are saying . The contentions of our aduersaries touch the faith . And pag. 159 , he concludeth in these wordes . Thus are the papistes deuyded about the principall articles of their faith . Vpon which subiect , he then after with much earnestnes , vainely and idly spendeth dyuers leaues , bringing therein euen obtorto cullo , whatsoeuer he haith read or heard touching the least disagreement among the Catholickes , which labour of his , will serue no doubt , to a iudiceous eye , lyke to the spyders web , painfully wrought , but to no purpose .

Wherefore I will breefly make plaine how free we are from all breach of faith euen by the acknowledgment of the protestantes them selues . First then D. Whitaker wounding him self and his cause by his confession , saith . t t de Eccl. cont. Bell. contro . 2. q. 5. p 227. Nostrae contentiones ( si quae sint ) sunt piae , et modestae , propter fidem , & propter religionem &c. Contentiones papistarum sunt friuolae & futiles , de figmentis et commentis sui cerebri . Our contentions ( if there be any ) are godly and modest , touching faith and religion : wheras the contentions of the papistes , are but tryflinge , concerning the fictions of their owne brayne . Thus graunting the dissentions of the protestantes more nearly to concerue faith and religion , then the dissentions among the Catholickes do .

Doctor Fulke saith of our vnity in this sort . v v Againste 〈◊〉 . Sand. &c. 295. As for the consent of the popish Church , it proueth nothing but that the deuill then had all thinges at his will and might sleepe ; So acknowledging our vnity truly ; but falsly and absurdly ascrybing it to the deuill who is the designed enemy to vnity .

To be short Duditius a famous protestant and highly respected by Beza , doth no lesse acknowledg the vnity of our Catholick Church , for thus doth Beza u u Beza in Ep. theol . ad Andraeam Dudit . Fp. 1. pa. 13 relate Duditius his woordes . Etsi ( inquis ) multa eaque horrenda propugnantur in Romana Ecclesia &c. Although many dreadfull thinges are defended in the Romane Church , which are buylded vpon a weake and rotten foundation , notwithstanding that Church is not deuyded with many dissentions : for it haith the plausible shew of reuerent Antiquity , ordinary s●ccession , and perpetuall consent &c.

Thus Duditius related by Beza , and not impugned herein by him .

Now here we are to note , that the testimonies of these and other protestantes ( here omitted ) acknowledging our vnity and consent , must necessarily be vnderstoode touching vnity in the misteries , and other fundamentall poyntes of our Religion , which is the thing onely that we are here to mantaine , since if vnity alone about pointes of indifferency , or of thinges not defyned should be ment by them , then in reguard of many such disputable questions yet among the schole men ; the former iudgmentes of our aduersaries should be false and not iustifiable . And thus much for this poynt ; from whence the Doctor may learne that among those which are true Catholickes , vnity of doctrine is most religiously obserued , since such not ouer partially resting in their owne natiue iudgmentes , to what way soeuer they be inclyning , do most diligently follow , the supreme resolution & current of the Church : in part resembling herein the inferiour orbes which with greater speede , sedulity , and expedition , performe the reuolutions of the highest Spheare wherunto they are subiect : then they do accomplish their owne naturall & perticuler motions .

The 9. Vntruth . Against the Popes Primacy .

Page 185. The Doctor wryteth in his digression thus . The Primitiue Church did not acknowledg the Popes Primacy . Here I see that M: Whyte will euer be M. Whyte , I meane that he will euer be lyke to him self , first in coyning , and after mantayning most impudent vntruthes .

Now as touching the discouery of this his false position , since to go through all the centuries of the primitiue Church , would be needlesly laboursome : I think it good to restraine my self onely to the fourth century or age after Christ , an age wherein Constantine the first Christian Emprour liued , and which for that respect not vndeseruedly seemes to be most entertayned and approued by the graue iudgment of the Kinges Maiesty . w w As appeareth out of his Maiesties wordes touching the same , in the summe of the conference before his Maiesty . pag. 97

Now for the greater clearing of this poynt , it will be needefull to obserue , what authority the Popes did exercyse , by the acknowledgment of our learned aduersaries , since the authority and soueraignty ouer all other Churches , and Prelates , is that which doth , as it were , organize and perfect the Popes Primacy .

Now then answearable hereto Cartwright wryteth , that x x Reply 2. part. 1 p. 501 Iulius Bishop of Rome at the Councell of Antioch , ouerreached , in clayming the hearing of causes that did not appertaine vnto him . Now this Iulius liued in the sourth age . Againe the said Cartwright saith of S. Damasus who was Pope in this age . y y Reply part. 1. p. 502. that he spake in the dragons voyce , when he shameth not to wryte , that the Bishop of Romes sentence , Was aboue all other , to be attended for in a Synode . So far was this sectaries censure different from the iudgment of S. Ierome , deliuered of the same Pope in these wordes z z Ep. 57. ad Damasum . P Ego nullum primum nisi Christum sequens beatitudini tuae , id est Cathedrae Petri communione consocior : super illam Petram Ecclesiam edificatam scio , quicunque extra hanc domum Aguxm commederit , prophanus est &c. quicunque tecum non colligit , spargit ,

In lyke sort touching appeales to Rome , ( an essentiall poynt of Ecclesiasticall Supremacy ) we finde that the Centurists a a Cent. 5. Col. 1013. do acknowledg , that Theodoret a Greeke Father , and one of this fourth age , being deposed by the Councell of Ephesus , did accordingly make his appeale to Pope Leo , and thereupon was by him restored to his Bishoprick . And to conclude , the Centuristes do no lesse acknowledg , that Chrisostom b b Cent. 5. Col. 663. did appeale to Innocentius , who decreed Theophilus Chrisostomes enemy , to be deposed & excommunicated .

Thus we fynd how dissonant this our ministers assertion touching the Primacy is , to the practise of the Primitiue Church , euen in the iudgment of those who are designed enemies to the said Primacy , as might well be exemplifyed , throughout all the Centuristes , and ages of those tymes , seing all reuerent antiquity , ( no lesse then the Catholickes of these dayes ) was fully perswaded , that S. Peter and his successors , were euer to be accompted the visible Baseis , or foundations of gods Church : and all other Bishops but Column●s : And as this foundation immediatly supportes these pillers , so these pillers the rest of this spirituall edifice and structure .

The 10. Vntruth . That Gregory the great , detested the Popes Primacy .

Page 193. M. Whyte descendeth to the example of S. Gregory the great , and first Pope of that name , in whose wryting he hopeth to fynd great sttrength , for the impugning of the Popes soueraignty : and among other thinges the D. saith . Gregory had no such iurisdiction as now the Pope vsurpeth , but detested it not only in Iohn of Constantinople , but also in him self . &c. Where now the Reader may be instructed , that the reason why this Gregory is by some supposed to disauow the doctrine of the primacy , is in that he reiecteth in Iohn of Constantinople , the title of vniuersall Bishop as sacrilegious , which his saying was grounded onely in taking the name of vniuersall Bishop , to exclude the true being of all other Bishops , as it is confessed by Andreas Brictius . c c de Eccl. lib 2. ca. 10.

But now that S. Gregory did both claime and practise the Primacy , is acknowledged by our aduersaries , for the Centuristes write d d Cent. 6. Col. 425. of him that he said . The Romane Sea appoynteth her watch ouer the whole world , and that he taught that the Apostolick Sea , is the head of all Churches : that Constantinople it self is subiect to the Apostolick Sea . Furthermore S. Gregory is charged by the Centuristes , e e Ibidem . that he chalenged to him self power to commaund Archbishops : To ordaine or depose Bishops at his pleasure : that f f Col. 427. he tooke vpon him right to cyte Archbishops to declare their cause before him when they were accused : That actually Gregory did vndertake to excommunicate g g Col. 427 such and such Bishops : That in their Prouinces h h Col. 428. he placed his Legates , to know and determine the causes of such as appealed to Rome .

Finally , to omitt many other poyntes recorded by them , that i i Ibidem . he vsurped power of appointing Synodes in their prouinces .

Here now I referr this point to the indifferent Reader , whether he wil beleue M. Whyte denying to the benefyte of his cause , the Primacy of S. Gregory , of the Centuristes being diuers learned protestantes , all confessing the same , though to their owne preiudice .

The 11. Vntruth . In proofe that Catholickes are more viceous then protestantes .

Page 209. For the extenuating and lesning of the sinfull liues of the protestants , the Doctor much extolleth their imputatiue , and supposed vertues , and as much depresseth the liues of all Catholickes in generall , and thus he entitleth that leafe , The protestants people as holy as the papistes . In lyke sort , from page 213. to 218. he spendeth him self in gathering together whatsoeuer Catholick writers haue spoken touching the liues of some loose liuers , thus scornfully entytling the leaues , The holines of the Church of Rome deciphered : most of which sayinges being found in sermons , or exhortations , and in heate of amplification , deliuered generally as the custome is , and this without any reference or comparison to the lyues of the protestantes , can not iustly be extended to all Catholickes , nomore then the reprehensions of the Prophets in the ould testament spoken without any restraint , could be truly applyed to all the Iewes .

Wherefore for the further vpbrayding of this our ministers lye which is wouen vpon the threede of malice , and for the more punctuall conuincing him of falshood , I will proue from the Protestantes owne confessions , that the lyues of Catholickes , are generally more vertuous , then those of the protestantes ( in which kind of proofe , from the lyke acknowledgment of vs Catholickes in fauour of the protestantes , the D. haith not brought so much as one lyne .

To this purpose then is not Luther forced thus to write , to the eternall shame of his owne religion ? k k Dom. 26. post Trin. Before when we were seduced by the Pope , euery man did willingly follow good woorkes : and now euery man neither saith nor knoweth any thing , but how to get all to him self by exactions , pillage : theft , and vsury , &c.

In lyke sort he confesseth more saying thus . l l In Postilla super Euang. Domin . 1. Aduen . The world groweth daily worse , men are more reuengfull , contentious , licenceous , then euer they were before in the papacy . And yet Luther . m m In sermon . coniuialibus . Ger. fol. 55. It is a wonderfull thing , & full of scandall , that from the tyme in which the pure doctrine of the Gospell was first recalled to light : the worlde should daily grow worse . See here the acknowledged fruites of his owne Gospell . In lyke manner Iacobus And●●as a very learned protestaut , thus confesseth of his owne religion . n n Conc. 4. in c. 21. L●c. Mandat serió Deus in verbo su● , &c. God earnestly commaundeth in his word , and exacteth of Christians , seriam et Christianam disciplinam , a serious and Christian discipline : but these thinges are accompted by vs , nouns papatus , nouusque Monachismus , a new papacy , and a new Monachisme : for thus they dispute . Didicimus modò per solam fi●●em in Christum saluari &c. We haue now learned to be saued in Christ onely by faith , &c. Wherefore suffer us to omitt all such workes of disciplyne , seing that by other meanes we may be saued by Christ . And that the whole world may not acknowledg these to be papistes nor to trust in their good workes : they do not exercyse any one of the said good workes , for in steed of fasting , they spend both day and night in drinking &c. their praying is turned into swearing &c.

So this learned protestant , who also termeth this kynd of lyfe the Euangelicall instruction , thus making protestancy a good disposition to draw on all wickednesse : Where you see that the gospellers ( euen in this mans iudgment being a gospeller him self ) are so geuen ouer to licenceousnes of manners , as they may be said to hold it onely a sinne not to sinne , and a vertue , to abandon all vertue ; since they make their faith & Religion ( contrary to which they be bound not to do ) to be the foundation or sanctuary of their prophane and heathnish comportment .

But now seeing that by laying contraries together , the one often receaueth much force from the other in the apprehension of our iudgment ; let vs a litle enter more perticulerly into the courses of such our ministers as from whom we are to expect the greatest satisfaction in this poynte , that so in an euen libration of the matter , the Reader may rest more fully satisfyed , and M. Whyte more clearly and irrepliably conuinced of his former vntruth .

Forbearing therefore at this tyme all other testimonies , I will content my self onely with the example of Zuinglius and other ministers confederated with him in Heluetia , who preaching our new euangelicall doctrine to that common wealth : exhibited certaine petitions to the state , the tenour whereof , is here euen literally taken from Zuinglius , and the other ministers owne writinges , bearing this tytle . o o Tom. 1. fol. 115 Pietate & prudentiae insigni Heluetiorum Reipub. Huldericus Zuinglius , ali●que Euangelicae doctrinae ministri , gratiam & pacem a Deo . Now we fynd in this former booke , that they thus first petitioned . Hoc vero summis praecibus contendimns &c. We earnestly request that the vse of mariage be not denyed vnto vs , who feeling the infirmity of the flesh , perceaue that the loue of chastity is not geuen to vs by god : For if We consider the wordes of the Apostle , we shall fynd with him none other cause of mariage , ( marke what a spirituall scholia these illuminated brethren do geue ) then to satisfy the lustfull desires of the flesh , which to burne in vs , we may not deny , seing that by meanes thereof , we are made infamous before the Congregations .

Would any man beleue this , were it not that their own certaine wrytings are yet extant to vpbraide them withall ? And in an other place they thus renew their petition . p p Ib. fo. 119 Non carnis libidine , for the loue , not of lust , but of chastity , lest that the soules committed to our charg by example of our sensuality , should be any longer offended . Thus they euen confesse , that till this tyme , their former licenceous lyfe , had much scandalized their folowers , And further yet . q q Ibidem Quarê cum carnis nostrae infirmitatem nobis non semel ( proh dolor ) &c. Wherefore seing we haue made tryall , that the infirmity and weaknes of our flesh , haith bene ( o the greife ) the cause of our often falling &c. The same Zuinglius with other 8 ministers , in their Epistle to the Bishop of Constance , subscrybed with their owne handes to the lyke purpose , thus wryteth . r r Zuinglius . Tom 1. fol 121. Hitherto we haue tryed , that the guift of chastity haith bene denyed vs . And yet further , s s Ibid. fol. 122. Arsimus ( proh dolor ) tantoperé , vt muha ind●coré gesserimus . We haue hurned ( o the shame ) so greatly , that many thinges we haue committed very vnsemely .

And for the clausure of all , they thus salue the matter . s s Ib. fol. 123 Non vsque adcò inciuilibus moribus sumus &c. To speake truly . we are not otherwise of such vnciuill conuersation , that we should be euill spoken of among the people committed to our charge , for any wickednesse , Hoc vno excepto , this one point excepted .

Here you haue the wordes of our holy and spiritualized s●ctmaisters , who you may well perceaue insisted further touching the same poynt , with the Heluetians and the former Bishop , in or the lyke dialect & phrase of expostulation .

Since according to the doctrine of our reuerend father Luther , t t Lutherus in Prouerb . 31● ( which we are bound both to teach and practise ) Nothing is more sweete and louing vpon the earth , then is the loue of a woman : Alas why should we , who haue of late reuealed the gospell of Christ heretofore so longe eclipsed , be recompensed therefore with the want of that most delightfull and naturall comfort of a woman . being forced to imitate the superstitious papist in embracing a votary and barren lyfe . Or why should the Heluetian state so seuerely exact at our handes , that we who onely preach vncorruptedly the Christian faith , should onely be depryued herein of our Christian liberty . Heu quanta patimur . Libidenous and goatish ministers , whose very penn ● spumant venerem , and with whom euen to meditate of a woman , is the center of your most serious thoughts : well may you vse your int●riections of proh dolor , proh pudor . o greife , o shame , as the burden to your sensuall and lasciuious wrytinges . For what can be a greater shame and greif vnto you ( if you be sensible of either ) then you who venditate your selues , for the restorers of the gospell so long hidden , to be ( to the disedifying of your owne followers ) thus wholly absorpt in such lustfull and fleshly cogitations . But we pardon you , for we know v v Io. ca. 3. quod natumest ex carne caro est : So great , each man sees , is the disparity betwene our euangelicall ministers ( who enioying the primitias of the spirit , were in reason obliged to warrant it , with greater effects and frutes of vertue ) and the confessed better lyues , euen of seculer Catholicks . And so lewdly and lowdly did M. Whyte lye in whom there is much Zuinglius ) when he affirmed that the protestantes were as holy as the papistes . But I feare that through my earnestnes in displaying of the ministers vanity , I haue bene ouer long in this poynt , therfore I will descend to the next vntruth .

The 12. Vntruth . Against auriculer Confession .

Page 227. discoursing of auriculer Confession , he saith , that the Primitiue Church knew it not .

For the discouery of this falshood , we fynd , that the Centuristes do confessse , w w Cen. 3. c. 6. Col. 27. that in the tymes of Ciprian and Tertulian , priuate Confession was vsed , euen of thoughtes , and lesser sinnes : And which is more , they acknowledge , x x Ibid. that it was then Commaunded , and thought necessary , And D. Whytaker writeth y y con. Camp. rat. 5. pag. 78. that not onely Ciprian , but almost all of the most holy Fathers of that tyme , were in errour touching Confession , and Satisfaction .

Thus we see how little bloud was in M. Whyte his cheekes , when he was not ashamed to set downe this former bould assertion , touching the doctrine of Confession . But indeede it seemeth that our minister accompteth it onely a shame , to feele in him self any touch of shame , so far is he of ( in likelyhood ) from all hope of future amendement , seeing on the contrary syde , that saying ( for the most part ) is true , z z Terent. in Adelh . Erubuit , salua res est .

The 13. Vntruth . Against Fasting .

Page . 224. Our delicate minister as a professed enemy to all austerity of lyfe , writeth thus against fasting . All antiquity can witnes , that in the primitiue Church , Fasting was held an indifferent thing , & euery man was left to his owne mind therein . This falshood is made discouerable by these acknowledgmentes following .

And first it is so certaine that AErius was condemned by Epiphanius , haer. 76. and by S. Augustine , haer. 53. for taking away all set dayes of fasting , as that D. Fulke thus wryteth of this point . a a In his answer to a counterfait Catholick p. 45. I will not dissemble that which you think the greatest matter : Aerius taught that fasting dayes are not to be obserued .

The same condemnation of Aerius by the former Fathers , is acknowledged by doctor Whytaker , b b Con. Dur. lib. 9. p. 830 By Pantaleon , c c In Chronographia . p. 28. and Osiander . d d Epitom . Cent. 4. pag. 424. But if Aerius was condemned by the former auncient Fathers for an heritike , for denying certaine prescribed tymes of fasting ; it inauoydably followeth , that fasting was not houlden as a thing indifferent in the primitiue Church .

This lye will appeare more euident , if we instance it in the fast of Lent , which fast was so farr from being accompted arbitrary , or a thing indifferent , in the primitiue Church , as that Cartwright reproueth S. -Ambrose for saying . e e Cartwright in Whitgiftes defence . It is sinne , not to fast in Lent .

Thus you see how familierly this ministers pen drops lye after lye , and such as the contrary assertion is mantayned for true , euen by the most eminent protestantes .

The 14. Vntruth . In proofe that Montanus the herityke , was the first that brought in the lawes of Fasting .

Page 224. Our Doctor in further disgrace of fasting thus writeth . Montanus a condemned herityke , was the first that euer brought in the lawes of Fasting , from whom the Papistes haue borowed them . The 〈◊〉 misapplication of which , is so forced and racked , that no inferiour a protestant then Hooker him self , confesseth ingeniously in these wordes , that e e Eccl. Pol. lib. 5. Sect. 72. p 29. the Montaristes were condemned for bringing in sundry vnac●stomed dayes of fasting , continued their fastes a great deale l●●ger , & made them more rigorous &c. Whereupon Tertulian mantayning Montanus , wrote a booke of the new fast . But what is this to vs Catholickes , for we see that the errour of Montanus consisted formally , not in absolutly bringing in of fasting , but in varying from the former practised fastes of the whole Church .

Answearably hereunto the protestant wryter of Quaerimonia Ecclesiae , reiect●th the former idle assertion in these wordes . pag 110. Eusebium ( inquiunt ) Montanum primas de iciuniis tulisse leges &c. They say that Eusebius did vndoubtedly teach , that Montanus first brougt in the lawes of fasting , but they are sowly deceaued in this as in some other pointes : for Montanus abrogating the fasts of the Church , brought in a new kind of fasting .

Thus we see by the former assertions , that M. Whyte like a good felow , and one that meanes to enioy his Christian liberty , can not well relish the vnsauery doctrine of fasting , as in some pages hereafter we shall synd that in lyke sort he reiecteth all voluntary chastity : which two pointes ( as before I noted ) do entertaine the one the other : for who knoweth not that Epicurisme is the oyle which norisheth the flame of lust .

The 15 Vntruth . In proofe that they make not god the author of sinne .

Page 263. M. Whyte being desireous that his religion should decline all contumelious reproach , and staine , touching the author of sinne , thus wryteth . The doctrine of the protestantes , doth not make God the author of sinne , nor inferreth any absolute necessity , constrayning vs that we can not do otherwise then we doe .

That the indifferent Reader may the better discouer whether these his wordes be false or true , I will only set downe the sentences of the cheifest protestants , and withall will deliuer the iudgmentes of other protestantes , against the former defending of the said sentences .

Zuinglius saith , that g g Tom. 1. de prouid . dei . fol. 366. God moueth the theefe to kill . And that the theefe killeth god procuring him . And that the theefe is inforced to sinne . Thus in the heritykes iudgment , God ( who in euery leafe of his sacred woord denounceth his comminations against sinners ) doth incyte , procure , and force man to sinne .

Beza in lyke sort teacheth , that h h In his display of popish practises . God exciteth the wicked will of one theefe to kill an other , guideth his hand , and weapons , iustly enforcing the will of the theefe . Fynally Caluin writeth , that i i Lib. 2. Inst. ca. 4. In sinning , the deuill is not author , but rather an instrument thereof : thus referring the author of sinne , to God him self .

Now that these sayinges of the former protestants do , if not actually , immediatly , and primariously , yet at least potentially , and necessarily , include in them selues , that god is the author of sinne : is graunted by other more modest protestant wryters , who do altogether condemne the foresaid doctrine of Caluin , Zuinglius , and Beza .

Thus is the said doctrine condemned by Castalio who wrote a speciall treatise hereof against Caluin . By Hooker , in his Ecclesiast. Pollicy lib 5. pag. 104. By D. Couell in his defence of M. Hooker pag 62. Yea in farther conuincing of M. Whytes former vntruth , we fynd that Iacobus Andreas a Protestant in Epitom . Coloq . Montisbelgar . pag. 47. thus plainely writeth . Deus est Author peccati secundum Bezam .

Here now I referr the matter to the iudiceous Reader , whether he will beleue M. Whytes former assertion as true , politikly onely deliuered by him to salue the honour of his Church , or the plaine contrary meaning of Caluin , Zuinglius , and Beza , set downe in their owne sayinges , & so acknowledged by others of their owne Religion : where we fynd that the protestant , 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 , k k Vpon the Cataloge . that he was Abbot of Clareiuaux . And Osiander saith of Bernard l l in Epitom . cent. 12. pag. 309. 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 m m Cen. 12. 10. 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 , n n Against the Rhem. Test. in Luc. 22. fol. 133. and D. Whytaker o o lib. cont. Dur. pag. 154. 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 , p p In M. W. his booke . pag. 1. 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 remembrance 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 record●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 , q q Epitom . Cent. 12. lib. ca. 6. pag. 310. 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 . r r In his Catalogue of the witnesses of truth .

This man now most seriously recordeth , that before S. Francis death , there appeared certain● 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 , pers●cut●d them , and so many tymes draue them ●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 whom ? 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 m m vpon the Reuelat. prop. 37. pag. 68. 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 . n n In Ep. de abrogandis in vniuersum om nibus statut . Ecclesiast. For certaine through the worke of Antichrist , the externall Church , together with the faith and Sacramentes , uanished away presently after the Apostles departure : and that for these thousand four hundreth yeres , the Church haith bene no where externall and visible .

Now during all these ages , when was M. W. company of men visibly professing the same faith that he doth ? Finally D. Fulke ( though not acknowledging so great an inuisibility yet ) wryteth , o o In his answ. to a counterf . Catholick . pag. 16. 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 aduersaries concerning the same . First then Cartwright confesseth o o In his 2. Reply part. 1. p. 485. 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 edition 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 . Exam. part. 3 p. 50. Lastly Chemni●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 , 4 4 Cent. ca. 10. 108. that Lactantius ( who lyued in the fourth Century or age ) affirmeth many superstitious thinges concerning the efficacy of Christes Image . Doctor Fulke affirmeth , a a Against H●lk●ns . &c. p. 672. 675. 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 b b Cent. 4. col. 302. that Ambrosius multa comm●morat superstitios● de cruce inu●nta . The said Centuristes also affirme c c Cent. 3. Col. 121. 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 far● 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 , d d Cent 4. Col. 496. that Chrisostomus transubstantiatiorem vid tur confirmare . Chrisostem is thought to confirme transubstantiation . In lyke sort by the Iudgment of other protestantes e e Visinus in his commone factio cuirsd●m Theologi . pag. 211. Theophilactus , & Dama ce●us , plane inclinant ad transubstantiatiorem . Theophilact & D. mascen , do euidently incl●ne to Transubstantiation .

Answearable hereto Occolampadius f f lib Epist. O●c●lamp . & Zu●ng . lib. 3. doth charge Damascen with the said doctrine . Finally D. H●mfrey writeth , g g Humfr. Iesuit . part. 2. rat. 5. that Gregory the great brought in Trans●bstantiation . In Ecclsiam verò ( saith he speaking of our conuersion ) quid inuexerunt Gregorius et Augustinus ? Int●l●runt &c. Transubstantiationem .

Now I would demaund of our minister with what countenance he can au●rre , that in the doctrine of Transubstantiation , 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 ouerual●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 fit● 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 , fi●st that supposing he d●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 passag● , to wit touching Augustines conn●rsion and his faith , is Hipotheticall , and deliuered with som hesitation and doubting : the other recalling the first , Categoricall , absolute , and peremptory . Now in my reprouall of this his falshood , I will vnyte together , the two former disioynted parcels , and directly proue from our aduersaries penaes , that S. Augustine did conuert our Country to the present Catholick Romane faith : in the euicting whereof , I will content my self with the confessions of the Centuristes , and of D. Humfrey : For if we peruse the history of those Censorions Magdeburgians , who reproue and controule at their pleasure , all the Fathers of all ages : we shall fynd that these Centuristes acknowledging S. Augustines conuersion of vs in their Alphabeticall Table of the 6. Century at the word Gregory , do set downe certaine erroures ( in their iudgmentes ) of S. Gregory in these wordes following . Eiusdem error de bonit operibus , de Confessione , de Coniugio , de Ecclesia , de Sanctorum inuocatione , de Inferno , de Iustificatione , de Libero arbitrio , de Purgatorio , de Paenitentia , de Satisfactione . And further in the said Century they charge him with Celebration of Masse . Col. 369. with claime & practise of supreme Iurisdiction ouer all Churches . col . 425. 426. &c. with Relickes and sprinkling of holy water . col . 364. with Pilgrimage . col. 384. with Monachisme col. 343. Finally ( to omit many other pointes ) with Chrisme & oyle col. 367.

Now this being the confessed Faith of S. Gregory , I think no reasonable man will deny , but that S. Augustine who was sent by him to conuert our Country , was of the same Faith with S. Gregory .

In lyke sort D. Humfrey is most full in this point , who thus writeth . Iesu●t . part. 2. ●at. 5. In Ecclesiam verò quid inuexerunt Gregorius & Augustinus ? &c. What brought Gregory & Augustine into the Church ? They brought in the Archbishops vestmont for the solemne celebration of Masse , they brought in Purgatory , and oblation of the healthfull houst , a●d Praiers for the dead &c. they brought in Relickes Transubstantiation &c. New consecration of Churches &c. From all which pointes , what other conclusion is gathered , then that Indulgences , Monachisme , the Papacy , and all the other chaos and heape of superstition was erected thereby . And thus fa●r of this testimony though heretofore vpon other occasion alledged .

Now here it being confessed both by the Centuristes , and by this learned Doctor , that S. Augustine did not onely conuert vs , but also did teach vs all the former doctrines : I would be resolued of M. whyte , by what extenuation or figure in Rethorick , he can style our instruction in the said maine articles of Catholick Religion , the planting of certaine tryfling Ceremonies . But I see he is most willing for his owne behalf to alleuiate and lessen the weight and consequence of our former conuersion .

The 23. Vntruth . Concerning the Conuersion of Countries .

Page 357. Touching the conuersion of other heathen Countries to the Faith of Christ , fore-tould so long since by the Prophets i i Esa. 60. 62. & 49. pf . 2. & 102. of God to be accomplished onely in the true Church of Christ : the D. as being emulous of the Romane Catholick Church her honour therein : flatly affirmeth of certaine Countries , by him mentioned , that they were conuerted by that Church which was of his owne faith and profession , and not by the Church of vs Catholickes , for thus he writeth . Allowing all these Countries to haue bene conuerted by such as were members of the Church of Rome , yet this was a thousand yeres agoe , when that Church was the same that ours is , and so the conuersions weare wrought by persons adhering to the protestantes faith .

This point is discouered to be false , first by refuting the reason deliuered by the Doctor , why the said Countries should be conuerted by the professors of the protestantes faith . Secondly by the testimonies of the said protestantes flatly confessing , that their Church , as yet neuer conuerted any Country to Christianity .

As concerning the first poynt , I say , that the Church of Rome more then a thousand yeres agoe , haith seaced ( supposing that before it was ) to be protestant , and therefore her self professing the contrary faith , as then , could not conuert the said Countries to protestancy .

That the Church of Rome acknowledged not in these tymes the protestantes religion , is most abundantly confessed by the protestantes them selues , who do frequently teach that the true Church of God ( & consequently in their supposales , their owne Church ) haith bene latent and inuisible more then these laste thousand yeres , during all which tyme , the Antichristian and popish Religion ( as they terme it ) haith possessed all Christian Countries whatsoeuer .

The protestantes abundant confessions , haue bene already made so euident in this point , incidently in the discouery of some of M. W. vntruthes , as that I presume an iteration of the same , would be ouer fastidious and wearisom to the Reader , and therefore I will passe on to the other point , cons●sting in the confessions of the protestantes , that their Church neuer yet conuerted any one Country to Christianity .

And first for confirmation hereof , we fynde that Sebastian Castalie ( a learned Caluenist , and highly praisep by D , Humfray ) k k De rat . inte●pr . li. 1. q. 62. writing of the accomplishment of the prophesies of conuerting of kingdomes , saith thus . Equidem a●t haec futura fatendum est &c.

In his Preface of 〈◊〉 great la●● Byble dedicated to K●●g Edward the 6. Truly we must confesse , that these thinges shall be performed here after , or haue been heretofore , or God is to be accused of lying . If any man answer that they haue bene performed , I will demaund when ? If he say , in the Apostles time , I will aske , how it falleth out , that neither then the knowledg of God was altogether perfect , and after in so short a time vanished away , which was promised to be eternall , and more aboundant then the floods of the sea .

And then there somwhat after , the said protestant thus acknowledgeth . The more I do examine the Scriptures , the lesse I obser●e it the same performed , howsoeuer the said Prophets be vnde●stoode .

To conclude this point , the prophecies deliuered by Esay and others the Prophets , for the spreading of Gods Ch●rch , are so fart from being yet acomplished in the protestantes Church , that diuers protestantes haue not onely acknowledged so much , but by reason of the not performance thereof , haue in the end become most wicked Apostataes : mantaining that if the faith and Religion preached by Christ and his Apostles had bene true , and his Church , that Church which was figured out by the auncient Prophets : that then should the said Prophesies , touching the enlargment of the Church , and the conuersion of nations , haue had their successiue euent , and infallible performance in the said Church , which they affirme hitherto ha●th not bene effected .

And vearably hereunto we find , that the want of the performance to the said prophesies in the protestantes Church , wrought so forcibly with Dauid George a Hollander , l l See the History of Dauid Georg painted at ●ntwerpe 1563. & first published by the Dinynes of Basill . & once professor of the protestants faith & religion in Basill ( to omitt the lyke examples of diuers others ) that in the end he taught most fearfull & horrible blasphemy , affirming Christ to haue bene a seducer : his cheifest reason being , in that the true Religion ( our Catholick Religion being by him supposed to be false , and therefore the conuersions of Countries made to it , not admitted to be intended by the Prophets ) according to the predictions , should haue spred and disseminated it self before this tyme , through the most Nations & Countries of the world , which poynt ( saith he ) hitherto is not accomplished .

Here now the iudiceous Reader may collect , both from what haith bene acknowledged aboue , as also from the present confession of the former Apostata ( being accompanied with such a dreadfull euent ) how vntrue the D. wordes were , when he affirmed diuers Countries some thousand yeres since , to haue bene conuerted from paganisme , vnto Christianity by that Church which in doctrine and faith conspired with the protestantes Church .

Thus you see M. W. that not I , but such as in other poyntes of Nouelisme , do interleague with you , geue you the lye therein : and thus is falshood truly controuled , euen by the Patrones of falshood .

The 24. Vntruth . Against the Popes authority in calling of Councells .

Page 375. He ( in charging the Pope with innouation of his iurisdiction ) thus saith .

The beginning of the Popes Supremacy ouer Councells , was of late , since the Councells of Constance and Basill , decreed within this hundreth yeres in the Councell of Lateran , by a few Italian Bishops , wheras in the auncient Church it was otherwise . In this poynt , for the more compendiousnes thereof , I will insist onely in the fourth and fifth Century after Christ , both being within the circuite of the primitiue Church .

First then we fynd , that D : Whitaker confesseth m m de Con●l . 9. 2. p. 42. an Ecclesiasticall Canon to be in the fourth Century , that Noe Councell should be celebrated , without the Bishop of Rome . He also further acknowledgeth , n n Ibid. p. 4. that Pope Iulius made challenge therby ( meaning by the benefite of the said Canon ) to assemble a Councell .

And where Bellarmine insisting in the president of Iulius and other Bishops vrging this Canon , Danaeus a learned protestant , thus onely replyeth . o o Resp. ad Bel. par. 1. p. 595. Nullius est moments &c. The example is of noe force , since it is proued from the Testimony of the Bishop of Rome who is a party in his owne cause . Thus confessing the poynt it self ( outfaced by the minister ) but denying onely the lawfulnes thereof .

Now in the fyfth age we fynde , that the Magdeburgians do thus plainely Censure the Popes of that tyme . p p Cent. 5. Col. 781. Generalia Concilia &c. The bishops of Rome haue challenged to them selues , power of celebrating Councells , as appeareth out of the 93. Epistle , & 7. chapter of Leo. And yet further the said Centuristes do say q q Ibidem Ac Synodos &c. They haue reiected such Councells as vnlawfull , which were not called together by their Authority .

And thus farr of this poynt : where you see , that our minister saying , that no Bishop of Rome challenged authority of assembling of Councells , or being aboue them , but within this hundreth yeares last , is contradicted by the former learned protestantes , who confesse that the Bishop of Rome practised it , eleuen or twelue hundreth ages . I pray you whether of these is more likly to lye ?

The 25. Vntruth : Against merite of woorkes .

Page 378. For the more disauthorising of the doctrine of merit of workes : our minister thus outlasheth . The doctrine touching the merit of workes , was bego● lately by the schoolemen .

For the triall of this poynt , some of the Fathers of the primitiue Church confessed euen by the protestants to teach this our Catholic Faith , shall becom the wittnesses bewene the D. and me .

First then the Magdeburgians do thus write of one Father . r r Cent. 5. Col. 1178. Chrisastome handleth impurely the doctrine of Iustification , and attributeth merite to workes .

Luther f f In Galat. c. 4. calleth Ierome , Ambrose , and Augvstine , Iusticiarios Iustice-workers of the ould Papacy .

Finally D. Humfrey s s Iesuit . part. 2. p. 530. ascendeth euen to Ireneus , Clemens , and others pronouncing of them , that then hauy in their writinges , the merite of workes .

And thus farr of this poynt . Wherefore our ministers ouersight was most grosse , in diuulging such a notorious vntruth , contrary to the expresse Iudgment of his owne most learned brethren .

The 26. Vntruth . Against the Sacrifice of the Masse .

Page 378. The minister endeuoring calumniously to dishonour the most healthfull and incruent Sacrifice of the Masse , writeth , that the Masse began not all at once , but by degrees .

Now here to instruct the Doctors ignorance , or at least to detect his malice : I am to lay downe the Iudgmente of the Catholick Church , teaching what is mantayned to be essentiall to the Sacrifice of the Masse , and what but accidentall . The true nature then and essence of this Sacrifice , we hould to consist , in the oblation of the most sacred body and blood of Christ and consummation thereof : what praiers or ceremonies do either precede or follow the wordes of the institution , are no essentiall part of the Masse , & if they were all omitted in the celebration thereof , yet were the Sacrifice of it true and perfect . And therefore we willingly confesse without any preiudice to our cause , that most of the said prayers or Ceremonies , were added by seuerall Popes , at different tymes : yet from our acknowledgment thereof , it in no sort followeth , that the Masse came in by degrees , since we all teach , that they are neither the Masse , nor any essentiall parte of it .

Now wheareas the minister by subtilty , and by falsly suggesting to the Reader , that the Masse came in at seuerall tymes , would haue it to be vnderstoode for our greater disaduauntage , of the essence and nature of the Masse it self : I will lay downe the Iudgment of the Primitiue Church herein , vnanimously teaching , ( euen by the confession of the most iudiceous protestantes ) the true and vnbloudly Sacrifice , & oblation of Christes body and bloud , to be performed in the celebration of the Eucharist : so shall the Reader be instructed in the antiqnity of that which is essentially the masse : and withall ( in reguard of the ministers calumnious dealing herein ) he shall haue iust reason to say . t t Ierem. 5. Astonishment and meruelous thinges are done in the land : the prophets prophesied a lye .

And here for greater compendiousnes , I will forbeare to set downe the Protestantes confessions of particuler Fathers teaching the doctrine of the Masse , and will restraine my self onely to such their sayinges , whereof some do belong to the primitiue Church in generall , and others to the first age or Century thereof .

And first we f●nd Caluin to wryte of them in generall u u lib. de vera Ecclesiae reform . extant . in Tract . The ol. Caluin . p. 389. Veteres excusandi non sunt &c: The auncient Fathers are not to be excused , seing it is euident that they turned from the true and genuine Institution of Christ . For whereas the lordes supper it celebrated to this end , that we should communicate with the Sacrifice of Christ , the Fathers not being contente therewith , haue added thereunto an oblation . And to the lyke purpose he saith in his Institutions . x x inst. l. 4. ca. 18. Sect. 11. Veteres quoque illos video &c I do see that those Auntient Fathers , did detort the memory thereof ( meaning of the Eucharist ) otherwise then was agreeing to the Institution of Christ : for their Lordes Supper , doth make shew and representation of I can not tell what reiterated and renewed Sacrifice . They haue more nearely imitated the Iudaicall manner of Sacrificing , then either Christ did ordaine , or the nature of the Gospell did suffer . Tnus Caluin .

Add hereunto for the greater Antiquity of the doctrine of the Sacrifice of the Masse , that the protestantes them selues do confesse the faith thereof to be vniuersall , euen in the first age or Century after Christ .

For we fynde , that Hospmian a famous protestant doth thus write . y y In his Sacram . l. 1. Ca. 6. p. 20 I am tum primo &c. Euen in the first age the Apostles being yet liuing , the deuill did deceaue men more about this Sacrament , then about Baptisme , & did withdraw men from the first forme thereof .

In lyke sort Sebastianus Francus an other learned protestant , thus plainely writeth , a a Epist. de abrog . in vniuersum omnibus stat. , Eccl. 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 prot●stant here in England , thus confesseth . b b In his Treatise entituled , The relickes of Rome , p. 344 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 . 2 2 Aug. li. 4. de T●n . ca. 14. Quid g●atius offerri ( faith one Fa. aut daripotest , quam caro sacrifici● nostri , corpus effectum 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. n●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 , c c In his true defence . part. 4. p. 566. 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 . d d Whyteg . def. p. 593. It was a wafer-cake brought in by Pope Alexander : which Pope euen by the testimony of Osia●der , e e Cent. 2 p. 10● 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 pers●sting in his serpentyne and v●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 , f●●● Christ , by Honorius the third . &c ,

That Adoration followeth vpon the beleefe of the reall presence , it is gra●●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 heathen 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 , f f Against Heskins . &c. p. 235. and D. Sa●liffe . g g In his Suruey of popery . p. 295. But to ascend to higher times , the Centuristes speaking of the prayers of S. Ambrose , h h Cent. 4. Col. 43. in his booke entituled , Orat. praeparat . ad Massam . do thus write , Continent adorationem panis in Sacramento . Those prayers do conte●ne the Adoration of the bread in the sacrament . Chem●●tius produceth diuers sentences of Augustine , Ambrose , and Naz●anzen , which sentences in Chem●●tius his Iudgment , do affirme the Adoration of the Sacrament . k k Exam. part. 2. p. 92.

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 ●i●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 & Doctoribus .

Doctor Fulke doth in like manner ingeniously acknowledg the same in these wordes . You can name the notable persons in all ages , in their gouernment and ministery , and especially the Succession of the Popes , you can rehearse in order vpon your fingers . Thus writeth he in his answear to A counterfait Catholick , p. 27. And the lyke doth he write in his Reioynder to Bristoes reply p. 343.

Thus do our aduersaries acknowledg in our behalfe touching Succession , which Caluin flatly denyeth to be found in his owne Church , who plainely teacheth l l Institut. li. 4. ca. 3. Sect. 4. that with them , the true succession of ordination , was broke of : so daungerously wounding him self with that sentence of S. Augustine . m m tom. 7. cont. Epist. Manich. c. 4. In Ecclesia gremio me iustiss mé tenet ab ipsa sede Petri &c. vsque ad presentem Ep scopatum : successio Sacerdotum .

To conclude , the vninterrupted descent and current of Succession in the Catholick Church , is infallibly euicted from our aduersaries acknowledgment , of the continuall visiblenes thereof , since the one doth reciprocally imply the other . For if our Church was euer visible , and the doctrine thereof neuer suffered any disparition or vanishing away : then were the Bishops and Pastors in lyke sort euer visible , since without Pastors to minister the word and Sacraments , and to gouerne the flock : the Church like a maistlesse shippe , can not for any tyme subs●st or bee .

And thus far of this point . Wherein our minister by denying Succession to be in our Church , and falsly ascribing it to his owne new congregation , doth thus in aduancing the one aboue the other , make innouation , to take the wall of true Antiquity , & heresy of true Religion .

The 30 Vntruth . In defence of Martyn Luthers lyfe and manners .

From page 425. to 433. The D. becometh Luthers Encomiast , and much laboureth to free his life , and death , from all obloquy , and infamy , often affirming , that what soeuer touching his lyfe may seeme worthy of reprehension , is onely forged by his aduersaries , meaning the Catholickes : and therefore in his table in the end of his booke , at the word Luther , he thus saith . Luthers lyfe iustifyed , against the maliceous reportes of the papists .

Now to conuince this shamelesse vntruth , I will ( forbearing herein the credible reportes of Catholickes ) alledg onely the confession of Luther him self deliuered in his owne wordes , or els the testimonies of learned protestantes ; so shall we see that our minister here perfectly acted his part , in bouldly mantayning against such euident testimonies , that what may seeme to detract from Luthers honesty , and integrity , are but the fictions of his enemies . And here for greater compendiousnes , I will insiste onely in two pointes , first in displaying in part his Sensuality : Secondly his Pryde .

And first touching his sayinges of lust and incontinency , he thus admonisheth . a a Sermo de Matrimonio . Si non vult vxor , aut non possit , veniat ancilla . If the wyfe will not or can not , let the maid come . Againe he thus writeth . b b Tom. 5. wittem . ser. de Matrim . fol. 119. As it is not in my power that I should be no man : so it is not in my power that I should be without a woman . And there after . It is not in our power either that it should be stayed or omitted , but it is as necessary , as that I should be a man , and more necessary then to eat , drink , purge , make cleane the nose &c. And yet more fully he speaketh of his owne incontinency in these wordes . c c De colloq. mens . fol. 526. I am almost mad through the rage of lust and desire of women . As also he thus further confesseth . d d To. 1. Ep. fol. 334. Ep. ad Philippá . I am burned with the great flame of my vntamed flesh : I who ought to be feruent in spirit , am feruent in the flesh , in lust , slouth , &c. Eight dayes are now past , wherein I neither write , pray , nor study , being uexed partly with temptation of the flesh , partly with other trouble .

This point is so euident , that Benedict Morgenstern a protestant writer saith of the Caluenistes , when they intend at any tyme to geue assent or prouocation to nature : Non verentur inter se dicere , hodie Lutheranicè vinemus . They were not afraid to say among them selues , to day we will liue after the manner of Luther . e e Tract . de Eccl. p. 221. Thus vsing the name of Luther , the more fully to expresse the libidenous lyfe and custome of Luther .

Now to all these confessions of his owne & other protestantes , it can not be replyed that him self did write thus when he was a papist , and before his reuolt : for of his lyfe during his stay in the papacy , you shall heare his owne report , that f f Vpon the Epistle to the Galathians in engl. in ca. 1. fol. 35. he honoured the Pope of mere conscience , kept chastity , pouerty , and obedience , and whatsoeuer ( saith he ) I did , I did it with a single heart , of good zeale , and for the glory of god , fearing greauously the last day , and desireous to be saued from the bothom of my heart . Thus he confesseth of the integrity of his mind and intention , during the tyme of his continuing a catholick . And thus much of his inclination to lust and wantonnes .

Now touching Luthers pryde ( forbearing his owne sayinges deliuered most insolently , in contempt of the auncient Fathers , and of King Henry the eight ) I will content my self with the testimonies onely of protestants , who particulerly inueighed against him for his pryde . Zuinglius , in reguard of his insupportable pryde , thus saith of him . g g To 2. Res. ad confes . Luth. fol. 478 En vt totum &c. Behould how Sathan laboureth wholly to possesse this man . And OEcolampadius admonisheth Luther , h h In resp. ad confes . Luth. to beware , lest being puffed vp by arogancy and pryde , he be seduced by Sathan . Answearably hereto Conradus Regius a learned and famous protestant , thus writeth of him . i i In libro German . con. Io. Hos. de caena Domini . Deus propter peccatum superbiae &c. God , by reason of the sinne of pryde wherewith Luther was puffed vp ( as many of his owne writinges do witnes ) haith taken away his true spirit f●om him , as he did from the Prophets 3. Reg. 22. and in place thereof , haith geuen him a proud , angry , and lying spirit .

To conclude , omitting diuers other learned protestantes testimonies , the Diuines of Tigur being Caluenistes , thus censure Luthers booke writen against the Sacramentaries , and Zuinglians , that it was k k In confes . Germanicè im pressa , Tigur● . An 1544. in 8. fol. 3. Liber plenus demoniis , plenus impudici● dicteriis : scatet tracundia et furore . And thus we fynd in what height of spirit , and elation of mind , he did write against his owne brethren , and how for the same he was rebuked by them .

Now hauing displaid in part Luthers deportment , and this , either from his owne mouth , or from the confessions of his owne brethren : I refer two thinges to the Readers consideration , one , whether our D. did auer an vntruth or no , in iustifiing , that whatsoeuer could be produced against Luthers life & conuersation , was malignantly forged onely by vs his enemies .

The second ( and that much more importing ) whether it standeth with probability of reason , or the accustomed course of Gods proceding ( who euer electeth meanes sutable and proportionable to their endes ) to make choice , for the restoring and replanting the truth of his Gospell and Religion ( supposing it was then decayed ) of a man whose course of lyfe , writings , and doctrine , do euen breath onely pryde , contumacy , sensuality , Sardanapalisme , and luxury .

Here now M. Whyte I haue thought good in the enumeration of your lyes , to end with Luther , as originally from him , you first did suck your lyinge doctrine . Onely I will conclude with this , that since you are entred with our vulgar multitude ( who cheifly rest vpon the outward graine and appearance of thinges ) into the number and catologue of our new Euangelicall Prophets : I would wish such your folowers , to entertaine an impartiall vew and consideration of this and other your forgeries and sleightes , which if they do , doubtlesse they shall in the ende fynde and acknowledg , that you are guided therein euen by that ghostly enemy of mannes soule , who once said : l l 3. Reg. 22. Egrediar , & ero spiritus mendaex in ore omnium Prophetarum eiu● . I will go forth , and will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his Prophets .

WHYTE DYED BLACK THE THIRD PART . Contayning diuers impertinences or absurd Illations , or reasoninges , drawne from Maister Whyte his alledged Authorities .

The 1. Paragraph . Werein are discouered strange Illations or arguinges , in proofe that the Scriptures are the sole rule of Faith , & against Traditions .

HAuing in the two precedent partes set downe many corruptions and lyes practised by M. Whyte : it now followeth according to my former intended Methode , that I also display diuers of his impertinent and absurde inferences and argumentes ( for these three pointes , to wit , corrupting , lying , & idly or absurdly disputing , are the three seuerall threedes whereof the whole worke of his Treatise is wouen . In all which ( though different in them selues ) he still retayneth one and the same intention of deceipt , like the loade-stone , which though often changeth his place , yet neuer changeth it center .

Now touchinge those his impertinences and loose illations , the Reader is to conceaue , that they consist in his alledging of such testimonies both of Scriptures , Fathers , and Catholick writers , as being truly set downe , do not neuerth●l●sse impugne that point of our Catholick doctrine , against which they were by him so vrged . Which course of writing , whether it may be ascrybed to our Doctors ignorance & want of learning , or rather ( which is more probable ) to his malice against the Catholick Faith , and desire to deceaue the simple and vnlearned , or lastly to the beggery of his cause , being deuoide of better arguments , I leaue to him self to decide . But howsoeuer it is , here I am to aduertise the Reader , that in perusing of such authorities produced by M. Whyte , he would euer recurr to the true state of the question , and particulerly that he would apply the said sentences , to that verie point or touch wherein the life of the question consisteth , and then he shall find how rouingly , & wandringly they are directed , still glauncing by , vpon some ignorant or wilfull mistaking or other , neuer reaching the mark intended . And so he may apply the wordes of Tertulian , though in a different sense , to the loose writinges of M. Whyte and such others Quemcunque conceperint ventum argumentationis scorpii isti , quocunque se acumine impegerint , vna tam linea ista : Tertull. aduers . Gnost . to wit the lyne drawne from our vnderstanding to the mayne point in controuersy .

And here M. Whyte can not say , in excuse of him self , that such testimonies of this nature are produced by him onely to proue so much and no more , as the wordes in their litterall and acknowledged sense , do immediatly import : Which euasion is insufficient for two respects .

First because the proof● of that which litterally & plainely they signify , is not in controuersy betwene the protestantes and vs , and therefore the iustifiing of so much being not denied by any learned Catholick , is needelesly vndertaken .

Secondly in that M. Whyte doth most labouriously , painefully , and purposly , alledg the said testimonies , to conuince , and impugne , some one Catholick poynt or other , taught by vs , and denyed by the protestantes , and this his drift and scope is manifested , either by his answearable entituling of the leaues wherein such authorities are found , or els by his owne wordes precedent or subsequent to the said sentences .

But to detayne the Reader no longer from these his allegations : The first point of this kynde which presenteth it self , is as touching the Rule of Faith , & reiecting of all Apostolicall Traditions : For pag. 13. we thus read , digres. 3. Wherein by the Scriptures , Fathers , Reasons , and papistes owne confessions , it is shewed , that the Scripture is the rule of Faith : As likewise he entituleth that leafe and some others following , in this manner . The Scripture onely , is tho iudg & rule of Faith . And so answearably hereto , pag. 17. beating the former tytle , he thus saith . Shall the Libertynes be recalled from their blind reuelations , to their writen text : and shall not the papistes be reuoked from their vncertaine Traditions to the same rule ?

But that we may the better behould how valiantly our minister impugneth all Traditions , by erectinge the Scripture as sole rule of Faith : we are here to call vnto mind what the Catholick Church teacheth in this poynt .

It then teacheth , that the word of God is to limit and confine our Faith , and that nothing is to be accompted as matter of faith , which receaueth not it proofe from thence . Hereupon it teacheth further , that this word is either writen , which is commonly called the Scripture , or els deliuered by Christ & his Church , and this comprehendeth Traditions . Both these we beleue to be of infallible authority , since the true and inward reason why the word of God is the word of God , is not because it is writen , rather then deliuered by speach , ( for this is merely extrinsicall to the point ) but because the said word proceded from them , who were infallibly and immediatly directed therein by the assistance of the holy Ghost .

This supposed , let vs see how M. Whyte proueth that the writen word is onely the rule of Faith , and consequently that there are no Traditions of the Church which may also in part be a rule thereof ,

First then our Doctor vrgeth to this end seuerall places of Scripture , as ( among others ) that of Salomon . a a prou. 2. 1. The scripture will make a man vnderstand righteousnes , and iudgment , and equity , & euery good path . Againe that of Esay . b b Esa. 8. We must repaire to the Law , to the testimony : if any speake not according to that word , there is no light in him . Also out of Malachy . c c Malach. 4. Remember the Law of Moyses my seruant , which I commaunded him in Horeb for all Israell , with the statutes & Iudgmentes . In lyke sort he alledgeth , that Abraham answearing the rich glutton , said , that d d Luc. 16. his brethren had Moyses and the Prophets .

Now that the Reader may see , how well these texts are to the point controuerted , I will set some of them downe in forme of Argument , and so apply them to M. Whytes purpose . As first thus . Salomon said of the Scriptures of the old Testament . The Scripture will make a man vnderstand righteousnes , and Iudgment , and equity , and euery good path : Ergo now in the tyme of Christianity , there are no Traditions , but the Scripture of the old Testament , it the onely rule of Faith . Againe , Remember the Law of Moyses my seruant , which I commaunded him in Horeb , for all Israell , with the statutes & iudgments ; Therefore no Traditions . Lastly . The brethren of the rich glutton had Moyses and the Prophets : Therefore no pointes of Christian Faith , are to be proued from 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 . e e cont. Hermog. 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 f f De nupr . & concup . ad Valer. l. 2. ca. 33. 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 , g g Orat. de iis qui adeunt Hietos . 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 introdu●eth S. Austine againe saying . De doct. chris . li. 2. ca. 42. 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 . k k Lect. 1. in 1. Tim. 6. 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 l l 1. q. Art. 8. Our Faith reste●h and st●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 . m m de com . sub vtr . spec. 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 from God , by the assistance of the holy Ghost ?

Finally he comes in with Perisius , wryting that n n de ration . Co● . l. 2. ca. 19. 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 & th●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 soueraig●ty of the Scriptures in determining of controuersies , without any needefull explication of gods Church , this assertion being indeede a head Theoreme or principle with the sectaries of this age . For page 4● . 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 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 1 1 1. Tim. 3. Mat. 18. 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 2 2 1. Pet. 1. Immor . all seede . The 3 3 1. Cor. ● . demonstration of the Spi●it & power . that it is 4 4 Heb. 4. Liuely & powerfull : that 5 5 Luc. 24. it maketh our bear●●● to burne within vs . that 6 6 Io. 6. It geueth a greater testimony to Christ , then Iohn Baptist could geue . that 7 7 2. Pet. 1. A voice from heauen is not so sure as it . that 8 8 1. Io. 5. It is the spirit which beareth witnes to the truth thereof . that 9 9 Ibid. If we receaue the witnes of men , the witnes of God is greater , Lastly he alledgeth those wordes of Christ . 10 10 Io 5. 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 , r r For so is M. Wh. cyted by Purchase in his late booke . 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 . 12 12 Lib. ● de p●ncip . sid. doct. cap. 20. 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 . 13 13 l. 5. Ep. 11. Let God him self teach me them● 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 . 14 14 l. 3. da Prouid . 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 . 15 15 Contra Faust. l. 32. ca. 19. You see this is your endevour● 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 and 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 15 15 Io. 20. The Scriptures are written that we may beleue in him . Againe . 16 16 1. Io. 5. He that beleueth in him , haith a witnes in him selfe . Thirdly 17 17 Ephe● . 2. We are all built vpon the foundation of the Apostles & Prophets . Christ him self being the head corner stone , in whom all the building is coopled together by the spirit .

Now to what end he mustereth all these sentences of Scripture god him self knoweth : for neither do they derogate any thing from 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 allegations 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 ● with a certaine man recorded by Sulpitius , 18 18 Sulpitius Seuerus Epist. Hist. Eccl. so writeth of Ithacius . 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 sa●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 conspicuous at one time then an other , which we all graunt , 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 . 3 3 In Daniel . pag. 714. In the ryme of Antiehrist there shall be no Sacrament in publick places , neither shall ●ay publick honour be geuen it , but priuatly and priuily shall it be kept and honoured . In the same manner he vrgeth Ouandus , 4 4 Breuiloq . in 4. sent. d 18. p. 602. 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 , 5 5 Bosius de sig. Eccl. l. 24. ca. 9. Dom. a Soro 2. d. 46. q. 1. art. 1. 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 imprisōed 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 . 6 6 Anal. fid. l. 6. ca. 4. 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 with whom D. Stapleton is alledged 7 7 Relect. contr. 1. q. 3. p. 30. 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 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 , 7 7 Io. 10. My sheepe here my voice . And againe . 8 8 Mat. 18. 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 . 9 9 Mat. 7. You shall know the false prophets by their frutes . And finally that saying of S. Paule , 10 10 Gal. 6. 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 . 11 11 Ephe. 2. 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 m m 2. Pet. 1. 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 12 12 li. 2. haer. ca. 48. 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 th●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 . 14 14 Resert . Possen . They do not moue , they do not perswade , but they enforce vs , they dry●e vs forward , they violently constraine vs . Thou readest wordes rudely and homely , but such as are quick , liuely , flaming , shyning , pearcing to the bottome of the spirit , and by their admirable power , transforming the whole man .

Now who can inferr out of these wordes , that the Scripture is knowne to vs before the Church , seeing indeede the priority of the one or the other , is not so much as intimated here at all ? And what praises are here ascribed to the Scriptures , may truly belonge vnto them after we are assured of their being , and expositions by the warrant of Gods Church .

Thus we fynde , that the further we enter into our ministers booke , the greater ouercharge of bootelesse and vnnecessary testimonies , do euer present them selues to vs , manifesting vnto the iudiceous and obseruant Reader , that this worke ( though the first borne of his braine ) is abortiue , imperfect , and weake , from all which stoare of impertinent proofes thus vauntingly by him alledged , demonstratiuely ( forsooth ) to confirme , what he still pretendeth to prooue : We may euict one irrefragable demonstration ex posteriori , to wit , that M. Whyte is absolutly ignorant in the doctrine of demonstrations .

The 5. Paragraph Wherein are examined strange kindes of arguinges , against the authority of the Church .

M. Whyte labouring to depresse the Churches auuhority , and euer more and more venting out his venome and poysen against her , in the some of that good spirit wherein he speaketh , vndertaketh pag. 126. & some others following , to proue , that the teaching of the Church is to be examined ( for so he entituleth those leaues ) As also he saith , It is necessary for euery particuler man , to examine and iudge of the thinges the Church teacheth him ; thus geuing the raynes to euery priuate and ignorant fellow , vnder the tecture & pretext of gods secret illuminations , to iudg his owne iudg , and so to call in question , the reputation & honour of her from whose chast loynes euen him self is ( at least originally ) descended . But that we may better see how little conducing his testimonies alledged are to the purpose : let vs first set downe what the Catholickes do freely graunt & teach in this point .

They ioyntly teach , that the bound of subiecting ones self to the Churches Authority , is properly incumbent vpon Christians , who are made members of the Church by baptisme , and consequently do owe their obedience thereunto , and not vpon infidels or Iewes , who are not obliged to embrace Christian Religion , except they see it confirmed by miracles , or some other enforcing reasons of credibility : Neuerthelesse , though an heritike do sinne , in doubting of the Churches Authority , yet supposing that his doubt and sinne , he doth not euill to examine the doctrine of the Church , according to the Scriptures , if so be he procedeth herein , onely with a desyre of fynding the truth .

Now let vs see what Authorities M. Whyte alledgeth to proue his former positions . First he vrgeth those wordes of the Apostle , a a 1. Thes. 5. Try all thinges , & hould that which is good . As also those of our Sau. b b Io. 7. 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 . c c 1. Io. 4. Derely beloued beleue not euery spirit , but try the spirits whether they be of God . In like sort those wordes of Christ . d d Mat. 7. Beware of false prophets , by their frutes you shall know them . And finally ( besides the example of the men of Beraea searching the Scriptures , e e Act. 17. ) he vrgeth that where the Apostle counseleth the Hebrewes , that f f Hebr. 5. 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 a a Ezech. 33. 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 reference , 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 . b b Eph. 4. 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 . c c Chrisost. in Act. ho. 33. 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 from 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 reduced onely to the written word , their owne priuate spirit onely , must finally decree , how the said word is to be vnderstoode , either for the impugning or defending , of any such pointes controuerted .

The 6. Paragraph Wherein are examined sundry argumentes framed by M. W. against the vnity of Catholickes , in matters of Religion .

Not many leafes after , M. Whyte , as well knowing the force of vnity in Faith , since it is true , that God 1 1 Cor. 14. Non est dissensionis Deus , sed pacis , goeth about to shew , that the Catholickes enioy not any vnity and concord in their doctrine , and therefore he thus stileth those leafes . The p●pistes haue no vnity in doctrine . And page .156 . he further saith . The papistes agree in nothing wherein they dissent from vs . If either M. W. or any other can proue so much , I must graunt that he greatly aduauntageth his cause , seeing those wordes of the Prophet 2 2 Isay. 19. Concurrere faciam Aegiptios contra Aegiptios , are tipically vnderstoode of the intestine warres and dissentions mantained by the professors of false doctrine . This his vaunt he beginneth to exemplify in diuers particulers , in the proofe whereof , the iudiceous Reader shall fynde , that this our impartinent minister ( for so he may well be tearmed , since he altogether insisteth in such vnnecessary and immateriall stuffe ) endeuoreth most calumniously to bleare the iudgmentes of the ignorant , they not being able at the first sight , to perceaue the very tuch of any doubt or question betwene the protestants and vs . Many authorities of Catholickes he produceth to this ende , the sense and meaning of which , he most strangely peruerteth from the true intention of the writer , which receaue their full satisfaction , from the circumstances of the place .

But now here I am ( according to my former prescribed methode ) to display the weaknes of such testimonies , which being acknowledged in their true & natiue sense and construction , do nothing at all contradict the Catholick doctrine against which they are vrged , and consequently do not conuince any wante of vnity in doctrine amonge the Catholickes . First then he alledgeth against prayer in an vnknowne tongue , Contarenus . 3 3 Christ . Instruct . p. 212 The prayers which men vnderstand not , want the frute which they should reape if they vnderstoode them : for they might both specially intend their myndes to god , for the obtayning euen in speciall of that , which with their mouthes they beg : and also through their pyous sense of their praier then vttered , they should be more edefyed . They want therefore this frute . Thus farre Contarenus .

Now here M. W. is to know , that Contarenus doth not here absolutely condemne prayer in a strange tongue ( which is the lyfe of this controuersy betwene the protestantes and vs , since they say it is merely vnlawfull , and we hould it lawfull ) but onely seemes to preferre praier in a vulgar and knowne tongue before it , which in reguard onely of the particuler frute aboue specifyed , is in the iudgment of most ( if not all Catholickes ) more profitable then the other , though the other haue certaine peculier helpes and aduantages to it self : But what is this to the lawfulnes or vnlawfulnes of praying in a strange tongue ? or what kind of logick is this : Prayer for some particuler reasons , is better in a vulgar tongue then in a strang tongue : therefore it is absolutely vnlawfull in a strange tongue ? In lyke sort , touching latin seruice , he bringeth in S. Thomas of Aquine , & Caietaine , affirming that it were better for the edification of the Church , if such Prayer were in a vulgar tongue . 4 4 In ● . Cor. 14. What Catholick denyeth this , if he haue onely respect to the edification & instruction of the hearers , and of nothing els ? But seing the publick Liturgies and prayers of the Church , are principally directed to other endes , then to the instruction of the standers by , what doth this testimony force against the contrary practise of the Church therein ?

Againe for the euacuating of the force and operation of confession of sinnes , he bringeth in Caietane teaching that 5 5 3. Tho. q. 8. art. 4. A man by contrition without any confession , is made cleane , & a formall member of the Church . which indeede is the generall doctrine of all Catholickes : and therefore the receaued position with them in the schooles is , that Attrition ( being a greeuing for our sinnes in a lower degree ) with Confession , is answearable to Contrition , without actuall Confession .

Yet here is to be noted , that true Contrition ( which is a repenting for our sinnes in the highest degree , onely for the loue of God ) can not be without Confession , at least in voto , and desire , seing he can not be truly and perfectly penitent , who neglecteth the ordinary meanes ( if opportunity serue for the obtayning of them ) appointed by God for the expiation of sinne . Now who seeth not the independency of this inference , Sinne is remitted by Contrition without Confession : therefore Confession is absolutely to be taken away . Most demonstratiuely concluded , as if euery man had true and perfect Contrition , or hauing it , were infallibly assured thereof : and yet this is M. Whytes trysting kinde of arguing .

In like sort touching Iustification by workes , which ( according to our Catholick doctrine ) are to be done in state of grace , and not by force of nature , and deriue their worth , not from the worker , but both from the promise of God , as also from the passion of our Sauiour , ( in the blood whereof they receaue a new tincture ) the Doctor idly introduceth S. Thomas Aquinas thus teaching . 6 6 In Galat. 3. Lect. 4. No workes , either Ceremoniall , or Morall , are the cause why any man is iust before God &c. And in an other place the same S. Thomas , 7 7 In Rom. 3. Lect. 4. The Apostle sheweth Iustification to be wrought by faith onely : there is in the woork of the Law , no hope of iustification , but by faith onely . As if the question were , whether Ceremoniall , Iudaicall , and Legall workes , did iustify ( which all Catholickes deny ) and not workes now in the new Testament , as is aboue explaned .

Finally as vnwilling to be ouer laboursome & painfull , in setting downe more of M. Whytes trifling & childish stuffe of this nature , seeing in this sense , that saying houldeth . Absurdum est res fu●●les , nimis seriò redarguere : I will therefore ( forbearing diuers others ) conclude with the testimony which , against the merit of workes he vrgeth out of C. Bellarmine ( a place before alledged , being a wilfull corruption , in concealing the wordes immediatly following explayning the sense , but here vrged as a mere impertinency , though taking the wordes in that very sense wherin M. W. pretendeth ) his wordes are these . 8 8 de Iustif. l. 5. ca. 7. In reguarde of the vncertainty of our owne righteousnes , and because of the daunger of vaine-glory : The saifest way is to put our confidence in the sole mercy of God . Now wherein doth he impugne the Catholick doctrine of merit , who teacheth ( for the greater humbling of our selues , and by reason of our manifould sinnes committed against god , and of our vncertainty of knowing whether the works done by vs , be performed in such sort , as they are truly pleasing to God ) that we should for greater security , ascribe nothing to our selues , but onely like the Centurion , should slie to the boundlesse and infinite mercy of his diuine Maiesty . Wherefore M. W. can not dispute thus from the Cardinals wordes . In reguard of the vncertainty of our owne righteousnes , and because of the daunger of vaine glory , the saifest way is to put our sole confidence in the sole mercy of God : Therefore workes in generall do not merite , or therefore workes done in true humility , and proceding from one that is righteous , donot merite . For the doubt here which Bellarmine intimateth , resteth not in the doctrine of merite , but in the vncertainty of our doing of them , to wit , whether th●y are performed by vs in that state , and with all those due circumstances , as are requisite for them that they may merite . But it seemeth that M. W. can not fall vpon any obscure sentences of Catholicks , but instantly he striueth to turne them as if they were the sayinges of his owne brethren , like the fyre which coueteth to conuert euery thing it toucheth into it self .

This done M. Whyte page 159. descendeth to shew the different opinions of Catholickes touching some pointes of the reall presence , as first whether ( after the bread and wyne being changed by the words of Consecration into the body and bloud of Christ ) the accidences do remaine without a subiect , or that they haue their inherence in the quantity , or that the body of Christ sustaineth them , or the lyke .

Secondly , how the accidents remaining after consecration , haue power to nourish , to wit , whether the thing nourished therewith , procede from the quantity , or that the substance of bread and wyne returneth againe , and so it causeth the nutrition , or that the accidences by Gods power , are changed into the thing nourished , or some such lyke manner .

Thus our minister goeth on discoursing very soberly , how it appeareth from these and the like examples , that the papistes agree not in their doctrine ; and further thus saith . You may see by these few examples , how the papistes are deuided about the principall articles of their faith &c. But here the iudiceous Reader may see , that touching the fust sort of Catholick testimonies aboue explayned , we finde no difference of iudgment at all , betwene the Catholickes by him alledged , and other Catholickes . And as concerning their seuerall opinions about those secondary questions of the blessed Sacrament , they are onely pointes of indifferency , and do not at all imply any disunion in matter of faith . For touching the B. Sacrament , that which is principally an Article of our faith is , whether bread and wyne , be really , and truly changed by the wordes of consecration , into the Body and bloud of Christ , the which all Catholickes whatsoeuer do iointly and constantly beleue . And as concerning those other doubtes resulting out of the former confessed Article . and vrged here by M. Whyte , they are onely indifferences , and philosophicall questions disputed in the schooles , and by seuerall men , seuerally mantained , without any breach of faith . But here I should make bould ( on the contrary part ) to put M. M. Whyte in mynd touching the diuision in doctrine among the protestantes ( a point heretofore touched in this Treatise ) that they are such , euen by the acknowledgment of them selues , as do wound the soundnes of Christian faith : I think the displaying thereof would be litle pleasing vnto him , gratefull to his cause . But for this present I will forbeare , and will onely adde hereto ( for the greater disaduantage of our aduersaries , that when a Catholick obstinatly , and pertinaceously , mantaineth any heresy ( for such accompted by the Church ) he , ipso facto , deuideth him self from the Church , and so seaceth to be a member there of , as seuerall tymes we graunt it hapneth : But the case is otherwise among the protestants . For albeit each of them doth defend his seuerall opinions in the weightiest pointes of faith : yet they neuerthelesse accompt one an other , as members of one and the same Church , as we see by experience it faleth out , not only betwene the Lutherans and the Caluenistes , but also betwene our English protestantes , and the puritanes , who ( notwithstanding the great disparity of faith and doctrine amonge them ) do in their owne opinions , make vp one and the same protestants Church : and do still repute each other , as faithfull brethren of the said Church , and zealous professoures of the gospell .

Here now I will close vp this third and last part of this small Treatise , wherein I trust I haue discouered M. Whytes disioynted and loose kynd of writing , all which his reasoninges and authorities ( seruing onely as a taist to the Reader , what more he may expect in this kind , if the ministers whole booke should be iudicially perused ) are taken out ( deuiding his booke into three partes ) onely of the first part , and fewer then twenty leafes of the said part , affordeth them all . Many other scores there are , which are scattered here and there , by one or two , as incidentally he taketh occasion to write , but all such I haue omitted , and purposly made choice of such passages , within the former small compasse of his booke , as do minister seuerall and diuers testimonies of this nature , of one and the same subiect . It were ouer laboursome to examine his whole book in this sort , since indede it is throughout euen loaded with an o●ercharg of the like bootelesse testimonies , he still filling vp many blankes and spaces thereof , with such idle impertinencies , the which 〈…〉 , may seeme to crosse our Catholick doctrine , yet indeede the transparency of them is such , as they cause not so much as any reflection in the eye and vnderstanding of the iudiceons , but in reguard of their emptines and want of force , they may be resembled ( to speake in S. Peters wordes 2. Pet. 2. ) to wells without water , and cloudes carried about with tempestes .

THE Conclusion .

WOrthy and iudiceous Academians , here now I am to geue a f●ll stop vnto my pen , since I hope ( according to my vndertaken taske ) I haue discouered such stoare of impostures in this my aduersaries booke , as that they may in reason be sufficient to disopinion you of his supposed worth and estimation . He is I graunt your sonne , in respect whereof I know you can not but with a motherly and compassionate eye , behould his blemishes , and inwardly lament to see your Whyte thus soyled . Notwithstanding it resteth on your part ( euen for the saluing of your owne honoures ) to withdraw hereafter your fauoures from so vndeseruing a branch ; since pittie it is , that learning , ingenuity , and integrity ( whereunto your selues deseruedly pretend ) should become a sanctuary to collusion , falshood , and impurity .

And now seeing here I haue vntwisted the cheife threedes whereupon the whole loome of his Treatise is wouen : I doubt not but out of your owne cleare-eyd Iudgmentes , you will immediatly looke vpon the same , as it is in it self fraughted with such vnworthy stuffe , and not as it haith receaued light and grace from the weake opinion of the ignorant , and seduced multitude : which I rather expect peculiarly at your handes , since your selnes know , that in a true vew of any thing , refracted beames neuer afford a perfecte sight . And thus to your owne censure and chastisment I remitt M. Whyte , whom not without iuste cause , I may well range in the Catalogue of those , of whom God by his Prophet saith Non misi eos , & ipsi prophetabant in nomine meo mandaciter . Ier. 27.

And next to come to thee ( good reader ) here thou seest what scarres do remaine vpon the face of this our ministers reputation , him self first playing the corrupter , then a lyer , and then a tryfling writer . But seeing thou art now partly instructed of the ministers foule deportment herein , I appeale euen to thine owne conscience , whether thou art inwardly perswaded , that he haith any honesty , any faith , any Religion , finally , any feare of God , who is not affraid thus shamelesly , prophanely , and heathnishly , to handle the highest misteries of Christianity . And if thou seest reason to be induced so to thinke , what stupor and dulnes of vnderstanding , yea what madnes then is it in thy self , to aduenture thy soules euerlasting saluation , or damnation vpon the bare affiance and credit of so persideous and corrupt a writer . Therefore let this mans want of sincerity and true dealing , awaken thy iudgment in the disquisition of gods infallible truth . Make triall by thine owne particuler search , whether these deceiptes , wherewith I charge the Doctor , be true or no : and if thou findest that he standes guilty thereof , then retyre back , and instantly cast of both him and his doctrine , assuring thy self , that the cause which he iustifieth is wrong , in that God ( who ones said d d psal. 100. Ambulans in via immaculata , hi● mihi ministrabat ) will not suffer his sacred will to be reuealed by such impostors and deceiuers . Let not the already conceaued opinion of his learning , ouer-sway thy Iudgment , but rather say with thy self , that faith must needes be erroneous , which can not sufficiently be mantained by learning , except withall it be mantained with lying , seeing truth nedeth not the support of falshood . Be assured that though for the tyme M. W. or any other of our aduersaries , see●e to make good their cause by their much writing , whereby in a vulgare eye , they vent out good stoare of litterature and reading , yet after such their workes are diligently perused and answeared , by laying open their falshoodes , corruptions , and such other collusions : the Catholick cause ( as experience haith taught ) is greatly aduauntaged thereby , them selues by this meanes running into greater dis●stimation and contempt euen of their owne followers : Such is the sweetnes of gods prouidence , that the Israelites of the Catholick Church are euer in the ende deliuered from the handes of the Egiptians , and see their enemies drowned in the red sea of shame and confusion c c ps. 121. Non commouebitur in a●ernum qui habitat in Ierusalem .

But now lastly M. Whyte to come more nearly to your self , with whom I must in a word or two take leaue : Tell me euen betwene god and your owne conscience ( if as yet you retaine any touch of conscience ) did you not write this your booke with a fearefull trembling hande , in remembring , that as god ( according to his Iustice ) doth euer punish all kinde of sinnes : so particulerly he poureth out his vyols of wrath and indignation in greater aboundance , vpon those who seduce the ignorant by such deceauable meanes ? How many poore soules shall ryse against you at the most dreadfull day , who shall continew in eternall torments , for being misled by this your most poysenous , corrupt , and lying writinges ? Are not your owne personall sinnes sufficient to draw on your perdition , but you must be loaded with the euerlasting ouerthrow of diuers others soules to further the same ? If seuere punishmentes be to be inflicted vpon them , who will expunge or deface , any one publick record of ciuill and temporall matters : what confusion then are they to vndergoe , who not once , not twice , but many scoares of tymes , haue wickedly corraded , corrupted , and belyed ( of which your selfe is found most guilty ) the auncient monumentes of the primitiue Fathers , and the writinges of other most learned Doctors , wherein ( next to the holy Scriptures ) is contained the spirituall tenure of our Christian faith , and by the producing whereof , we make good our tytle , to the rich inheritance of mannes saluation . Reflect vpon your owne case ( you , euen you ) who remaines in f f Act. 8. the gaull of bi●ternes , & in the bond of iniquity . Your state yet is remediable , since so longe as you haue tyme of repentance , so longe g g Io. 11. your sicknes is not vnto death . Wherefore make vse of that short remnant , and suffer not earthly considerations of preferment , ambition , and the like , any longer to interpose them selues , betwene your sight and the truth . I shall be glad ( as the light appeared to Adam to bewray his sinne and shame ) if this my discouery , may be of force to dispell that spirituall darknesse of your malice against the Catholick Church , so repentingly acknowledging your inexcusable faultines in your former worke . Be not agreued at these my sharpe admonitions ( since the more seuere , the more medicinable ) but remember that the sight of Toby was restored , by the bitter gaule of the fishe . I can not but bewaile your incorrigiblenes , if this my councell , proceding onely from Charity shall be so farre from winning you to a better course , that ( as in some natures it hapneth ) it may be found to raise your malice hereafter against Gods Church , to a highe● strayne , like vnto some medicines , which ( as the Phisitions say ) if they do not purge the humour intended : them selues doe turne into the said humour .

But to conclude , M. Whyte ( howsoeuer you entertaine my wordes ) fare well , feare hell , feare damnation , and do not thus precipitately and desperatly runne vpon the dinte of gods most dreadfull comminations & threates , him self thundring , h h Ezech. 13. Eritmanus mea super P●ophetas &c M●handes shall be vpon the Prophets that see v●ne thinges , and diuine a lye : in the Councell of my people they shall not be , & in the Scripture of the house of Israell , they shall not be written , neither shall they enter into the Lande of Israell : And you shall know that I am the Lord God , for that they haue deceaued my people saying , Peace , & there is no peace .

Laus Deo , & B. Virgini Mariae .