I. Question: Why are you a Catholic? The answer follows. II. Question: But why are you a Protestant? An answer attempted (in vain) / written by the Reverend Father S.C. Monk of the Holy Order of St. Benedict ...

About this Item

Title
I. Question: Why are you a Catholic? The answer follows. II. Question: But why are you a Protestant? An answer attempted (in vain) / written by the Reverend Father S.C. Monk of the Holy Order of St. Benedict ...
Author
Cressy, Serenus, 1605-1674.
Publication
London :: [s.n.],
1686.
Rights/Permissions

To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.

Subject terms
Catholic Church.
Protestantism -- Controversial literature -- Early works to 1800.
Link to this Item
http://name.umdl.umich.edu/A34972.0001.001
Cite this Item
"I. Question: Why are you a Catholic? The answer follows. II. Question: But why are you a Protestant? An answer attempted (in vain) / written by the Reverend Father S.C. Monk of the Holy Order of St. Benedict ..." In the digital collection Early English Books Online. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/A34972.0001.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed June 15, 2024.

Pages

§. 15.

Now whereas you said, That all Fundamental Doctrines of Christianity are so clearly set down in Scripture, that no sober Enquirer can be mistaken in them: If this were true, yet since neither the Scripture, nor you your selves, do clearly express which and how many Do∣ctrines are fundamental, every tittle of Scriptures must be read and ex∣amined by every one of you, for fear a necessary Doctrine should chance to escape you. But to demonstrate the groundlesness of that

Page 7

your Assertion, I desire you to reflect on the prodigious multiplicity of Sects swarming in this age, all which ground their Belief upon pre∣tended clear Texts of Scripture alone: you will then scarce find one Article of Christian Faith exempted from their Disputes. There are not wanting who deny the Mistery of the Holy Trinity, the Divinity and Incarnation of our Lord, the Divine Personality of the Holy Ghost. Some absolutely deny Freewill, whilst others exalt the power of it so high, as to affirm Divine Grace unnecessary to its best Operations. Some affirm our Nature to be so incurably polluted by Original Sin as that all the best actions of the Regenerate are Mortal Sins; Others will acknowledge no Original Sin at all. Some affirm Baptism necessary to Salvation, even of Infants: Others reject Infant-Baptism: and Cal∣vinists assert, that Infants without Baptism are sanctified by their Pa∣rents faith: and that some Infants dying, though baptized may be damned. Some believe mans Soul to be mortal, and that it perisheth with the Body, not having any Knowledg or Sentiment after death: Some confine God to a determinate place in Heaven, and also deny his Prescience of future Contingents. Lastly some deny an Eternity of tor∣ments in Hell. Surely you will not deny most of these to be contrary to Fundamental Doctrines of our Faith: yet all who maintain these Tenets, and all Sectaries who contradict them, do ground themselves upon express Scripture, which to you seems so clear. You cannot be more confident that you have light on the true sence of Scripture, than they of a contrary sense, and only self-love and selfe-esteem determine both the one and the other.

Can it then be prudence in any man to hazard Eternity upon his own sence of Scripture, the half of which perhaps he never read? Com∣monly a Text or two concludes every point controverted, when per∣haps there are twenty Texts, unconsidered by the Person, which would rectify the sence he gave to the former? Is that Guide to be trusted, which has seduced such infinite Multitudes, opposing, calum∣niating, and hating one another? All Mankind may be witness that this Private Light hath hitherto never been able to confute or un∣decieve one Sect. In a word, is it not in effect an injurious blasphem∣ing of the Goodness, Wisdom and Omnipotence of God to affirm that he has obliged under penalty of damnation all Christians to unity of Faith in all necessary Doctrines; and also that he hath promised to conserve his Church in this Unity to the end of the world: and on the

Page 8

other side to affirm withal, that the only Means appointed by him to produce this Unity should be a certain Means of destroying Unity, and which, if made use of by all Christians, the gates of Hell would be too strong for him, so that there would scarce be left a Church upon earth.

Do you have questions about this content? Need to report a problem? Please contact us.