An answer, to a little book call'd Protestancy to be embrac'd or, A new and infallible method to reduce Romanists from popery to Protestancy

A Subsect: 'Tis not a probable Opinion that a Protestant may be sav'd.

MOreover I deny that it is a probable O∣pinion that Protestants may be Sav'd. First Because the Church has defin'd the contrary, which definition excludes all probability from that Opinion. (Secondly,) I deny that Learned and Pious Men hold that Opinion. Our Adversary foreseeing this our negative, adds, dare we say that Protestants are neither Learn'd nor Pious? and then with a triumphing Jock he quots that Verse of Horace.

Auditum admissi risum teneatis amici.

To our Imagin'd confusion. But fair and softly. Would you think that a publick Professor of Philo∣sophy should from a copulative deny'd inferr the ne∣gative of both the members, as it from this deny'd copulative,

Our Adversary is a Souldier and a Physitian

He should presently say, then, according to you I am neither a Souldier, nor a Phisitian. Who would not laugh at this Illation? And consequently if I de∣sire you not to laugh, Reader, or Hearer, it is not at us, but at him for his simplicity, il, ne, faut, pas chanter devant la Victoire, (saies the French-Man) He should not have aplauded himself afore a clearer Eye then his, had seen his Victory.

When I say Protestants are not Learn'd and Pious, I don't say, they are neither Learn'd nor Pious; there's a great difference between these two propo∣sitions.

I say that Protestants are not Learn'd and Pious, because they who are Learn'd (viz. in matters of Faith) see the Truth, and they who are Pious em∣brace it, when they see it.

Since Protestants then do not embrace the R. Ca∣tholick Faith, which has appear'd as the only true to all Antiquity, as I may easily show, and clear∣ly shines to Men (who have not their understand∣ing vailed, 2 Cor. 3.15.) out of the Holy Scrip∣ture, as I shall make appear anon, either they do not see it, and those are not Learn'd, or they see it and do not embrace it according to that video meliora proboque deteriora sequor, that is to say, I see what is Good, and approve of it, but in the mean time I practice what is Evil,) and those are not Pious.

But while I say they are not Learn'd and Pious in order to Salvation, I don't deny that many of them are very knowing Men in matter of Philoso∣phy, Astrology, Mathematicks, and such like Sciences; and also Men of moral Lives. But, Quid mihi proderat saies St. Augustin, Ingenium per omnes Doctrinas liberales agile, cum in Doctrina pietatis errarem? What did it avail me to have had a Wit fitted for all Liberal Arts, whilst I was Igno∣rant of the Art of saving my Soul erring in the Doc∣trine of Piety? Out of the True Church there is no Sanctity, and without True Sanctity there is no True or solid Piety.

Let me give our Adversary one Light more by which he may see the weakness of his Argument.

I give, and not grant that it is a probable O∣pinion

that a Protestant may be Sav'd, and sup∣pose that Sempronius relying on it becomes a Pro∣testant.

Now, I say either Sempronius certainly believes that all the Articles of his Faith are clearly set down in Scripture (for they are no where else) or not? If the former, then he does not rely upon a pro∣bable Opinion only, for his being a Protestant, but upon a certainty; if the latter, then he is not a true Protestant who has the Articles of his Faith not from Church or Apostolical Tradition, but from Scripture only. So a Man can never become a Protestant (who must believe that all the Articles of his Faith are clearly set down in Scripture) relying only on this Principle, 'tis a probable Opinion that a Prote∣stant may be Sav'd.

I ask again our Adversary, whither this Principle, a Man may follow a probable Opinion in matter of Religion.

Be a true or false Principle? If false, then a Man may prove a true Religion by a false Princi∣ple. If true, then a Man may prove the Religion which is false in the Opinion of our Adversary, to be a true Religion, by a true Principle, which is ab∣surd, viz. the R. Catholick Religion is proven to be true, because Catholicks, of whom many are Learned and Pious, nay some Protestants, whose Authority makes with him a probable Opinion, hold it to be a saving, and consequently a true Re∣ligion.

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉