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
these former doctrines of the Protestants animate mans will most forcibly to all Sardanapalisme and sensuality and beget a certayne incuriouâ— and negligent torpour slowneâ— in the soule eyther for practising vertue or auoyding of sinne Foâ— who obserueth not that the will iâ— faster or slower mooued to good or euil by how much it is peyzed more heauily or lightly with the pullies or weights of the hope of a future good or feare of a future euill But to proced further As these former negatiue Theses of Protestants do incline the will to all turpitude in maÌ„ners consequentâ—y worke in the will that which in â—ts owne Nature is nothing but meerely negatiue so vpon iust examination we shall finde that the first broachers and inuentours of them were men of most flagitious and wicked conuersation so sucking their owne venome out of â—heir owne doctrine For greater contracting of which poynt I will â—nsist in the foure Cardinall as I may terme them and prime Protestants of this age by whome we may well coniecture the like in other more obscure ProtestaÌ„ts for we read that If the eye be wicked then all the body shal be darke Matth. 1.5 Now in the displaying heerof I will forbeare all testimonies of Catholikes agaynst theÌ„ since they would be presumed as ouer partiall in their Censures but will rest eyther in their owne writings or coÌ„fessions of their learned ProtestaÌ„ts their acknowledged brethreÌ„ of the Gospel These foure chiefe Protestants shall be Luther Zwinglius Caluin Beza men who aboue all others haue much spread and dilated this negatiue faith of Protestancy in whome concerning morality you shal find litle of the Gospell though they vanted much of their professing the Gospell And first to begin with Luther Touching faith Luther thus teacheth (k) Luth. tom 1. propè finem Faith vnlesse it be without the least good workes doth not iustify it is not faith Which very saying D. Couel acknowledgeth as spoken by Luther tearmeth it Harsh (l) D. Couel in his defence of Hooker printed 1603. pag. 41. iustly called in questioÌ„ by the Church of Rome CoÌ„cerning mariage or diuorce Luthâ—r thus writeth Si (m) Luth. serm de Matrins This sentence as spoken by Luther is acknoledged by D. Whit. cont CaÌ„p rat 8. nolit vxor aut non possit veniat ancilla If the wife will not or cannot perform the act of mariage let the mayd come And as touching Luthers own licentious and goatish conuersation in manners want of chastity heare his owne wordes deliuered of himselfe Nothing (n) Luth. in prouerb 31. Addeth this amoâ—ous ryme in Dutch signifying as it is heâ—r set downe in the text is more sweet or louing vpon earth then is the loue of a womaÌ„ if a man can obtayn it And againe As (o) Luth. tom 5. Wittenb serm de Matrim fol. 119. it is not in my power that I should be no man so it is not in my power I should be without a woman And yet more I (p) Luther tom episto latinar fol. 334. ad Philippum am burned with the great flame of my vntamed flesh c. Eight dayes are now past wherin I neyther did wryte pray nor study being vexed partly with temptations of the flesh partly with other trouble And finally (q) Luther in Colloq Mensal fol. 526. vide fol. 400. I am almost madd through the rage of lust and desire of women But I will cease to stirre further in this filthy puddle of Luthers sensuality lust and will end with him in setting down the saying of Benedictus Morgensternensis a Protestant Writer who reports of the Caluinists that when they at any tyme would giue assent to prouocation of Nature satisfy their lust they were not ashamed to say amoÌ„g themselues Hodie (r) In tract de Eccles p. 221. Lutheranice viuemus To day we will liue Lutheran-like Thus they vsing the name of Luther as a Motto the more fully to expresse the sensuall deportment of Luther To come in this next place to Swinglius the second Arch of the ProtestaÌ„t Church in her first erecting in the dayes of Luther First touching his doctrine concerning good workes a vertuous life for the more depressing and vnderualewing therof Swinglius teacheth that the promises of eternall lyfe made to theÌ„ in Scripture are only (s) Swingl tom 1. printed 1581. de prouident Dei f. 137. Hyperbolical or traÌ„scending the truth Touching God being the Authour of sin Swinglius thus writeth (t) Swingl tom 1. de de prouid fol. 3â—6 That the theefe is enforced to sinne That (u) Swing vbi supra God mooueth the Theefe to kill (x) Swingl vbi supra That the Theefe killeth God procuring him That (y) Vbi supra fol. 366 Dauids adultery pertayned to God as Authour (x) Swingl vbi supra fol. 365. Finally that z sinning agaynst the law we are not Authours but Gods Instruments A point so euident confessed that (a) In his Absurda absurdorum c. printed 1606 cap. 5. de praedest fo 3. 4. Grawerus Rector of the Protestant Vniuersity of Islebium coÌ„demneth Swinglius of this most blasphemous doctrine of God being the Authour of sinne Now to come to Swinglius his deportment and cariage in manners (b) The title of Swinglius other eyght Ministers supplication for wyues is this Pietate prudentia insigni Heluetiorum Reipublicae Huldericus Swinglius alijque EuaÌ„gelica doctrinae Ministri gratiam paâ—em à Deo Extat in tom 1. fol. 110 Swinglius with some other Ministers in Switzerland wherin they then liued maketh supplication to that State that they may be suffered to marry take wyues in these wordes following (c) Vbi supra fo 115 VVe earnestly request that the vse of Mariage be not denyed vs who feeling the infirmity of the flesh perceaue that the gift of Chastity is not giuen vs by God c. libidinis aestum in nobis feruere negare non possumus cum huius ipsius opera nos coraÌ„ Ecclesijs infames reddiderunt we cannot deny but the heate of lust boyleth in vs in so much that our actios in that kind haue made vs infamous among the Professours of our owne Churches And further (d) Vbi upra VVe desire to marry least the Soules committed to our charge diutius offendaÌ„tur should be any longer offended And yet more (e) Vbi supra fol. 119 VVe haue proued that the weakenes of our flesh hath been the cause proh dolor O for griefe of our often falling And finally (f) Vbi supra fol. 12â— we haue burned pro pudor O for shame that we haue committed many things vnseemely By this heer set downe the Reader may take a scantling of Swinglius who was the chiefe of these supplicating Ministers for wiues and how he was wholy deuoted to lust sensuality In this next place occurreth Caluin from whose
the nearest definition or rather description is to pencill it out in these wordes Protestancy is a Religion which consisteth in the denyall of the Reall presence denyall of the Sacrifice of the Masse denyall of freewill denyall of Purgatory and so in the deniall of the many other Articles iointly denyed by the Protestants But here againe this definition is most defectiue for heer also the differentia constitutiua which should constitute Protestancy and withall distinguish it from other Religions is wanting first because Negations and such is the differentia heer supposed cannot coÌ„stitute any thing for only Entia and Entia bare negations are not giue a constitution and being to Entia Agayne the presumed differentia in this definition to wit the denyall of the Real presence denyall of freewil c. stretcheth it selfe by way of application to other Religions aswell as to Protestancy for the Turkes the Iewes and the Heathens deny these former points with as stroÌ„g a bent of contradiction as the Protestant doth and so accordingly conspire vnanimously with the Protestant in such denyals Thus then we see that this Imaginary differentia in this second definition is ouer generall and of too great a latitude and doth not distinguish the Protestant from Turkes Iewes and Heathens Well then to contract this point seeing euery thing that hath any reality of being can haue its nature and Essence truly dissected by definition or description And seeing Protestancy cannot be defined for how can that be called a formed and positiue fayth which in it selfe is meer priuatiue then followeth it that it cannot be knowne what Protestancy in it self truly is and if Protestancy cannot be knowne what it is then is it to be reputed a Non-entity Yet to close vp this Chapter and in some sort to be officious seruiceable to our Aduersaries my definition of Protestancy shall for the tyme be this to wit a Religion which incorporates in it selfe the Negatiue doctrines of the Ancient stigmaticall Heretikes as heerafter will be demoÌ„strated or if you will A Religion whose definition consisteth in that it cannot be defined And thus Protestancy only is in that it is not That Protestancy consisteth of doctrines meerely contradictory in themselues and that therefore Protestancy is a Non-entity CHAP. IX PHilosophy instructeth vs that what truly implyeth in it self an absolute contradiction the same hath no Entity or being The reason whereof is this what implyeth a Contradiction supposeth a Being and a Not-being of a thing and all at one and the same tyme from whence then this absurdity would follow to wit that if such a thing could be then could a thing be whose being should consist in a Not-being and consequently should be an Irreality and nothing An vnwarrantable errour since God to whome it is more easy to doe then not to doe cannot effect or make any such thing for euery thing that is ought in some sort to beare a likenes to him from whome it proceedeth But that which hath no Being and in it selfe is nothing cannot beare any resemblance to him who giueth life Being to euery thing (a) Act. 17. In ipso viuimus mouemur sumus This Philosophicall Axiome extendeth it selfe not only to the existence or want of existence in things corporeall or material but also to the Being or not-being in things speculatiue immateriall I meane in doctrines and other suâ—h Theories of the vnderstaÌ„ding Since then it wil easily be proued that Protestancy in many poynts is compounded of seuerall contradictory and opposite doctrines Tenets such that though all may be false consequently haue no reall Being yet that of necessity the one part must want all reality of being for its owne supporting then vnauoydably it may be concluded that Protestancy as coÌ„sisting of such irreconciliable doctrines wanteth all reality is in it selfe and is but a Non-entity I will exemplify this in a poynt or two wherein the Protestants agree only in disagreeing The first shal be touching the Nature of the Sacraments All or most of the Protestants do conspiringly deny our Catholike doctrine therein in teaching that they coÌ„ferre grace but after their vnanimous denyall thereof then they presently by imbracing of contrary doctrines dissent amongst themselues like lines which once meeting in one common Center instantly breake of and runne seuerall wayes for â—winglius teacheth that the Sacraments in generall are bare and naked externall signes and is therefore condemned by (b) Lib. de Caena Do. lib. 4. Instit cap. 15. sect 1. Caluin but Caluin by ascribing more to the Sacraments then to externall signes is by way of retaliation condemned by (c) Epist. ad quandaÌ„ Germania ciuitatem fol. 196. Swinglius In like sort The Protestants do disauow all iustification by workes yet most of them hould that good workes ought necessarily to accompany a iustifying fayth But to crosse this Luther after he once became setled in the lees of sensuality thus writeth (d) So saith Luther vpon the Galat Englished in cap. 1. It is impiety to affirme that fayth except it be adorned with Charity iustifyeth not Yea further he sayth (e) Luther tom 1. pro. pos 3. fides nisi sit sine c. except fayth be without good workes it iustifyeth not c. O the calamity of these Caniculaâ— and vnlucky dayes in which eueâ— doctrinally and religiously as may say is exiled all practise oâ— Religion and good workes Againe touching the Real presence in the Eucharist all the Sacramentaries disclayme from our doctrine therein neuertheles diuers eminent Protestants as (f) lib. 5. Eccles Polic. sect 67. M. Hooker (g) Contra Duraeum pag. 168. D. VVhitakers and (h) Caluin lib. 4. Inctit cap. 17 sect 7. Caluin himselfe do teach the Manducation of Christs true and Reall body in the Eucharist by the mouth of fayth Yet is this doctrine who by disallowed by (i) In his Epistles annexed to his CommoÌ„ places englished epist. 25. Peter Martyr though Peter Martyr be therefore reciprocally controuled by Bucer in his Scrip. Anglic. pag. 548. as inclining to vse his owne wordes too much to Popery It is in like sort condemned for the most part by our (k) In their ChristiaÌ„ letter to M. Hooker English Puritanes Now to turne our Pen a litle backe vâ—on these three former points in â—he first we find these two contraâ—ictory positions The Sacraments â—re only bare externall signes And â—he Sacraments are more then externall signes In the second Good workes are necessary to accompany fayth And Good workes are not necessary to accompany faith In the third the true and reall body of Christ is taken in the Eucharist with the mouth of fayth And the true and reall body of Christ is not taken in the Eucharist with the mouth of fayth Now what more true Contradiction can there be in Positions Tenets of fayth then these are seeing as the Nature of Contradictions require they all