A14461:1282
The Christian disputations, by Master Peter Viret. Divided into three parts, dialogue wiseThe Christian disputations, by Master Peter Viret. Deuided into three partes, dialogue wise
The Christian disputations, by Master Peter Viret. Divided into three parts, dialogue wise: set out with such grace, that it cannot be, but that a man shall take great pleasure in the reading thereof. Translated out of French into English, by John Brooke of AsheThe Christian disputations, by Master Peter Viret. Deuided into three partes, dialogue wise: set out with such grace, that it cannot be, but that a man shall take greate pleasure in the reading thereoff. Translated out of French into English, by Iohn Brooke of Ashe
London: printed by Thomas East, 1579
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Theophilus. We may well make him such a monster, as 1Eusebius Cesariensis did make of the Philosopher Archesilaus, in his books of the preparation of the Gospel, and 2to compare it to him, of whom he writeth in these words. They said of him, that as touching his fore parts, he was Plato, and as to the hinder parts, Pyrrho, & the middle Diodorus. For he hath troubled and marred the eloquence of Plato, through the subtleties and sophistries of the Philosopher Diodorus, and by the subtle disputations of Pyrrho: and now saying this, by and by that, he was easily rolled and lead now here and now there, as a man not knowing any thing, and having no rest: And yet nevertheless he seemeth through the shadow of eloquence, that he knoweth much: & he was never in that mind, y• he would ⟨p. 258⟩say twice one thing, and that he would abide firm and steadfast in one opinion. For he esteemed not a man to be ingenious and witty, which preserved & continued in one matter and doctrine. And therefore he was called a caviller, sophister and troubler, which knew nothing, and would not y• others should perceive any thing. He troubled every one through his sophistries, & was as the serpent called 3Hydra, which hath seven heads: But he cutteth them off with his own sword, speaking against & gainsaying his own Doctrine, denying that which he hath affirmed, and destroying that which he before hath builded.
Theophilus. We may well make him such a monster, as 1Eusebius Cesariensis did make of the Philosopher Archesilaus, in his bookes of the preparation of the Gospell, and 2to compare it to him, of whom he writeth in these words. They sayd of him, that as touchinge his fore partes, hée was Plato, and as to the hinder partes, Pyrro, & the middle Diodorus. For he hath troubled and marred the eloquence of Plato, thorow the subtilties and sophistries of the Philosopher Diodorus, and by the subtile disputations of Pyrrho: and now saying this, by and by that, he was easily rolled and lead now héere and now there, as a man not knowing any thing, and hauinge no rest: And yet neuerthelesse he séemeth thorow the shadow of eloquence, that he knoweth much: & he was neuer in that minde, y he would