Ibid. p. â—60 It is great probability with them meaning with the Catholikes that so we make our selues answerable to fynd out a distinct and seuerall Church from the Apostles age till this present els needs we must acknowledge that our Church is sprung of late or since theirs Thus these Protestants for the vphoulding of their own Church are forced to teach that the Catholike Church the Protestant are but one and the same Church Now if any Protestant seeking to redeeme his Church from such dangers as are in this Treatise threatned to fall vpon it as besides Inuisibility and want of Succession of Pastours the blemish of being an Irreality and Non-entity c. should for his last despairing refuge answere with the former Authours that the Protestant Church and the Roman Church are but one that seeing the Roman Church hath euer beene in being and Visible that therefore the Protestant Church as being the same Church with the Roman is heerby freed from all those spots and blemishes of Inuisibility want of Succession Irreality want of true subsistence c. heer in this Treatise aboue inforced Therefore to preuent all such poore and needy tergiuersatioÌ„ for falshood would gladly shroud it selfe vnder the wings of truth I will heer discouer the absurdity of this their supposall by demoÌ„strating that the Catholike Church and the Protestant Church cannot be one and the same Church so certaine it is that there is no CoÌ„munion betweene Christ and Beliall And first If we take into our consideration what it is which maketh the true Church for speaking of the Church of God we must needs vnderstand thereby the true Church seeing God hath no false Church for that sentence of S. Cyprian Cyprian lib. de Vâ—ita â— Eccles is true adulterari non potest sponsa Christi incorrupta est pudica To this is replyed that men professing the truth of Christian Religion make this Church Well then if so it can be proued that the Catholikes and the ProtestaÌ„ts do maintaine such contrary Articles of fayth as that of necessity the one part must be false consequeÌ„tly not to be belieued by the Members of Christs Church theÌ„ followeth it that these different Professours of them I meane the Catholikes and the Protestants cannot make One and the same Church And to come to this point though such disparity of fayth hath beene proued to be eueÌ„ among the Protestants themselues aboue in this Treatise But if one Protestant thinke another Protestant to be for his supposed false fayth no member of Christs Church but an Heretike then with much more reason we may pronounce the same betweene the Catholike and the Protestant Now this poynt taketh its more euident demonstration of proofe from this one consideration to wit that the Catholike and the Protestant doe not belieue one the same Creed If then they both do not belieue one and the same Creed and yet the Creed is but an abstract or Compendium of the true fayth of christ can it be possibly coÌ„ceaued that the Catholicke and Protestant doe make one and the same Church But to descend to the Creed It is true that the Protestant Catholike doe in words recite one and the same Creed but seeing it is the intended sense of the holy Ghost in euery Article thereof and not the words which make the Creed it followeth that if the Catholike and Protestant doe belieue the sayd Articles of the Creed in a different or rather contrary sense that then they doe not belieue the Creed for to belieue the Creed in a false sense is not to belieue it all The Creed in this respect iustly challenging to it selfe that priuiledge which the holy Scripture doth of which S. Ierome thus writeth g S. Ierome in epist. ad Paulinâ—eâ—a Scripturae non in legendo sed in intelligendo consistunt That this they doe I wil exemplify in some Articles threof And to beginne with that first Article I belieue in God The Catholike belieues that his God no way formally cooperates with man to sin the Protestant belieues that his God (h) Beza in his display of Popish Preachers pag. â—02 Swingl tom 1 de prouident c. 6. fol. 365. Caluin Instit l. 1. c. 18. cooperateth forceth and impelleth a man to sinne as is aboue in this Treatise shewed The Catholike belieues that God wil not punish man for the not obseruing of such precepts which are not in mans power to obserue the Protestant belieues that it is not in our power to keepe the Ten Commandements and yet withall belieues that (i) D. Reynolds in his second Conclusion annexed to his Conference p. 697. God will punish man with euerlasting Torments for his not keeping of the sayd Ten Commandements Briefly the Catholike belieues that his God giues sufficient grace to all men that they may be saued The Protestants God decreeth diuers men without any respect or preuision of their workes to eternall damnation for thus Caluin writeth (k) Caluin Instit l. 3. c. â—2 See Willet Synops p. 554. affirming the same God doth ordayne by his Counsell that amoÌ„g men some be borne to eternall damnation from their nothers wombe Touching the Article of Iudging the quicke and the dead The Catholike belieues that Christ at his comming to IudgmeÌ„t will so iudge man as that his good workes receauing their force and vertue from Christs passion shal be rewarded The Protestant belieues that (l) Calu. in Antid Concil Trident. Kemnitius in Exam. Concil Trident. Christ will reward only a bare naked faith Touching that I belieue the Catholike Church The Catholike belieues this Church to be a society of men professing the present Romane fayth of which some are predestinated others reprobated The (m) Confess August art 7. Luth l. de Concil Eccles Calu. l 4. Instit Protestant belieues that his Church consisteth only of the Elect and faythfull and not of other sorts of men Touching the Article of the Communion of Saints The Catholike doth belieue such a Communion to be between the soules in heauen the soules in Purgatory and men liuing in this world as that the soules in Purgatory may be holpen by the praiers of the liuing the liuing may be holpen by the intercessioÌ„ of the Saints in heauen The Protestant denyeth (n) Brennus in Confess VVittenb c. de Purgat Calu. l. 3. Instit c. 5. sect 6. al such Communion betweene these seuerall parts of the Church Concerning the Article of forgiuenes of sinnes The Catholike belieues that actuall sinnes are forgiuen by the Sacrament of Pennance and that thereby the soule of man becommeth truly Iust in the sight of God obtayning by this meanes a true and Inherent Iustice The Protestant acknowledgeth not any Sacrament of Pennance neyther doth he acknowledge any reall and (o) Calu. l. 3. Instit c 12. Kemnit â—n Exam. Concil Trident. Inherent Iustice in man but only an imputatiue Iustice
this I say be true as is prooued to be in this Chapter what other inferēce can be made but that Protestancy and the Protestant Church for want of knowing and acknowledging what doctrines are Protestancy and what sorts of men are Protestants are in themselues but meer empty aëry conceyts and for want of all true and reall subsistence but a Non-Entity The Non-Entity of Protestancy demonstrated from that euery Protestant eyther in himselfe or in his Predecessours originally departed and came out from the Roman Catholike Church CHAP. XVI AN other Medium to proue that Protestancy is a meer Irreality or Non-Entity may be this Yf it can be proued that Protestancy is more late yong then the Catholike Religion is then followeth it that Protestancy cannot haue any true and reall Subsistence Fot if our Catholike Roman Religion had a being before Protestancy and that Protestancy did appeare long after and consisteth only in the denyall of most of the Articles of the Catholike Religion then followeth it vnauoydably that Protestancy is but an imaginary Conceyte or Fabricke of the imagination without any foundation of Being for seing the Catholike Fayth the Protestant Faith are directly contradictory oppositly repugnāt both of them cannot enioy a reall Being for if they could thē meer Contradictories this is denyed that it can be performed euen by Gods Power should enioy a true and Reall Being togeather Now that Protestancy is more late or of a newer date then the Roman Religion I thus proue There cannot any one Protestāt be alledged speaking of such Protestants as are out of Cōtrouersy and acknowledged for such both by Protestant and Catholike who was not eyther in himselfe or in his Forefathers first a Catholike who by dogmatizing some Protestant Opinions afore neuer generally taught did separate himselfe depart from the Cath. Church then afore in Being Of which sort of men these wordes in S. Iohn are vnderstood Exierūt ex nobis 1. Ioan. 2. The very stampe or signature of Innouatours in doctrine Let vs exemplify this in the first and chiefest Protestants I will begin with Ochinus so ascend higher This Ochinus who was a chiefe mā in disseminating of Protestancy in England in King Edwards dayes was first a (a) So saith Sleidan l. 9. at anno 1547. fol. 297. Monke and forsaking his Monastical life began to preach Protestancy (b) Osiander Cent. 16. l. 1. c. 33. Bucer was at the first also a Moke vpon his reading of Luthers booke of Vowes forsooke his Monastery married a womā Swinglius * So saith Hospiniā in hystor Sacram. fol. 22. was first a Catholike Priest publike Preacher at Tigure in Switzerlād Luther was a Priest an (c) In his Epist to his Father extat tom 2. Wittēberg printed 1568. fol. 269. Austin Friar vpō his first reuolt from the Papacy tooke to wife Caterine Bore as the whole world knoweth Now that there was no other Church in Being before Luthers Apostacy then the Roman Catholike Church appeareth from the liberal acknowledgmēt of the learned Protestāts For M. Perkins thus writes (d) In his Expositiō vpon the Creed p. 400. VVe say that before the dayes of Luther for the space of many hundred yeares an Vniuersall Apostasy so ouerspread the face of the Church that is was not then visible to the world And Doctour Iewell confesseth no lesse saying (e) In his Apolog. of the Church pant 4. c. 34. The truth was vnknowne at that tyme vnheard of when Martin Luther Hulderick Swinglius first came to the knowledge and preaching of the Gospell Yea Luther himself euen Thrasonically contesteth this poynt in these his words (f) Luther in epist ad Argentinens anno 1525. Christum à nobis primò vulgatum audemus gloriari so cleare it is that Luther was originally a Catholike and that at his first rising there was no Protestant Church in the world But to proceed further Husse was a Catholike Priest before his reuolt and wholy till that tyme imbraced the Catholike Fayth as (g) In Colloq de Antichristo Luther and (h) In Apocalip c. 11. p. 290. M. Fox do testify Ierome of Prague was first a Catholike and after became an Heretike who being at the Councell of Constance renounced openly his heresies but after apostating the second tyme he lost his lyfe VVicleff was first a Catholike Priest and Parson of Lutterworth in Licestershyre and first abandoned his Religion because he was depriued of a Benefice by the Arch-bishop of Canterbury as (i) In his Annals of England printed 1591. pa. 425. Stow recordeth VValdo was a rich man of Lyons in France and originally a Catholike of whome D. Humfrey thus writeth (k) In Iesuitism part 2. rat 3. pag. 270 he did forsake all things that being poore he might better follow Christ and the Euangelicall perfections The VValdensis who were deriued of VValdo and thereupon so called were an Order of begging Fryars and did professe as the said D. Hunfrey writeth (l) vbi supra a kind of Monasticall lyfe And of the VValdenses doctrine in particular Caluin thus writeth (m) Epist 244. The forme of the Confession of the VValdenses doth inuolue all those in eternall damnation who do not confesse that the bread is truly become the body of Christ They also euer taught seauen Sacraments Vowes single lyfe and Purgatory (n) In tractat de Eccles pag. 124. as u Morgensternensis a Lutheran writeth The Albigenses were the same men with the Waldenses and therfore were originally Catholikes for thus D. Abbots writeth thereof (o) In his second part of the defence printed 1607. pog 55. Thus Lyonists or poore men of Lyons and Waldenses or Albigenses were the same men but diuersly and vpon diuers occasions tearmed by the Romish Synagogue Berengarius was Archdeacon of Angiers in France and therefore it followeth that he was Catholicke till his denyall of the doctrine of Transubstantiation and yet after he abandoning his Heresy dyed (p) As witnesseth Fox in Act. Mon. pag. 13. Catholyke Now to rise to higher tymes The like may be sayd of the auncient Nouelists broaching some poynts of Protestancy As Aerius denying prayer for the dead Manicheus freewill Iouinian teaching Virginity to be no better thē mariage Donatus denying the Visibility of the Church and all others of those tymes without exception From which men are descended the Aerians Manicheans Iouinians c. taking their denomination from the former men according to that Chrpsost Homil. 3. in act Apolog Prout Haeresiarchae Nomen ita Secta vocatur All which men were originally Catholikes and most of them Priests and vpō their broaching of these their particular opinions of Protestancy did depart from their knowne common Mother then in Being That these men and all such others of those tymes were originally Catholykes and departed frō a more auncient Church by forging these their
extinguishment of al reall positiue Articles of ChristiaÌ„ faith and Religion That the Heathen Philosopher conspireth with the Protestant in the denyall of most if not all of such points of Religion wherin the Protestant by his like denyall of them differeth from the Catholike CHAP. VI. IT will not be heer I hope impertinent to shew in this place how the Heathen Philosopher coÌ„parteth in the most points for I will not say in all with the ProtestaÌ„ts in which points the Protestants do differ by their negatiue Fayth from the Catholike fayth From which being once declared it will appeare that if he Heathen Philosopher hath no true and positiue Fayth of Christian Religion who penetrateth no further then into the Nature impressed in thinges which nature is the very Art or Organ of God then may it be deseruedly called in question whether the Protestant Fayth hath a-any reality or formed being in it selfe And thus may falshood be controwled by the patrons of falshood And to exemplify this assumed taske in most of the chiefest Articles of the Protestant Negatiue Fayth The Protestant acknowledgeth not any true real Sacrifice to be in these dayes the HeatheÌ„ Philospher agrees with him therein The Protestant acknowledgeth not Freewill in man the Heathen teacheth the same by maintaining of his Stoicall fatum or destiny The Protestant denyeth Lymbus Patrum Purgatory and Inuocation of Saints The Heathen being demaunded of these points would answere they are but meer dreames or fictions The ProtestaÌ„t denyeth all merit of workes or Iustification by workes much more Euangelicall Counsells The Heathen as not knowing what these things meane disclaymes from the same The Protestant taketh away Vniuersality of grace purchased by our Sauiours passion The Heathen doth the like since he is ignorant what Grace is and reiecteth our Sauiours passion The Protestant teacheth the Impossibility of keeping the Commaundements the Heathen not acknowledging the sayd Commandements but guided only by the streame of Nature without Grace must therefore of necessity deny the possibility of obseruing them The Protestant maintaineth that Christ from his Natiuity was as man not free from all ignorance and full of all knowledge the Heathen as not belieuing in Christ must needs iustify the same The Protestant denyeth all reuerence and bowing to the name of IESVS the Heathen doth the same The Protestant denyeth that the Sacraments do conferre Grace the Heathen acknowledgeth no Sacraments and therfore no grace to be deriued to man by his participating of them To conclude the Protestant denyeth all Monachisme Vowes the necessity of Baptisme and diuers other Affirmatiue Positions aboue recited and taught by the Catholike Church Will the Heathen Philosopher think you acknowledge as true any of the sayd Catholike points Thus we see that where the ratio formalis of Protestancy consisteth in absolutely denying the Affirmatiue positions of the Catholikes this vnbelieuing Naturalist or Heathen Philosopher by his like denyall of the said points entreth into a most straite league and intercourse of Friendship with the Protestant therein And from this great conformity of negatiue Fayth between the Heathen and the Protestant it ryseth that diuers Protestants do wholy gentilize heerein granting Saluation and eternall happines to Heathens dying Heathens Thus for example we find no lesse an obscure Protestant then Swinglius to write in this sort (a) Zwing in l epist Swingl Oecolamp lib. 1. pag. 39. Ethnicus si piam mentem domi fouerit Christianus est etiamsi Christum ignoret And thereupon Swinglius concludeth particulerly that (b) Swing tom 2. fol. 118. 559. Hercules Theseus Socrates Aristides c. are now in heauen A poynt so confessed by Swinglius that Echarius a learned Protestant thus acknowledgeth of Swinglius quod (c) In his Fasâ—iculus CoÌ„trouers printed Lipsiae an 1009. cap. 19. p. 427. Socrates Aristides Numa Camillus Hercules Scipiones Catones alij Gentiles comparticipes sint vitae eternae scribit quidem Swinglius ad Regem Galliae quem defendunt Tigurim Bullingerus Gualterus Hardenburgius c. That these named Protestants I meane I (d) Gualterus in his Apolog. p o Swiâ—g fol. 27. praefix 1. tom oper Swingl Gualterus (e) Bulling in coÌ„fes Eccles Tigurin Bullin in his preface of allowaÌ„ce to Swingl his exposition fidei ad Regem fol. 559. Bullinger (f) Simlerus in vita Bullingeri Simlerus the Tigurine Deuines did defend with Swinglius the saluauation of the Heathens dying Heathens appeareth further besides from the testimony of the forsaid Echarius euen from the references heer set downe Now where the Protestant to vindicate his profession from reproach and contumely may reply in answere heerto that seeing most of the poynts aboue rehearsed do presuppose beliefe in Christ in which beliefe the ProtestaÌ„t doth differ from the HeatheÌ„ Philosopher the Heathen not belieuing in him it therefore must of necessity follow that the Heathen Philosopher as not belieuing in Christ must therefore not belieue the former Articles which depend of the belieuing in Christ I vrge this answere is impertinent for I doe not heer insist in the reason why the Heathen Philosopher houldeth the negatiue part in the former points but I insist onely in auerring that the Protestant doth agree with the Heathen Philosopher in the denyall of the sayd points affirmed by the Catholike Neither auaileth it any thing to say that thogh the Protestant houldeth the negatiue part in the former conclusions yet that he belieueth with the Catholike in Christ that he houldeth with him there is Grace that ther are SacrameÌ„ts that there is Scripture c. though in the maÌ„ner or some other circumstance accompanying them he differeth froÌ„ the Catholike This solueth not the doubt First because we obserue that Swinglius those other Protestants aboue cited do not exact any articulate beliefe in Christ at all as necessary to saluation since we see they are not afrayd to indenize HeatheÌ„s for good Christians SecoÌ„dly in that I restraine this my Assertion of coÌ„paring the Heathen Philosopher with the Protestant only in those poynts wherein the Protestant differeth from the Catholike But in the former poynts it is certayne that the Heathen agreeth with the Protestant and the Protestant as maintayning the Negatiue differeth from the Catholike defeÌ„ding in them the Affirmatiue Againe where the Protestant agreeth with the Catholike for example that Christ is the Sauior of the world that there is Scripture Grace Sacraments Baptisme Eucharist c. these Articles in general the Protestant houldeth not as he is a ProtestaÌ„t but only as he is a Christian as in the front of this Treatise is manifested For quatenus he is a Protestant that is quatenus he is a man differing from the Catholike he euer houldeth the Negatiue And euen where he houldeth the Affirmatiue foundation in some of the sayd points as that Christ is the Sauiour of the world that there is Diuine Scripture Grace Sacraments Baptisme Eucharist c.