Adoration or Jnuocation or in any other sort To this Peter (10) Peter Martyr lib. contra Gardin part 1. obiect 150. Martyr and others do answere that if any such reuerence was exhibited by the Fathers to the Eucharist this reuerence was not terminated in the Eucharist it selfe but directed to Christ signifyed therein and so by the mediation of those earthly elements transferred vnto him No otherwyse tâ—â— when the Papists for thus do they partâ—câ—larly instance praying before Jmages 〈◊〉 not their prayers to the Images but to Christ 〈◊〉 the Saint represented therein But against tâ— Euasion I first aske what secret intelligâ— haue our Aduersaryes with the Fathers â—tention herein since the Fathers words gâ— not the least intimation thereof Seconâ— I say that (11) L de Hierarch Eccles c. 3. part 3. saying O Diuinissimum Sacrosanctum Sacram. c. Dionysius doth inuoke 〈◊〉 Sacrament it selfe and not Christ only â—fore the Sacrament Thirdly this their â—sweare admitting it for true doth waâ— euen in their iudgements the Catholâ—â— praying before Images and the reuereâ—â— giuen to them which Doctrine the Proâ—stants do so much inueigh against Animaduersion CLXVII THe Scripture is most difficult for three â—spects First in regard of its multiplieâ— of the Senses of one and the same passage Scripture Secondly in respect of the phrâ—â— wherein the Scripture is deliuered Thirdâ— by reason of the height of the subiect wheâ— the Scripture intreateth To touch all tâ—â— briefly First concerning the Sense Tâ—â— are in diuers passages of Scripture three â—uerall senses besydes the literall all iâ—â—ded by the Holy Ghost The senses are â—led Allegoricus Tropologicus and Anagogâ— Now how shall an ignorant maÌ„ know 〈◊〉 texts of Scripture be capable of all these 〈◊〉 of them The Style of the Scripture is â—â—de difficult as being stored with figures 〈◊〉 Allegoryes and full of Hebrew phrazes 〈◊〉 Dialects as appeareth in perusing the â—â—lms and the Apocalyps The subiect of the â—â—â—ipture is most high as discoursing of the â—â—eation of the world of Nothing of the â—ysteryes of the Trinity and the Incarnatiâ—â— besides many other Dogmatical points 〈◊〉 transcending the light of mans naturall â—â—prehension And therefore S. Ambrose had â—â—od cause thus to pronounce of the holy â—â—â—ipture Mare (12) Ambros Ep. 44. ad Constantium est scriptura Diuina haâ—â—s in se sensus profundos Ad hereto that the â—â—â—ipture hath to an ignorant eye diuers seeâ—ng contrarietyes though in theÌ„selues they are most true and reconcileable For example these two texts (13) Ezec. 18. Filius non portabit iâ—quitatem patris anima quae peccauerit ipsa â—â—rietur And this other Visitans (14) Exod 10. iniâ—â—tatem patrum in filios in tertiam quartaÌ„â—â—nerationem how can an ignorant man or â—o man reconcile these passages And what â—â—ity then may one discerne in a Mechaniâ—â—l fellow or silly woman who can only â—t reade carrying the bible vnder their â—â—me to the Church and vaunting of the â—ines of the Scripture and auerring that â—â—emselues are able to vnfould expound â—e most abstrusest passages there O pride â—â—d ignorance Ad finally that in the Scripâ—â—e the plurall number is sometymes vsed for â—â—e singular number as Marc. 15. we read they that were crucifyed with him rayled at hiâ— and yet we know it was but only one of the theeues that did so the good thiefe honoring our Sauiour See the like hereto touching this kynd of phraze of the Scripture besydes other places in Hebr. 7. Againe the Scripture in diuers texts doth vnderstaÌ„â— by the word Omnis only quidam For example in Math. 27. we reade dicunt omnâ— vt crucifigatur and yet the B. Virgin S. Maâ— magdelen the Apostles and diuers others dâ— not so cry out against our Sauiour The liâ— phraze is in those words Omnes quae sâ— sunt querunt Philip. 2. yet the Apostles and many other good Christians were eâ—empted out of this sentence But now heâ—â— I demand how can an vnlearned man râ—concile these and the like sentences wâ—â— the true meaning of the Holy Ghost in tâ— Scripture Animaduersion CLXVIII THe Catholike Church deliuereth câ—taine Rules for the more perfect knoâ—ledg of true Traditions The first When 〈◊〉 vniuersall Church doth imbrace any doctriâ— as a point of fayth the which is not found in 〈◊〉 holy Scriptures it is necessary to say that thesâ— point proceedeth from the Tradition of the Aâ—â—stles The reason hereof is in that the vniuâ—â—sall Church as being the (1) 1. Timoth 3. pillar and fouâ—dation of truth cannot erre And therefâ— what the Church belieueth to be of fayâ— â—e same doubtlesly is of fayth But no â—int or Article is of fayth but what God â—th reuealed either by the Apostles or Proâ—ts since at this present the Church is not â—ouerned with new Reuelations The second When the vniuersall Church â—h obserue any thing which not any but only â—d had power to institute and yet which is not â—nd written in the Scripture the same we are â—resume to be deliuered from Christ and his â—ostles the reason hereof is like to the reaâ—n of the former Rule to wit in that the â—iuersall Church cannot erre either in belieâ—g or in working especially if the worâ—g doth concerne any rite of diuine worâ—â— And such is the Baptisme of Infants The third That which is obserued throughâ— the vniuersall Church and cannot fynd any 〈◊〉 institution thereof in the most ancient tymes same we are to belieue that it was first ordâ—yâ—â— by the Apostles though it be of that nature that the Church had power firct to ordayne it â—is is the rule of (2) Lib. 4 contra Donat. cap. 24. S. Austin The fast of â—t may be an example hereof For this fast â—ght haue been instituted by the Church Christ or his Apostles had not afore instiâ—ed it Yet we maintayne that it was instiâ—ed by Christ or his Apostles because asâ—ding vp to higher tymes and seeking afâ— the first Origen therof we find no beâ—ning thereof but only in the tyme of Apostles The fourth When all the Doctours of the Church being gathered together either in a generall Councell or in their seuerall writings and bookes do teach with a common consent that such or such a point descendeth from Apostolicall Tradition we are to belieue that it is an Apostolicall Tradition The reason of this rule is because if all the Doctors of the Church shold erre then followeth it that the whole Church should erre since she is obliged to follow her Pastours and Doctours Now where we speake of the Fathers touching any point in their seuerall writings here we are to vnderstand that we hould it not necessary that all the Fathers should write therof but it is sufficient if some Fathers of the chiefest note and eminency do expressely affirme the point in writing and that other Fathers do not contradict them therein taking notize of such their writings Here we say
some hundreds and yet remaining to be yearely seene euen with spots of bloud at the chiefe Church in Brussells in the lowe Countryes What can our Aduersaries answere herero Yf they grant the miracle they withall grant the truth of the Doctrine of the Reall Presence To deny it by saying that when one hoast is corrupted through tyme another is secretly thrust in the former place is more then absurd For would the Princes of those Countryes the Lords Bishops Prelates other Religious persons and the whole Communalty suffer themselues to be thus abused from tyme to tyme with such impostures but that they would be most desirous to find out and discry all such wicked stratagemes and deuises Truly I do not see what answere in full weight of Reason can be giuen hereto to conuince the iudgment of any sufficient Man Animaduersion LXXI THat Catholike Religion affordeth Saluation to the Professours thereof is proued seuerall wayes euen from our Aduersaries owne pennes And first Because oâ—â— Aduersaries do reach that the Church oâ— Rome notwithstanding her presumed Eâ—rours is the true Church of Christ consequently her Professours capable of Saâ—uation According hereto thus writeth D. Field (d) L. of the Church c. 46. We doubt not but that Church â—t which the Bishop of Rome with more then Luâ—â—ferlike pryde exalted himselfe was notwithstanding the true Church of God and that it held a sauing profession of the truth in Christ. D. Sâ—â—â— auerreth the same verity in these words (e) In his Defence against Penry pag. 176. you thinke that all the Popish sort wheâ—â— dyed in the popish Church are damned yâ—â— thinke absurdly and do dissent from the iudgment of all learned Protestants With theâ—â— conspireth to omit others D. Couell thâ—â— writing We (f) In his Defence of M. Hooâ—er pag. 77. affirme them of tâ—e Churchâ— Rome to be a part of the true Church of Chriâ—â— and that those that liue dye in that Churcâ— may be saued Another Reason may be taken from the lawfulnes euen in the iudgment of the learned Protestants of Chiâ—dren of Papists as we are stiled whether they be Baptized by Catholike Priests 〈◊〉 Protestant Ministers And the cause of thâ— lawfulnes thereof is deliuered by the Protestants in these words Because (g) So teach the Deuines of Geneua in their propositions and principles disputed at Gen. p. 178. the same is taught by D. Whitgâ—â—fe in 〈◊〉 Defence pa. â—23 by M. Hooker Eccles poâ— l. 3. p. 131. by otheâ— we affirme that those Children are comprehenâ— within the Couenant of eternall life by meanes of the fayth of their Parents A third Reason of the Protestants true iudgment herein concerneth the Fathers of the Primitiue Church in generall who that they liued dyed Papists is most euident by what hath beene confessed aboue by our Aduersaries Now of them Cartwrighâ— thus writeth I (h) Cartwright in his Reply in D. Whitguifts Defence p. 82 doubt not but that diuers Fathers of the Greeke Church who were patrones of Freewill are saued The like charitable opinion of the Fathers though Papists both liuing dying is deliuered by (i) Contra Raâ— Camp pag. 78. D. Whitaker notwithstanding the Fathers Doctrine touching Satisfaction and Merit of Works Finally the Protestants iudgement is also herein manifested in their commonly giuing in their writings and speaches to Austin Ierome Ambrose and the rest whom they acknowledge to Professe and dye in our Catholike fayth and Religion the name and title of Saint as S. Austin S. Jerome c. Animaduersion LXXII YF it be vrged that the Deniall of Freewill for exaÌ„ple was taught by Manicheus and consequently that the Protestant fayth therein is as ancient as those Primitiue tymes It may be replyed that this particular Heretike or that particular Heretike did teach but one or other Protestant Article in those dayes and were sustantly written against for such their Innouations the said Innouatours being Catholike in all other points And therefore you may truâ—â— infer that the vrging of such examples is merely impertinent either for the proofe of the Antiquity of the Protestant Religion or for the Visibility of the Protestant Church in those dayes Animaduersion LXXIII YF you dispute with any Protestant by writing or enterchange of letters write nothing but Matter with as much compendiousneâ— as the Subiect will beare without any Verball Excursions or digressions For this proceeding will force your Aduersary to reply if he will reply to the Maâ—ter For otherwise leauing the materialâ— point which is chiefly issuable and to be handled he will shape a reply to other lesse necessary stuffe deliuered by you And then his Reply must passe abroad by the help of many partiall tongues for a full answere to your whole Discourse Animaduersion LXXIV WHereas you may alledge diuers acknowledged Heresies both in the iudgment of Protestants Catholiks out of the Bookes concerning diuers persons who belieued some few points of Protestancy recorded in the said Bookes here I speake of Wâ—â—ldo Wiclife c. Now if here your Aduersary Disputant doth auouch as many Protestants do that these Heresies were falsly obtruded and fathered vpon the said presumed Protestants by their Enemies you may here reply that to affirme this is against the force of all Reason For seeing the same Bookes do make indifferent mention both of the Protestant opinions and of the other Heresies defended by the same Men either the said Bookes are to be belieued in both or to be reiected concerning both Yf the first then it is certaine that those men did belieue those acknowledged Heresies Yf the later then the said Bookes are not of sufficient authority to proue that there were any Protestants in those ages Animaduersion LXXV IN your proofes drawne from Scripture labour to be much practised in the Protestant Translation of it of which infinite places make for the Catholike Cause euen as the Scripture is translated by the Protestant For this Course gauleth them far more then if you insisted only in the Catholike Translation Animaduersion LXXVI I Will here set downe certaine Obseruations which will easely solue all difficulties or Argument whatsoeuer rising from Scripture or Fathers against Communion vnder one kind only 1. First whereas sundry places of Scripture and Fathers do speake indifferently oâ— only make mention of Communion vnder both kinds or do affirme the vse thereof to be lawfull yet from hence which is the point issuable cannot be inferred any precept of Christ as necessary to Saluation 2. Secondly when such places are vrged which contayne in them a Precept the same places are either vnderstood of Priests who do sacrifice whose bond is different from theirs of the Laity Or els they concerne only the tyme and place when 〈◊〉 where that custome of both kinds was obserued for the custome of the Church whether it be generall in the whole Church or particular in some notable place thereof aâ— in one Country Kingdome
do still remayne at one tyme though far remote one from another whereas these Precedent and future tymes in both which one and the same Jnstant of Duration or Eternity is are euer in a flowing and departing Motion and consequently cannot by any possibility remayne together For we see that the tyme past doth euer giue place to the tyme to come Thus far of these former Animaduersions in this place to shew that it is possible that Christs Boâ—â— may be in seuerall places at one and thâ— same tyme. Animaduersion LXXXXIV IN all Positiue and Affirmatiue Points oâ— fayth the Protestants do agree with the Catholiks the Protestants borrowing thâ— said Affirmatiue points from the Church of Rome According hereto we find Luthâ—â— thus to wryte We (y) Luther lib. Contra Ana. baptist confesse that there is vnder the Papacy most of the Christian Good yâ—â— rather all the Christian Good and that from thence it came to vs. We confesse that there is iâ— the Papacy true Scripture true Baptisme the true Sacrament of the Altar the true keyes to the remission of sinnes the true office of preaching true Catechisme c. I say further there is in thâ— Papacy true Christianity or rather the truâ— kernell of Christianity Thus Luther To the former position I adioyne this following In such points of fayth wherin Protestancy dissenteth from the Roman Church all the said points are merrely Negations to the contrary Affirmatiue Articles belieued by the Church of Rome As for example Deniall of Reall Presence Deniall of praying to Saints Deniall of Freewill and so of the rest Now from these two propositions do result these Inferences or Conclusions following The first that the Protestant as he belieueth any affirmatiue Articles with the Church of Rome in that respect he is not a Protestant but rather a Catholike as â—king the beliefe of them from the Caâ—â—olike Church as is aboue said The seâ—ond Inference That Protestancy as Proâ—stancy consisteth in Deniall of such Affirâ—atiue points which the Church of Rome â—ffirmes to be true and not in belieuing â—ith the said Church certaine chiefe points â—f Christianity The third Inference Seeing â—he reduplicatiue formality of Protestancy reâ—teth in Negations or priuations of an Affirmatiue fayth and seing Negations or priâ—â—tions haue no Entity subsistence or reall being that therfore Protestancy as Protestancy hath no reality of Being but is in it selfe a meere Non-entity or nothing consequently it followeth that Protestancy cannot proceed from God who is the Authour of things and of that which is but not of that which is not or is Nothing The last Inference shal be That Protestants by their Deniall of so many Affirmatiue Articles of Christianity may seeme to beare great Reference to Antichrist who at his comming shall by his Deniall of all points of Christian Religion seeke what in him lyeth to annihilate and ouerthrow all Christian Religion And for such his proceeding some ancient Fathers do coÌ„iecture that his name shal be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying Nego as Hyppolitus Martyr writeth in Oratione de consummatione mundi And this both by reason that this Greeke Word maketh vp the number to wit 666. which is ascribed peculiarly to Antichrist in the Apocalyps cap. 13. as also in that Antichrist his Ministers at his comming both in their Dâ—nialls and workes shall labour mightely to euert Christian Religion Animaduersion LXXXXV THough Protestancy seeme to maintaine some Affirmatiue Positions as Parity of Ministers Mariage of Priests and other Votaries Reprobation Christs only Mediatorship by way of Jntercession Christ suffering in Soule yet it is euident that these poutions are only Affirmatiue in words but merely Negatiue in sense since they are Negatiues to the Monarchy of the Churches Gouermentâ— to vowed Chastity to vniuersality of Grace to the Intercession of Saincts and to the all sufficiency of Christs Corporall Death All which our Catholike points are Affirmatiue Such is the subtility of Innouation in Doctrine as for the greater honour to inuest their Negatiue Tenets in Affirmatiue Titles Animaduersion LXXXXVI THough in shew of words Falshood as is aboue shewed may be deliuered in Affirmatiues so I here say that Truth sometimes is deliuered in Negatiue Words notwithstanding Truth is euer Affirmatiue and Falshood Negatiue and therfore the Schoolemen truly teach Intellectus (z) S. Thomas part 1. q. 17. decipituâ— non circa quid est sed circa quid non est To exemplify this Animaduersion To say God is cruel or Man is blind though these sayings be deliuered in Affirmatiue termes and false yet they are in sense and vnderstanding meerely Negatiue since Cruelty is exclusiue to Mercy and blindnes to sight so on the contrary to say God is not Cruell and Man is not blynd though they be in termes Negatiue true yet they are in sense Affirmatiue only as denying the Negation of Mercy in God and of Blindnes in Man Animaduersion LXXXXVII OVr Aduersaries cannot agree among themselues what Doctrines be Protestancy and who ought to be truly termed Protestants Can their Religion then be true and descend from Heauen Here then I will first shew within what narrow Limits our Aduersaries do confine Protestancy and the members of the Protestant Church Next then I will discouer such is the fluctuating and wauering iudgment of them herein how they are content at other times to extend and enlarge those bounds by affording Protestancâ— and the members therof a greater space or compasse as I may say to expatiate and walke in And to begin D. Whitaker thus sayth of the Papists J will (a) L. 2. contra Duraum Sect. 1. not allow the very name of a lawfull Church vnto the Roman Church because it hath nothing which a true Chuâ—â—â— ought to haue The Confession of Ausburg excludes the Anabaptists in these words we (b) Cap. â— condemne the Anabaptists who disallow the Baptisme of Infants and thinke them to be saâ—â—â— without Baptisme to which sentence the Confession of Switzerland (c) Cap. 20. subscribeth The Arians are excluded from being Protestants by the foresaid Confession of Ausburg in these termes We (d) Act. 1. condemne all Heresies rising against this Article meaning the Article of the Trinity as the Manichees Arians Eunomians c. All Heretikes are excluded out of the number of Protestants for thus D. Suâ—cliffe teacheth Heretikes (e) In his first Booke of the Church c. 1. are not of the Church meaning of the true Church and consequently in his iudgment of the Protestant Church With whom agrees D. White saying All (f) In his way to the Church pag. 10. Heretiks teach the truth in some things yet we deny them to be of the Church of God That Schismatikes are not of the Protestant Church is taught for thus writeth D. Fulke (g) Of the succession of the Church What skilleth it whether one being drawne by Heresy or Schisme from thâ— body of Christ be subiect to eternall
5. with vs touching Patronage and intercession of Angells that therfore D. Whitaker doth accordingly confesse and say thereof Jllum (h) Whitak in respons ad rat Camp rat 1. p. 15. verò Tobiae Raphaelem c. Litle do we regard the Example of Raphaell the Angell mentioned in Toby c. All this is different from the Canonicall Scriptures c. Concerning the force of Merit of Almes and other good works proceeding from true fayth in the Messias The Doctrine of the Ancient Iewes is deliuered in the Booke of Tobyâ— Almes (i) Tob. 1â— doth deliuer from Death and doth purge all sinne and in the foresaid booke of Ecclesiasticus As water (k) Eccles 3. quenceth burning fyer So Almes expiateth sinne Touching vnwritten Traditions (l) Orig. hom 5. in Numer Hilar. in Psalm 2. Origen and Hilary do affirme that Moyses did leaue many things vnwritten the knowledge whereof was continued by tradition And Rabby Iudas affirmeth the same of Moyses a thing so euident that the doctrine of the Tradition of the Iewes is confessed by (m) writing vpon the Booke in Capitulis patrum Paulus Phagius the Protestant That Monasticall Lyfe was not altogether wanting but in some sort professed among the ancient Iewes is witnessed by Iosephus thus writing The (n) Ioseph antiquitaâ—um Iudaicarum l. 18. c. â— righteousnes of the Essenes is meruaylous c. They enioy their riches in Common c. And in this course aboue foure thousand men do liue hauing neither wyfes nor seruants c. And in another place Triall (o) Ioseph l. de bello Iudaito l. 2. cap. 7. is had of a mans continency and his other manners are for two yeares tryed and then he is taken into the Company Lastly to omit for greater breuity the Doctrine of Vowes the doctrine of one Visible high Priest head of the Church in those Jewish tymes the Doctrine of the Iewes in remitting the ending of Controuersyes not to the Scripture but to a certaine visible and liuely Judge the doctrine of the Iewes concerning Confession of sinne all these being related by (p) Gala. in areanis Cathol veritatis l. 10 v. 3. Galatinus I will close this passage with Melchisedech his offering of bread and Wyne in sacrifice and the prefiguration thereby of our Sacrifice of the New Testament Of this point Rabby Phinees thus sayth Jn (q) Phinees in cap. 28. Numer the tyme of the Messias all Sacrifice shall cease but the Sacrifice of bread and Wyne shall not cease c. as it is said Psalm 100. Thou art a Priest for euer according to the Order of Melchisedech Rabby (r) Hasardan in Bereschit Rabbi ad cap. 14. Gen. Hasardan Rabby (s) Samuel in Bereschit Rabbi ad cap. 14. Genes Samuel say the like of Melchisedech his offering vp of bread and wyne in figure of the Sacrifice now in the tyme of the New Testament a point so euident that (t) Bibliander de SS Trinitote l. 2. pag. 89. Bibliander the remarkable Protestant doth not doubt to confesse the same of the old Jewish Rabins Thus far of the doctrines of the ancient Iewes before Christ his Incarnation which doctrines we Catholiks at this day hold All which doctrines are meerely Dogmaticall points without any Type or reference to Christ his comming that only of Melchisedech excepted and therefore it cannot be answered that the said doctrines should now cease vpon our Sauiours comming in flesh into the world as some ignorant men would suggest but it must needs be that the said Doctrines if they were true then they must be also true now By which so many foresaid Examples of our Catholike fayth thus affirmed by the ancient Iewes it is made most certaine that our Religion â—s not New or lately inuented but most ancient and vndoubtedly Apostolike Animaduersion LXXXXIX IT is a most impudent assertion of D. Field who thus writeth We (*) D. Fâ—â—ld in his Book of the Church l. 3. c 8. p. 76. firmely belieue that all the Churches of the world wherein our Fathers liued and dyed to haue beene the true Protestant Churches of God c. and that they which taught imbraced and belieued those damnable Errours which the Romanist do defend against vs were only a faction But see now this most vast Lye is controuled First then D. Iewell thus acknowledgeth The (u) Iewel in his Apology of the Church part 4. c. 4. Truth was vnknowne at that tyme and vnheard of when Martin Luther and Hulderick Swinglius first came vnto the knowledg and preaching of the Gospel And therefore (x) Buâ—ter in Ep. anno 36. ad Episc Hereford Bucer stileth Luther The first Apostle to vs of the reformed Doctrine And Schlusselburg the great Protestant thus contesteth the same Jt (y) In Theolog. Calu. l. 2. fol. 130. is impudency to affirme that many leâ—ned men in Germany before Luther did hold tâ—â— Doctrine of the Gospell Yea Luther himselfe thus vaunteth of himself Christum (z) Luther Ep. ad Argentinens à nobis primo vulgatum audemus gloriari And truly the force of reason assureth vs that there were no Protestants at or immediatly before the breaking out of Luther For if any were why did they lye hid and vnknowne at Luthers Rising No other pretext can be alledged but feare of persecution But this cannot be alledged For the Protestants if any then were might securely step out and ioyne themselues with Luther considering that then diuers Magistrats and Commonwealths had openly vndertaken the Patronage of Luthers Doctrine and Religion Animaduersion C. IN all points of faith the Authority of the Priuate Spirit is to be contemned as begetting nothing but Noueltyes and Innouation And let ech good Catholike anchor his iudgement vpon the authority of Christs visible Church and the chiefe Head therof assuring himselfe that although Simon the fisher was not able to determine Matters of fayth yet that Simon Peter and his Successours assisted with competency of meanes haue euer an impeacheable Soueraignty granted to them and a delegated authority from Christ himselfe for the absolute discussing and deciding of all Controuersyes in Religion Tu (a) Math. 16. es Petrus super hanc Petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam portae Jnferi non praeualabunt aduersus eum And truly if the visible Church of Christ and the Supreme Iudge therof could err in matter of fayth how could God be excused from Cruelty by threatning to all Men eternall Perdition if we be not obedient to the Church of God Dic (b) Math 18. Ecclesiae si Ecclesiam non audierit sit sicut Ethnicus Publicanus Furthermore as the Apostle saith (*) Hebr. 8. Our Testament is established in better Promisses c. meaning then the Testament of the Jewes But if it was said in the tyme of the Old Law that he who (c) Deuteron 17. presumptuously refuseth to obey the CommandemeÌ„t of
Superstitious then a Protestant And a Protestant sooner becom an Atheist then a Catholike The Reason of both is euident And first whereas the Catholike Religion besides the beliefe of many dogmaticall points of fayth retayneth the practise of many Ceremonies the true vse of which Ceremonies as being first instituted by the primitiue Church are most lawfull but now if the ignorant Catholike through want of due instruction do ascribe more to them then is due or do put greater cōfidence in them then he ought as forgetting them to be but Ceremonies then perhaps he may haue a superstitious conceite of them as it happened in the Brazen Serpent though otherwise seruing as the figure of Christ To which the Iewes through abuse thereof in ascribing more worship to it then they ought at length bare a Superstitions respect But now touching the Protestants greater propension to Atheisme the reason is in that Protestancy euer refynes it selfe by Negatiues Thus for example The Caluinist or Puritan denies more then Lutheran or the moderate Protestāt The Anabaptist more then the Puritan The Anti-trinitarians more then the Anabaptists the Iew or Turks more then the Anti-trinitarians and for the last sublimation through deniall of all Iudaisme and Turcisme resolues into Atheisme And hereupon we find that whereas many Protestants by their often refyning of their Religion and all by Negatiues do in the end become Atheists denying euen the being of a Deity that few or no Catholikes immediatly from Catholike Religion euer fall into the open Blasphemy of Atheisme Animaduersion CVIII THe preaching of the Word and Sacraments supposing them to be Notes of the Church as our Aduersaries do suggest proue only the Place where the Church is but not which is the Church For the Church consisteth of men and we cannot tell who they are that receaue the Word truly preached or the Sacraments truly administred Againe whereas as Lubbertus (k) L. 4. de Eccles cap. 1. a Protestant truly teacheth Notius est duplex vnum Naturae alterum nobis Now here the Question is only of such Notes as are Notes in respect of vs for our better informing which is the true Church and not as they are Notes in respect of Nature For here we are instructed a posteriori and according to the measure of that knowledg which God vouchsafes to afford to vs. Now in reference hereto we freely grant that the true preaching of the word and Administration of the Sacraments may be termed Notes of the Church but not Notes to vs which is only the point here stood vpon For though they be Notes in Nature of the truth of the Church yet what doth this auayle vs since they are not Notes to vs for our direction to find which is the true Church Againe the true preaching of the word and the Administration of the Sacraments cannot be Notes to vs which is the true Church seeing the Scripture it selfe cannot be made knowne to vs for Scripture but only by the attestation of the Church as M. Hooker testifieth in these words Of (l) Hooker in Eccles Pol. saec 14. l. 1. pag. 86. things necessary the very chiefest is to know what Bookes we are to esteeme holy which is confessed impossible for the Scripture it selfe to teach And againe We (m) Vbi supra l. 3. p. 146. all know the first outward Motiue to esteeme of the Scripture is the authority of the Church Thus he Now this being granted it ineuitably followeth that first we must know which is the true Church to giue this approbation of the Scripture before we can know which is the Scripture and much more then before we can be assured of the true preaching of the Word and which is the true construction of the Scripture To these former Arguments I adioyne this pertinent obseruation It is this When the Catholikes demand to set downe the true Notes of the Church our Aduersaries answering That is the true Church which enioyeth a true preaching of the Word and an auayleable administration of the Sacraments Now I here affirme that this description of Notes is but our owne Question returned vs back in other termes and consequently but a Sophisme consisting in an idle circulation of the same point inuested with a new forme of words For when I demand which is the true Church I vertually implicitly and according to the immediate meaning of my words demand which Church is that which enioyeth the true preaching of the word and the true vse of the Sacraments since only the true Church is honored with this kind of preaching and distribution of the Sacraments Thus far touching the Notes prostituted by our Aduersaries as the true Notes of Christ his Church Animaduersion CIX SVch Protestants as do mantayne that there were Protestants in all ages before Luther giue the reason that the feare of Persecution was the cause why the said Protestants did then lye latent and became not visible to the world But this is a meere aēry suggestion For thus I argue The Church of God vnder persecution either communicateth openly with a false visible Church in participation of Sacraments and externall professiō of fayth Or els she doth refrayne from all such externall Communion if she do communicate with a false Idolatrous Church as diuers of our Aduersaryes repute the Church of Rome to be then is she not the true Church since the true Church cannot brooke any such dissimulation For we read With the hart a (n) Rom. 10. Mā belieueth vnto Iustice and with the mouth confesseth vnto Saluation If she doth not communicate with it then by such her forbearing she is made knowne and consequently is become thereby visible for who are persecuted but Men that are knowne Or how can one lying secretly and hiddenly be said to be persecuted The truth of this point is further warrantable from the examples of the persecution in the primitiue Church which of all other pressures of the Church was incomparably the greatest And yet we fynd that the particular Bishops Confessours and Martyrs are euen to this day made knowne who they were what false Opinions and Heresyes they impugned And the like may be said of the English Catholikes persecuted in Queene Elizabeths reigne since the names and memoryes of those reuerend Pryests and others of the Laity to speake nothing of many worthy Confessours and other suffering great losses and disgraces who lost their lyues in her dayes only for Religion are euen to this day fresh and recorded Therefore I heare demaund that if the Catholiks in this our Country being but a small part of Christendome could not but for some few nūbers of yeares in comparison escape the search and hands of their persecutours and become thereby most visible knowne How could then the Protestants being supposed to be dispersed thtoughout many Nations lye hid and auoyd for so many ages together as is pretended the force of that persecution which is affirmed by
done but that which is donne cannot be vndone though it be done freely and contingently Therefore it may be concluded that the Prescience of God imposeth not a necessity to things as foresight or foreknowledg is considered in it selfe neither as it is considered to be the Prescience of God This is proued for as God doth foresee what men will do so he also foreseeth what himselfe will doe but the Prescience of God doth not force God that he will worke or do any thing therefore by the same reason his Prescience doth not force men In like manner the Protestants obiect that Gratia efficax which we Catholikes do grant that it is giuen to diuers men doth destroy Freewill To this I answere with S. Austin that this Gratia efficax hath indeed an infallible certitude but yet hath no necessitude but only ex hypothesi and in this respect it doth not hinder the Freedome of mans Will for though certaine it is that this Gratia efficax will not be reiected yet it is as certaine that it may be reiected And therefore this efficacious grace where it is giuen doth no more induce a necessity or hinder the Freedome of the will then the Prescience or foreknowledg of God doth Animaduersion CXXXVI SOme of our Aduersaries and particularly Luther as is aboue said do thus write The ten (p) Luther ser de Moyse Commandements appertaine not to Christians And againe The ten (q) Fox Act. Mon. p. 1335. Commandements were giuen vs not to do them but to know our Damnation and to call for Mercy And yet more plainly D. Willet writeth The Law remayneth still impossible to be kept by vs through the weaknes of our flesh Neither (r) Willet in Synops Papism pa. 564. doth God giue vs ability to keepe it but Christ hath fulfilled it for vs. Thus these men seeke to free vs from keeping the CoÌ„mandements because say they Christ hath kept them for vs. And may not any man conclude from the same ground that we Christians are not bound to pray at any tyme or to practise Vertue and Piety because Christ hath prayed for vs all and liued a most holy life for vs all Such incentiues to all vice and turpitude in conuersation doth this doctrine beget in the belieuers thereof and therefore the lesse wonder that we find Luther thus to write A (s) Luth. tom 1. wittenberg de captiuit Babilon fol. 74. Christian man is so rich that although â—e would he cannot loose his Saluation by any sâ—nne how great soeuer vnlesse he will not belieue Animaduersion CXXXVII IN setting downe the necessity of the euer Visibility of Christs Church I will not so much insist in the Scriptures or in the authority of the Fathers confirming the same as in the true and ingenious acknowledgment of the learned Protestants thereof which being here once expressed then I will draw a most dangerous and irrepliable inference to the mayne ouerthrow of the Protestants Church Well then to beginâ— We find Caluin thus to write Nan (t) Inst. l. 4. c. 1. Sect. 4. is visibili Ecclesia c. Extra cuius gremium non est speranda peccatorâ—m remissio Out of whose besome we cannot expect any remission of sinneâ— Hâ—nnius giueth his sentence in these words God (u) In his Treatise of Eâ—â—â—will pa. â—1 in all times hath placed his Church is a high place and hath exalted it in the sight of aâ—l â—eople and Nations Iacobus Andraeas that famous Protestant We (x) In his booke against Hosius pag. 210. are not ignorant that the Church must be a visible CoÌ„pany of teachers and hearers Melancthou is most luxuriant in his Sentences of this point who thus writeth Necesse (y) Melanct in Concil Theologi â—art 2. est fateri esse visibilem Ecclesâ—am c. It is necessary to confesse the Church to be visible Whither tendeth then haec portentosa Oratio this monstrous Opinion which denieth the Church to be visible And in another place this Protestant thus further discourseth Whensoeuer (z) In loc com â—dit 15â—â— c dâ— Ecclâ—s we thinke of the Church let vs bâ—hould the Company of such men as are gathered together which is the visible Church neither let vs dreame that the Elect of God are to be found in any other place then in this visible Society c. Neither let vs imagine of any other inâ—isible Church Briefly the said Melancthon vrging seuerall texts of Scripture in proofe of the Churches visibility sayth (a) Melanct vbi supra Hi simâ—â—s loci c. these and such like places of Scripture Non de idaea Platonica sed de Ecclesia visibili loquuntur D. Field thus writeth The (b) Lib. 1. of the Church c. â—0 pag. 19. Persons of whoÌ„ the Church consisteth are visible their profession knowne euen vnto the prophane c. I will conclude with D. Humfrey thus teaching Cur (c) D. Humfrey in his Iesuitis part 2. cap. 3. anxiè curiosè probant quod est à nobis numquam negatum Why do the Papists so painfully seeke to proue that which we neuer denyed And then after he sayth Non enim clunculâ—rij secâ—stus connoçationes sâ—nt Christianae The Society of Christians are not secret meetings And then there speaking of the Church militant he further thus sayth Oportet Ecclesiam essâ— conspicuam Conclusio est clarissima It is a manifest Conclusion that the Church is to be conspicuous and visible Thus far of the learned Protestants confessing the truth touching the euer necessary and vninterrupted visibility of the Church of Christ Now the Deduction which I draw from the premisses is this That seeing the Church of Christ must euer be conspicuous and visible And further seeing that the Protestant Church hath beene wholy latent and inuisible according to the iudgment of some Protestants for the space of this last thousand yeares but by the acknowledgment of other learned Protestants during these last thirteene or foureteene hundred yeares as aboue I haue set downe in our Aduersaries literall authorities and sentences acknowledging so much what other thing then can result out of our Aduersaries owne positions but that the Protestant Church through want of a necessary and vninterrupted visibility is not the true Church of Christ Animaduersion CXXXVIII THat Luther was an Enemy to the Diuinity of Christ and the Blessed Trinity is aboue shewed In this Animaduersion Caluin shal be charged with the like impiety This I proue in that Caluin labours to auoyd detort all such chiefe places of sacred writ as the Ancient Fathers were accustomed to alledge in proofe of Christs Diuinity Now first I will set downe his owne words against the B. Trinity whereof he thus sayth Haec (d) In Ep. 2. ad Polonos in tract Theolog. p 796. precatio Sancta Trinitas vnus Deus miserere nostri mihi non placet barbariem â—mnino sapit This prayer Holy Trinity one God â—aue mercy
Church of Christ Thou (37) Esay c. â—0 shalt sucke the milke of the Gentills and the breasts of Kings And againe it is prophesied of the Church by the Kingly Prophet J (38) Psal â— will giue thee the Heathens 〈◊〉 thy inheritance and the End of the Earth for sâ—â— thy possession Now two things are cleare the first that many Heathen Kingdomes hâ—â—e beene conuerted to Christianity by the Pope and his ministers This is proued from the coÌ„fession of D. Whitaker who acknowledging the conuersion of many Countryes made by the Church of Rome thus debaseth them The (39) Whitak l. de Eccles pag. 336. Conuersion of so many Nations after the tyme of Gregory haue not beene pure but corrupt Now that the Protestant Church neuer conuerted any Gentill King or Nation to the fayth of Christ appeareth from its coÌ„fessed Inuisibility for so many ages till Luthers tyme aboue set downe Thus then I here aâ—gue The predictions of conuerting Kings and Kingdoms to the fayth of Christ were performed by the Pope only and his Substituts and not by the Protestants Therefore the predictions for the enlarging of Christ his Church by conuerting Gentills vnto it were performed by Antichrist Christs designed Enemy How do these stand together and yet do these incompatibilityes necessarily result out of the former Assertions Animaduersion CLIV. THe example of Paphnutius his standing in the Nicene Councell in defence of Priests mariage so much insisted vpon by so many eminent Protestants is misapplied and withall in all likely hood most false It is misapplyed because where it is vrged in proofe of Priests Mariage it proueth the contrary For though perhaps Paphnutius might be persuaded that Priesthood did not dissolue Mariage afore contracted yet he sayth plainly Those (40) So relateth Socrates l. 1. ca. 8. who are made Priests before they are maried cannot after marry And this Paphnutius calleth Veterem Ecclesiae traditionem The ancient tradition of the Church So far was Paphnutius from ascribing the doctrine of Priests not marrying after the Order of Priesthood taken to the Councell of Nice Now that this example of Paphnutius is vntrue many probabilities may be vrged First because there is not so much as any Mention of this matter concerning Paphnutius made by any who did wryte of the Nicene Councell before Socrates tyme who first relateth the words of Paphnutius For neither did Eusebius Athanasius Epiphanius Theodoret nor yet Ruffinus himselfe who writ many things of Paphnutius and of the Nicene Councell all being more ancient then Socrates make any mention of this matter Now I here demaÌ„d could all these be silent in so great a busines and so earnestly debated in the Nicene Councell Secondly this example of Paphnutius seemeth to be against the third Canon of the said Nycene Councell which altogether forbiddeth Priests to haue dwelling with them any Woman other then their Mother Sister their Fathers sister their Mothers sister c. Now if as Socrates reporteth in the example of Paphnutius the Councell had left liberty for married Laymen afterwards made Priests to haue kept still their former Wynes why then was not the wyse first placed here in the exception but altogether omitted This example of Paphnutius is so much suspected to be false that Frigeuilleus (41) In his palmâ— Christiana p. 103. Ganuius a Protestant doth plainly ascribe it to the forgery of Socrates Animaduersion CLV IT will not be amisse to obserue the Protestants Method in disputing with the Catholikes touching the Reall Presence as it is taught by the Church of Rome For the Question of the Reall Presence being but propounded they quickly tell vs that Christ neuer intended or willed it which answere is made to omit all other Protestants by (42) In his Decads in English serm 8. p. 971. Bullinger And when to declare Christs Will therein we alledge his words they make then a new question of his power as denying such to be his will or sense of words vnder pretence that it is (43) So answereth whitak in his answ to M. William Reynolds pa 179. contradictory to the truth and Nature of his humane body now in Heauen and so is therby impossible And when in reply therto we proue to them directly that it is not impossible then returning per circuitum to their firster Euasion they answere that the Question (44) So answereth D. Whitak in his answere to M. Reynolds refutation pag. 192. is not of his power but only of his Will and so dancing in a round they triffle and delude vs by a subtle escape of an endles Circulation Animaduersion CLVI IT is most certaine that the doctrine of many of our Aduersaries touching the Reall Presence is inuolued with greater shew of Impossibility then our Catholike doctrine thereof is for whereas they teach that Christs reall body is really (45) So teach besides many others M. Perkins in his reformed Catholike pag. 187. and D. Fulke against the Rhâ—mish Testam in 1. Cor. 15. and truly present and yet not bodily and corporally but only Spiritually present By which word Spiritually they do not exclude the true and reall presence of his body Now how this should be free from repugnancy and meere contradiction and therfore impossible I cannot discerne For to affirme that Christs very body and not only a figure or efficacy thereof should be truly and really present and yet not bodily but spiritually present is in it selfe inexplicable and as Swinglius (46) Swimglius co 2. de vera falsa religionâ— fol. â—06 in confutation therof truly obserueth is vpon the matter no other thing then to turne his body into a Spirit For as the true substance of Christs Spirit cannot be said to be present to vs only corporally or bodily and not spiritually because it is a spirit and no Body so neither may the substance it selfe of Christs very body be said to be present to vs not bodily but only Spiritually nor at all spiritually vnlesse we do which is impertinent to the matter in hand vnderstand the word Spirituall as the Apostle doth 1. Cor. 15. because it is a true and reall body no Spirit Animaduersion CLVII VNiuersality of our Catholike Doctrine in all chiefest points dispersed througout all Nations euen by the acknowledgment of our Aduersaries as appeareth from their confessed Inuisibility of their owne Church and Religion for so many ages is a most strong Argument of the truth of our Catholike Religion My reason hereof is in that the doctrine of the Roman Church could not by any pretended corruption be deriued from that Church to so many Nations so far remote and distant ech from other Sundry of which Nations were vnknowne to the Latin Church and many of them at variance therewith in some small points Therefore from hence I conclude that our Catholike fayth was the Primitiue fayth first taught by the Apostles in all those far different Nations wherein
diuine Scriptures yet they are recorded and written in the Monuments of the auncient Authours and in Ecclesiasticall bookes The second reason may be the continuall vse of them For diuers Traditions are in continuall obseruation practise as the Rites and Ceremonyes of administring the Sacraments Holy-dayes appoynted tymes of fasting the Celebration of the Masse and of Diuine office or prayers and such like The third cause are certaine externall Monuments which continue for a most long tyme as most ancient TeÌ„ples or Churches in which are Altars the Holy Fonts for Baptisme the Memorialls or Toumbs of Saincts Crosses Images Ecclesiasticall bookes c. The fourth Reason is Heresy it selfe For God doth wonderfully vse the Enemyes of the Church to the preseruation of the Church For because as in euery age there haue risen vp some Heretyks who haue impugned diuers dogmaticall Traditions of the Church So hath God in ech age raysed certaine learned Orthodoxall Men who that they might better resist the Heretykes haue with most great diligence and labour searched out the Doctrine of the Church and ancient Traditions and haue transmitted them in wryting to all posterity I will ad this following obseruation in fuller warrant of vnwritten Traditions against such who restrayne the proofe of all poynts to the Scripture it selfe To wit that it is one thing for an Article of fayth to be expressed in Scripture Another thing for an Article of fayth to be grounded vpon â—cripture All Christian doctrine is not expressed in Scripture yet euery Christian doctrine is so grounded on Scripture that it may in somâ— sort or other be proued from Scripture And in this sense all Traditions receaued by the vniuersall Church of Christ may be said to be grounded on Scripture since they are grouÌ„ded vpon the authority of the Church admitting them To which Church Christ himselfe hath promised an infallibility of Truth and of not erring according to that Ego vobiscum sum omnibus diebus vsque Consummationem saeculi Math. 18. And againe Portae inferi non praeualebunt aduersum eam Math. 16. to wit against the Church of Christ Animaduersion CLXXXII PRotestancy is proued to be an intentionall thing in it selfe and voyde of all Reall fayth This is proued from the Definition of Fayth giuen by the Apostle thus defining fayth fides est sperandarum substantia rerum argumentum non apparentium That is fayth is the (50) Heb. 11. substance of things to be hoped for the argument of things not appearing This definition sheweth that fayth is a supernaturall Vertue and the Obiect thereof is that which through its owne abstrusenes sublimity cannot be apprehended or conceaued by force of Mans owne wit it transcending all Naturall Reason This we see exemplyfyed in the two supreme Articles of the Trinity and the Incarnation the Mysteryes and difficulties of which transcend all humane reason or light of Nature And hence it is that the Conclusion of the Schoole Deuines is this Quae (51) S. Thomas part 1. 2. quaest 1. fidei sunt non possunt esse scita Now to apply this Yf Protestancy be a supernaturall fayth or els it is no true sauing fayth then the Obiect of this Protestanticall fayth is of that difficult Nature as that Man through the force of Naturall reason only cannot giue any assent thereto without the speciall concurrency of Gods Grace But here I demand that seeing the Obiect of Protestancy as Protestancy is meere Negatiues and denialls as deniall of Reall Presence deniall of Purgatory deniall of Freewill deniall of praying to Saincts briefly deniall of most of the affirmatiue points taught by our Catholike Church here I say I demand what supernaturality or force of Gods speciall concurrency is required that man should giue an assent to these Negations or denyalls Nay I here say that mans naturall reason euen of it selfe without any externaâ—l help is propense and inclyning to belieue these and other such like Negations except the Affirmatiues to those Negations can be conuinced as for true either by Diuine or Humane proofe and Authority Thus it followeth that Protestancy euen from the Definition of Fayth giuen by the Apostle is no supernaturall Fayth but in respect of such a Fayth is a meere Irreality and wast of fayth Animaduersion CLXXXIII THe reasons which S. Thomas Aquinas (52) S. Thom in 3. part quaest 27. Artic 4. doth insist vpon being most probable inducements for freeing the Blessed Virgin Mary from Originall Sinne are these following The first Seeing God did decree to aduance the Blessed Virgin to so supreme dignity that she should excell euen the Angells themselues therfore it was most sutable agreeable that no priuiledg should be conferred vpon any pure Creature which was not conferred vpon the B. Virgin except such a priuiledg were repugnant to the condition state Nature or Sex But to be sanctifyed in the first instant of Creation was giuen to our First Parents As also to be sanctifyed in the first instant of Creation and neuer to be polluted with any Sinne was giuen to the holy Angells But this priuiledg is in no sort repugnant to the condition state Nature or Sex of the B. Virgin Therefore it is a pious thing to belieue that the Mother of God did not want this priuiledge Secondly because that testimony of the Heauenly Spouse ought in all probability to be accomplished and fulfilled in the Blessed Virgin Tota (53) Can. 4. pulchra es amica mea macula non est in te Thirdly because the Mother of Christ hath a singular Affinity and Coniunction with Christ himselfe Fourthly in that the Sonne of God who is the wisdome of the Father did as it were inhabitate in the wombe of the Mother after a most peculiar and wonderfull manner But it is said in holy Scripture In maleuolam (54) Wisdoms c. 1. animam c. Wisdome cannot enter into a wicked hart nor dwell in the body which is subiect to sinne Lastly because as well the honour as the ignominy of the Mother redoundeth to the Sonne Now touching the proofe of the Assumption of our B. Lady both in Body Soule pretermitting the Authority of the (55) S. Ierome writeth a sermon styling it de Eesto assumptionis Mariae The Centurists alledge that S. Austin did write a Book-entituling it de Assumptione Virginis Mariae Ancient Fathers herin I will at this present content my selfe with the Argument of S. Bernard in proofe thereof who thus disputeth Seeing God hath discouered and reuealed the Bodies of many Saincts which lay hid in diuers places that they might be honored of faythful Christians It then ineuitably followeth that if the sacred Body of the Blessed Virgin had beene still on earth he would in like maÌ„ner haue made knowne no doubt in what place or Country it did lye But it not being certainly knowne where that Body or any part thereof is in any place of the world it may irrâ—pliably
be concluded that her Body is not to be found in Earth but only in Heauen this is S. Bernards demonstration in this point Animaduersion CLXXXIV BEza as aboue is shewed thus writeth of the Doctrine of reprobation God (a) Beza in his Display c. pag. 17. 31 76. c. decreeth to destruction createth to perdition and predestinateth to his hatred and Destruction with whom accordeth Caluin as elswhere is shewed in these words (b) Calu Instit l. 3. cap. 23. paragr 6. God by his Councell and appointment doth so ordaine that amongst men some be borne destined to certainâ— death from their Mothers Wombe who by their perdition may glorify his Name Now heere I wish the diligent Reader to obserue the dangerous resulâ—ancyes and Absurdity 〈◊〉 necessary following from this their doctrine of Reprobation First it is a mayne hinderance to Vertue and encouragement to Vice as aboue I haue declared Since iâ— teacheth that that man who is reprobated cannot preuent his reprobation by any piouâ— lyfe how vertuous soeuer why then should that man abstaine from exercise of wickednes seeing his wickednes doth not in any sort further his damnation it being by the Protestants Dâ—ctrine decreed from a Eternity without respect of any worke good or bad Secondly this Doctrine maketh God a Lyar and dissembler For to omit infiniâ—â— other texts of Scripture we find his Prophets thus to speake of God God (c) Ezech 33. willinâ— the death of the wicked And again He (d) 2. Peter 3. wâ— not haue any to perish And yet more God (e) 1. Timoth 2. would haue all men saued and come to the knowledg of the truth Now I say if God createth some men absolutely from their Mothers wombe without respect of his Sinnes to eternall damnation are not these his fayre speeches to be interpreted but Dissimulation and vntruths and followeth it not then consequently that this their blasphemous doctrine labours to transforme God into the Deuill by making him to vtter lyes and speake false for of the Deuill we thus read It is (f) 1. Ioan. 3. he who speakes Lyes of himself is a lyer the Father of Lyes Animaduersion CLXXXV YF we take into our consideration that other Doctrine of our Aduersaries which teacheth that God is the Authour of sinne which Doctrine we haue aboue shewed to be mantayned by the Protestants the inferences vnauoydably proceeding from that Doctrine are no lesse blasphemous then the former For first it maketh God to be the only sinner and that the Deuill and Man are innocent and no sinners at all For if the thiefe for example be compelled by God to steale who compells the Deuill to set on the thiefe as Swinglius (g) Swingl Serm. de prouident affirmes then is not God in this case the only Sinner This is proued since the goodnes badnes of the worke in euery Action is chiefly to be attributed to the Principall Authour willer and worker of it and not to the Instrument And this the rather since Austin sayth Sinne is so voluntary that except it be voluntary it is no sinne But sinne is only voluntary in God according to the doctrine of our Aduersaries and not in Man in whom it is necessary Therefore hence I conclude that according to this their blasphemy Sinne is only in God and not in Man Secondly this Doctrine of God being the Authour of Sinne ascribeth the proprieties of the Deuill to God For it is the office of the Deuill to tempt man and therefore in the Holy (h) Mat. 4. writ the Deuill is called a Tempter But this is more peculiar to God according to the foresaid Doctrine then to the Deuill Since God in the iudgment of the Protestants so forcibly tempteth man to sinne as that it is not in his power to resist or withstand the temptation which is more then the Deuill can performe Thirdly it is the property of the Deuill to sow Tares or ill weedes of sinne in the Fyeld of our Harts according to those words The Enemy (i) Mat. 13. comes and sowes tares But God doth this according to the former Doctrine more then the Deuill For God as Caluin affirmes doth excecate (k) Caluin 1. Instit 18. 24. 4. Instit 14. and obdurate the minds of men doth strike them with a spirit of errour giddines and madnes and this not by permission but by operation Thus Caluin Animaduersion CLXXXVI THe Protestants Doctrine of the infallibility of only fayth iustifying a Man and of some other of their positions takes away the force of all Prayer making it either needles or fruitlesse Needles as of things certaine which need not to be asked Fruitles as of things impossible which cannot be obtained The first point is thus proued That Prayer is needles which prayes for that which cannot fayle vs as either already past or assuredly possest or to come Therefore according to the Protestants grounds they ought not to pray for Remission of Sinnes for the fauour of God for perseuerance in fayth or for the glory of Heauen since euery Protestant by his speciall fayth belieueth in his iudgment most certainly that his Sinnes are forgiuen him and that he shall perseuer in fayth and come to Heauen The second point to wit of the Fruitlesnes of Prayer is in like wise thus euicted To pray for the keeping of the Ten Commandements is fruitles since our Aduersaries teach as I haue aboue shewed that the keeping of them is impossible In like manner it is Fruitles to pray for the Preuenting of any Euill whether it be Malum culpae as sinne or Malum paenae as punishment or whether it be any temporall affliction whatsoeuer And the reason is because as our Aduersaries do teach All Euill as well as Good shall infallibly fall out as Goâ— hath according to his owne irrespectiue immutable and ineuitable will pleasurâ— decreed and appointed it For sorting here to to omit the like authorities of many others in this point Luther thus writeth 〈◊〉 a Fatall Necessity of things Nullius (l) Luther in Assert damnat per Leonem Art 36. est 〈◊〉 manu c. Jt is in no mans power to thinke God or Euill but all things proceed from absoluâ— Necessity Thus we see that it ineuitably 〈◊〉 most consequently may be gathered froâ— the Protestants Theorems and principles thaâ— all Prayer is either Needles or Fruitles inauayleable Animaduersion CLXXXVII MAny of the learned Protestants weâ—ghing the emptines of their owne Religion as consisting only of Tenets whicâ— are but an Annihilation of all positiue and true fayth haue therefore vpon mature deliberation in diuers weighty points whoâ—y reiected the Negatiue Religion of our Aduersaries and in place therof haue fully imbraced the contrary Affirmatiue Catholike Articles of fayth euer and at this day maintayned by the Church of Rome So trâ—â— is that saying of S. Austin Truth (m) Contra Donat post coll c. 24. is