The orthodox faith and vvay to the Church explaned and iustified in answer to a popish treatise, entituled, White died blacke; wherein T.W. p. in his triple accusation of D. White for impostures, vntruths, and absurd illations, is proued a trifler: and the present controuersies betweene vs and the Romanists are more fully deliuered and cleared. By Francis White Bachelour in Diuinitie, and elder brother of Doctor Iohn White.

About this Item

Title
The orthodox faith and vvay to the Church explaned and iustified in answer to a popish treatise, entituled, White died blacke; wherein T.W. p. in his triple accusation of D. White for impostures, vntruths, and absurd illations, is proued a trifler: and the present controuersies betweene vs and the Romanists are more fully deliuered and cleared. By Francis White Bachelour in Diuinitie, and elder brother of Doctor Iohn White.
Author
White, Francis, 1564?-1638.
Publication
London :: Printed by Richard Field for William Barret, and are to be sold at his shop in Pauls Church-yard at the signe of the three Pigeons,
1617.
Rights/Permissions

To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.

Subject terms
Worthington, Thomas, 1549-1627. -- Whyte dyed black -- Controversial literature -- Early works to 1800.
Catholic Church -- Controversial literature -- Early works to 1800.
Link to this Item
http://name.umdl.umich.edu/A15081.0001.001
Cite this Item
"The orthodox faith and vvay to the Church explaned and iustified in answer to a popish treatise, entituled, White died blacke; wherein T.W. p. in his triple accusation of D. White for impostures, vntruths, and absurd illations, is proued a trifler: and the present controuersies betweene vs and the Romanists are more fully deliuered and cleared. By Francis White Bachelour in Diuinitie, and elder brother of Doctor Iohn White." In the digital collection Early English Books Online 2. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/A15081.0001.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed June 3, 2024.

Pages

Paragr. 7. A place of Thomas, concerning the Popes au∣thority in the Edition or making of a new Creede.

T. W. Maister White is not ashamed to affirme, that wee take all authoritie from the Scripture, and giue it to the Church: and finallie, the Churches authoritie to the Pope.

Answ. It can be no shame for D. White to charge you with your owne Tenet: but it is cowardise and double dealing in you to dissemble the same.

The three imputations obiected are iustly laid to your charge.

First, you take all authority (quoad nos) from the Scrip∣turem 1.1, teaching that it is not the ground or pillar of truthn 1.2, nor properly and of it selfe any cause or meanes of beleefe or charitieo 1.3, and God doth not immediatly speake by itp 1.4, neither is the holy Ghost ioyned with the writing of the Scriptureq 1.5; the Church is not subiect to the Scripturer 1.6: and put case any person liuing out of the communion of the Romane Church, do reade or studie the same, it is not the word of God to them, or of greater

Page 121

authority then Aesops fabless 1.7.

Secondly, the Papists giue all authoritie to the present Romane Churcht 1.8: they make the same the onely exter∣nall ground and pillar of truthu 1.9, the sole Iudge of Con∣trouersiesx 1.10, the principle or first ground and foundation, from whence the Scripture in regard of men, receiueth all authoritiey 1.11.

Thirdly, they giue the Churches authoritie to the Pope, and no Papist in these daies can or will deny this; for besides the positiue speeches of their greatest Do∣ctorsz 1.12, the same assertion followeth vpon the maine prin∣ciples of their doctrine; which are, That the Pope is the prime subiect of Ecclesiasticall authority, and that the whole authoritie of all the body and the members there∣of, is deriued by, and from hima 1.13; and the promise of the perpetuall assistance of the holy Ghost, infallible iudge∣ment, supreme authority, and other priuiledges are in∣tailed vpon his tribunallb 1.14.

T. W. Maister Whites words are; Thomas saithc 1.15, The making of a new Creed belongeth to the Pope, as all o∣ther things doe which concerne the whole Church. But Thomas Aquinas his words are: Noua editio Symboli, &c. A new edition of a Creede; He meaneth by way of vn∣foulding, explication, and explicite declaring of the Faith, alreadie reuealed in Scripture or Tradition. This diabolicall

Page 122

deprauation, and vncharitable impudence of our Minister, &c.

Answ. In this obiection two things are to be conside∣red: First, the forme of speech; Thomas saith, The ma∣king of a new Creed: whereas his words are, The edition of a new Creed. Secondly, the matter it selfe, how farre our Aduersaries extend the Popes authority, in making or putting forth a new Creede.

Touching the first, the same forme of speech which D. White vseth in relating Thomas his doctrine about this present Controuersie, is frequent in learned Papists themselues. Vigueriusd 1.16 abridging this very place of Tho∣mas, saith; Potestas condendi Symbolum, &c. The authori∣ty of making a Creed, belongeth to the high Bishop of Rome. And Gabriel Biele 1.17; Ex his patet, quod Ecclesia vel Papa, ordinando aut faciendo nouum Symbolum, &c. That the Church or Pope by ordaining or making a new Creed, &c. And the same is found in Gersonf 1.18, Bannesg 1.19, &c. And therefore our Aduersarie hath small reason to flye vpon the Dr. with his leud termes of diabolicall, &c.

Secondly, as touching the matter it selfe; some learned Papists haue expresly maintained, that the Pope may cre∣ate a new Article of faithh 1.20: and although our moderne Papists verbally professei 1.21, that the Pope hath no further authority of making a Creede, but onely by way of ex∣plication, yet their practise is contrary.

First, the Popek 1.22, de facto, hath framed a new Creede, containing a number of Articles, wherof none are found in the holy Scripture, or were formerly contained in the ancient Creeds.

Page 123

Secondly, our Aduersaries yeeld their Pope authori∣tie to deriue matters of Faith out of Scripture* 1.23 and anci∣ent Creeds, without arguments or premises taken from the same, by a like art, as if an Alchymist should pretend to extract Gold out of a pibble-stone, wherein is no Gold.

For example, whatsoeuer the Catholike Church, that is, the Pope and Councel definitiuely affirme, is true; but the Pope and Prelats in the second Synod of Nicel 1.24, and of Constancem 1.25, &c. definitiuely decreed: that ye worship of Images and the Lords Supper in one kind, were the faith of the Scripture and the Primitiue Church. The Church therefore in decreeing these Articles, and pro∣nouncing Anathema to such as should refuse them, did make no new Articles or Creede, but onely by way of explication and extraction, deriued the same from Scrip∣ture and Antiquitie; like as if one should forme darknesse out of light.

Thirdly, our learned Aduersaries teachn 1.26, that the holy Ghost reuealeth sundry things more, then those which be contained in the written or traditionary word, to the Pope and Romane Church. I intreate this clamorous Popish Priest to giue a reason, why the Pope may not out of those reuelations frame and compose a new Creede?

Page 124

And as famous Doctorso 1.27 among the Papists, as euer their Church had any, haue not long since maintained, that the Popes decretall Epistles are of equall authoritie with Canonicall Scripture: and what shall hinder but that a new Creede may be composed of the matter of such de∣cretals, as well as to be extracted from the Scripture and auncient Creeds?

Notes

Do you have questions about this content? Need to report a problem? Please contact us.