Protestancy to be embrac'd, or, A new and infallible method to reduce Romanists from popery to Protestancy a treatise of great use to all His Majesties subjects, and necessary to prevent error and popery / by David Abercromby, D., lately converted, after he had profess'd near nineteen years Jesuitism and popery.

SECT. I. Their Faith and Doctrine.

1. THeir Faith is so blind, that I have heard many of them say, if a Ge∣neral Council had defin'd white to be black, they would believe it, whereby you see they are disposed to admit of any error, if it be authoriz'd by a General Council, though the infalli∣bility thereof be no point of their Faith, as I have proved

evidently in the foregoing Article.

2. They believe Baptism absolutely necessary to Salva∣tion, and none a true and re∣al one, if the Minister when he pronounceth the words intends not to Baptize, which no doubt happens frequently, since his intention may be easily diverted to his other designs and affairs: Let all the World judge if people thus principled can enjoy a true repose of mind or peace of Conscience, the only fore∣tast we have in this life, of that to come: For how can they know assuredly, whether the Minister or Priest really intended to Baptize them or not, and so they may doubt

if they be Christians? for such they grant none is to be accounted without true Bap∣tism; and of this they can have no certainty, because they are still uncertain of the Ministers intention, judg'd by them so necessary to the validity of this Sacrament, that if he intended only the meer pronounciation of the words, I Baptize thee in the name of the Father, &c. The Baptism could be no more a true one than a bare, frivolous, and insignificant Ceremony; what trouble then and turmoil of Spirit they must needs perpetually wrestle with, while Prote∣stants as to this point enjoy a perfect Tranquility, holding

Baptism independent on the Ministers good or ill will, ma∣lice or intention, provided he pronounce seriously the words, and set form of Bap∣tism, which we cannot be but sure of.

3. I was once eye-witness to the cruel torture of Con∣science, a Romanist suffered upon a doubt of his Baptism, occasion'd by this Romish Doctrine: We were in the same Ship together upon Sea, press'd by a furious Storm to think on what was our only concern in that conjuncture: In the mean time this Gentle∣man showing by his melan∣choly looks the inward di∣stemper of his Soul; cryes aloud, as if he had been be∣side

himself, he fear'd to be damn'd: I question'd him on what grounds he spoke so rashly; because, said he, I know not whether I be Bap∣tiz'd or not; I doubt if the Priest had any such intention when he pronounc'd the words commonly used in Baptism; I told him whate∣ver I thought fittest to con∣vince his understanding and quiet his Conscience, but could not prevail, because he knew the Council of Trent teacheth the Ministers inten∣tion to be absolutely necessa∣ry to the existency of Bap∣tism.

4. On the same grounds they may doubt if their Priests can absolve, and be truly

Priests, because in their per∣swasion they are no Priests without the intention of the Bishop that ordain'd them, which perhaps he had not when he utter'd the set form of Ordination. This minds me of a Bishop lately de∣ceas'd in France, who con∣fess'd at his last hour he had ordain'd many, but ever without intention to ordain any: I was intimately ac∣quainted with one ordain'd by the same Prelate, and I am fully perswaded if he were advertis'd of this last confession of his, he would scruple to continue a moment in the function of Priest∣hood.

5. Who can relish, if he hath any sentiment of true Piety, what they teach of their Purgatory and purging fires. This Doctrine flatters sinners in their imperfections, causeth them to live more loosely than otherwise they would do, to make little scru∣ple of these sins they call ve∣nial, and never eternally pu∣nish'd: On this account they are not so apprehensive of these Everlasting▪ Torments we should ever remember of, when we are sollicited to sin, if no higher motive can with∣draw us from it: Hell I say enters not so deeply into their thoughts because they rely on this third place: And the worst of them all after an ab∣solution

got from a Priest, hopes to go to Heaven, if not streight, at least a little about by Purgatory: The Protestants who believe no middle place after death, out of Heaven or Hell, walk more cautiously, fear more God's dreadful but just Judg∣ments, certain if they dye in the Lord, they shall rest from their labours, if in sin they shall be liable to his wrath for ever.

6. The Scripture is the true Spiritual book we should still have in our hands.

Nocturnâ versare manu ver∣sare diurnâ.

Here we are to gather that

Spiritual Manna to nourish not our Bodies but our Souls, while we travel through the Wilderness of this wild World. These sacred Wri∣tings are capable to make us wise unto Salvation; search the Scriptures saith S. John, for in them ye think ye have Eternal Life: Yet the Roma∣nists deprive the people of this Spiritual Food, forbid∣ing them severely to read the Holy Scriptures, as if they were more hurtful than pro∣fitable; hence 'tis they live in a deep ignorance of all true Christian Duty, in indif∣ferency, and lukewarmness, without relish of heavenly things, without true devoti∣on, which is never more stir∣red

up, than when we hear God speaking in the secret of our hearts by the Divine O∣racles of his Holy Word.

7. They cause the People to contemn or at least to have less veneration for Di∣vine Scriptures, by teaching they contain not all things necessary to Salvation, they are obscure, they are imper∣fect. They seem sometimes to question their Divine Origi∣nal, when they ask how we are sure they are inspir'd by the Holy Ghost; as if that were not known to say no more by the Air, Majesty, and Simplicity of expression, proper to God only, as we know the Kings Letters and Commands to his Subjects by

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

his Seal and proper expressi∣ons, none but the King ut∣tering himself after that man∣ner: So the Holy Scriptures being as God's Patents and Letters to us, we need not enquire from whom they are, let us only disclose them, and we shall instantly know their Divine Original, quasi dei sigillo, as by God's own Seal and Characters proper to him only, without having recourse to the pretended in∣fallible decisions of General Councils, as Romanists do, who must run back to the Scriptures again to prove these decisions infallible, and so, in circuitu ambulant, they turn round in a circle without advancing one step. But 'tis

not so much my design to dis∣pute and quarrel with the Romanists, as to go on peace∣ably and in the Spirit of Chri∣stian Charity, pointing out as with the finger, the great Obstacles to perfection they meet with, by following blindly the Maxims of Pope∣ry: I add only here their Prayers in an unknown Tongue unfruitful as S. Paul saith, to the understanding, is not a small let to Piety and Devotion; what Spiritual Consolation can the ignorant sort reap at Mass, or as they call it, Divine Service, by hearing the Priest praying they know not what? unless they hold against common sence and reason, that igno∣rance

is the Mother of Piety and Devotion.

8. Their Doctrine of Transubstantiation, is on se∣veral accounts dangerous and ensnaring.

First, It destroys all evi∣dence grounded on the ex∣perimental knowledge of our senses, and makes void the proof Christ made use of to his Apostles, in aim to convince them he was not a Spirit; Handle me, sayes he, and see, for a spirit hath not Flesh and Bones as ye see me have, which can be no conviction to Ro∣manists, who both tast, han∣dle, and see bread in the Eu∣charist; if they will trust their own senses as our Saviour in

a not unlike case desir'd his Disciples to trust to theirs, yet deny flatly what they see, tast, and handle, to be Bread, against their own and the ex∣perience of all men not blind of both eyes: Our Saviour's Proof, I say, that he was not a Spirit, shall never influence a Papist to Conviction, for though the Apostles could both see and handle our Sa∣viour's Body, nevertheless 'tis no necessary inference by their Doctrine of Transub∣stantiation, that Christ's Bo∣dy was there; may they not say the Apostles could touch, handle, and see the appear∣ance only thereof, as they handle, and see the accidents of Bread, and not really

Bread in the Eucharist in their opinion of this Sacrament, which taketh quite away the force of Christ's argument grounded on the meer Te∣stimony of our senses and fa∣vours, the Marcionists deny∣ing he had ever a true and re∣al body?

I shall say yet something more surprizing, but no less true than what I have said be∣fore. This Doctrine of Tran∣substantiation. 1. Establisheth that old and odd fancy of some doting Philosophers, who doubted of all things how evident soever. 2. 'Tis evidently destructive to the whole body of Christian Re∣ligion: In order to prove apodictically these two Pro∣positions,

I must suppose a Third one, as a self-evident Principle, and whence they both flow as from their only source, That our Senses in the Eucharist, are deceiv'd in and about their proper object; which I think can be denyed by no Romanists, since they confess, though they see all the appearances of true Bread, that nevertheless there is no such substance in the Eucharist, but the Body and Blood of Christ, under the veils of Bread and Wine: I see nothing, I tast nothing, I touch nothing in a Conse∣crated Wafer, but what my senses are sensible of in an unconsecrated one, but saith the Romanist, I must not

stand in this case to the judg∣ment of my senses, what I see, touch, and tast, after the Consecration, is no more in reality Bread, what-ever the constant and experimen∣tal knowledge of our Senses teach us to the contrary; they will grant then I hope they are deceiv'd, and mistake their own proper object; but perhaps because they foresee the dangerous conse∣quence of such a Concession, some will be apt to run to a School-distinction, in aim to defend with a show of rea∣son this self-evident falshood, that our Senses in the case here handled are not decei∣ved as to their proper Ob∣ject: They may distinguish, I

fancy, two sort of Objects, a Mediate one, and another Immediate, the Immediate one is, the colour, shape, quantity, and other accidents or appearances of Bread, the Mediate one is the substance it self; our Senses, say they, mistake not the former, be∣cause the accidents are the same both before and after the Consecration, but sure I am, they mistake the latter, it being now by their Princi∣ples invisibly changed into the Body of Christ: This di∣stinction then cannot serve their turn. Let them torture their discursive faculty never so much, they shall never be able to prove that our Senses are not truly deceiv'd, re∣presenting

to us as Bread, what really, if we believe the Romanists, is not Bread. I come now to the Conclusions springing naturally from this granted Principle: If I mind to play the Pyrrhonian, and doubt of every thing I have from the Romish Transubstan∣tiation, a ground whereon to build this extravagancy; whither-soever I direct my sight, I can ascertain you of nothing that my eye sees: I enter into a Garden, and there I behold here Lillies, and there Roses, I smell them, I touch them, and yet I may question the truth of this, and doubt if I see any such thing, what if the red of the Roses and the white of

the Lillies be now by an Eu∣charistick-like Miracle the covertures of some other sub∣stances that are neither Roses nor Lillies; so perhaps 'tis not a Rose that I smell, a Lilly that I see, Fire that I feel, an Apple that I tast, a Trumpet that I hear, but some other substances in their shape, and cloath'd with their Garments: As 'tis not Bread that I see in the Eucharist, but another substance, to wit Christ's Body and Blood un∣der the accidental parts of Bread and Wine; what do we know but the whole visi∣ble Mass of this World, and all the Objects of our Senses are nothing else but meer ac∣cidents and Superficial Re∣presentations

of things that perhaps were and now have no foundation in being, or never were, but have ever been supplied by God's infi∣nite power? Thus the Pyr∣rhonian Triumphs upon the same ground whereon the Romanist settles that strange Doctrine of Transubstantia∣tion, while the whole Body of Christian Religion is as it were a flote and carried too and fro by the wind of this uncertain Doctrine. For if our Senses may mistake their own proper object, as confes∣sedly the Romanist sayes they do in the Eucharist, our Faith is nothing else but fancy and uncertainty: Comes it not by hearing? Fides exau∣ditu?

if than one sence may be deceiv'd, why may not likewise the other? What I see in the Eucharist is not Bread; though it appears to be such, perhaps what I hear is not the true Word of God, though it shine with all the Characters thereof: In fine, since our Senses are capable of an errour relating to their proper object, an eye-wit∣ness now can be no witness at all, or at least no Convicti∣on: To what purpose then did our Saviour show him∣self after his Resurrection so often, and to so many in the day of his glorious Ascension? In promptu causa est, the An∣swer is at hand, to no purpose, if our Senses could mistake

their proper object, and what so many eye-witnesses saw and judg'd to be Christ, could have been his meer shape and figure, as the Marci∣onist pretends, with a clear advantage over and from the Romanists whose Doctrine he may easily make use of in defence of his error and He∣resie. To conclude, if what appears to the eyes of all men to be Bread, is no such thing, what has been sounded in the ears of all the World, from Father to Son as a truth may prove a falshood? Our ears being no less apt to be im∣pos'd upon than our eyes. Which looks like a mortal blow to all tradition of equal authority with Divine Scrip∣tures,

and I discover not yet how the Romanist can shun it: For since he grants we may all, and have been from the Cradle of the Church, mistaken in what we see, may not we likewise be deceiv'd in what we have heard from our Fathers, and they in what they have heard from their Fore-runners, &c. And the rather that an ear-witness is not so much to be credited as he that has seen: You judge by this discourse, what ex∣treams these are forc'd into, who deny on so slight grounds the greatest and most sensible evidence, which is that of our senses: But Christ's Word, sayes the Ro∣manist, is my security; he as∣sures

us the Bread is chang'd into his body, I enquire no more: Who speaks so for∣gets, or knows not what is said elsewhere, litera occidit, the letter killeth, and the literal Sense is an occasion to several of gross errors and pi∣tiful mistakes: Christ is cal∣led a Door, a Rock, a Wine Tree, a Lyon, &c. We would be look'd upon as be∣sides our selves if we assent∣ed to all this, as interpreted in the literal sence, and ac∣cording to the bare sound of the words: For as the lite∣ral sence of such and the like expressions, involves not only obvious implicancys and ma∣nifest absurdities, but more∣over was constantly contra∣dicted

by the experimental knowledge of such as were so happy as to see Christ, e∣ven so in our case, these words, this is my Body, if under∣stood conformably to the mute Letter, both represent to our mind a World of ille∣gal, absur'd, and irrational inferences, and are besides contradicted through all A∣ges by the constant experi∣ence of all seeing and feel∣ing men: Let no Man ne∣vertheless imagine we ground our mysteries on the Testi∣mony of our Senses; we only say nothing can be suppos'd as a mystery that is point blank against the evidence of sence and infallible experi∣ence, which cannot be retort∣ed

against the mystery of the Trinity, for though we nei∣ther see it nor feel it, yet our Senses shew nothing to us e∣vidently destructive to it, and on this account this my∣stery is not against but above the reach both of Sense and Reason.

Secondly, This Doctrine inclineth the meaner capaci∣ties to idolatry, and the sharper wits to Hypocrisie and Dissimulation: The com∣mon People, because incapa∣ble to distinguish the appear∣ance of Bread they see, from the Body of Christ they see not, and being taught to a∣dore him hidden thus under the veils of Bread and Wine, are apt to, and no doubt

do frequently adore the acci∣dents they see, which they call sometimes blasphemous∣ly, God, yea say commonly, when the Wafer is lifted up by the Priest in the midst of the Mass, on leve Dieu, God is lifted, their understanding finding no passage through the Consecrated Wafer to Christ's Body.

9. As for the sharper sort of Romanists when they re∣flect;

1. On what is said in Scrip∣ture, that the Hea∣vens must receive Christ until the times of restitution of all things.

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

2. That a Body can no more be without its due ex∣tension, for example, of five or six foot, than water with∣out humidity, fire without heat, a stone without hard∣ness.

3. That the Bread cannot be miraculously chang'd into Christ's Body, because all mi∣racles are of necessity visible, as is clear by all those we ever heard or read of: But here the substance into which the Bread is converted, is not vi∣sible: This visibility never∣theless is necessary in a change really miraculous, as it ap∣pears by that of water into wine, of Moses Rod into a Serpent, &c.

4. That 'tis inconsistent with reason to say Christ's Body is at the same time in Heaven and Earth, yea, and in as many places as there be all the World over Conse∣crated Wafers: Who-ever understands these absurdities, will never, I am confident, believe a true Transubstanti∣ation, though he profess o∣therwise outwardly through Hypocrisie and Dissimulati∣on: The Trinity, I confess, and Hypostatical Union, or the Incarnation, are far be∣yond the reach of our reason, yet because they are not the Objects of our Senses, we be∣lieve them with less reluctan∣cy, and more easily upon au∣thority; but that which hath

ever been, and still is evi∣dently repugnant to the ex∣perimental knowledge of all our Senses, as the Transub∣stantiation confessedly is, can scarce ever be looked upon as a truth, by such as make use of their discerning facul∣ty. The Romanists instance commonly these Words of Christ, This is my Body, as the ground of this Doctrine, which they say, must not be taken in a figurative sence, because they are Christ's last Will and Testament; and no man, neither ignorant nor malicious expresseth his last Will by Figures and Meta∣phors: But here lies their mistake, that these words, This is my Body, are a true

and real Testament, or Christ's Legacy to his Apostles: For he says not, I leave you my Body, which is the usual man∣ner of uttering our selves in Testaments, but, This is my Body. 'Tis no Testament, than as they imagine, or at least not a proper one.

10. Their Doctrine relat∣ing to the mediation of the Virgin Mary and other Saints, withdraws them from ren∣dering to Christ our only Redeemer due Honour and Glory: For though there is no other Name under Hea∣ven whereby we must be sa∣ved but that of Christ, yet many of them pretend to E∣ternal Happiness by the me∣rits of the Saints and the Vir∣gin

Mary, whom they joyn still with Jesus in their Visits to the Sick, either crying a∣loud to them, or exhorting the sick to pronounce Jesus Maria, as if they judg'd Christ's merits insufficient, or that some other Name, than that of Christ our Advocate, with the Father, could be a propitiation for our Sins; hence 'tis they extol so much their meritorious works, that we have reason to say, they ground thereon their best hopes of the other Life; at least 'tis certain, the simple undiscerning sort relys more on what they do than on what Christ did for them, I mean more upon their good works than on his infinite me∣rits and mercys.

Notes

• Luk. 24.32.
• Act. 3.22.