appeareth froÌ„ that which is aboue deliuered touching the Protestants reprehension both of the translations of Scripture made by forrayne Protestants as also of our English Translations But if the Protestants doe reiect their owne brethrens Translations theÌ„ much lesse will they staÌ„d vnappealably to our Catholike Translations of the Scripture 4. If the Catholike proceed further in insisting in the Originals of both the Testaments The Protestants deny that the originalls of them are the same in all passages as they were first penned by the Prophets the Euangelists and the Apostles Thus for example in the new Testament where in (d) Matth c. 10. S. Matthew it is sayd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first Peter (e) Beza in his Annotat. vpon the new Testament set foorth anno 1556 Beza denyeth the Originall herin iustifiing though it be thus read in all Greeke copyes extant at this day that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 primus was added by some one enclining to the defence of the Popes Primacy In like sort (f) Beza vbi supra Beza denyeth that the Greeke Originall in Luke 22. is at this present the same as it was first penned by the Euangelist mantayning that it is corrupted in fauour of the Reall presence 5. If he insist in such passages of Scripture whose Originalls and Translations therin are on all parts accepted for true and tell his Aduersary that the whole Church of God in her Primitiue and purer tymes euer interpreted the said passages of Scripture in that sense in which they are at this present by the Catholikes alledged The ProtestaÌ„t absolutly (g) So doth D. Whitakers l de Eceles contra Bellarm. controuers 2. q. 4. p. 223. Perkins in his Exposition of the Creed p. 400. Iewell in his Apology of the Church of England part 4. cap. 4. and most other Protestants denyes that infallible authority of the Church of God in interpreting the holy Scripture but disclayming from it appeales to his owne Priuate spirit interpreting the same 6. If forbearing the written word of God he alledge in warranting of his fayth the vnwritten word of God I meane Apostolicall Traditions the Protestant denyes peremptorily the Authority of all such Traditions Thus for example where S. Chrysostome sayth (h) Chrysost in 2. Thessal hom 4. The Apostles did not deliuer all things by writinge but many thinges without and these be as worthy of credit as the other D. VVhitakers reiects this authority touching Traditions in these wordes (i) D. Whitak de sacra scriptura pag. 678. I answere That this is an inconsiderate speach and vnworthy so great a Father And Cartwright in depressing the weight of Traditions maintayned by S. Augustine thus writeth (k) See Cartwright in whitgifts defence p. 103. To allow S. Austins saying is to bring in Popery agayne 7. If leauing the word of God he descend to humane authorities yet so humane as that they haue the peculiar promise of (l) Matt. 18. Christs assistance therein I meane to the graue authority of Generall Councells the Protestants deny all authority of them For D. VVhitakers openly professeth that Generall Councels (m) L. de Concil contra Bellar. q. 6. may and haue erred But Peter Martyr more fully dismasketh himselfe in denying the authority of Generall Councells for he thus plainely writeth (n) Pet. Martyr lib. de votis pag. 476. As long as we insist in Generall Councells so long we shall continue in the Popish Errours 8. If he produce the Testimonies of particuler Fathers of the Primitiue Church Marke with what contempt and indignity the Protestant denyes them for Luther thus depresseth them (o) Luth. de seruo arbitrio printed 1551. pag. 434. The Fathers of so many ages haue beene plainely blind and most ignorant in the Scriptures they haue erred all their lyfe tyme vnles they were amended before their deaths they were neyther Saints nor pertayning to the Church And another though no Lutherane yet of Luthers descent in this his scurrilous Pasquill thus traduceth the Fathers (p) D. Wâ—itak conâ—r contra Duraeum l. 6. pag. 413. Ex Patrum erroribus ille Pontificiae Religionis cento consequutus est The Popish Religion is a patched cloath of the Fathers Errours sowed togeather see how impudent and petulant Nouelisme in fayth is in expecting precedency and taking the wall of Reuerend hoary Antiquity 9. If in such poynts which coÌ„cerne matter of fact as touching the supposed change of fayth in the visibility of the Church the vocation and mission of Pastours the vninterrupted Administration of the word and Sacraments all which are to receaue their proofe or els not to be proued at all froÌ„ the Authority of auncient most authenticall Histories If I say the Catholike do in proofe heerof produce the auncient Histories of those Primitiue tymes D. VVhitakers thus by denyall aleniateth and lesseneth the Authority of all Histories (q) D. D. Whitak contra Duraeum l. 7. pag. 478. Sufficit nobis c. To vs it is sufficient by comparing the Popish opinions with the Scripture to discouer the disparity of faith between them and vs And as for Historiographers we giue them liberty to write what they will And accordingly touching the Imaginary change of Rome in her fayth he thus coÌ„cludeth (r) Whitak vbi supra pag. 277. It is not needfull to vs to search out in Histories the beginning of this change 10. To conclude if in the last place for most demonstratiue and Affirmatiue Notes markes of the true Church the Catholike do rest as in nube Testium to vse the Apostles phrase in vniuersality Visibility vninterrupted continuance vnity Succession of Pastours Holynes of doctrine Conuersion of Kings and Nations of the Gentils c. The Protestants besides that they will not admit any Historyes in proofe of them deny and discarde the testimonies of all these Positiue Heads of proofes by erecting the Preaching of the word and Administration of the Sacraments for notes by this meanes they reduce to their owne iudgements which is the true Church seeing they will not acknowledge the word to be purely preached or the Sacramentâ— to be rightly administred but when and where their Priuate spirit out of its Pythagorean and controwling Chaire vouchsafes so to pronouÌ„ce By all this now we may see how wholy Negatiue the Protestant is indeed so Negatiue in al points as that it may be feared he in the end will deny his owne being for as heer aboue we haue shewed that his Religion consisteth in pure denyall of our Positiue and Affirmatiue Articles so in this Chapter we haue layd downe how he labours to othrow by his like denyalls the authority of all such Affirmatiue and Positiue Heads principles from whence the Catholikes for the fortifiyng of their owne faith and Religion do drawe their proofes In which kind of proceeding the Protestant deales no otherwise with the Catholike then if a man
these he taketh not from himselfe but borroweth them from the Catholike Church This is euideÌ„t for at the tyme of Luthers first reuolt who was the first Protestant in these dayes as his owne (g) Conrad Slâ—es in Theol. Caluin l. 2. fol 17. saith It is imâ—udency to say thaâ— any learned men in Germany before Luther did hould the doctrine of the Gospel See Luther of this point in loc coÌ„m class 4. p. 51. brethren do teach from whence did Luther learne that Christ was the Sauiour of the world that there is diuine Scripture Grace SacrameÌ„ts or from whence receaued he his Ordination if not from the Catholike Church The confessed Inuisibility of the ProtestaÌ„t Church not only at the first rising of Luther but also for many ages before proued in this Treatise doth conuince the truth of this point And therefore D. Field had iust reason to say (h) D. Field in his Treatise of the Church lib. 3. c. pag. 72. In the known Church of the world wherin our Ancestors liued and dyed Luther and the rest were baptized receaued their Ordinance and power of Ministry If now any other should at last expostulate and say that the Protestant is wronged by comparing him to the Heathen Philosophers seeing many of those Philophers were Idolaters to this I reply and say that the comparison heer made is not with such wicked Philosophers but only with those most learned Philosophers who acknowledged a Deity and neuer taught nor formally practised Idolatry and such were Plato Xenophon Aristotle Seneca and many others Againe the coÌ„formity in faith heere made is not touching those points which the Philosophers affirmatiuely belieued or practised but only in such negatiue Positions which are also denyed by the Protestant And with this I will heere rest concluding nothing of my selfe but will referre it to the censure of the most iudicious Reader whether this great affinity and brotherly association between the learned Heathen Philosopher and the symbolizing Protestant in their both promiscuously denying such Articles as are affimed by the Catholiks do carry any blemish to the Protestants Gospell or no or whether if the Heathen haue no reall Fayth in the sayd negatiue points it followeth not that the Protestant as a Protestant can haue in like sort no reall fayth in his belieuing the same Negatiue points But by this we may discerne that the cloudes of partiality and contradiction being once gathered about the maÌ„s iudgment doth make him thinke others to seeme lesse and to erre when indeed they doe not That Protestancy is but a Nullity of fayth and consequently with reference to fayth a Non-entity proued from the definition of faith and other Conditions necessarily annexed to Fayth CHAP. VII EVery definition of a thing is the Touchstone wherewith we try what other things can truly come within the Orb or coÌ„passe of the thing defined what not I will exemplify this in the definition of fayth deliuered by the Apostle and so see if the Fayth of a Protestant can be called fayth or rather in respect of Faith a NoÌ„entity absence of fayth We finde that the Apostle defineth Fayth in these wordes (a) Heb. 11. Fides est sperandarum substantia rerum argumentum non apparentium That is fayth is the substance of thinges to be hoped for the argument of thinges not appearinge This definition sheweth by the iudgement of all learned men that Fayth is a supernaturall vertue and the obiectum thereof is that which throgh its owne abstrusnes and sublimity cannot be apprehended or conceaued by force of mans owne wit it transcending all naturall reason To exemplify this in the supreme Articles of the most blessed Trinity and the Incarnation the two Cardinall-mysteries of Christian fayth Fayth teacheth vs that in the Trinity there is one peculiar Nature in three different Persons Now mans naturall vnderstaÌ„ding cannot apprehend how this Indiuiduality of Nature can be in three Persons without distraction or multiplication of the nature the rather seeing euery one of these Persons is identifyed really formally with this Nature the strickest vnion that can be conceaued In like sort touching the Incarnation by meanes whereof the Creatour of all flesh suffered in flesh mans reason cannot lay any true leuell to conceaue how one Hypostasis or person caÌ„ be in two natures or how this Hypostasis or person is identifyed made the same really with the diuine nature and yet is vnited most inwardly with the humane nature Thus in regard of the difficulty of belieuing Articles of fayth the conclusion among all the Schoole Deuines resulting out of the former definitioÌ„ of fayth is that (b) S. Thomas part 2 2. q. 1. quae fidei sunt non possunt esse scita so certayne it is that betweene mans Capacity and the Nature of supernaturall Fayth the proportion lyes onely in disproportion and that in matters of fayth euen reason dictates to vs to belieue against Reason Now to apply this if 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 Man through the force of natural reason caÌ„not giue any assent therto without the special concurrency of Gods Grace But heer now I demaund that seeing the Obiect of Protestancy as Protestancy is meere negations and denials of things to be as aboue is proued what supernaturality as I may terme it or force of Gods speciall concurrency is required that man should giue his assent to belieue that such or such a thing is not as for example that there is no Purgatory no place but Heauen for children dying vnbaptized no praying to Saints no inherent Iustice and so of the rest denyed by them I heer say that mans naturall reason euen of it selfe without any other externall help is propense inclining to giue assent to these all other negations except the affirmatiues to these negations can be conuinced for true eyther by diuine or humane proofes and authorityes so litle is any supernaturall assistance needfull heerto If then the obiect of Protestancy by reason of its Negations be most easy to be belieued and that the beliefe of it doth not surmouÌ„t the force of mans naturall reason but rather most sorting and agreable thereto then if the Apostles definition of Fayth be true as I trust no Protestant is of that supercilious and froward disposition as to deny it followeth that Protestancy is not the Obiect of Supernaturall Fayth but in respect of true infused sayth is a Non-entity and bare Intentionality But to proceed further The Schoole-men (c) S. Tho. part 2 q. 5 teach that true and Supernaturall Fayth hath a necessary reference to two things the first is called prima veritas reuelans which is God who reuealeth all truths points of fayth This first is styled by the diuines Obiectum formale fidei The second thing required to Fayth especially after the Church
of the opinion relyeth vpon the truth of the matter yet here the truth of the matter relyeth vpon the truth of the opinion The third poynt is the actuall fayth which (h) Luth. in l. de captin Babil Kem. in 2. part Exam. Concil Trident ad Can. 3. Centurist Cent. 1. c. 4. Cet 5. col 5.7 Luther and the Lutheranes ascribe to infants at that very instant that they are baptized Now coÌ„mon sense and the force of reason assureth vs that there is not nor can be any such faith in childreÌ„ but that this is in it self a meer Chymera PhaÌ„tasy for first doth not the poore InfaÌ„ts strugling what they can in time of their bodies immersion into the water manifestly impugne this aëry conceite Since if at that instant they did belieue they should offend God by such their resistance and so by this meanes they should commit sinne rather then haue their Originall sinne remitted Agayne how can Infants belieue except they heare (i) Rom. 10 Fides ex auditu Thus I leaue to euery one to iudge of what truth of Being or reall Existency this doctrine hath in it selfe And thus farre of these former aëry speculations of doctrine broached by the Protestants though but briefly touched by me for how can one wel extend himselfe in discoursing of such points which in theÌ„selues do want al extension In the vnfoulding wherof I labour not so much to display the falshood absurdity of theÌ„ which neuertheles incidently is by this meanes partly discouered as to make euident according to my methode vndertaken that not any of the sayd Protestants Positions or Tenets haue any Reality or Being but that they are meerely forged in the imagination without ground or foundation of any true and Positiue subsistence The last of the Protestant Positions omitting diuers others for greater breuity in which I will insist shall be touching the Protestant Church shewing that it â—s Nothing in it selfe but only a Church framed in the ayre and accordingly the Protestants are forced couertly to discourse of it â—n a mist of darke wordes so painters veyle that which they cannot delineate by Art But since this wil require a more large discourse branching it selfe into two parts I haue therefore purposely reserued the two next Chapters for the fuller dissecting of the same That the Protestant Church is a meerâ— Non-Entity or Idea proued from the confessed Inuisibility thereof CHAP. XII IN our entreating of the Protestant Church first we are to recall to mynd the definition giuen thereof by the Protestants secoÌ„dly the confessed Inuisibility of the sayd Church for many hundred yeares from both which poynts the resultaÌ„cy will be that the Protestant Church and consequently Protestancy as mantained by the sayd Church is but an vnreall thinge And to beginne with the definition (a) Lib. Institut 4. c. 1. Sect. 2. in minori Instit c. 8. Sect 4. Caluin defineth the true Church and therefore in his owne iudgement the Protestant Church to consist only of the number of the faythfull Elect and only to be knowe to God Now what other thing is this Church then a bare Intention as â—he Philosophers speake or phanâ—asme wrought in the shop of his owne brayne for first seeing no man can know who be those other men who are of the Elect who truly belieue how can it be knowne who are the members who make this Church or where it is Againe this definition rather destroyeth and taketh away the Church then describes or constitutes it For if all the workes euen of the iustified be mortall sinnes as (b) Luth. in Assert art 32. Luther and (c) Art 6. 20. Confessio Augustana do teach and that if only the â—ust do make this Church then followeth that no man is of the Church and consequently that the Protestant Church thus defined is but a meer Platonicall Idaea the reason heereof being because there are no iust men in the world since the workes of men are sins Next we will descend to the Inuisibility of the Protestant Church confessed by the learned Protestants for many ages or ratheâ— since the dayes of the Apostles In handling of which point I will first set down the ackowledgmeÌ„ts of the learned Protestants of their Churches Inuisibility and then after I will draw from thence the necessary deduction of sequence for prouing the Irreality for aëry Intentionality of the Protestants fayth and Religion And first it is ouer euident that D. Perkins thus confesseth of the inuisibility of the Protestants Church (d) In his expositioÌ„ of the Creed For many hundred yeares our Church was not visible to the world An vniuersall Apostasy ouerspeading the whole face of the earth And yet more particuâ—erly he thus acknowledgeth (e) Perkins vbi supra during the space of nine hundred yeares the Popish heresy hath spread it selfe ouer the whole earth But Sebastianus Francus a learned and very markeable Protestant confesseth more largely of this point thus writing (f) In ep de aebrogâ—ndis in vniuersun omnibus statutis Ecclesiast For certayne through the worke of Antichrist the externall Church togeather with the fayth and Sacraments vanished away presently after the Apostles departure that for these fourteene hundred yeares the Church hath not beene externall and visible To whose iudgement D. Fulke to omit for breuity the like Confessions of diuers other Protestants subscribeth in these wordes (g) D Fulâ— in his answere to a Counterfeyte Catholike pag. 35. The true Church decayed immediatly after the Apostles tyme. Now to inferre and deduce Conclusions first then if the Protestant Church hath had no Being since the death of the Apostles as we see by the acknowledgmeÌ„ts of the learned Protestants themselues it hath not had but hath laine hid so many yeares in a vast Chaos of nothing then followeth it that the Protestant Church is only an Imaginary thing hauing no substantiality as I may terme it or existence in it selfe Secondly I thus inferre If the Protestant Church hath no reall Being or existence in it selfe but is a poore fabrick of the imagination then followeth it vnauoidably that the Protestant fayth must necessarily partake of the nature of the Protestant Church I meane not to be any reall or subsisting thing For how can that faith be positiue or reall of which there haue beene for so many ages confessed and indeed for all ages without exception no meÌ„bers of the Church to make profession of the sayd fayth This I auerre is â—bsurd to mantaine since we see a shadow caÌ„not produce a shadow Agayne I adde heere to that by reason of inherency there is a necessary reference in euery Acâ—ident to its Subiect if the subiect be wanting then followeth it that the Accident as loosing its Inherency is also wanting and becommeth Nothing now then Protestancy or the fayth of a ProtestaÌ„t suppose it be any thing must be a quality and consequently an Accident
inhering in the vnderstanding of the Professour but if since the Apostles daies there haue beene no Professours of ProtestaÌ„cy by reason of the Inuisibility of that Church for so many ages doth it not then follow that a least during all those ages Protestancy as wanting its proper Subiect to inhere in hath had no real Being but hath beene all those many series or Centuries of yeareâ— a meere Nothing That the confessed want of Personalâ— Succession and lawfull calling in the Protestant Church proueth their Church to be no reall thing but a meer fiction and consequently that Protestancy is but an Intentionality or bare Notion of the mynd CHAP. XIII PHilosophy teacheth vs that euery thing doth consist of somewhat which is essentiall to it and of other things which are but Accidentall and necessary The Accidents serue only ad bent esse and by meanes of Inherency to giue as it were their attendance for greater state and honour of the thing the which they do inuest and therefore may actually at least in thought be separated and disioyned from such their subiect without any destruction of it But it is otherwise with that which is essentiall to any thing for that necessarily conduceth ad simpliciter esse of the thing the which Essentiall poynt being by supposall taken away the thing wherof it was Essentiall instantly looseth its Being is become therby a nothing Now to apply this to the Protestant Church And to pretermit what Accidentally accompanyeth the Church we will insist onely in that which is by our aduersaries acknowledgemeÌ„t Essentiall to the Church to wit the Administration of the VVord and Sacraments Now if it can be proued that the ProtestaÌ„t Church wanteth this Administration of the word and Sacraments then may we infallibly conclude that the Protestant Church is no Church nor Protestancy any Reall thing in it selfe But seeing this Administration of the word and Sacraments cannot be performed but by the help of the true Pastors we wil first shew the necessity of Pastours secoÌ„dly that the administratioÌ„ of the word Sacraments are Essentiall to the Being of a Church And lastly we will proue that the Protestant Church like a mastlesse ship hath neuer enioyed any true Pastours consequently neuer enioyed the Administration of the word and Sacraments the very Essence or being of a true Church And first the holy Scriptures doe often inculcate that in the Church of God there euer must be Personall Succession and lawfull calling coÌ„sequently that that society of Christians which want these two poynts is no Church at all Touching the necessity of Personal Succession thus we read (a) Isa 59 My Spirit which is vpon thee and the words which I haue put in thy mouth shall not depart out of thy mouth nor out of the mouth of thy seede nor out of the mouth of thy seeds seed from hence foorth for euer To which accord those wordes of the Apostle spoken of our Sauiour (b) Ephes 4. He hath placed Pastours to the consummation of Saints till we all meete in vnity of fayth That is as the Protestants do comment (c) So sayth Do-For Fulk agaynst the Rhemish Testament for euer and (d) D Fulk agaynst Heskins Sanders c. pag. 539. to the end of the world Now the reason why Pastours must be euer in the Church or els it is no Church but only a false vsurpation of the word Church is because in the Church there euer must be the Administration of the word and Sacraments but there can be no Administration of the word and Sacraments without Pastours euen according to the Apostles iudgmeÌ„t who sayth Rom. 10. How shall they belieue whome they haue not heard and how shall they heare without a Preacher which things to wit the Administration of the word and Sacrament as (e) D. VVhitaker contra Duâ—â—cum lib. 3. p. 249. D. VVhitakers teacheth being present do constitute a Church being absent do subuert it And D. VVillet in Sinops pag. 69. further in direct words affirmeth That the absence of the Administration of the word and Sacraments doth make a Nullity of the Church And sortably heerto other Protestants do write thus (f) Proposition and Principles disputed of in the Church of Geneua pag. 845. The ministery is an Essentiall marke of the true Church FroÌ„ which true acknowledgment of the learned Protestants we see that a Church without the due Administration of the word and Sacraments wanteth its Essence and is but a Nullity or Non Ens. Now as Personall Succession for the administration of the word and SacrameÌ„ts is deduced from the Scripture so also is the necessity of Lawfull vocation according to those wordes (g) Rom. 10. How shall they preach except they be sent And that (h) Heb. 5. No man taketh the honour of Priest-hood but he that is called of God as Aaron was which calling in the Apostles times was euer conferred by Imposition of hands But heer let vs see if the Protestants can make good the Personall Succession and ordinary calling of their Ministers for the preaching of the word and Administration of the SacrameÌ„ts But this is first denyed euen by the confessed Inuisibility of the Protestant Church for if the Protestant Church hath beene wholly inuisible or rather vtterly extinct for the space of thirteene or fourteene hundred yeares at the least as themselues haue aboue confessed theÌ„ during that long space of tyme the Protestant Church as not being then in Being wanted her Pastours the stalke which supports the vine and eonsequently wanted the Administration of the word and Sacraments and through such its want it wanted its owne Essâ—nce and was but a Nullity or Nothing during all that long Circuite of so many ages Furthermore whereas the Protestants seeing themselues thus plunged do flie for reliefe to Extraordinary calling for thus writeth Caluin (i) Lasciuius a Protestant in his booke ac RussoruÌ„ relig c. 23 alledgeth Caluin thus saying and see Caluin lib. Instit 4. c. 3. sest 4. Quia Papae Tyrannide c. Because through the Tyranny of the Pope the true Ordidinary Succession of Ordination was broken of therefore we stood in need of a new helpe and this was the extraordinary guift And D. Fulk thus writeth hereof (k) Fulke agaynst StapletoÌ„ and Martiall pag. 2. The Protestants that first preached in these last dayes had Extraordinary Caliing Therefore I will show that this poore refuge is impugned euen by the Protestants themselues so daÌ„gerous an incision their own pens haue made in the wounds of their owne Church for first D. Bilson thus teacheth (l) D. Bilson in his perpetual gouermeÌ„t of the Church c. 9. pag. 111. They can haue no part of Apostolicall Commission who haue no shew of Apostolicall succession Agayne Extraordinary Calling is euer warranted with working of Miracles as it was in the Apostles tymes euen by the doctrine of the Protestants for thus doth Luther
expostulate others of their Calling and might not one by retortion expostulate Luther in his owne words (m) Luth. tom 5. Ien. Germ. fol. 67. Vnde venis quis te misit Vbi sunt miracula quae te à Deo missum esse testantur And yet it is most certayne that God hath neuer honoured any one ProtestaÌ„t so much since the first appearing of Protestancy as to exhibite any one true and stupendious Miracle for confirmation of Protestancy A point so vndenyable that D. Fulk thus acknowledgeth (n) Against the Rhemish Testam in Apocalip 13. It is known that Caluin and the rest whome Papists call Arch-Heretikes worke no miracles Thus farre of this poynt Now to encircle the contents of all this Chapter within a narrow coÌ„passe I thus dispute If the Protestant Church hath had no true Personall Succession and Ordinary vocation â—f Ministers then hath it not had any true Pastours the euer watching Centinels of Gods Church as (o) Isa 162. Isay stileth them if it hath not had true Pastours then hath it not enioyed the true Administration of the word and SacrameÌ„ts if it hath not enioyed the true Administration of the word and Sacraments then hath it lost its Essence and is therby become a Nullity as D. VVillet and other Protestants in expresse words aboue cyted doe auer but if the Protestant Church hath by this meanes waÌ„ted its owne Essence and became a Nullity then euen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and demonstratiuely it followeth that Protestancy which is the supposed faith prea-by the Protestant Church belieued by her children hath in it selfe no Essence or being but is a meere Nullity or Non Ens. The Non-Entity of Protestancy proued from that which it worketh in the VVills of its Professours CHAP. XIV ABoue we haue discouered that Protestancy is depriued of all reality of being both in regard that its whole Systema or frame consisteth of meere Negations which are nothing els but an ouerthrowe of Positiue Articles of faith as also besides from seueral other heads in that diuers particuler Negatiue Tenets of their profession are if they be truely vnfoulded fouÌ„d to be only vaporous imaginations without al subsisteÌ„ce or being Now we will demonstrate the like Irreality of Protestancy by taking into our consideration what that Religion produceth in the belieuers thereof in regard of the Will of Morality in conuersation maÌ„ners Where first we are to note that Sinne I meane the deformity which is in euery sinnefull act is in its owne nature Non ens and therfore cannot proceed from God VVho (a) Gen. 1 Iohn 1. made only thinges and all thinges The reason heerof is in that Sinne being a deuiation erring from the rule of reason and a priuatioÌ„ of goodnes hath as (b) De ciuit Dei l. 12. c. 7. S. Austin all learned men teach no efficient but a deficient cause consequently is Non-ens And therefore Peter Martyr as aboue is sayd for authorities pertinent may well be iterated very fully discourseth of the nature of Sinne in these wordes An (c) In CoÌ„mon places in English part 1. cap. 17. euill thing such is Sinne hath no efficient but a deficient cause If any will search out this efficient cause it is euen like as he would see the Darknes with his eyes or comprehend Silence with his eares which being priuations it is no need that they should haue efficient causes Now to apply this to our matter in hand Heere I auouch that diuers Negatiue Articles of protestancy doe of their owne nature incline mans Will to sinne and al turpitude in manners and therefore as those protestantical Theses or Tenets in the vnderstaÌ„ding being but Negations or Priuations of the contrary positiue Articles of the Catholikes are depriued of al Entity of Being so also is that which they produce and beget in the Wil I meane Sinne wickednes in the belieuers of them depriued of al Entity or Being thogh otherwise most displeasing hatefull in the sight of God And so that Axiome of Philosophy may heere by allusion take place Ex nihilo nihil fit That Sinne is the fruit and effect of Protestancy I will exemplify it in those few Articles ensuing maintayned by the Protestants And first the Protestants Denyall of Free-will we Catholikes houlding the Affirmatiue heereto impelleth man most forcibly to the satisfying of his vnlawfull and voluptuous desires in all kindes of Sinne. For who is persuaded truly that he hath not Free-will in his actions but that he is forced to doe that he doth why should he labour to scale the craggy tower of vertue or auoyd the pleasing bayte of Sinne seeing it is not in his power through want of Free-will to performe eyther And vpon this ground it is that the Protestants teach that (d) Luther serm de Moyse the ten CoÌ„mandements appertayne not vnto Christians (e) D. VVillet Synops Papism pag. 504. And that the law remaineth stil impossible to be kept through the weakenes of our flesh neither doth God giue vs ability to keepe it c. Now doth not this doctrine open the passage to the breach of all the ten Commandements and this without controwle or condeÌ„ning the party so offending since it is not in his power to doe otherwyse In like sort the Protestants doctrine of Reprobation which is but the Negatiue to the Catholike doctrine of Vniuersality of Grace much discourageth men froÌ„ vertue and inuiteth them to vice since that man who is a reprobate let him labour neuer so much to please God with walking in a most vertuous and paynefull lyfe yet by this doctrine certaine it is that he shall be damned Againe the Protestants denyal of Purgatory as it freeth a man froÌ„ making any restitution or satisfaction for wrongs done to a third person so it much emboldeneth him to sinne assuring himselfe by this doctrine that notwithstaÌ„ding any enormous sinnes whatsoeuer committed by him he once dying â—n a true fayth there are no temporall punishments reserued for him after this lyfe I heere but briefly touch how â—he Protestants by their defence of â—heir Iustifying fayth excluding workes both from iustification merit do speake and write most â—asely and vnworthily of good workes For doth not (f) In praefat ad Rom. Illiricus â—hus traduce all good workes To hould that good workes are in respect but of presence necessary to saluation as some Protestants do hould is a papisticall errour Yea he further most impiously enlargeth himselfe saying (g) Vide Art colloq Aldeburg pag. 120. sest 11. Good workes are not only not necessary to saluation but hurtfull to it And D. Whitakers speaking particulerly of Virginity doth thus disualew it (h) Contra Camp rat 8. Virginity is not simply good but after a certayne manner And of fasting D. Willet thus teacheth (i) Synops pag. 241. Neyther is God better worshipped by eating or not eating Thus farre to shew that