SIR LUCIUS CARY, LATE LORD VISCOUNT OF FALKLAND, His Diſcourſe of INFALLIBILITY, with an Anſwer to it: And his Lordſhips REPLY.
Never before publiſhed.
Together with Mr. Walter Mountague's Letter concerning the changing his Religion.
Anſwered by my Lord of FALKLAND.
LONDON Printed by Gartrude Dawſon, for Iohn Hardeſty, and are to be ſold at the Signe of the Black Spread-Eagle, in Duck-Lane, 1651.
NOt long before the death of that incomparable perſon, your Lordſhips Mother, that great example of piety and humility, the Lady Viſcounteſſe of Falkland, ſhe was pleaſed to commit to my hand that, which ſhe beleeved, next her Children, the deareſt pledge of her dead Lord ſome excellent Monuments of his Reaſon, Wit, and Induſtry. in the ſearch of that, which he would have as gladly found, as he hath rationally rejected, an Infallible Iudge here on Earth in all our Controverſies in point of Religion, of which the labouring world ſeemeth at preſent to ſtand in ſo much need. I have conſidered often of that ſingular truſt and friendſhip, in making me the depoſitarie of ſo rich a Jewell: And ſince ſhe, from whoſe hands I received it, is gone thither, where ſhe ſtands in no need of theſe diſcourſes, I know no perſon living that hath more right to it then your Lordſhip, or indeed to whom I would more willingly offer it. For though your Lordſhip be now out of my immediate charge and Tuition, yet as long as it ſhall pleaſe God to make me able to do, or point at any thing that may, though never ſo little, helpe forward to perfect a good work in you, I ſhall never account my ſelfe diſobliged. I muſt profeſſe to all the World, that there is no Family now in being, to which I owe more true ſervice, then to your Lordſhips: And ſhall to the utmoſt of my power, upon all occaſions make it good. I have nothing left me but a poor thankfull heart, which hath been my onely ſure Companion, when all things elſe have forſaken me: That ſtill remaines〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉and〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, being neither in the power of time nor perſons to ſpoile me of that, which like a good Conſcience to my ſelf, muſt to my friends be the beſt feaſt I can make them.
My Lord, my deſign is not by this to ingage your Lordſhip in this Polemicall diſcourſe, nor my ſelf neither, having neither ability nor leaſure for a buſineſs of that concern, and by reaſon of my buſie imployment, I had not been able to have preſented it thus to your Lordſhip, without the aſsiſtance of Judicious Friends, that honour the work for the Authors ſake, and the Author for his owne.
But, My Lord, I hope I ſhall have my end in it however, an end which no good man will envy me, namely, an occaſion hereby to reminde your Lordſhip of the Gallant Author, your Noble Father, that by propoſing Him to you as your conſtant Coppy, you may do Him an honour beyond all his Friends: For while they praiſe, you may imitate him.
Indeed, it is one of the greateſt comforts I have in this calamitous life, to remember, that I had the honour to be ſo: neare Him: And a reproach, which I cannot clear my ſelf of, to have been at the ſame time ſo neare, and ſo farr off; ſo neare in Converſation, and yet ſo farr removed from him in thoſe Excellencies, whereby he was the envy of this Age, and will be the wonder of the next.
His Religion, (for that I ſhould begin with) was the more Eminent, becauſe the more Early, at that age, when yong Gallants think leaſt on it: When they, yong Candidates of Atheiſme begin to diſpute themſelves out of a beleefe of a Deity, urging hard againſt that, which indeed is beſt for them that it ſhould never be, a Iudgement to come; then, I ſay, that ſalvation which theſe mention with a ſcoff or a Jeere, he began to work out with fear and trembling, and effectually to remember, that is, to honour and ſerve his Creator in the daies of his youth.
In the next place, I may not forget his vaſt naturall parts: Dixit ex tempore ſaith Pliny of Iſoeus, ſed tanquam diu ſcripſerit,, and I may truely apply it to him, his Anſwers were quick and ſuddain, but ſuch, as might very well ſeem to have been meditated. In ſhort, his abilities were ſuch, as though he needed no ſupplies of induſtry, yet his induſtry ſuch as though he had had no parts at all. How often have I heard him pitty thoſe Hawking and Hunting Gentlemen, who if unſeaſonable weather for their ſports had betrayed them to keep home, without a worſe excerciſe within doores, could not have told how to have ſpent their time: And all becauſe they were ſuch ſtrangers to ſuch good Companions, with whom he was ſo familiar, ſuch as neither cloy nor weary any, with whom they converſe, ſuch company as Eraſmus, a perſon much eſteemed by my Lord your Father, ſo much extolls in his 31, and 35, Epiſtle of his fourth Book: Not friends of the Cellar, or the Kitchin;〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, indeed their owne friends rather then his who entertaineth them: But ſuch, as being bidden, are ready, uninvited intrude not, that bite no mans meat or reputation, ſilent, not ſpoken to, ſpoken to, ſpeak as we pleaſe, what we pleaſe, how long and how much we pleaſe: Candidly communicating themſelves to us without betraying our ſecrets committed to them; that ſtill tell us ſomewhat that may delight us for its Antiquitie, pleaſe us for its Novelty, or ſome way or other enrich our knowledge. While others ſtudied the Heraldry of Horſes, of Doggs, or at the beſt their owne: He, though not inferior to his Neighbours in Deſcent, and Honour, knowing well how much more glorious it is to be the firſt then the laſt of a Noble Family, (Blood without Vertue making Vice but more conſpicuous) was ſo farr from relying upon that empty Title, that He ſeemed Ipſe ſuos genuiſſe Parentes, to have begotten his Anceſtors, and to have given them a more Illuſtrious life, then he recieved from them.
Though there were as much true worth cloſely treaſured up in him, as well divided, had been able to have ſet up a hundred Pretenders, yet ſo much Modesty withall, that the hearing of any thing was more pleaſing to him then one tittle of his owne praiſe.
This Vertue was indeed in a high degree in him, and ſhewed it ſelfe upon all occaſions. If any thing, though never ſo little unhandſomely, had been ſpoken or done where he was, he was the greateſt ſufferer in the company, and much more out of countenance then he that made the offence. And ſurely he that was ſo tender of another mans Civility, may very juſtly be preſumed to have had a great regard to his owne. And ſo he had indeed. For though his Courage were as great as his Wit and his Learning, (and that is expreſsion high enough) his Valour ſo undaunted and dreadleſſe, as his great fall witneſt,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, In that fatall Haile that made more Orphans then his Children: Yet to do an ill or an uncivill thing, he was an arrant Coward: Though he was of Davids Stature, of his Courage too,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and in this moſt like him, afraid of nothing but to offend.
But what needs any body plead for his Civility more then this preſent Diſcourſe, where he excels his Antagonist in that, as well as in reaſon, and ſhewes that a Gentleman writ with a Scholars Pen.
Before I ſhut up all, my Lord, one Vertue there is yet to be mentioned, which of all that ever had relation to his Lordſhip, I may not, I muſt not ever forget, and that was his Friendſhip. That is a Vertue, which by the unintermitted affliction of my life, I have had more then ordinary occaſion to make uſe of. And that I muſt needs ſay was it, which made all his other Graces and Excellencies reliſh to me, He being the deareſt and the trueſt Friend, that through the whole courſe of my unhappy life I ever had the happineſſe to meet with.
If it be a kind of pleaſure to reade diſcourſes of Friends and Friendſhip, What is it to enjoy ſuch a Friend in whom really was, what Excellencie either Hiſtory can record, or almoſt Poëtry faine?
Nothing ſo hard in Lucians Toxaris, that he durſt not do, and nothing ſo handſome in all Seneca's Lawes of Benefits, that he knew not how to do, and to out-do for his Friend.
Let your Vertuous and dear Grandmother, my Lord, and all your Kindred yet alive, ſpeak to this: And your bleſſed Mother were ſhe now alive, would ſay, ſhe had the beſt of Friends before the beſt of Husbands. This was it that made Tew ſo valued a Manſion to us: For as when we went from Oxford thither, we found our ſelves never out of the Univerſitie: So we thought our ſelves never abſent from our own beloved home. But I dare ſay no more of this, it being now a mellancholy thing, I am ſure to me, to call back into my memory happineſſe never to be recalled, and to afflict my ſelf anew with the conſideration of what felicity I have out-lived.
Your Lordſhip is now the onely ſurviving pledge of that admired Father, of whom-when we his poor ſervants have ſaid all we can, the Character will be farr too ſhort. It is in you, and onely you, my Lord to ſet him out truely, and to reſemble him to the life, and that will be by taking that Evangelicall Counſell, Tu autem fac ſimiliter: Do like him, live like him, and pardon me if I add one thing more, like him, Love
THe eminent abilities in the moſt noble Author of the enſuing learned Diſcourſe, and learneder Reply, can ſcarcely be imagined unknown to any whom this language can reach: But if any ſuch there be, I ſhall deſire them to learne the perfections of that moſt excellent Perſon, rather from the Dedication, then this Preface; the deſigne of which, is onely to give the Reader ſome ſatisfation concerning the nature of this Controverſie in it ſelfe, and of theſe Diſſertations in particular.
The Romiſh Doctrine of their owne Infallibility, as it is the moſt gcnerall Controverſie betweene them, and all other Churches excluded by them from their Communion: So it is of ſuch a comprehenſive nature, that being once proved and clearely demonſtrated, it would without queſtion draw all other Churches ſo excluded, to a moſt humble ſubmiſsion and acknowledgement, nay, to an earneſt deſire of a ſuddaine Reconciliation upon any Termes whatſoever. For howſoever they pleaſe to ſpeak and write of our Hereticall and obſtinate perſiſtance in manifeſt Errors, yet I hope they cannot ſeriouſly thinks we would be ſo irrationall, as to contradict him whom we our ſelves think beyond a poſſibillity of erring, and to diſpute perpetually with them, whom onely to heare were to be ſatisfied.
But when they have propounded their Deciſions to be beleeved, and imbraced by us as Infallibly true, and that becauſe they propound them, who in their own opinion are Infallible; if notwithſtanding ſome of thoſe Deciſions ſeeme to us to be evidently falſe, becauſe cleanly contradictory to that which they themſelves propound as infallibly true, that is the Word of God: ſurely we cannot be blamed, if we have deſired their Infallibility to be moſt clearly demonſtrated, at leaſt to a higher degree of evidence then we have of the contradiction of their Deciſions to the infallible Rule. Wherefore, The great Defenders of the Doctrine of the Church of England, have with more then ordinary diligence endeavoured to view the grounds of this Controverſie, and have written by the advantage either of their learning accurately, or of their parts moſt ſtrongly, or of the cauſe it ſelfe moſt convincingly, againſt that darling Infallibility. How clearely this Controverſie hath been managed, with what evidence of truth diſcuſſed, what ſucceſſe ſo much of reaſon hath had, cannot more plainly appeare then in this, that the very name of Infallibility before ſo much exalted, begins now to be very burthenſome, even to the maintainers of it: Inſomuch as one of their lateſt and ableſt Proſelytes, Hugh Paulin de Creſſy, lately Dean of Laghlin, &c. in Ireland, and Prebendary of Windfor in England, in his Exomologeſis, or faithfull Narration of the occaſion and motives of his Converſion, hath dealt very clearly with the World, and told us, that this Infallibilitie is an unfortunate Word. That Mr. Chillingworth hath cumbated againſt it with too too great ſucceſſe, ſo great, that he could wiſh the Word were forgotten, or at leaſt layd by. That not onely Mr. Chillingworth, whom he ſtill worthily admires; but we the reſt of the poore Proteſtants have in very deed, very much to ſay for our ſelves, when we are preſſed unneceſſarily with it. And therefore Mr. Creſſy's adviſe to all the Romaniſts is this, that we may never be invited to combat the authority of the Church under that notion. Oh the ſtrength of Reaſon rightly managed! O the power of Truth clearly declared! that it ſhould force an emment member of the Church of Rome (whoſe great Principle is non-retractation) to retract ſo neceſſary, ſo fundamentall a Doctrine, to deſert all their Schooles, and contradict all their Controvertiſts. But indeed not without very good cauſe: For he profeſſes withall, that no ſuch word as Infallibility is to be found in any Councel: Neither did ever the Church enlarge her Authority to ſo vaſte a wideneſſe: But doth rather deliver the victory into our hands when we urge her Deciſions. In all which Confeſſions, although he may ſeeme onely to ſpeak of the Word, yet that cannot be it which he is ſo wearie of, becauſe we except not againſt the word at all, but confeſſe it rightly to ſignifie that which we impugne, neither do we ever bring any nominall Argument againſt it. But as when Cardinall Bellarmine ſets downe the Doctrine of the Church in their poſitive tearmes. Summus Pontifex, cum totam Eccleſiam docet, in his, quae ad Fidem pertinent, nullo caſu errare poteſt. We conceive he hath ſuffciently expreſſed the ſence of the word Infallibility, ſo that, Infallibilis eſt, & nullo caſu errare poteſt, are to us the ſame thing. It cannot therefore be the Word alone, but the whole importance and ſence of that word Infallibility, which Mr. Creſſy ſo earneſtly deſires all his Catholicks ever hereafter to forſake, becauſe the former Church did never acknowledge it, and the preſent Church will never be able to maintaine it. This is the great ſucceſſe which the Reaſon, Parts, and Learning of the late Defendors of our Church have had in this maine Architectonicall Controverſie.
And yet though the Church never maintained it, though the Proteſtants have had ſuch advantage againſt it, though Mr. Creſſy confeſsing both, hath wiſhed all Catholicks to forſake it, yet will he not wholly forſake it himſelf, but undertakes moſt irrationally to anſwer for it. If the Church never aſſerted it, if the Catholicks be not at all concerned in it, to what end will Mr. Creſſy the great mitigator of the rigor, and defendor of the latitude of the Churches Deciſions, maintaine it? If Mr. Chillingworth have had ſuch good ſucceſſe againſt it, why will his old Friend Mr. Creſſy endeavour to anſwer his arguments? eſpecially, conſidering when he hath anſwered them all, he can onely from thence conclude that, Mr. Chillingworth was a very had Diſputant, who could bring no argument able to confute that, which in it ſelfe is not to be maintained.
So unreaſonable it is and inconſiſtent with his Conceſsions, that he ſhould give an anſwer at all, but the manner of his anſwer, which he gives, is farr more irrationall. For deſerting the Infallibility, he anſwers onely the authority of the Church, and ſo makes this authority anſwer for that Infallibility: from whence theſe three manifeſt abſurdities muſt neceſſarily follow.
I once thought to have replied to thoſe anſwers, which he hath given to Mr. Chillingworth's arguments: but his antecedent Conceſsion hath made them ſo inconſiderable to me, that upon a ſecond thought, I feare I ſhould be as guilty in replying after my Objections, as he hath been in anſwering after his Confeſsions. Wherefore I ſhall conclude with an aſſeveration of min own, which ſhall be therefore ſhort becauſe mine: That the Reply of this moſt excellent Perſon, Sola operarum ſumma praeſertim in Graecis incuria excepta, is the moſt accurate Refutation of all, which can be ſaid in this Controverſie, that ever yet appeared, and if what hath already been delivered have had ſuch ſucceſſe upon ſo eminent an adverſary, then may we very rationally expect at leaſt the ſame effect upon all, who ſhall be ſo happy as to read theſe Diſcourſes.
TO him that doubteth whether the Church of Rome hath any errors, they anſwer, that ſhe hath none, for ſhe never can have any; this being ſo much harder to beleeve then the firſt, had need be proved by ſome certainer Arguments, if they expect that the beleefe of this one ſhould draw on whatſoever they pleaſe to propoſe; yet this, if offered to be proved by no better wayes, then we offer to prove by, that ſhe hath erred; which are arguments from Scripture, and ancient Writers, all which they ſay are fallible, for nothing is not ſo but the Church: Which if it be the onely infallible determination, and that can never be believed upon its owne authority, we can never infallibly know that the Church is infallible, for theſe other waies of proofe may deceive both them and us, and ſo neither ſide is bound to beleeve them; If they ſay that an argument out of Scripture is ſufficient ground of Divine Faith, why are they offended with the Proteſtants for beleeving every part of their Religion upon that ground, upon which they build all theirs at once. And if following the ſame Rule, with equall deſire of finding the Truth by it, (having neither of thoſe qualities which Iſid. Pelus, ſaith are the cauſe of all Hereſie,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Pride and Prejudication) why ſhould God be more offended with the one, then with the other, though they chance to erre.
They ſay, the Church is therefore made infallible by God, that all men may have ſome certain Guide; yet, though it be infallible, unleſſe it both plainly appeare to be ſo, (for it is not certaine to whom it doth not appeare certaine) and unleſſe it be manifeſt which is the Church, God hath not attained his end; and it were to ſet a ladder to Heaven, and ſeem to have a great care of my going up, whereas unleſſe there be care taken that I may know this ladder is here to that purpoſe, it were as good for me it never had been ſet.
If they ſay we may know, for that generall Tradition inſtructs us in it.
I anſwer, that ignorant people cannot know this, and ſo it can be no Rule for them; and if learned people miſtake in this, there can be no condemnation for them.
For ſuppoſe, to know whether the Church of Rome may erre, (as a way which will conclude againſt her, but not for her) I ſeek whether ſhe have erred; and conceiving ſhe hath contradicted her ſelf, conclude neceſſarily ſhe hath erred, I ſuppoſe it not damnable, (though falſe) becauſe I try the Church by one of the touch-ſtones which herſelf appoints me (Conformity with the Ancients.) For to ſay, I am to beleeve the preſent Church, that it differs not from the former, though it ſeem to me to do ſo, is to ſend me to a witneſſe, and bid me not beleeve it; now to ſay the Church is provided for a guide of Faith, but muſt be known by ſuch markes as the ignorant cannot ſeek it by, and the learned may chance not find it by, can no way ſatisfie me.
If they ſay God will reveale the Truth to whomſoever ſeeks it theſe waies ſincerely, this ſaying both ſides will (without meanes of being confuted) make uſe of, therefore it would be as good that neither did.
When they have proved the Church to be Infallible yet to my underſtanding they have proceeded nothing farther, unleſſe we can be ſure which is it. For it ſignifies onely that God will have a Church alwaies which ſhall not erre, but not that ſuch, or ſuch a ſucceſſion ſhall be in the right, ſo that if they ſay, the Greek Church. is not the Church, becauſe by its own confeſſion it is not Infallible: I anſwer, That it may be now the Church, and may hereafter erre, (and ſo not be now infallible) and yet the Church never erre, becauſe before their fall from Truth, others may ariſe to maintaine it, who then will be the Church, and ſo the Church may ſtill be infallible, though not in reſpect of any ſet perſons, whom we may know at all times for our Guide.
Then if they prove the Church of Rome to be the true Church, and not the Greek Church, becauſe their opinions are conſonant either to Scripture or Antiquitie, they run into a Circle, proving their Tenets to be true. Firſt, becauſe the Church holds them: And then theirs to be the Church, becauſe the Church holds the Truth: Which laſt, though it appears to me the onely way, yet it takes away its being a Guide, which we may follow without examination, without which all they ſay beſides, is nothing.
Nay, ſuppoſe that they had evinced, that ſome ſucceſſion were Infallible, and ſo had proved to a learned man, that the Roman Chruch muſt be this, becauſe none elſe pretends to it, yet this can be no ſufficient ground to the ignorant, who cannot have any infallible foundation for their beleefe, that the Church of Greece pretends not to the ſame; and even to the Learned it is but an accidentall Argument, becauſe if any other Company had likewiſe claimed to be Infallible, it had overthrown all.
The chiefeſt reaſon why they diſallow of Scripture for Judge, is, becauſe when differences ariſe about the interpretation, there is no way to end them: And that it will not ſtand with the goodneſſe of God, to damne men for not following Ins Will, if he had aſſigncd no infallible way to find it.
I confeſſe this to be wonderfull true, (〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) and let them excuſe themſelves that think otherwiſe; yet this will be no Argument againſt him that beleeves, that to them who follow their reaſon in the interpretation of the Scriptures, God will either give his Grace for aſſiſtance to find the Truth, or his pardon if they miſſe it: And then this ſuppoſed neceſſitie of an infallible Guide, (with the ſuppoſed damnation for want of it) fall together to the ground.
If they command us to beleeve infallibly the contrary to this, they are to prove it falſe by ſome infallible way (for the concluſion muſt be of the ſame nature, and not conclude more then the premiſſes ſet down.) Now ſuch a way Scripture, and Reaſon, and infuſed Faith cannot be, (for they uſe to object the fallibility of theſe, to thoſe that build their Religion upon them) nor the authority of the Church, (for this is part of the Queſtion, and muſt it ſelf be firſt proved, and that by none of the former waies, for the former reaſons.)
The Popes Infallibility can be no infallible ground of Faith, being it ſelf no neceſſary part of Faith, and we can be no ſurer of any thing proved, then we are of that which proves it:) and if he be fallible, no part is the more infallible for his ſiding with them; So if the Church be divided, I have no way to know the true Church, but by ſearching which agrees with Scripture and Antiquitie, and ſo judging accordingly: (but this is not to ſubmit my ſelf to her opinions, as my Guide, which they tell us is neceſſarie) which courſe, if they approve not of as fit for a learned, man, they are in a worſe caſe for the ignorant, who can take no courſe at all, nor is he the better at all for his Guide the Church, whilft two parts diſpute which is it, and that by arguments he underſtands not.
If I grant the Pope, or a Councell by him called, to be infallible, yet I conceive their decrees can he no ſufficient grounds, (by their own axioms) of divine Faith.
For firſt of all, no Councell is valid, not approved by the Pope (for thus they overthrow that held at Ariminum) and a Pope choſen by Simony, is (ipſo facto) no Pope.
I can have then no certainer grounds for the infallibility of thoſe decrees, and conſequently for my beleefe of them, then I have, that the choice of him is neither directly, nor indirectly Simoniacall.
Secondly, ſuppoſe him Pope, and to have confirmed their decrees; yet, that theſe are the decrees of a Councell, or that he hath confirmed them, I can have'but an uncontradicted confeſſion of many men; (for if another Councell ſhould declare theſe to have been the Acts of another former Councell, I ſhould need againe ſome certain way of knowing how this declaration is a Councell) which is no ground, ſay they, of Faith, I am ſure not ſo good and generall a one, as we have that the Scripture is Scripture, which yet they will not allow any to be certaine of, but from them.
Thirdly, For the ſence of their decrees, I can have no better expounder then reaſon; which if (though I miſtake) I ſhall not be damned for following, why ſhall I for miſtaking the ſence of the Scripture? or why am I a leſſe fit Interpreter of the one, then of the other? and when both ſeeme equally cleare, and yet contradictory, ſhall not I aſſoon beleeve Scripture which is without doubt of as great authority?
But I doubt whether Councells are fit deciders of Queſtions; for ſuch they cannot be if they beget more, and men are in greater doubts afterwards (none of the former being diminiſhed) then they were at ffrſt.
Now I conceive there ariſe ſo many out of this way, that the learned cannot end all, nor the ignorant know all. As (beſides the fore-named conſiderations) who is to call them? the Pope or Kings? who are to have voices in them, Biſhops onely, or Prieſts alſo? whether the Pope, or Councell be ſuperiour: and the laſt need the approbation of the firſt (debated amongſt themſelves?) Whether any Countries, not being called, or not being there, (as the Abiſsines, ſo great a part of Chriſtianitie, and not reſolvedly condemned by them for Hereticks, were abſent at the Councell of Trent) make it not generall? Whether if it be one not every where received, (as when the Biſhops ſent from ſome places have exceeded their Commiſſion, as in the Councell of Florence) it be yet of neceſſitie to be ſubſcribed unto? Whether there were any ſurreption or force uſed, and whether thoſe diſanull the Acts? Whether the moſt voices are to be held the Act of the Councell, or thoſe of all required (which never yet agreed?) Or whether two parts will ſerve, as in the Tridentine Synod? A conſiderable doubt; becauſe Nicephorus Calliſtus, relalating the reſolution of a Councell at Rome, againſt that of Ariminum makes him give three reaſons.
Which proves, that (in their opinions) if either moſt not preſent, agree not to it, or all preſent be not pleaſed with it, a Councell hath no power to bind.
All theſe doubts I ſay perſwade me, that whatſoever brings with it ſo many new Queſtions, can be no fit end of the old.
Then, if before a generall Councell have defined a Queſtion, it be lawfull to hold either way, and damnable to do ſo after; I deſire to know why it is ſo. Scripture and Tradition ſeem to me not to ſay ſo? but if they did ſo, I ſuppoſe you will grant they do this Doctrine, That the Soules of the bleſſed ſhall ſee God before the day of Judgement: (and not be kept in ſecret Receptacles) for without this, the Doctrine of Prayers to Saints, cannot ſtand; and yet, for denying this, Bellarmine excuſeth Pope John the 22th becauſe the Church (he meanes, I doubt not, a generall Councell) had not then condemned it.
I deſire to know, why he ſhould not be condemned as well without one, as many Hereticks, that are held ſo by their Church, yet condemned by none: (which if he make to be the Rule of Hereſie, it had been happy to have lived before the Councell of Nice, when no opinion had been dam nable, but ſome againſt the Apoſtles Councell at Hieruſalem, becauſe there had yet been no other generall Councell;) at leaſt, why ſhould not I be excuſed by the ſame reaſon, though I beleeve not a Councell to be infallible? ſince I never heard that any Councell hath decreed that they are ſo. neither if it hath, can we be bound by that decree, unleſſe firſt made certaine ſome other way, that it ſelfe is ſo.
If you ſay, we muſt beleeve it becauſe of Tradition, I anſwer, Sometimes you will have the not beleeving any thing not declared by a Councell, to have power enough to damne (that is when againſt any of us:) at other times the Church hath not decreed unleſſe a Councell have, and their error is pardonable, and they good Catholicks.
Next, (as I have asked before) how ſhall an ignorant man know it? For he in likelihood can ſpeak but with a few, from whom he cannot know, that all of the Church of Romes part do now, and in paſt ages have beleeved it to be Tradition, ſo certaine as to make it a ground of Faith, (unleſſe he have ſome revelation that thoſe deceived him not) neither indeed can thoſe that ſhould inform him of the opinions of former times be certainely informed themſelves: For truely, if the relation of Pappias could cozen ſo far all the prime Doctors of the Chriſtian Church into a beleefe of the celebration of a thouſand yeeres after the reſurredion, ſo as that no one of thoſe two firſt ages oppoſe it, (which appeares plainly enough, becauſe thoſe that after riſe up againſt this, never quoated any thing for themſelves before Dionyſius Alexandrinus, who lived at leaſt two hundred and fifty yeares after Chriſt;) nay, if thoſe firſt men did not onely beleeve it as probable, but Juſtine Martir ſaith, he holds it, and ſo do all that are in all parts Orthodox Chriſtians,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉ſets it down directly for a Tradition, and relates the very words that Chriſt uſed, when he taught this, which is plainner then any other Tradition, is proved or ſaid to be out of antiquity by them) if I ſay theſe could be ſo deceived, why might not other of the ancients as well be deceived in other points, and then what certaintie ſhall the learned have (when after much labour, they think they can make it appeare, that the ancients thought any thing Tradition) that indeed it was ſo, and that either the folly or the knavery of ſome Pappias deceived them not? I confeſſe it makes me think of ſome that Tully ſpeakes of, who arcem amittunt, dum propugnacula defendunt, looſe the Fort, whilſt they defend the out-works; For whilſt they anſwer this way the Arguments of Tradition for the opinions of the Chiliaſts, they make unuſefull to themſelves the force, of Tradition, to prove any elſe by.
For which cauſe it was rather wiſely then honeſtly done of them, who (before Fevardentius ſet him forth) left out that part of Irenaeus which we alleadge, (though we need it not much; for many of the Fathers take notice of this beleef of his) yet he juſtifies himſelf for doing it, by ſaying, that if they leave out all errors in the books they publiſh, (that is, I ſuppoſe, all opinions contrary to the Church of Rome) bona pars ſcriptorum, Patrum Orthodoxorum evaneſceret, a great part of the writings of the Orthodox Fathers muſt vaniſh away.
But the Tradition that can be found out of Ancients (ſince their witneſſing may deceive us) hath much leſſe ſtrength, when they argue onely thus, ſure ſo many would not ſay this is true, if there were no Tradition for them,
I would have you remember, they can deliver their opinions poſſibly, but either before the controverſie ariſe in the Church, (upon ſome chance) or after; If before, it is confeſſed that they writ not often cautiouſly enough, and ſo they anſwer all they ſeem to ſay for Arrius, and Pelagius his Faith, before themſelves, and ſo conſequently, their controverſie (though it may be not their opinion) aroſe.
If after, Then they anſwer often, (if any thing be by them at that time ſpoken againſt them) that the heat of diſputation brought it from them, and their reſolution to oppoſe hereticks enough; I deſire, it may be lawfull for us to anſwer ſo too, (either one of theſe former waies, or that it was (as often they ſay too) ſome Hyperbole) when they preſſe us with the opinions of Fathers.
At leaſt I am ſure, if they may deceive us with ſaying a thing is Tradition, when it is not, we may be ſooner deceived if we will conclude it for a Tradition, when they ſpeak it onely as a Truth, and (for ought appeares) their particular opinion.
Beſides, If Salvian comparing the Arrians with evill livers, (and that after they were condemned by a Councell) extenuates (by reaſon of their beleeving themſelves in the right) with much inſtance, the fault of the Arrians, and ſaith, how they ſhall be puniſhed in the day of Judgement, none can know but the Judge.
If I ſay, They confeſſe it to be his opinion, they muſt alſo confeſſe the Doctrine of the Church to differ from that of Salvians time, becauſe he was allowed a member of that, for all this ſaying, whereas he of the Church of Rome, that ſhould now ſay ſo of us, would be counted ſeſqui-heareticus, a Heretick and halfe, or elſe they muſt ſay (which they can onely ſay, and hot prove) that he was ſo earneſt againſt ill men, that for the aggravation of their crime, he leſſened that of the Hereticks, and ſaid, what at another time he would not have ſaid; which if they do, will it not overthrow wholly the authority of the Fathers? Since we can never infallibly know, what they thought at all times, from what they were moved to ſay, at ſome one time, by ſome Collatericall conſiderations.
Next, To this certaine and undoubted damning of all out of the Church of Rome, which averteth me from it, comes their putting all to death that are ſo, where they have power (which is an effect, though not a neceſſary one of the firſt-opinion) and that averteth me yet more, for I do not beleeve all to be damned that they damne, but I conceive all to be killed that they kill; I am ſure if you look upon Conſtantines Epiſtle, written to perſwade concord upon their firſt diſagreement between Alexander, and Arrius, you will find, that he thought, (and if the Biſhops about him had then thought otherwiſe, he would have been ſure better informed) that neither ſide deſerved either death, or damnation, (and yet ſure you will ſay, this Queſtion was as great as ever roſe ſince) for having ſpoken of the opinions, as things ſo indifferent, that the Reader might almoſt think that they had been fallen out at ſpurn-point, or kittlepins, he adds,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, for that which is neceſſary is one thing, that all agree, and keep the ſame Faith, about divine Providence. I am ſure, in the ſame Author, Moſes (a man praiſed by him) refuſing to be made Biſhop by Lucius, becauſe he was an Arrian, and he anſwering that he did ill to refuſe it, becauſe he knew not what his Faith was, anſwered,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. The baniſhing of Biſhops ſhew enough thy Faith. So that it is plaine, that he thought puniſhing for opinions to be a mark, which might ſerve to know falſe opinions by. And I beleeve throughout Antiquitie, you will find. no putting any to death, unleſſe it be ſuch as begin to kill firſt, as the Circumcellians, or ſuch like: I am ſure Chriſtian Religions chiefeſt glory being, that it encreaſeth by being perſecuted; and having that advantage of the Mahumetan, which came in by force, me thinks (eſpecially ſince Syneſius had told us, and Reaſon told men ſo before Syneſius, that〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; Every thing is deſtroyed by the contrary to what ſetled and compoſed it;) It ſhould be to take ill care of Chriſtianity, to hold it up by Turkiſh meanes, at leaſt it muſt breed doubts, that if the Religion had alwaies remained the ſame, it would not be now defended by waies ſo contrary to thoſe, by which at firſt it was propagated.
I deſire recrimination may not be uſed; for though it be true, that Calvin had done it, and the Church of England, a little (which is a little too much) for negare manifeſta non audeo, & excuſare immodica non poſſum, yet ſhe (confeſſing ſhe may erre) is not ſo chargeable with any fault, as thoſe which pretend they cannot, and ſo will be ſure never to mend it; and beſides I will be bound to defend no more then I have undertaken, which is to give reaſon why the Church of Rome is infallible.
I confeſs this opinion of damning ſo many, and this cuſtome of burning ſo many, this breeding up thoſe, who knew nothing elſe in any point of Religion, yet to be in a readineſſe to cry, To the fire with him, to Hell with him, (as polybius ſaith in a certaine furious faction of an army of ſeverall nations, and conſequently of ſeverall languages,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉They all joyned onely in underſtanding this word, [throw at him.] Theſe I ſay, in my opinion were chiefly the cauſes which made ſo many, ſo ſuddenly leave the Church of Rome, that indeed to borrow the ſame Authors Phraſe,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: They needed no perſwaſion to do it, but onely newes that others had done it: For as this alone if beleeved, makes all the reſt to be ſo too, ſo one thing alone diſliked, (where infallibility is claimed) overthrowes all the reſt.
If it were granted, that it agreeth not with the goodneſſe of God, to let men want an infallible Guide, and therefore there muſt be one, and that the Church of Rome were it, yet if that teach any thing to my underſtanding contrary to Gods goodneſſe, I am not to receive her Doctrine, for the ſame cauſe for which they would have me receive it, (it being as good an argument this guide teacheth things contrary to Gods goodneſſe, therefore this is not appointed by God, as to ſay, it is agreeable to his goodneſſe there ſhould be one, therefore there is one) and ſure it is lawfull to examine particular Doctrines, whether they agree with that Principle, which is their foundation; and for that (me thinks) to damn him, that neither with negligence, nor prejudication, ſearches what is Gods will, (though he miſſe of it) is as contrary, as the firſt can be ſuppoſed.
Next, I would know, whether he, that hath never heard of the Church of Rome, ſhall yet be damned for not beleeving her infallible?
I have ſo good an opinion of them, as to aſſure my ſelf, they will anſwer he ſhall not.
I will then ask, whether he that hath ſearched what Religions there are, and finds hers to be one, and her infallibility to be a part of it, (if his reaſon will not aſſent to that) ſhall be damned for being inquiſitive after Truth, (for he hath committed no other fault, greater then the other) and whether ſuch an ignorance, (I mean after impartiall ſearch) be not of all other the moſt invincible?
Nay, grant the Church to be infallible, yet me thinks, he that denies it, and imploies his reaſon to ſeek, if it be true, ſhould be in as good caſe, as he that beleeveth it, and ſearcheth not at all the truth of the Propoſition he receives; For I cannot ſee why he ſhould be ſaved, becauſe by reaſon of his parents beleef, or the Religion of the Country, or ſome ſuch accident, the Truth was offered to his underſtanding, when, had the contrary been offered, he would have received that. And the other damned, that beleeves falſhood upon as good ground, as the other doth truth, unleſſe the Church be like a Conjurers Circle, that will keep a man from the Divell, though he came unto it by chance.
They grant no man is an Heretick, that beleeves not his Hereſie obſtinately, and if he be no Heretick, he may ſure be ſaved; It is not then certain damnation for any man to deny the Infallibility of the Church of Rome, but for him onely that denies it obſtinately; And then I am ſafe, for I am ſure I do not; Neither can they ſay, I ſhall be damned for Schiſme, though not for Hereſie, for he is as well no Shciſmatick, though in Schiſme, that is willing, to joyne in Communion with the true Church, when it appears to be ſo to him, as he is no Heretick, though he holds Hereticall opinions, who holds them not obſtinately, that is (as I ſuppoſe) with a deſire to be informed if he be in the wrong.
Next, Why if it be not neceſſary alwaies to beleeve the Truth, ſo one beleeve in generall what the Church would have beleeved, (for ſo they excuſe great men that have held contrary opinions to theirs now, before they were defined, or knew them to be ſo) why I ſay, ſhall not the ſame implicite aſſent ſerve to whatſoever God would have aſſented unto? (though I miſtake what that is:) when indeed to beleeve implicitely what God would have beleeved, is to beleeve implicitely likewiſe what the Church teacheth, if this Doctrine be within the number of thoſe, which God commands to be beleeved.
I have the leſſe doubt of this opinion, that I ſhall have no harme for not beleeving the Infallibility of the Church of Rome, becauſe of my being ſo farr from leaning to the contrary, and ſo ſuffering my will to have power over my underſtanding, that if God would leave it to me, which Tenet ſhould be true, I would rather chuſe, that that ſhould, then the contrary.
For they may well beleeve me, that I take no pleaſure in tumbling hard and unpleaſant Books, and making my ſelf giddy with diſputing obſcure Queſtions,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. If I ſhould beleeve, there ſhould alwaies be, whom I might alwaies know, a ſociety of men, whoſe opinions muſt be certainely true, and who would〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, labour to diſcuſſe and define all ariſing doubts, ſo that I might be excuſably at eaſe, and have no part left for me but that of obedience, which muſt needs be a leſſe difficult, and ſo a more agreeable way, then to endure endleſſe Volumes of Commenters, the harſh Greek of Epiphanius, and the harder Latin of Trenaeus, and be pained by diſtinguiſhing between different ſences, and various Lections, and he would deſerve not the loweſt place in Bedlem, that would preferr theſe ſtudies before ſo many, ſo more pleaſant; that would rather imploy his underſtanding then ſubmit it, and if he could think God impoſed upon him onely the reſiſting temptations, would by way of addition require from himſelf, the reſolving of doubts; yet I ſay not, that all theſe Books are to be read by thoſe that underſtand not the languages, (for them I conceive their ſeeking into the Scripture may ſuffice) but he who hath by Gods grace skill to look into them, cannot better uſe it then in the ſearching of his will, where they ſay it is to be found, that he may aſſent to them, if there he find reaſon for it, or if not, they may have no excuſe for not excuſing him.
For whereas they ſay it is pride makes us doubt of their Infallibilitie.
I anſwer, That their too much lazineſſe and impatience of examining is the cauſe, that many of them do not doubt.
Next, what pride is it never to aſſent, before I find reaſon (ſince they, when they follow their Church as infallible, pretend reaſon for it, and will not ſay they would, if they thought they found none) and if they ſay, we do find reaſon, but will not confeſſe it, then pride hinders not our aſſent, but our declaration of it, which if it do in any one, he is without queſtion〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, condemned by himſelf, and it muſt be a very partiall Advocate, that would ſtrive to acquit him.
One much prevailing argument, which they make, is this, That whoſoever leaves them, fall into diſſention between themſelves, whereas they in the mean while are allwaies at Unity.
I anſwer,
Yet theſe arguments muſt not make the Dominicans Hercticks, and muſt us: If they ſay the Church hath not reſolved it, (which ſignifies onely that they are not agreed about it, which is that we object) I anſwer, It ought to have done ſo, if uniformity to the Ancient Church be required, in which all that ever I could heare of, before Saint Auſtine (who is ever various I confeſſe in it) delivered the contrary to the Dominicans as not doubtfull; and to ſay it is lawfull for them to diſagree, whereſoever they do not agree, is ridiculous, (for they cannot do both at once about the ſame point) and if they ſay they mean by the Churches not having concluded it, that a Councell hath not: I Anſwer,
Firſt, That they condemne ſome without any Councell, and why not theſe?
Next, I ſay the opinion of the diffuſed Church is of more force, then the concluſion of the repreſentative (which hath its authority from the other) and therefore if all extant for the firſt four hundered yeares taught any thing, it is more Hereſie to deny that, then any Cannon of a Councell; But may not howſoever any other Company of People (that would maintaine themſelves to be infallible) ſay as much, that all other Sects differ from one another, and therefore ſhould all agree with them, would not thoſe (think they) aſcribe all other mens diſſentions, and learned mens falling into diverſe hereſies to their not allowing their Infallibility, to their not aſſenting to their Decrees, and not ſuffering them〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to ſit as teachers of thoſe things that come in Queſtion, and to have all others in the place of Diſciples obedient to them, which is that which Nilus a Greek Biſhop profeſſed, that (becauſe the Greeks would not allow the Romans) was the chief cauſe of ſeparation between them.
Next, They uſe much to object, how could errors come into the Church without oppoſition, and mention both of them, and the oppoſition to them in Hiſtory.
I anſwer,
They might come not at once, but by degrees, as in the growth of a Child, or motion of a Clock, we ſee neither in the preſent, but know there was a preſent when we find it paſt.
Next, I ſay there are two ſorts of errors; To hold a thing neceſſary that is unlawfull, and falſe; or that is but profitable, and probable. Of the ſecond ſort, that errors ſhould come in, it appears not hard to me, (eſpecially in thoſe ages where want of Printing, made Books, and conſequently Learning, not ſo common as now it is, where the few that did ſtudy, buſied themſelves in Schoole ſpeculations onely, when the authority of a man of chief note, had a more generall influence then now it hath, and ſo as Thucidides ſaith the Plague did in his time,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the diſeaſe that firſt ſettled in the head EASILY paſſed through all the body, conſidering how apt men are to deſire that all men ſhould think as they do, and conſequently to lay a neceſſity upon the receiving that opinion, if they conceive that a way to have it received. And then if it were beleeved generally, profitable (as confeſſion) who would be apt to oppoſe their calling it necceſſary, for the ſame cauſe for which they called it ſo.
Beſides, If this error were delivered by ſome Father in the hot oppoſition of ſome Heretick, it may be none would oppoſe it, leaſt the adverſaries might take advantage by their diſſention, and he that diſputed for the Orthodox ſide, might loſe by it much of his authority.
The word neceſſary it ſelf, is alſo often uſed for very convenient, and then from neceſſary in that ſence, to abſolutely neceſſary is no difficult change, though it be a great one.
Then the Fathers uſe the word Hereticks, ſometimes in a larger ſence, and ſometimes in a ſtricter, and ſo differ in the reckoning them up, ſome leaving out thoſe that others put in, (though they had ſeen the precedent Catalogue) and ſo the doubtfullneſſe of the ſence of theſe words might bring in error: Names alſo, as Altar, Sacrifice, Maſſe, may have been uſed.
Firſt, in one ſence, and the name retained though the thing ſignified received change; as it was once of an Emperour of Rome,Tacitus. cui proprium fuit nuper reperta, (I leave out ſcelera) priſcis verbis obtegere, whoſe property it was to cover things newly found with ancient tearmes, And the ſame Author tells us, that the ſame ſtate, was as it were, cheated out of her liberty, becauſe there did remaine eadem Magiſtratuum vocabula, the ſame titles of Magiſtrates: And I beleeve, that if the Proteſtants beyond the Seas would have thought Biſhops as good a word as Super-intendents, (and ſo in other ſuch things) many, who underſtand nothing but names, would have miſſed the ſcandale they have now taken. Theſe waies I think theſe things may have come, without much oppoſition from being thought profitable to be done, and probable to be beleeved, to be thought neceſſary to be both; and how things may have been by little and little received under old names, which would not have been ſo at once under new ones; it is not hard to conceive.
The firſt of theſe being no ſuch ſmall fault, but that part of the Montaniſts Hereſies was, thinking uncommanded faſting daies neceſſary to be obſerved, which without doubt might lawfully have been kept, ſo that no neceſſitie had been impoſed.
But my maine anſwer is, that if to be in the Church without known precedent oppoſition, be a certaine note of being derived from the begining, let them anſwer how came in the opinion of the Chiliaſts, not contradicted till two hundred yeares after it came in.
To condude, If they can prove that the Scripture may be a certainer teacher of truth to them, then to us, ſo that they may conclude the Infallibility of the Church out of it, and we nothing; If they can prove the Churches Infallibility to be a ſuffcient Guide for him, that doubts which is the Church, and cannot examine that (for want of learning) by her chiefe marke, which is conformity with the Ancients: If they can prove, that the conſent of Fathers long together, is a ſtronger Argument againſt us, then againſt the Dominicans; If they can prove (though it be affirmed by the firſt of them, that ſuch a thing is Tradition, and beleeved by all Chriſtians, and this aſſertion till a great while after, uncontradicted) yet they are not bound to receive it, and upon leſſe grounds we are; If indeed any can prove by any infallible way, the Infallibility of the Church of Rome, and the neceſſity under paine of damnation for all men to beleeve it, (which were the more ſtrange, becauſe Juſtin Martyr, and Clements Alexandrinus among the Ancients, and Eraſmùs, and Ludovicus Vives among the Modernes, beleeve ſome Pagans to be ſaved) I will ſubſcribe to it, and
If any man vouchſafe to think, either this, or the Authour of it, of value enough to confute the one, and informe the other, I ſhall deſire him to do it with proceeding to the buſineſſe, and not ſtanding upon any ſmall ſlip of mine, (of which this may be full) and with that temper, which is fit to be uſed by men that are not ſo paſſionate, as to have the definition of reaſonable Creatures in vaine, remembring that Truth in likelyhood is, where her Author God was, in the ſtill voice, and not the loud wind; and that Epiphanius excuſeth himſelf, if he have called any Hereticks in his anger, Deceivers, or Wretches, (〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. ) and I requeſt him alſo; to help to bring me to the Truth, (if I be out of it) not onely by his arguments, but alſo by his Prayers; which way if he uſe, and I ſtill continue on the part I am of, and yet doe neither〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, nor〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, neither am willfully blind, nor deny impudently, what I ſee, then I am confident, that he will neither have reaſon to be offended with me in this world, nor God (for that) to puniſh me in the next.
NAture being not able to perfect the work of humane kind, which ſhee had begun, and burſting at thoſe throwes and ſpringings, which her timely child gave, to ſee the light of eternall life, (whereof the diſtaſte of all things experienced in this world, and certain ſparklings ſowed in our ſoule had given it a dim notice) expected from her mercifull2 Creator, the aid (whereof how much greater the wonder was to bee, and the neceſſity, now divers thouſand yeers by lamentable experience was more deer, ſo much the readier was he) and it was to ſend from his eternall breſt, his only wiſedome to recount us wonders, and averre them under the ſeal of his immutable truth. He knew all ſecrets, and could not be touched with ſuſpition of ignorance; he was all goodneſs, and free from all calumnie of jealouſie or envie: who knew him, could not miſtruſt him, for beſide thoſe great Verdicts alreadie expreſſed in his favour, his works gave aſſurance of his words, he fulfilling in deeds, whatſoever he perſwaded in words, and working to himſelf, what he wiſhed unto others. Lo here, the high, and ſage Maſter of our faith, whoſe Oracles we cannot miſ-doubt, ſo we be aſſured they are his; and who hath in vain ſpent ſo much ſweat, and pains, if after he paſſed from hence, he hath left no meanes to aſſure mankind, what it was hee taught and practiſed, and for the teaching and practiſing of it, eſchewed not the ſtormie paſſage betwixt Bethlehem and Mount Calvarie: but as in Bethlehem he multiplied the three drops of his Circumciſion into the thouſands of innocent Brooks; ſo upon the Mount Calvarie he opened the great Source, which hath now through 16. Ages irrigated the world with an infinitie of ſtreames of proportionall examples of blood and ſufferance. Now was his Legacie performed, and hee from Mount Olivet triumphantly returned, from whence he was come, and the world left to be ſaved by3 faith, that is, by a conſtant perſwaſion of thoſe things which he had taught.
The Conditions of this Faith were three. Firſt, That it ſhould be a means fitting for humane kind, that is, for learned, and unlearned, for yong, and old, for wiſe, and fooles, for Princes and peaſants, Rabbies, and Ideots. Secondly, That it ſhould be a tenent, conſtant, undoubted, undiſputable, uncontroulable. Thirdly, That it ſhould be a rule of our life and actions, making but a paſſage of this preſent life, to the following, and teaching us to contemn the preſent and ſeen ſubſtance, in hope of an unſeen and abſent fortune. Certes, a hard taske, and which needeth to be well grounded and founded by God himſelf. For who well conſidereth it, cannot doubt it, to be as great a miracle (to make the whole Maſſe of mankinde, to forſake what it ſeeth, and take to obſcure hopes or things, it does not ſo much apprehend what they are) as to force the ſtrongeſt works of nature, to hang the ſea in the aire, to alter the courſe of Moon, and Starres, and whatſoever elſe is ſtrange and incredible in nature. Beſides that, to make a way of knowledge common, and indifferent to learned, and unlearned, to make the ignorant underſtand, what the learned cannot reach unto, and the learned die in defence of the truth he hath no other warrant for, then becauſe he hath learned it from an ignorant perſon, was the work of him alone who framed them both, and underſtood in what veins ſo different blouds doe run.
But done it was to be, and how? Thoſe to whom4 during his life, he had moſt fully declared his mind, went, and told it to others, and all was done. We cannot denie the way to have been fitting, and expedient, ſo it be found efficacious and powerfull to effect, what the Author intended. For if Faith muſt beleeve what Chriſt hath taught, what better inſtrument to breed faith, then who heard him ſpeak? If Faith muſt be common to learned, and unlearned, what better meanes, then by hearing? From which no unlearnedneſſe can excuſe, nor learnedneſſe be exempt. Every man may have from whom to hear and learn, if not a wiſer then himſelfe, yet one who may have properties to be a better witneſſe. Children naturally beleeve what their parents tell them, unlearned men what Doctors teach them, abſent men, what thoſe who were preſent doe report. All this goeth very well, ſo that this Expedient prove efficacious to the end intended.
Object. But it hath the prejudice of humane fallibilitie, for who, for weakneſſe that he doth not carry away what he hath heard, who, for vanity to ſeem to know more then his fellowes, who, to make ſome lucre of it, or for ſome emulation to ſome other; but ſeldome it hapneth that a multitude can carry away a thing all in the ſame manner; and 1600 yeers are paſſed ſince, ſo that it is not credible, a Doctrine ſo delivered can perſever incorrupted until this day.
Anſw. Yet if we look into the immediate progreſſe and joints of the deſcent, we cannot finde where it can miſſe, for the doctrine being ſupernaturall, and not delivered by mans skill or wit, the firſt and main5 principle of it can be no other, then to know what was delivered them by their Teachers, a thing not ſurpaſſing the underſtanding of any ſenſible wiſe man; ſo that put but twenty wiſe underſtanding men to agree, that the Preacher, to their certaine knowledge, ſaid ſuch a thing, there remaineth no probable nor poſſible doubt, but that it was ſo.
Now then ſuppoſe, that one of thoſe (who having been taught by Chriſts own mouth, had received by the confirmation of the Holy Ghoſt, that he could neither forget nor forgoe this received doctrine) ſhould have preached over and over again the ſame doctrine not long, nor hard to be carryed away in all the Cities, Towns, and Boroughs of ſome great Country, ſo that whilſt he ſtayd there, they were throughly underſtanding and endoctrinated in that way. Now let him be gone, and after him all dead, who had heard him ſpeake; and then ſome queſtion ariſe concerning this doctrine (as we may ſay in the ſecond age) let us ſee whether error can creep in or no, if the Chriſtians keepe unto their hold. Their hold is what they were taught by Chriſts Apoſtles. Let therefore the wiſeſt and beſt men of thoſe Cities and Towns meet together about the controverſie, and diſcuſſe it out of this principle (what was delivered unto them as taught by the Apoſtles) will not there be a quick end of their diſpute? For every man can ſay, My father heard the Apoſtle ſpeak, he underſtood him to have ſaid this, ſo he himſelfe beleeved, ſo he taught me, that this was that which, the Apoſtle taught us. And when6 out of divers Cities and Towns, ſhall come a multitude of witneſſes, all agreeing in one point, how can it be doubted, but that this is Chriſts doctrine, and that which his Apoſtle taught? And to diſagree how is it poſſible? Since all their fathers heard the ſame things, and things not above their capacity, and often told them, and well apprehended by them when they were taught, and by conſequence could not tell their children otherwiſe then what they had heard and underſtood, in a matter of ſuch moment, and of which they apprehended no leſſe, then that it concerned their own, and their childrens ſalvation, happineſſe, or miſery for all eternity. And what here is moſt evidently certaine, in the children of thoſe who heard the Apoſtles, may be derived with as much evidence again in the grand-children, and ſo in every age even to our preſent; for if in any age any queſtion beginne, and it be reduced unto this principle; what did our forefathers teach us? neither can there be any pretended ignorance (for who can be ignorant of what was taught him when he was a childe, and in what he was bred, as in the grounds and ſubſtance of his hopes, for all eternity?)
True it is, that if men leave this principle, and ſeek to judge the controverſie by learned diſcourſe, then may the, Church be divided, one part following the authority of their Anceſtors; the other the ſubtle Arguments, and the great opinion they conceive, of the learning of their preſent Teachers: ſo that one ſide will claime ſucceſſion, and to have received it from hand to hand; the other the glory7 of great learning, and to have come by great induſtry to diſcover the errors of their forefathers. But it is evident, that if what the Apoſtles preached be the touchſtone of what is true, and what they preached to be ſeen in what thoſe beleeve who have heard them, and they who received it, from them that heard them; It is moſt evident, I ſay, that the one part, who ſeek for Chriſtian truth in learned diſcourſe, muſt needs forgoe the moſt certain and eaſie way, of attaining unto what they aime at: And likewiſe evident, that who keep themſelves duly and carefully unto this principle cannot poſſibly in any continuance of time, ſwerve from the truth which Chriſt hath left unto his Church. So that the whole difficulty is reduced unto this, whether the Church for ſo many ages be perpetually preſerved in this principle, that what ſhe received from her forefathers is, that ſhe muſt beleive, and deliver unto her poſterity; A thing ſo grafted in nature; which maketh us receive our being, our breeding, our learning, our goods, our eſtates, our arts, and all things we have, from our fathers, that it is a wonder of our mutability, that without forcible Engines we can be drawn from it.
NOw let us turn our diſcourſe, and as we have ſeen, that if our Saviour ordred his Apoſtles in the manner explicated, there was no way for his Church to ſwerve from his truth, but by ſwerving from the moſt plain, the moſt naturall, and moſt evident, and concluding rule of his doctrine, and that but one, and moſt eaſie; ſo let us ſee whether from the preſent Church we can draw the like forcible train, which may lead us up to Chriſt and his Apoſtles. Be therefore ſuppoſed or imagined, what no judicious man can deny to ſee with his eyes, if he hath never ſo little caſt them upon this preſent religion of Chriſtendome, to wit, that there is one Congregation or Church which layeth claime to Chriſt his doctrine, as upon this title, that ſhe hath received it from his Apoſtles without interruption, delivered ever from Father to Sonne, from Maſter to Scholler, from time to time, from hand to hand, even unto this day; and that ſhe does not admit any other doctrine for good and legitimate, which ſhe does not receive in this manner. Againe, that whoſoever pretendeth Chriſt his truth againſt her, ſaith, that true it is, that once ſhe had the true way, but that by length of time ſhe is fallen into groſſe errours which they will reforme, not by any truth they have received from hand to hand, from thoſe who by both parts are acknowledged to have received their leſſon from9 Chriſt and his Apoſtles, but by ſtudy and learned Arguments, either out of ancient Writers, or out of the ſecrets of nature and reaſon. This being ſuppoſed, either this principle hath remained unto her ſince the beginning, or ſhe took it up in ſome one age of the 16 ſhe hath endured; if ſhe took it up in ſome latter age, ſhe then thought ſhe had nothing in her what ſhe had not received from her fore fathers in this ſort: And if ſhe thought ſo, ſhe knew it. For as it is impoſſible now any country ſhould think it was generally taught, ſuch a thing if it were not ſo; ſo alſo was there the like neceſſity, and impoſſibility to be otherwiſe, if all men were not runne mad. Therefore clear it is, ſhe took it not up firſt then, but was in former poſſeſſion, and ſo clear it is, that ſhe could not have it now, if ſhe had it not from the very beginning. Now if ſhe had it, and hath conſerved it from the beginning, no new opinion could take root in her, unleſſe it came unto her under this Maxime, as received from hand, to hand; and to ſay, that any opinion which was not truly received from hand to hand, ſhould by ſuch a community be accepted, as received from hand to hand, is to make it beleeve, what it ſeeth clearly to be falſe, to lye unto it's own ſoule, againſt it's own ſoule, and the ſoule of it's poſterity. Let us adde to this, that the multitude of this Church is ſo diſperſed through ſo many Countries and languages of ſo divers governments, that it is totally impoſſible they ſhould agree together, or meet upon a falſe determination, to affirme with one conſent a falſity for truth, no intereſt being able to10 be common unto them all to produce ſuch an effect. Wherefore as an underſtanding man cannot chuſe but laugh at the ſelf-weening Hampſhire Clown, who thinks in his heart there was no ſuch Country as France, and that all that was told of it were but Travellers tales, becauſe himſelfe being upon the Sea ſhore, had ſeen nothing but water beyond England; ſo I think no wiſe man will accompt him leſſe then phrentick, that underſtandeth ſo little in humane wayes, as to think whole Nations by deſigne, or by hazard, can agree together to profeſſe, and proteſt a thing, which they know of their own knowledge to be a meer lye, and a well known falſhood to themſelves, and all their neighbours.
THe force of the declared linke of ſucceſſion, is ſo manifeſt to a capable underſtanding, that being compared with any objection made againſt it, it will of it ſelfe maintain it's evidence, and bear down the greateſt oppoſitors and oppoſition, if the underſtanding be left unto it ſelfe, and not wreſted by the prejudice of a ſome wayes intereſſed will. Nevertheleſſe, there is a deeper root, which greatly ſtrengthens and reduceth into action, the former efficacity of the tradition. And this is, that Chriſtian doctrine is not a ſpeculative knowledge, inſtituted for delight of man to entertain his underſtanding, and hath no further end then the delectation which ariſeth out of contemplation; but11 it is an art of living, a rule of attaining unto eternall bliſſe, a practicall doctrine whoſe end is to informe our action, that our life and actions ſquared by her directions, may lead us to that great good, the which God Almighty eſteemed ſo highly of; that he thought it reaſon enough for himto ſhade his Divinity under the miſery of man, to make us partakers of ſo great a bliſſe. Hence it followeth, that no error can fall, even in a point which ſeemeth wholly ſpeculative in Chriſtian faith, but ſoone it breedeth a practicall effect, or rather defection in Chriſtian behaviour. What could ſeem more ſpeculative, then whether the ſecond, or third Perſons of the Trinity were truly or participately God? Yet no ſooner was an error broached in theſe queſtions, but there followed a great alteration in Chriſtian action; in their Baptiſmes, in their manner of Prayer, in the motives of Love and Charity toward Almighty God, the very ground-work and foundation of all Chriſtian life. Whether man hath free-will or no, ſeemeth a queſtion, belonging to the nature of man, fit for a curious Phyloſopher; but upon the preaching of the negative part, preſently followed an unknowen Libertinage, men yeilding themſelves over to all concupiſcence, ſince they were perſwaded they had no power to reſiſt, free-will being denyed. I need not inſtance in prayer to Saints, worſhiping Images, prayer for the dead, and the like; which is evident, could not be changed without an apparent change in Chriſtian Churches. So that a doctrine contrary to faith, is like a diſeaſe,12 which although the cauſe be internall, yet cannot the effects and ſymptomes be kept from the outward parts and view of the world. The conſequence which this note draweth, is, that it is not poſſible, that any materiall point of Chriſtian faith can be changed, as it were by obreption, whilſt men are on ſleepe, but it muſt needs raiſe a great ſcandall and tumult in the Chriſtian Common-weale. For ſuppoſe the Apoſtles had taught the world it were Idolatry to pray to Saints, or uſe reverence towards their Pictures: How can we imagine this honour brought in, without a vehement conflict and tumult, in a people which did ſo greatly abhor Idolatry, as the Apoſtles, Diſciples did? I might make the like inſtance in other points, if the whole Hiſtory of the Church did not conſiſt of the invaſions made by Heretiques, and the great and moſt violent waving of the Church to and fro upon thoſe occaſions. We remember in a manner as yet, how change came into Germany, France, Scotland, and our own Country: Let thoſe be a ſigne to us, what we may thinke can be the creeping in of falſe doctrine; ſpecially, that there is no point of doctrine, contrary to the Catholique Church, rooted in any Chriſtian Nation, that the Eccleſiaſticall Hiſtory does not mention the times and combats by which it entred, and tore the Church in peices.
Let it therefore remaine for moſt evidently conſtant, that into the Chriſtian Church can come no error, but it muſt be ſeen and noted, and raiſe ſcandall and oppoſition to ſhew it ſelfe (as truly it13 is) contrary to the nature of Piety and Religion.
And when it does come, it cannot draw after it any others, then ſuch as firſt deſert the root of Faith, and Anchor of Salvation, that is to be judged by what their fore-fathers taught them, and affirmed to have received from their Anceſtors, as the Faith which Chriſt and his Apoſtles delivered to the whole world of their time, and to ſuch as ever claime and maintaine the right of ſucceſſion, as rule of what they beleeve. Yet may this alſo be worthy of conſideration, that as in our naturall body, the principall parts are defended by Bones, Fleſh, Skinnes, and ſuch like defences, in ſuch ſort, that no outward Agent can come to offend them, before having annoyed ſome of theſe; ſo in the Catholique faith, there are in ſpeculation thoſe we call Theologicall concluſions, and other pious opinions; and in practiſe many Rites and Ceremonies, which ſtop the paſſage unto the maine principall parts of Chriſtian beleife and action. And about theſe we ſee daily ſuch great motions in the Catholique Church, that he muſt be very ignorant of the Spirit of God, which quickneth his Church, that can imagine any vitall part of his faith can be wounded while it lyes aſleep, and is inſenſible of the harm befalleth it; for as in any Science a principle cannot be miſtaken, but it muſt needs draw a great ſhoale of falſe conſequence upon it, and lame the whole Science, ſo never ſo little an error in faith can be admitted, but in other Tenets and Ceremonies it muſt needs make a great change, and innovation.
NOw let any diſcreet man conſider, what further evidence he can deſire, or peradventure, what greater aſſurance nature can afford, and not be of an awkward wilfulneſſe to aske, that which is not conformable to the lawes of nature? Much like unto him, who being ſate in a chaire far from the chimney, could not think of applying himſelfe to the fire, but was angry the fire and chimney were made ſo far from him. The Phyloſophers ſay, it is indiſciplinati ingenii to expect in any Art or Science more exactneſſe then the nature of it affordeth. As if a man would bind a Seaman, to goe ſo far every day, whether wind and weather ſerved or no: So in morall matters, and ſuch as are ſubject to humane action, we muſt expect ſuch aſſurance as humane actions, beare. If for the government of your ſpirituall life, you have as much as for the managing of your naturall and civill life, what can you expect more? Two or three witneſſes of men, beyond exception, will caſt a man out of, not onely his lands, but life and all. He that amongſt Merchants will not adventure, when there is a hundred to one of gaining well, will be accompted a ſilly Factor. And amongſt Souldiers, he that will feare danger where but one of a hundred is ſlaine, ſhall not eſcape the ſtain of Cowardiſe. What then ſhall we expect in Religion, but to ſee a maine advantage on the one ſide, we15 may caſt our ſelves on? and for the reſt remem ber we are men, creatures ſubject to chance and mutability, and thank God he hath given us that aſſurance in a ſupernaturall way, which we are content withall, in our naturall and civill ventures and poſſeſſions, which nevertheleſſe God knoweth we often love better, and would leſſe hazard then the unknowne good of the life to come. Yet peradventure, God hath provided better for his Church then for Nature, ſince he loved her more, and in his own Perſon did more for her. Let us therefore examine the aſſurance he hath left her particularly. It was found in the ſecond Chapter, upon this principle, that ſo great a multitude of men as cleave to this ground (to have received their faith by tradition) could not conſpire by lying, to deceive their poſterity. And if I be not deceived, this principle being granted, the concluſion (that this preſent Church is the true) followeth in as ſevere a way of diſcourſe, as in Ariſtotles Organ is taught, and exemplified in Mathematicall Writers; whoſe uſe and art it is to put the like ſuppoſitions, whence to enduce ſomething out againſt their principle. As in the ſaid Chapter you are bidden, to put what yeare, or age ſuch an error entred, and it is evidently true, that if it be true, then that yeare or age conſpired to tell a lye to deceive their poſterity. And as for the ſtrength of their principle it ſelfe (although no morall man can be ſo abſurd as to doubt of it) yet may we conſider, that the underſtanding being the part, which maketh man to be a man, and truth being the perfection16 of our underſtanding, and true ſpeech the effect, naturall to true knowledge, or underſtanding: It is cleare, that to ſpeak truth is as naturall a fruit of mans nature, as Peares of a Peare tree, Grapes of a Vine, Hony of the Bee: and that it can be no leſſe grafted in nature, for men to ſpeak truly, then it is in any other naturall cauſe to yeeld the fruit, for whoſe ſake nature bred the cauſe. Wherefore as the conſtancy of the effect ſheweth, that it holdeth upon eternall principles, that no one ſpecies of perfect creatures can periſh, although we are not ſo skilfull of nature, as hanſomely to weave the demonſtration; ſo cannot it be doubted, but that if one had all the principles of mans nature well digeſted, he might demonſtratively deduce the impoſſibility, of (that ſuch multitudes of men ſhould conſpire to a lye) the variety of particulars, ever holding their being from a conſtancy and uniformity in the univerſall. Adde to this the notoriouſneſſe of the lye, ſuch as he is rarely found, that is, ſo wicked as to venture upon; beſides the greatneſſe of the ſubject, and of the danger enſuing upon himſelfe, and his deareſt pledges. The ground therefore aſſumed, is a demonſtrative principle, and peradventure in a higher degree then moſt phyſicall principles be: For who knoweth not the nature of the ſoule, to be the higheſt thing Phyſicks can reach unto? Who knoweth not, that immateriall things are leſſe ſubject to mutability then thoſe which are grounded in matter? Then as more noble, and as more immateriall, it hath greater exemption from mutability, then17 any other naturall cauſe whatſoever. One addition more, may chance to cleare the whole buſineſſe more fully. Nothing more cleare then that, no naturall cauſe faileth of his effect, without there be ſome impediment from a ſtronger. Now the impediments which hinder a man from ſpeaking truth, experience teacheth us, to be no other then hopes and feares. The ſame experience giveth us to know, that it is a rare thing, that hopes and feares ſhould comprehend ſo great multitudes, as are in the union of the Catholique Church, ſpecially during an age, which is the leaſt time neceſſary for the effect we ſpeak of; that what peradventure might at one time be ill admitted, ſhould not be rejected at another. But if there were; can any man be ſo mad as to think, it could be a ſecret hope or feare, which ſhould not break our amongſt the poſterity, and be knowen, that what was done was not true, but counterfeited upon feare or intereſt, which if it were, a whole ages counterfeiting would not be ſufficient to make the poſterity beleeve, they had received ſuch a point of doctrine by tradition. Wherefore I doe not ſee, how this principle of tradition, and the doctrine received by it, can be accompted of leſſe certainty, then any Phyſicall demonſtration whatſoever; or Faith upon this ground not as ſure as any naturall cauſe, as the courſe of Sunne and Moon, as the flowing and ebbing of the Sea, as the Summer and Winter, Sowing and Harveſt, and whatſoever we undoubtedly preſume upon the like nature, and kind.
18The principle which is taken in the following Chapter, is of no leſſe force (if not of far better) to who rightly underſtandeth the nature of God his workes, whoſe courſe it is deeplier to root and ſtrengthen thoſe things which he would have moſt to flouriſh, or whereof he hath moſt care. Now Chriſtians well know, that God Almighty hath made mankind for his elect, as the world which is about us for mankind. And therefore he hath rooted thoſe things which more immediately belong to the Elect (as is his Church, his Faith, and Holy Spirit in it) more ſtrongly then the principles either of mans nature, or of, the world which was made for it: himſelfe aſſuring us of it, when he told us, One title ſhould not miſſe of the holy Writ, though Heaven and Earth ſhould be diſſolved. And ſo ſeeing the latter principle, relyed upon the not failing of Gods Holy Spirit to his Church, which ſhould ever watch upon their actions, that nothing ſhould creep into Chriſtian life, which perſently the zeale of his faithfull ſhould not ſtartle at. I think it needleſſe to ſeek to further qualifie the ſtrength of that part, which receiveth it from the quality of ſo good a workman as was the Holy Ghoſt.
I Doubt not but whoſoever ſhall have received ſatisfaction in the diſcourſe paſſed, will alſo have received in that point we ſeeke after; that is in being aſſured both that Chriſt hath left a Director in the world, and where to find him, there being left no doubt, but it is his holy Church upon earth. Nor can there be any queſtion, which is this Church, ſithence there is but one that doth and can lay claime, to have received from hand to hand his holy doctrine in writings and hearts. Others may cry loud, they have found it, but they muſt firſt confeſſe it was loſt: and ſo if they have, it was not received by hands, I meane, as far as it diſagreeth with Catholique doctrine; ſo that where there is not ſo much as claime, there can be no diſpute. And that this Church is a lawfull directreſſe, that is, hath the conditions requiſite, I think can no wayes be doubted. Let us conſider in her, preſence, or viſibility, authority, power. As for the firſt, her multitude and ſucceſſion, makes the Church if ſhe is ever acceſſible, ever knowen. The Arrians ſeemed to chaſe her out of the world in their flouriſh, but the perſecution moved againſt her, made her even then well known and admired. In our owne Countrey we have ſeen no Biſhop, no forme of Church for many yeares; yet never ſo, but that the courſe of juſtice did proclaime her through England, and who was20 curious could never want meanes to come to know her confeſſion of faith what it is, and upon what it is grounded. Whereſoever ſhe is, if in peace, her Majeſty and Ceremonies in all her actions, make her ſpectable and admired. If in war, ſhe never wanteth Champions to maintain her, and the very heat of her adverſaries, makes her known to ſuch as are deſirous to underſtand the truth of a matter ſo important, as is the eternall welfare of our ſoule.
For Authority: her very claime of antiquity and ſucceſſion (to have been that Church which received her beginning from Chriſt and his Apoſtles, and never forewent it, but hath ever maintained it) giveth a great reverence unto her amongſt thoſe, who beleeve her, and amongſt thoſe, who with indifferency and love of truth, ſeek to inform themſelves; a great prejudice above others: For it draweth a greater likelyhood of truth, then others have. And if it be true, it carrieth an infinite authority with it, of Biſhops, Doctors, Martyrs, Saint, miracles, learning, wiſedome, venerable antiquity, and the like: that if a prudent man ſhould ſit with himſelfe and conſider, that if he were to chuſe what kind of one he would have it, to carry away the hearts of men towards the admiration and love of God Almighty, he could find nothing wanting in this, that could be maintained with the fluxibility of nature. For to ſay, he would have no wicked men in it, were to ſay, he would have it made of Angels and not of Men.
There remaineth Power: the which no man21 can doubt but Chriſt hath given it moſt ample, who conſidereth his words ſo often repeated to his Apoſtles. But (abſtracting from that) who doth not ſee, that the Church hath the nature and proportion of ones Country, unto every one? As in a mans Country, he hath Father, and Mother, Brothers, Siſters, Kinsfolkes, Allyes, Neighbours, and Country-men, which anciently were called Cives, or Concives, and of theſe are made his Country; ſo in the Church findeth he in way of ſpirituall inſtruction and education, all theſe degrees neerer and farther off, until he come unto that further moſt of being, of all united under the univerſall Government of Chriſt his Vicar: And as he in his Countrey findeth bearing, breeding, ſettling in eſtates and fortunes, and laſtly protection and ſecurity; ſo likewiſe in the way of Chriſtianity doth he find this more fully in the Church: ſo that if it be true, that a man oweth more unto his Maſter then unto his Father, becauſe bene eſſe is better then eſſe: certainly a man alſo (as far as Church and Country can be ſeparated) muſt owe more to the Church then to his very Country; wherefore likewiſe the power which the Church hath to command and inſtruct, is greater then the power of the temporall Country, and community, whereof he is part; Againe, this Church can ſatisfie learned and unlearned. For in matters above the reach of reaſon, whoſe ſource and ſpring is from what Chriſt and his Apoſtles taught, what learned man, that underſtands the nature of ſcience and method, can refuſe in his inmoſt ſoule to bow22 to that which is teſtified by ſo great a multitude, to have come from Chriſt: And what unlearned man can require more for his faith, then to be taught by a Miſtreſſe of ſo many prerogatives and advantages above all others? Or how can he think to be quieted in conſcience, if he be not content to fare as ſhe doth, who hath this prerogative, evident that none is ſo likely by thouſands of degrees.
THe ſtemme and body of our poſition thus raiſed, will of it ſelfe ſhoot out the branches of divers Queſtions, or rather the ſolution thereof.
And firſt, How it hapned that diverſe Heretiques have pretended tradition (the Millenarians, Carpocratians, Gnoſtiaks, and divers others) yet they with their traditions have been rejected, and the holy Church left onely in claime of tradition?
For if we look into, what Catholique tradition is, and what the ſaid Heretiques pretended, under the name of Tradition, the queſtion will remain voided. For the Catholique Church calleth Tradition, that doctrine which was publikely preached in the Churches, ordred and planted in the manners and cuſtomes of the Church. The Heretiques called Tradition a kind of ſecret doctrine, either gathered out of private converſation with the Apoſtles, or rather they pretended that the Apoſtles, beſides what they publikely taught23 the world, had another private or myſticall way proper to Schollers, more endeared then the reſt, which came not to publike view, but was in huggermugger delivered from thoſe ſecret Diſciples unto others, and ſo unto them; where it is eaſily ſeen, what difference there is betwixt this Catholique Tradition and this pretended. For (the force and energie of tradition reſiding in the multitudes of hearers, and being planted in the perpetuall action, and life of Chriſtians, ſo that it muſt have ſuch a publicity that it cannot be unknown amongſt them.) Thoſe the Heretiques pretend both manifeſtly, want the life and being of traditions, and by the very great report of them loſe all authority and name. For, ſuppoſe ſome privare doctrine of an Apoſtle to ſome Diſciple, ſhould be publiſhed and recorded by that Diſciple, and ſome others, this might well be a truth, but would never obtain the force of a Catholique poſition, that is, ſuch as it ſhould be damnation to reject, becauſe the deſcent from the Apoſtle is not notorious, and fitting to ſway the body of the whole Church.
The Second Queſtion may be, How it commeth to paſſe, that ſomething which at firſt bindeth not the Churches beleef, afterward commeth to bind it? For if it were ever a Tradition it muſt ever be publique, and bind the Church: And if once it were not, it appeareth not how ever it could come to be; for if this age, (for example) hath it not, how can it deliver it over to the next age that followeth?
But if we conſider, that the hope of Chriſtian doctrine24 being great, and the Apoſtles preaching in ſo great varietie of Countries, it might happen ſome point in one Countrie to have been leſſe underſtood, or peradventure not preached at all, which in another was often preached, and well both underſtood and retained, we may eaſily free our ſelves from theſe brambles. For the Spirit of Tradition reſiding in this, that the teſtimony of that, the Apoſtles delivered this Doctrine be exceptione majus, and beyond all danger of deceit; It is not neceſſary to the efficaciouſneſs of Tradition, that the whole univerſall Church be witneſſe to ſuch a truth, but ſo great a part as could be a Warrant againſt miſtaking and deceit; ſo that if all the Churches of Aſia, or Greece, or Aphrique, or Egypt, ſhould conſtantly affirm ſuch a Doctrine to have been delivered unto them by the Apoſtles, it were enough to make a Doctrine exceptione majorem: Whence it inſueth that if in a meeting of the Univerſall Church it were found that ſuch a part had ſuch a Tradition, concerning ſome matter, whereof the reſt either had no knowledge or no certainty, ſuch a Doctrine would paſſe into a neceſſary bond in the whole Church, which before was either unknown or doubted of in ſome part thereof. A likely example thereof might be in the Canonicall bookes, the which being written ſome to one Church, and ſome to another, by little and little were ſpread from thoſe Churches unto others, and ſo ſome ſooner, ſome later, received into the conſtant beleife of the Catholique world.
25The Third queſtion may be, How (Chriſtian religion, conſiſting in ſo many points) it is poſsible to be kept incorrupted by tradition, the which depending on memory, and our memory being ſo fraile, and ſubject to variation, it ſeemeth, cannot without manifeſt miracle, conſerve ſo great diverſity of points unchanged, for ſo many ages?
But if we conſider, that Faith is a Science, and Science a thing whoſe parts are ſo connexed, that if one be falſe, all muſt needs be falſe, we ſhall eaſily ſee that contrarily; the multitude of divers points is a conſervation the one to the other. For, if one be certaine, it of it ſelfe is able to bring us to the right in another, whereof we doubt. And as in a mans body, if he wanteth one member, or the operation of it, he muſt needs find the want of it in another: And as a Common-wealth that is well ordained, cannot miſſe any office or part, without the redounding of the deſſect upon the whole, or ſome other part; ſo a Chriſtian, being an eſſence inſtituted by God, as ſpecially as any naturall creature, hath not the parts of his faith and action by accident and chance knitted together, but all parts by a naturall order, and will of the Maker, ordred for the conſervation of the moſt inward eſſence, which is the charity we owe to God, and our Neighbour. Wherefore Chriſtian life and action conſiſteth but upon one main tradition, whoſe parts be thoſe particulars, which men ſpecifie, either in matter of Beleefe or Action: So that this connextion of its parts amongſt themſelves, added to the Spirit26 of God, ever conſerving zeale in the heart of his Church, with thoſe helpes alſo of nature (wherewith we ſee wonders in this kind done) will ſhew this conſervation to be ſo far from impoſſibility, that it will appeare a moſt con-naturall and fitting thing. Let us but conſider, it conſtant nations, their language, their habits, their manners of ſacrificing, eating, generally living; how long it doth continue amongſt them. See that forlorne nation of Jewes, how conſtantly it maintaineth the Scripture? how obſtinately their errors? The Arabians of the deſert, from Iſmael his time unto this day, live in families, wandring about the deſert. Where Chriſtians labour to convert Idolaters, they find the maine and onely argument for their errors, that they received them from their fore-fathers, and will not quit them. The King of Socotora, thinking to pleaſe the Portugals by reducing a nation, that had the name of Chriſtians, to true Chriſtianity, he found them obſtinately proteſt unto him, that they would ſooner loſe their lives, then part with the religion their Anceſtors had left them. The Maronites, a ſmall handfull of people, amongſt Turks and Heretiques, to this day have maintained their religion in Siria. And certainly thouſands of examples of this kind may be collected in all Nations and Countries; eſpecially, if they be either rude, and ſuch as mingle not with others, or ſuch as be wiſe, and out of wiſedome ſeek to maintaine their ancient beleefe. And Catholiques are of both natures: For they have ſtrict commands,27 not to come to the Ceremonies and Rites of other religions, and in their own, they have all meanes imaginable to affect them to it, and conſerve a reverence and zeale towards it.
TO come at length to the principall aime of this Treatiſe, that is, to give an anſwer to him that demandeth a guide at my hands. I remit him to the moderne preſent viſible Church of Rome, that is, her, who is in an externe ſenſible communion with the externe ſenſible Clergy of Rome, and the externe ſenſible Head and Paſtour of the Church. If he aske me now, how he ſhall know her? (I ſuppoſe he meaneth, how he ſhould know her to be the true) I muſt contreinterrogate him, who he is? that is, in whoſe name he ſpeaketh? Is he an ignorant man? Is he unlearned? yet of good underſtanding in the world? Is he a Scholler? and what Scholler? A Gramarian, whoſe underſtanding hath no other helpe then of languages? Is he a Phyloſopher? Is he a Divine? (I meane an Academicall one, for a true Divine is to teach, not to aske this queſtion:) Is he a Stateſman? For he who can think one anſwer, can or ought be made to all theſe; may likewiſe expect, that a round bowle may ſtop a ſquare hole, or one cauſe produce all effects, and hang lead at his heels to fly withall. Yet I deny not, but all theſe muſt have the ſame guide,28 though they are to be aſſured of, that in divers ſorts and manners. If therefore the ignorant man ſpeaketh, I will ſhew him in the Church of God an excellencie in decencie, Majeſtie of Ceremonies above all other Sects and Religions, whereby dull capacities are ſweetly enſnared, to beleeve the truth they hear, from whom they ſee to have the outward Signs of vertue and devotion. If the unlearned ask; I ſhew him the claim of Antiquitie, the multitude, the advantages of ſanctity and learning, the juſtifiableneſs of the cauſe, how the world was once in this accord, and thoſe who oppoſed, when they firſt parted, firſt began the Schiſm; how the points of difference be ſuch as on the Catholike ſide help devotion, and on the contrary diminiſh the ſame, and ſuch like ſenſible differences which will clearly ſhew a main advantage on the Catholike ſide, which is the proportionall motive to his underſtanding: To the Grammarian I will give two Memorandums.
Firſt, that ſeeing Catholiques were firſt in poſſeſſion both of the Scriptures and the interpretations, the adverſe part is bound to bring ſuch places as can receive no probable Expoſition by the Catholikes. It is not ſufficient that their Expoſitions ſeem good or better; that is, more conformable unto the Text, but they muſt be evincent, to which no ſo ſound anſwer, even with ſome impropriety can be given. For who knoweth not, that is converſant in Criticks, how many obſcure, and difficult places occurre in moſt plain Authors: and the Scripture of all Books (the greater part of29 the men who wrote them, ſpecially the new Teſtament, being not eloquent, and writing not in their native tongue) for the moſt part are ſubject to many Improprieties.
The other Memorandum is, That to prove a Catholike point by Scripture, it is ſufficient that the place brought, do bear the Explication the Catholike beareth, and if it be more probable by the very letter, it is an evincent place. The reaſon is, Becauſe the Queſtion being about a Chriſtian Law, the Axioms of the Juriſts taketh place that Conſuetudo optima interpres Legis. So that if it be manifeſt that Chriſtian practiſe (which was before the controverſie) be for the one ſenſe, and the words be tolerable, no force of Grammar can prevail to equalize this advantage. The Grammarian therefore who will obſerve theſe rules, I turn him looſe to the Scriptures, and Fathers to ſeek in them what is the faith of Chriſt, and properties, of his Church to know her by. Of the the Philoſopher I exact to go like a Philoſopher, and to ſearch out the pecificall differences of every Sect, and when he hath found them, if any one but the Catholike hath any rule of Faith and good life: which I remit to him to enquire? But at leaſt when he hath found the Catholiques to be this claim of Tradition before declared, then, if this doe not bring him as demonſtratively, as he knoweth any concluſion in Philoſophie, and Mathematicks, to the notice that this is the only true Church of Chriſt, for my part I ſhall quit him before God and man. The Divine if he hath truly30 underſtood the principles of his Faith in the nature of a Divine (I mean, Trinity, Incarnation, Redemption, Euchariſt, Beatitude, the Creation and Diſſolution of the World) and hath ſeen the exact conformitie with the deepeſt principles of nature, with an unſpeakable wiſedome of the contriver: If he does not plainly confeſſe it was above the nature of man to frame the Catholike-Religion, and ſeeth not that onely, that is conformable to nature and it ſelfe; I ſay, he hath no ground ſufficient to be of it. At laſt, the Stateſman who is truly informed of the Church, (how far it is really of Chriſts Inſtitution, and what either pious men have added, or peradventure, ambitious men encroached,) If he does not find a government of ſo high and Exotick ſtrain, that neither mans wit would dare to have attempted it, neither mans power could poſſibly have effected it. If he findeth not eminent helpes, and no diſadvantage to the temporall government, I ſhall think there wanteth one Star in the Heaven of the Church, to direct theſe Sages to Bethlehem. But if God Almighty hath in all ſorts and manners provided his Church, that ſhe may enlighten every man in his way, which goeth the way of a man; then let every man conſider, which is the fit way for himſelfe, and what in other matters of that way he accompteth evidence. And, if there be no intereſt in his ſoule, to make him loath to beleeve, what in another matter of the like nature he would not ſtick at, or heavy to practiſe what he ſeeth clearly enough, I feare not his choice; but if God ſend him time31 and meanes to proſecute his ſearch any indifferent while, it is long ago known of what religion he is to be of
Although if what is already be not ſatisfaction unto the writing, and the Author thereof, (for whoſe ſake and contentment, all that hath been diſcourſed hitherto, hath been ſet down:) I confeſſe, that I have not ability to give him ſatisfaction: yet leaſt it ſhould be interpreted neglect, If I did not make an application of it unto the writing, I ſhall as breifly as I can, for avoiding tediouſneſſe, runne over the diſcourſe. And true it is, ſpeaking of the Church of Rome, as this day it is the true Church of God: I anſwer the doubter, ſhe neither hath, nor can have any error, which he need to feare, and be ſhye of. The which two limitations I adde, for avoiding queſtions, impertinent to our diſcourſe. The firſt, for thoſe which are concerning the connection of the Sea of Rome to the univerſall Church. The latter, to avoid ſuch queſtions as touch that point, whether the Church may erre, in any Phyloſophicall or other ſuch like matter? which queſtions are not ſo pertinent to our matter.
Neither doe I remit the Queſtioner unto Scripture for his ſatisfaction, although I hold Scripture32 a very ſufficient meanes, to ſatisfie the man, who goeth to it with that preparation of underſtanding and will, which is meet and required. Howſoever this I may anſwer, for them who prove it out of Scripture, that becauſe they diſpute againſt them who admit of Scripture, and deny the authority of the Church, if they can convince it, they doe well; though they will not themſelves admit generally of a proofe our of Scripture, as not able to prove every thing in foro contentioſo.
That they ſay, the Church is made infallible, that we may have ſome guide, I think it very rationall. For nature hath given ever ſome ſtrong and uncontroulable principle in all natures to guide the reſt. The Common-wealth hath a Governour not queſtionable, our underſtanding hath ſome principles, which ſhe cannot judge, but by them judgeth of all other verities. If there ſhould not be ſome ſuch principle in the Church, it were the onely maimed thing God had created; and maimed in its principall part, in the very head. And if there be ſuch a principle, the whole Church is infallible by that, as the whole man ſeeth by his eyes, toucheth by his hands. Neither can I deny, but that the Author well excepteth, or aſſumeth, that there is no leſſe neceſſity, the Church ſhould be known to be infallible, or which is this Church, then that there is one. For if I ſhould admit abſolutely, that it is neceſſary for every man to know the Church is Infallible, precedently to the knowledge of which is the true Church, I ſhould33 forget what I had before ſaid, that ſatisfaction is to be given to every one, according to his capacity. It is ſufficient for a Childe to beleeve his Parents, for a Clown to beleeve his Preacher, about the Churches Infallibility. For Faith is given to mankind, to be a meanes to him of beleeving, and living like a Chriſtian: and ſo he hath this ſecond, it is not much matter in what termes he be with the firſt. The good women and Clownes in Italy, and Spaine, trouble not themſelves to ſeek the grounds of their faith, but with a Chriſtian ſimplicity, ſeek to live according unto that their Preachers tell them; and without queſtion, by perſeverance, come to the happineſſe, great Clearks by too much ſpeculation may faile of. Such therefore know no otherwiſe the Infallibility of the Church, then becauſe ſhe telleth it them, to whom they give credit, as innocently as any child to his Mother.
The Church therefore was made infallible, becauſe ſo it was fitting for her Maker, ſo it was fitting for her ſelfe, ſo it was fit for that part of mankind, that had more refined wits; not becauſe it was neceſſary for every one which was to come to her, or live in her, whereof the greateſt part firſt commeth to her, drawn by ſome of the meanes before delivered, and beleeveth her about her infallibility.
Neither doe I remit him to a generall and conſtant tradition, as if himſelfe ſhould climbe up every age by learned Writers, and find it in every one. I take it to be impoſſible. Teſtimonies34 one may find in many ages, but ſuch as will demonſtrate and convince, a full tradition, I much doubt. Neither doe I find by experience, that who will draw a man by a rope or chain, giveth him the whole rope or chaine into his hands, but onely one end of it, unto which if he cleave hard, he ſhall be drawn which way the rope is carried. Tradition is a long chaine, every generation or delivery from father to ſonne, being a link in it. I ſend him therefore no further then to this preſent age, where he ſhall (beyond all doubtfulneſſe) find that this doctrine was delivered unto this age, by the care of their Anceſtors. And if we ſeek upon what termes, we find, that upon a fixed opinion of damnation in failing; and ſo, that they had received it ſo from their fore-fathers upon the ſame termes, with opinion that it had continued ever ſince Chriſt his time by this meanes. And he who is able to look into the meanes, how this can remaine conſtantly ſo many ages, may find it not onely the far ſecurer, but an evidently infallible ſucceſſion of doctrine, inviolable as long as there is a Church. And this doth not onely ſhew that there is one, but which ſhe is, and that there can be no other. For I ſuppoſe, no man will be ſo ſenſeleſſe as to ſay, the Apoſtles preached one thing in one part, and the contrary in another: wherefore it will be agreed, that once the Church agreed in her faith. This ſuppoſed, let us ſet the time when one part changed, and will it not be evident, that the changing Church being challenged cannot plead, ſhe received35 it from her Anceſtors, becauſe it is manifeſtly falſe to both parties? Then muſt needs one onely Church remain with that claime. And although we did not know what the Greek Church doth by her Hiſtory, yet the force of conſequence would tell us, they cannot doe this which the Weſterne Church doth, becauſe the doing of one is incompatible with the doing of the ſame by the other.
As for the two places concerning the Popes and Councels infallibility, it is not to my purpoſe to medle of them, becauſe on the one ſide, the way I have begun, there is no need of thoſe diſcourſes; and on the other, I ſhould engage my ſelfe in quarrels betwixt Catholique, and Catholique, obſcure the matter I have taken in hand, and profit nothing in my hearers, more then to be judged, peradventure to have more learning then wiſedome to governe it withall. Wherefore I ſhall omit thoſe Paragraphes, if I onely note concerning the tradition impoſed upon Papius, that the very narration of it, ſheweth that it is no tradition, in the ſence we ſpeak of tradition, but in the ſence ſome Heretiques have pretended tradition; as it were a doctrine ſecretly delivered, and gathered out of private conference with the Apoſtles, and not their publique preaching delivered to the Churches, which is the way we exalt tradition in. The witneſſes alſo of ancient Fathers are no parts of tradition, but ſignes and markes where it hath paſſed, whereas the body of tradition is in the life and beleife of the whole Church. For the Church36 (as I have ſaid) is an eſſence compoſed, as it were, of interne and externe parts; the interne being faith, the externe, the outward action, which muſt needs be conformable to the internall faith, nor can there be a materiall change in the action, but it muſt argue the internall change of faith, nor internall change in faith, but it muſt draw with it an Iliad of altered actions.
As for the place of Fevardentius, which alloweth many Fathers to have fallen into errors, I thinke it will not trouble him, who is acquainted with the courſe of the preſent Church, wherein divers, who be thought great Divines, fall into errors, for which their bookes ſometimes are hindred from the print, ſometimes, recalled, or ſome leaves commanded to be paſted up. The reaſon is, the multiplicity of Catholique doctrine, which doth not oblige a man to the knowledge of every part, but to the prompt ſubjection, to the inſtruction of the Church, wherefore many men may hold falſe doctrine inculpably, not knowing it to be ſuch, even now after the learned labours of ſo many, that have ſtrived to open and facilitate by method, what is true and what is falſe; much more in the Fathers times, when there was great want of ſo many compilers, as theſe latter ages have produced.
As for the two points, he ſaith, avert him from Catholique doctrine, I am miſtaken, if he be not miſtaken in both. The firſt is, that Catholique doctrine damnes all, who are not in the union of their Church. He thinketh the ſentence hard,37 yet, I thinke he will not deny me this, that if any Church does not ſay ſo, it cannot be the true Church: For call the Church what you will, the Congregation of the Elect, the Congregation of the Faithfull, the Congregation of Saints, or Juſt; call it, I ſay, or define it what you will, doth it not clearly follow, that whoſoever is out of that Church cannot be ſaved; for he ſhall not be Elect, Juſt, Faithfull, &c. without which there is no Salvation. How then can any Church maintaine theſe two propoſitions? I am the true Church, and yet one may be ſaved, without being in me. But peradventure he is ſcandalized, that the Catholique Church requireth actuall communion, externall with her, which he thinketh in ſome caſe may be wanting, without detriment of Salvation. But how would he have the Church ſpeake, which ſpeaketh in common, but abſtracting from ſuch particular caſes, as may change wholly the nature of the queſtion. For example ſake; hath not the Church reaſon to ſay, he that denyeth the bleſſed Trinity is an Heretique? It hapneth, one who hath converſed among the Tritheites, hearing them uſe the word Trinity for three Gods, meaning to ſpeak againſt them, denyeth there is any Trinity; ſhall this man be comprehended in the foreſaid condemnation? Or was the ſentence ill pronounced? Neither, as I think. For bo h was it well done by the Church, to condemne denyers of the Trinity, becauſe per ſe loquendo (as the Phyloſophers ſpeak) that is, according to the ordinary courſe, and nature of things, who denyeth a thing38 in words, denyeth it in heart; yet the man fore-ſpoken, did not ſo, and was not condemned in that ſentence. In like manner, when the Church condemneth all ſuch as are not in actuall union, and communion with her, ſhe doth well: becauſe according to the ordinary courſe, this doth not fall out, without either preſumption, and damnable pride, or elſe culpable, either ignorance, or feare, and love of private intereſt, before God and his Church. But it followeth not thence, that by accident no man may ſometime be excuſed. The words of our Saviour concerning Baptiſme and Euchariſt their neceſſity, are very preciſe, yet the Church doubteth not to excuſe thoſe who have it in voto.
But to proceed unto the point. The corrent of Catholique Doctors holdeth, that no man ſhall be damned for infidelity, but he who wilfully doth miſ-beleeve, and that to doe ſo, it is required that faith be ſufficiently propoſed unto him. And what is to be ſufficiently propoſed, is not determined amongſt them. There wanteth not Divines, that teach, that even ignorantia affectata, doth excuſe from Heriſie.
On the other ſide it is moſt certaine, that no man is damned for not profeſſing, what he is not damned for not beleeving. Wherefore profeſſion being that which engrafteth a man exteriorly in the Church of God, according unto the ordinary opinions of Catholiques; it followeth, that no man is condemned for not being of the Church, who is not for infidelity, for which it is a very39 uncertaine caſe, who be damned and who not. So that the Catholique poſition is not ſo crude, as peradventure the Author underſtood it to be, though the words be rough, and ought to be ſo, as being of what is according to the courſe of nature, not what chance and accidents may invent.
The other point was of puting Heretiques to death, which I think he underſtandeth to be done Vindicatively, not Medicinally. I meane impoſed as a puniſhment, and not in way to prevent miſcheife, or oppreſſe it in the head. If the Circumcellians were the firſt, that is ancient enough for the juſtification of the fact, although for baniſhment (which alſo he ſeemeth to reprehend) we know the firſt that could ſuffer it, did ſuffer it. Arrius, I meane, by the hand of Conſtantine, whom he praiſeth for a ſpeech he uttered, before he knew the conſequence of the danger, and ſeemeth to reprehend for his after and better wits. Saint Auguſtine juſtifieth ſuch proceeding againſt Here tiques. Saint Gregory adviſed the like againſt Pagans, (if I remember) and the Church laterly, hath rather increaſed then decreaſed in the practiſe of it. Mores's ſpeech, I beleeve is miſtaken, the force of it being, that the baniſhment of Biſhops ſhewed his faith, becauſe the baniſhed were Catholiques, which ſhewed Lucius to be none. But what can be ſaid, if the Church uſeth that for the prevention of a greater, and more dangerous evill, which all politique Eſtates uſe for the remedies of leſſe, and leſſe dangerous evils, and are commended for it? For if Faith be the way of Salvation ▪40 and hereby the bane of Faith; if Salvation be the greateſt good, then the danger of a Countries being over runne with Hereſie, is the greateſt of dangers, greater then the multiplying of Theeves, greater then the unſurety of the wayes, greater then a Plague, or Invaſion. Why then doth not reaſon force us to uſe the meanes to prevent it, which the ſame reaſon and experience, teacheth us to be moſt efficacious in this, and all other contagious and gangrening maladies of the Common-wealth. I hope reaſon it ſelfe, and the zeale of the Author to his own and Countries Salvation, will ſupply my ſhortneſſe in this point. For ſuppoſing a Church be aſſured ſhe is in the right, and that the doctrine preached by another, leadeth to damnation, I know not why Caipha's words ſhould not be propheticall in this caſe, and that truly it doth not expedire, that unus moriatur pro populo, & non tota gens pereat.
He urgeth afterwards againſt the unity of the Church, that it is none ſuch as we brag off. And I confeſſe we brag of it, and thinke we have reaſon too. And if it pleaſe him to look into the difference of our Country of England, and ſome Land of Barbarians, as Braſile, or ſuch other, where they live without Law or Government. I thinke he will find, that our bragging is not without ground. For wherein is the difference betwixt a civill Government, and a barbarous Anarchie? Is it either, that in a civill Eſtate there be no quarrels, or amongſt Barbarians there is no quiet. The former would prejudice our Courts and Juſtice,41 the latter is impoſſible, even in nature. What is then the goodneſſe of Government, but that in a well govern'd Country, there is a meanes to end quarrels, and in an Anarchy there can be no aſſured peace? This therefore is that we brag of, that amongſt us, if any controverſie riſe, there is a way to end it, which is not amongſt them who part from us. And ſecondly, that there is no aſſured agreement amongſt thoſe who are parted from us; for although to day they agree, there is no bond, nor tye, why to morrow they may not diſagree. Theſe two things we brag of, and I think the Author will not deny it. For he confeſſeth we all agree, in that the Church is an infallible Miſtreſſe. Then it is evident, that if in any controverſie ſhe interpoſeth her judgement, the controverſie is ended. He likewiſe confeſſeth, that who part from us, have no ſuch definitive authority amongſt them, and that Scripture whereon they relie, hath not this vertue, to take up controverſies clearly. Againe, I doe confeſſe, moſt Engliſh men confeſſe a Trinity, the Incarnation, and Paſſion of our Saviour, but if to morrow, any one or more of them, light upon ſome book of an Arrian, Trinitarian, or other Sect, ſo wittily written, that he putteth probable ſolutions for the places of Scriptures, ſheweth ſlight wayes, how our well-meaning fore-fathers may have ſlipped into ſuch an error; what is there to retaine theſe men, from diſagreeing with the reſt of their brethern, and betake themſelves to the Arrians: And when the heat is paſſed,42 light upon ſome Rabbi, who ſhall cunningly exaggerate the abſurdities (as he ſhall terme them) of the Trinity, Incarnation, Paſſion; ſay our Saviour did ſtrange things in vertue of ſome conſtellation, and delivering theſe things ſo oratorically, that for a new heat theſe things ſhall ſeem more conformable, then his Arrianiſme; what then ſhall hinder this to become a Jew, and at laſt to prove himſelfe ſo great a Clerk, as to write De Tribus Impoſtoribus. Take away the power of the Church (which every man doth, who taketh away the Infallibility) what can retaine any man, why he ſhould not yeeld to that diſcourſe, which ſeemeth faireſt, ſeeing nothing is certaine? But peradventure, ſome may attribute power unto the Church without Infallibility, whom I would have conſider, but what himſelfe ſaith. For his Church, by the power it hath, muſt either ſay, I command you to beleeve me, or I command you to profeſſe this, whether you beleeve me or no. The ſecond I think, no enemy of equivocation will admit, as the former is as much, as if it ſhould ſay, I know not whether I ſay true or no, yet you muſt think I ſay true. So that if I underſtand any thing, where there is no Infallibility, there is no Power, where no Power, no Unity, where no Unity, no Entity, no Church. Now for the controverſies mentioned (beſides that, there is a meanes to terminate them) they be ſuch, as bring no breach of the ancient life, and action of Chriſtians, which all thoſe Opinions doe, which for the moſt part are reputed to make Heretiques; That ſome controverſies43 amongſt us are not reſolved, is a thing neceſſary amongſt humane affaires, where things muſt have a time to be borne, to encreaſe, to fall; and the greater things are, the greater is their period. Wherefore I doe not ſee, why this may hurt the Church, more then the Suits which hang in our Courts, prejudice the Government of the Land. Neither can any other Church aſſume Infallibility to it ſelfe; becauſe it cannot lay hold of this principle, that it receiveth its doctrine by hands; and ſo muſt firſt profeſſe the Church of Chriſt to be fallible, or elſe it cannot part from it.
The laſt point of the Authors diſcourſe, is, to ſhew how errors might have crept in. Wherein I ſhall have no oppoſition with him, for I doe not thinke the queſtion is, how they ſhould creep in, but how they ſhould be kept out? For the fluxibility of humane nature is ſo great, that it is no wonder if errors ſhould have crept in, the wayes being ſo many, but it is a great wonder of God, that none ſhould have crept in. This nevertheleſſe I may ſay, (if the Author will confeſſe, (as I think) he will not deny, but that it is diſputable, whether any error in ſixteen ages hath crept in) this very thing is above nature. For if there were not an excellency beyond the nature of corruptible things, it would be undeniably evident, that not one or two, but hundreds of errors had quite changed the ſhape of the Church in ſo many yeares, tempeſts, diviſions, want of commerce in the body of the Church. But this one44 maxime, that ſhe receiveth her Faith by Tradition, and not from Doctors, hath ever kept her entire. And he that will ſhew the contrary, muſt ſhew how it could come to paſſe, that thoſe who lived in ſuch an age, could ſay unto their children, this we received from our fore-fathers, as taught them by their fore-fathers, to have been received from Chriſt and his Apoſtles, from hand to hand; which if it could not be, the queſtion is reſolved, that no error is in the Church of God, which holdeth her faith upon that tenure.
And truly, if the Author deſire to examine many Religions, let him look their main ground wherein they relye, and ſee whether that be good or no. And I thinke amongſt Chriſtians he ſhall find but two, Tradition, and Scripture. And the Catholique onely to relye upon Tradition, and all the reſt upon Scripture. And alſo ſhall he ſee, that relying upon Scripture cannot draw to an unity, thoſe who relye upon it; and that more then one cannot relye upon Tradition, which when I have conſidered, I have no further to ſeeke, for if I will be a Chriſtian, I muſt belong to one ſide. By falling on the one ſide, I ſee my fortune in thouſands who have gone before me, to wit, that I ſhall be to ſeek all my life time, as I ſee they are, and how greatly they magnifie very weak peices. On the other ſide, I ſee every man who followeth it, as far as he follow it, is at quiet; and therefore cannot chuſe, but think there to be the ſtone to reſt my head upon, againſt which Jacob his Ladder is reared unto Heaven.
45The Author hath through his whole diſcourſe, inſerted divers things, which ſeem particularly to the juſtification of himſelfe, in the way of his ſearch. The which, as I think, on one ſide I ſhould be too blame to exaimine (for who am I, to judge the Servant of another man) ſo, becauſe I cannot think, but that they were inſerted for love of truth, and to heare what might be ſaid againſt them (craving pardon, if on preſumption of that, it is his will, I anyway offend) I ſhall touch the matter, wholly abſtracting from the perſonall diſpoſition of any man. And to begin a far of, it is confeſſed amongſt Catholiques, that all ſinne muſt be wilfull, and ſo as far as any mans doubt in Religion is not by will, but by force and neceſſity, ſo far it is not culpable, but may be laudable before God and man. As was without doubt the anxious ſearch of Saint Auguſtine for the truth, which he relateth in his confeſſions, for who is aſſured of being out of the truth, muſt have time to ſeek it, and ſo long this doubt is rationall, and laudable. That which muſt juſtifie this ſearch, is in common, that which juſtifieth all actions, that a man be ſure in the aime he aimeth at, and in the meanes he taketh, not to be governed by any paſſion, intereſt, or wilfulneſſe, but that he ſincerely aimeth, and carefully purſueth in the ſearch of the truth it ſelfe, for the love of it; and of thoſe goods which depend of the knowledge of it. This is a thing, in which a rationall man can have no other judge then himſelfe; for no man knoweth what is within a man, but46 the Spirit, or conſcience of man. But he himſelfe muſt be a rigorous Judge unto himſelfe, for it is very hard to know the truth: when I ſay rigorous, I mean exact, and fearfull miſ-deeming: As holy Job was, who ſaid, He was fearfull of all his actions. Holy David, but amongſt all, Saint Auguſtine doth more ſweetly complaine of the miſery of man, not knowing his own diſpoſitions, and yet he was then forty yeares of age, when paſſions and heates of youth which make this diſcuſſion harder, are generally ſettled. Beſides this, he muſt have this care, that he ſeek what the nature of the ſubject can yeeld, and not as thoſe Phyſitians, who when they have promiſed no leſſe then immortality, can at laſt onely reach to ſome conſervation of health, or youth, in ſome ſmall degree. So I could wiſh the Author, to well aſſure himſelfe firſt, that there is poſſible, an Infallibility, before he be too earneſt, to be contented with nothing leſſe. For what if humane nature ſhould not be capable of ſo great a good, would he therefore think fitting to live without any Religion, becauſe he could not get ſuch a one as himſelfe deſired, though with more then a mans wiſh. Were it not rationall to ſee, whether amongſt Religions, ſome one hath not ſuch notable advantages over the reſt, as in reaſon it might ſeeme, humane nature might be contented withall Let him caſt his accompts with the deareſt things he hath, his own, or freinds lives, his eſtate, his hope of poſterity, and ſee upon what termes of advantage he is ready to venture all theſe, and then return47 to Religion, and ſee whether, if he doe not venture his ſoule upon the like, it be truly reaſon, or ſome other not confeſſed motive, which withdraweth him. For my own part, as I doubt not of an Infallibity, ſo I doubt not, but ſetting that aſide, there be thoſe excellencies found on the Catholique party, which may force a man to preferre it, and venture all he hath upon it, before all other Religions, and Sects in the world: Why then may not one, who after long ſearching findeth no Infallibility, reſt himſelfe on the like, ſuppoſing mans nature affordeth no better?
Another thing may make a mans ſearch faulty, and is carefully to be looked unto, I meane, that it is eaſie for a man to miſtake himſelfe, by too much confidence in himſelfe or others. He that will make a judgement in an Art he is not Maſter in, if he be deceived, is to impute it unto himſelfe. The Phraſe commandeth us to beleeve every man in his Art; he who knoweth and underſtandeth himſelfe, beleeveth not. Therefore when we ſee Maſters in an Art, we are not skilled in, oppoſe us, we may beleeve we are in the wrong: which will bred this reſolution in the Author of the diſcourſe, that if himſelfe be not skilled all thoſe wayes in which he purſueth his ſearch, he muſt find himſelfe obliged to ſeek Maſters, who be both well skilled, and (the matter being ſubject to faction) alſo very honeſt and upright men, or elſe he doth not quit himſelfe before God and man.
I cannot part without one note more, which is, that it is not all one to incurre damnation for infidelity,48 and to be in ſtate of Salvation. For the man to whom infidelity is not imputed, may be in ſtate of damnation, for other faults, as thoſe were who having known God by his works, did not glorifie him as they ought: nay, they may be damned through want of Faith, and yet not be condemned for incredulity. As for example ſake, if when they have ſinned, they know not what meanes to take to have them forgiven, though they be without fault in not beleeving, nevertheleſſe dying without remiſſion of ſinne, they are not in ſtate to come to life everlaſting. As the man, who ſhould venture into a Wood without a guide, although he did his beſt to have a guide, nothing leſſe might fall out of his way, as well as he, who neglected the taking of one; ſo if God ſent his Sonne to ſhew us the way of Salvation, and that be but one; as well is he like not to be ſaved, who never heard of ſuch a way, as he that heard of it, and neglected it; for neither of the two goeth that way; and who goes not on the way, is not like to come to the end. I know God is good and mercifull; but I know his workes, as far as we know, are diſpenſed by the order of ſecond cauſes; and where we ſee no ſecond cauſes, we cannot preſume of the effects. God is good and mercifull I know, and feedeth the Birds of the aire, and much more men; yet we ſee in dearths and hard winters, both men and Birds to periſh, doe they what they could to get victuals. And how am I aſſured he will ſend Angels to illuminate ſuch men as doe their endeavours, that their ſoules may not periſh? But49 far more doe I doubt, whether ever man, who had not the way of Chriſt, or even of thoſe, who walked in it, did ever doe his beſt (except ſome few, and very few, perhaps not two of Chriſt his greateſt favourites) and was not ſo culpable, that his perdition would not have been imputed unto himſelfe. God of his mercy put us in the ſcore of thoſe, of whom he ſaith, He will take pitty upon whom he pleaſeth, and compaſsion of them he pleaſeth.
I Receive your intention to inſtruct me for a great Obligation, but I ſhould have eſteemed it a greater; if you would have pleaſed to let me know to whom I owe the Favour, and ſhould pay my thanks; and if you had not tranſlated the command of ſecreſie from proper to metaphoricall Almes.
I am alſo to thank you (for in this Age we are beholding to them who doe what is fit) for not52 mixing Gall with your Inke; ſince I have ever thought that there ſhould bee as little bitterneſs in a Treatiſe of Controverſie, as in a Love-letter, and that the contrary way was both void of Chriſtian charitie, and humane wiſedome, as ſerving onely〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to fright away the game,Syneſius. and make their Adverſarie unwilling to receive Inſtruction from him, from whom they have received Injuries; and making themſelves unabler to diſcover Truth (which Saint Auſtine ſayes is hard for him to find who is calme, but impoſſible for him that is angry:) raiſing beſides a great ſuſpition of ignorance in him that uſeth it; ſince it is a very true Rule which we have received from Hierocles,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Confidence of knowledge conduceth much to meekneſſe: Now in this I intend to take you for my pattern, and the ſame Author for my Counſellour;〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and being able to overthrow what is falſe (for ſo muſt I thinke I can, and ſuch I muſt take your reaſons to be, as long as they perſwade me not) 〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, reſiſting Errors without Anger, and purſuing Truth with mildneſſe.
Now this I muſt profeſſe for my ſelfe, that ſince I conſidered any thing in Religion, and knew that there were ſeverall of them in the world, I never avoided to hear (at leaſt) any man that was willing to perſwade me by reaſon, that any of53 them was the true,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Nay rather I have laid wait to meet with ſuch of all ſorts, as were moſt likely to ſay moſt on their ſide (as S. Chryſoſtome ſayes of Abraham, that he did〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉lay nets for Gueſts) and though almoſt all that undertake the ſearch of ſo important a Truth, doe it better, provided, with ſharpneſs of wit, and ſoliditie of judgement, yet I verily beleeve that few doe with that indifference and equalitie Which is fit for a Judge, and with which I both began and continue it.
Yet (leaſt there might ſome un-mark't prejudice lye lurking in me, and leaſt I might harbour ſome ſecret inclination to thoſe Tenets which I had firſt been taught) I have ever lean'd, and ſet my Byas to the other ſide, and have both more diſcourſed of matters of Religion with thoſe of the Church of Rome then with their Adverſaries, and read more of their writings; though none either ſo often or ſo carefully, as this which I am now anſwering, both becauſe it was intended for my Inſtruction and confutation; as alſo becauſe the beauty of the ſtile and language, in which you have apparrelled your conceptions (although
yet) ſhowes the Author a conſiderable Perſon, and I may ſay of the ſplendour and outſide of what you have ſaid (for my opinion (that it wants ſoliditie, and that the Logick of it is inferiour to the Rhetorick) is ſeen by my writing againſt it) what54 Tacitus ſayes of Vitellius his Annie, Phalerae torqueſque ſplendebant, & non Vitellio principe dignus exercitus; for as he would have had that glorious Army been imployed in the defence of a better and braver Prince,Xenophon Hiſt. 3. ſo I wiſh your eloquence had guilded the better cauſe;〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. And (having learn't moreover from the Pagan Divinitie of Hierocles (which in this is conformable to that of moſt Chriſtians) that〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that all our ſearch is but the ſtretching forth of our hands, and that our finding proceeds from Gods delivering the Truth unto us, and that prayer is the beſt meanes to joyn the latter to the former:) I have not only with my utmoſt endeavours done my part; but alſo beſought God with my moſt earneſt fervency to doe his; and ſo〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, joyning Prayer to ſearch, like form to Matter; I doubt not but God who hath given me a will, to ſeek his Will, alſo〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉;Euſeb. Orat. de Laud. Conſt. and if I have not the truth already, I ſhall be taught the truth by him, and by you as his Inſtrument, or ſhall be excuſed, if I find it not; aſſuring you that I was never more ready to part with my clothes when they were torn, then with my opinions when they were confuted, and appeared to me to be ſo.
To begin then with your Treatiſe, you can ſay nothing for Tradition, which I will not willingly55 allow, Scripture it ſelf being a Traditum, and by that way comming to our knowledge, (for I am confident that thoſe who would know it by the Spirit, run themſelves into the ſame Circle between Scripture and Spirit, out of which ſome of your ſide have but unſucceſſefully laboured to get out between Scripture and Church) but that this way which you propound ſhould be convenient to know what was Tradition at firſt, I can by no means agree. Which to conſider the better, I will comprehend all the ſtrength of what you have ſaid in a little room, and ſhut up your Oration into the compaſſe of ſome 3. Sillogiſmes; thus you argue,
What company ſoever of Chriſtians alone pretend to teach nothing but what they have received from their Fathers, as received from theirs, as ſo come down from the Apoſtles, that company alone muſt hold the truth.
But that company of Chriſtians which are in communion with the Church of Rome only pretend this,
Therefore they alone hold the truth, and the Church.
The Major you prove thus:
If ſuch a company of Chriſtians could teach falſhoods, then (ſince it is granted that what was at firſt delivered was true) ſome age muſt either have erred in underſtanding their Anceſtors, or have joyned to deceive their poſterity.
But neither of theſe are beleevable,
Therefore neither is it beleevable, that ſuch a company of Chriſtians ſhould teach falſhoods.
The Minor you prove thus; (I mean that they56 alone pretend it, for that they, I mean all they, pretend it, you take for granted.)
If it be incompatible with the Church of Romes doing it, that any elſe ſhould doe it, then ſhe does it alone.
But it is incompatible, (which is denied, and not yet proved.)
Therefore ſhe doth it alone.
The ſeverall parts of this Argument, I mean firſt to Anſwer; and ſecondly, Whatſoever lyes ſcatter'd in your diſcourſe any thing to this purpoſe, or any other unanſwer'd in the firſt part: and thirdly, I will reply to thoſe Anſwers which you have been pleaſed to make, to part of that Nothing which I writ, wiſhing that this laſt work might have bin longer, I mean that by anſwering it all, and in order, you had given me occaſion to have dwelt more upon my Reply.
Now if I doe not ſhew that all of the Church of Rome do not, nor cannot pretend this, that for two to pretend it is not incompatible (as having been ſo heretofore) that thoſe who alone pretend this may pretend it falſely, that ſome men, and in time all may miſtake their Anceſtors, and have a mind in ſome caſes to deceive their poſterity, and that it is not neceſſary for a whole age at once to joyn in doing it, though it be done (if I ſay) I ſhew not this, then let me not bee beleeved, and if you can ſhew me that I have not ſhewed it, I will promiſe to beleeve you.
Firſt, That the Church of Rome doth not, nor cannot pretend, that all their doctrine was received57 by them from their fathers as come down from the Apoſtles, it appeares, becauſe when queſtions have riſen about ſuch things, whereof there was before no ſpeech, yet if a Councell have determined them, they are received with the ſame aſſent, as if they had come from the Apoſtles; and they profeſſe now the ſame readineſſe to receive alwayes any ſuch definition, though about a queſtion now unknown; and it is likely, they have done what they profeſſe they are ready to doe; at leaſt, they ſhew, that yours is not the ground upon which they build. And I pray aske your ſelfe, whether thoſe that teach the common people (who are the greateſt part of your Church) uſe to be askt about it by them, or uſe to tell them, that this they received from their Fathers, as deſcended from the Apoſtles, by a continuall verball Tradition. For ſuppoſe they told them, that [this Tradition tels us] yet they are not able to diſtinguiſh between ſuch as is but Eccleſiaſticall, and Apoſtolicall, or whether this be known to them onely by deductions, or from ancient bookes, and no ſuch uncontinued line of teaching, and not rather perſwade them in generall to beleeve it, what by Arguments drawne from Scripture, what from reaſon, what from Fathers, Councels, or Decretals? I am not certaine what is their courſe, but I am ſure, the moſt ordinary amongſt the Ancients (whom they pretend to follow) was, that when they had told the people, that ſuch a propoſition was true, they added [neither is it I that ſay ſo, but the Apoſtle, the Prophet, or58 the Evangeliſt] and mentioned the place, where they thought ſuch a doctrine was included, ſeldome ſpeak of any verball Tradition (leſſe of ſuch a one, upon which you wholly rely) except urg'd to it, when that was impudently claim'd by ſome Heretique; and when they did (as the Aſian Biſhops about Eaſter, Juſtin Martir about the age of Chriſt, Saint Auſtine about communicating Infants, Papius and Iraeneus about the doctrine of the Chiliaſts) then (as Lucian tels us, that when that Jugler Alexander ſent to a City a Verſe to be ſet upon their doores to keepe away the Plague, thoſe houſes which uſed the remedy, were more viſited then thoſe that did not ſo) thoſe doctrines which the Fathers did grace by writing verball Tradition in their foreheads, were not leſſe (perhaps more) apt to be after diſbeleeved, then the other which were not in that kind taught.
Now if the Ignorant be not expreſly inſtructed, that upon this ground they are to think that true, which they are bid to beleeve (eſpecially where their religion is eaſily enough received, onely for being that of their Country) you muſt allow, that the greateſt part of your Church cannot, nor does not pretend, to have received all they beleeve under that Notion; and to know they did, you muſt have ſpoke with them all, or have heard them all inſtructed; for what is in ſome places ſo taught, may be delivered upon other grounds in the very next Pariſhes.
From the Ignorant let'us come to the learned,59 and ſee whether they doe not both beleeve more, and require more to be beleeved, then hath had any ſuch pedigree as you imagine. Firſt, then the great, eloquent, and judicious Cardinall Perron, (whom I preferre ſo much before all thoſe of his ſide that have been Authors, that [if a Pigmy may be allowed to meaſure Giants] I ſhould think that the vaſt learning and induſtry of Bellarmine, and Baronius, might with moſt advantage to their party, and no diſgrace to them, have been employ'd in ſeeking quotations for his large and monſtrous underſtanding to have employ'd them) he, I ſay, tels us, (and not from himſelfe, but from Saint Auſtine) that the Trinity, Pennance, Free-will, and the Church, were never exactly diſputed of, before the Arrians, the Novatians, the Pelagians, and the Donatiſts. Now (ſince without doubt the former ages diſputed as well as they could, and ſo could not inſtruct their Proſelites, better then they confuted their Adverſaries) I think it evident, that more hath ſince been concluded, then came from Tradition, and that the way you ſpeak of, appeared not ſufficient, either to Cardinall Perron, or Saint Auſtin. But becauſe Bellarmine (being written in a more generall language) is more generally (though, I thinke unjuſtly) eſteemed then Perron, I will aske you a queſtion of him, when he excuſeth Pope John the 22th. for denying, that Saints enjoy the beatificall viſion before the day of judgement (in which he was lead by a Troop of Fathers) becauſe the Church had not then defined60 the contrary; did Bellarmine beleeve, that then Chriſtians had received from their Fathers, as from the Apoſtles, a direct contrary Tradition to his doctrine? If he did, how could he think the Pope, either poſſibly to be ignorant of it, or excuſeable, it he ſtood againſt it? If not, then he thought our Age beholding to our Fathers, for finding out ſome truths, which had no ſuch line to come down by; nay, which the Apoſtles either taught not, or but obſcurely, and ſo as needs Arguments to deduce it out of their writings; at leaſt, not ſo generally, but that a Pope, and many more chiefe Doctors of the Church, knew not they had done ſo, (although you often put us in minde, that Tertullian tels us, how in that Church which he governed, the Apoſtles poured out all their doctrines with their blood) and in his time, Fathers taught not their children ſo: And this objection lyes againſt you, as often as any of your ſide confeſſe any of the Ancients (accompted Orthodox) to have delivered any doctrine, contrary to that of the now Church of Rome, which many of them often confeſſe, and your ſelfe doe not deny: for that they could not have done, if an uninterrupted verball Tradition had been then the onely rule of true doctrine, and they had known it to be ſo (for then they had a way of information, which you muſt confeſſ eaſie, ſince they might ſoon have known, whether generally, Chriſtians had been taught the contrary, under ſuch a Notion, and in ſuch a degree, as you ſpeak of) or the Church of Rome had not ſince, either61 deviated from the tradition of one part, or introduced on the other.
But becauſe you knew, that the claime of Tradition could not ſerve your Churches turne, if any other different from yours made the ſame; you therefore affirme, that none doth, and prove it, becauſe two cannot doe it; and in this you muſt give me leave to ſay, that you imitate the Philoſopher, who made Arguments againſt Motion, though one walked before him; for though we ſee that the Greek Church does it as much as the Romane, (though apt to be deceived in the doing it, by the ſame wayes) yet you hope to perſwade us beyond our eyes, by a reaſon, which indeed ends in an aſſertion: for, I pray, why may not two companies of Chriſtians, both pretend to ſuch a Tradition, (though oppoſing each other) as well as the Aſian Churches and the Roman did long together, about the celebration of Eaſter? But not onely that it may be ſo, but that it is ſo, you may find by Hieremy, Nilus, and Barlaam (who profeſſe to ſtand to the Scriptures, the ancient Tradition of their Fathers, and the ſeven firſt generall Councels, and they can be diſprov'd no way, but by the ſame you may be ſo too) over and above the confeſſions of your own men.
But ſuppoſe you did pretend, and alone pretend to ſuch a Tradition, yet you might falſely doe it: for I deſire you to remember, that the Apoſtles delivered, as well Writings as verball Doctrine; and whatſoever the firſt ages thought62 to be contained there, that they might as well deliver to their poſterity, as taught them by the Apoſtles, as what they received by word of mouth; ſince we uſe to ſay, I learnt this of ſuch a man, when we mean from his book, and though you ſtrive to joyne verball Tradition in commiſſion with Scripture, yet ſure none of you can deſire to thruſt Scripture out quite from being at leaſt a part of the Rule. Now that they might erre in interpreting their writings (and an error in the cheifeſt then, might eaſily cauſe a generall one ſince) I think you will not deny, eſpecially ſince to ſay, that they left by Tradition every place of Scripture interpreted, would be an evidently falſe aſſertion: for how could the Fathers then have written upon it ſuch differently-expounding Comments.
Secondly, How ſhall it appeare, that there were not once two contrary Traditions claimed by two Parts (as the Aſian Church, and the Roman, whereof, both it ſeemes claim'd a direct verball Tradition, becauſe one pretended to have received theirs from Saint John, and the other, from Saint Peter, whereof there is no word in their workes) and that the erring Part did not prevaile? We know, out of the fifth of Euſebius Hiſtory, that the fore-runners laid claime to Tradition, and nam'd the very Pope, that had chang'd the doctrine at Rome; which claime (how impudently ſoever) yet ſhewes, that men might joyne to deceive their Poſterity, as pretending to a Tradition, when there was no ſuch; for, if63 you ſay thoſe were but few, I anſwer, both that you are not certaine of their number, and ſince ſo many may joyn, I pray, what number is it cannot?
Thirdly, Since you muſt and doe confeſſe, that ſome Doctrines, which were not once generally witneſſed to have been delivered by the Apoſtles, are now Doctrines of Faith (as the Epiſtle to the Hebrewes was rejected by the Roman Church in Saint Hierom's time, though to her yee uſe to ſay, that Iraeneus would have every Church agree, and though Saint Hierom, whom you would prove to have thought Damaſus infallible, when it is known, that he thought Libertius a Heretick, received it for all that) becauſe you ſay, that theſe doctrines had ſo much Tradition as was exceptione major, beyond exception, (though the Church of Rome thought not ſo then;) doth not this reſt upon the Logick of thoſe Ages, to conclude what Teſtimony is ſo? which might eaſily deceive them, eſpecially ſince you confeſſe alſo, that particular Traditions may be falſe (as you inſtance in the Chiliaſts) and yet the ſame reaſon, which perſwaded ſome to receive them, may perſwade more and more in ſeverall times (and ſo no age need to joyne, as you ſuppoſe) and ſo a falſe Tradition may grow a generall one; as it ſeemes that of the Chiliaſts (if it be one) did, ſo generall, that Juſtin Martyr ſayes, in his time all Orthodox Chriſtians held it.
Beſides, in thoſe things which were beleeved very convenient, and which yet it was fear'd, that64 unleſſe men thought them neceſſary, they would be backward to practiſe, in reſpect of the contrariety of them to their diſpoſitions, (as confeſſion) how eaſie was it for them to be after taught, under paine of more danger, then at firſt they were delivered, with? as Phyſitians often tell their Patients, unleſſe they take ſuch a Potion, from which they are very averſe, they muſt unavoidably die, though the not taking of it (even in their own opinions) would but make them leſſe likely to recover. Some of great authority (moved by a good meaning) might thus deceive others; theſe, thus deceived, might deceive others; till, being generally ſpread, other good men, being loath to oppoſe them for the ſame reaſon, for which others deſir'd to ſpread them, (as we ſaw Eraſmus, who beleeved your confeſſion, not to have been inſtituted by the Apoſtles, yet would not reprehend them that ſaid ſo, thinking it an error, that would increaſe Piety) they be at laſt taken to have been commanded by the Apoſtles, without contradiction.
Indeed all the waies, by which I ſhewd in that paper, which you vouchſafed to anſwer (which I deſire not to repeat, to avoid both your being wearied, and my own,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, ) that errors might come to be generall; all thoſe are waies, by which the ſame errors might come to be thought to have proceeded from Tradition. Saint Auſtin, and Tertullian, agreeing in the ſence of the ſentence, which we read in the latter,Note: PLACE = "marg" n = "*" De Corouâ. Si legem nuſquam65 reperio, ſequitur ut Traditio conſuetudini morem hunc dederit, habiturum quandoque apoſtoli authoritatem ex interpretatione rationis; and it is the more ſtrange, that Tertullian ſhould allow any cuſtome the authority of comming from the Apoſtles, ſince in the ſame place, he gives any man leave to beginne a cuſtome, ſo it be good (which depends upon his reaſon, as the reception of it does upon theirs that follow him) and ſo make it a cuſtome, in theſe words. Annon putas licere omni fideli concipere, & conſtituere, duntaxat, quod Deo congruat, quod diſciplinae conducat, quod ſaluti proficiat, dicente Domino cur non & vobis ipſis quod juſtum eſt judicatis? By which it ſeemes, he was willing, more ſhould be beleev'd then was firſt taught, and when that way had brought in any thing (for there is the ſame reaſon of opinion, as of actions) and made it common, then the former Rule ſerves to rivet it in, under the falſe Notion of comming from the Apoſtles, or having at leaſt equall authority, neither can you except againſt this, as ſaid by him when he was a Montaniſt, ſince your ſide uſeth to brag of this, and the like places, as making for them.
To explaine my meaning the fuller, give me leave to conſider one queſtion, which ſhall be, the immaculate conception of the Bleſſed Virgin: In the firſt ages it is a thing granted, that many Fathers beleeved her, not onely not free from Originall ſinne, but not even from Actuall;Wadd. Pag. 271 after this ſecond queſtion came to be more conſidered, and this firſt to be defin'd; but yet thoſe of the66 Amrmative opinion, cannot but grant to thoſe of the Negative, that many Fathers ſided with them (or elſe they were impudent Quoters, who claim three hundred) nay,Wadding p. 124. even in Saint Thomas his time, they confeſſe, that the Negative opinion was the more common doctrine; and yet ſee I pray, how things are altered? We have now a Hiſtory of ſome Treaties, of two Kings of Spaine with two Popes, by two Embaſſadours to perſwade them to define the Affirmative. The Hiſtory is written by one Wadding an Iriſh-man, his Secretary, there I find, that the Biſhop of Carthage, (having Order from the Embaſſadour his Maſter to deſire to preſſe, nay almoſt to tear a Definition from his Holineſſe about it) tells him (and not falſely) that thoſe who hold the Negative are, Inter Catholicos ſoli & pauci unius inſtituti viri,Page 97. & unus & alter ab ill is edocti, but a few of one onely Order, and one or two of their Diſciples. His Maſter bids him urge for the contrary: The opinion and ſubſcription of ſo many Prelates Orders,Page 90. and Univerſities, the univerſall acclamation of the People, the weighty neceſſity of cutting off ſcandals;Page 400. nay, ſaith he, many Univerſities ſuffer none to take Degrees without making a Vow for the Defence of the Immaculate conception; and for the Oppugners,Page 57. Conſtat eos ſentire aliter, quàm univerſa docet Eccleſia, they differ from the Doctrine of the Univerſall Church: If then an opinion for which nothing is to be ſaid out of Antiquitie, and much againſt it, which was even lately, the leſſe common opinion, could grow to67 be held by ſo great a multitude in ſo high a degree, in ſo ſhort a time, that the much greater part of the Church ſhould now preſſe to have it defin'd, and that ſo earneſtly, that to remove the oppoſing Fathers out of the way, they make a confeſſion very advantagious to us Hereticks, that many things have been defin'd by their Church againſt many Fathers,Page 127. you may eaſily ſee that Opinions may grow very generall, nay grow to claim Tradition in one Age that were unknown in another; for that they claim and prove only becauſe of the the general reception in all Apoſtolicall Churches, not of any ſuch uninterrupted teſtimony of Fathers to their Children, that ſo it hath been taught in all Ages.
You may ſee then that all your Church goes not upon your grounds, ſince if they did ſo, many of it that ſtand for the Affirmative muſt pretend to them, and if they doe, then ſure the Pope muſt have confeſſed them to be witneſſes beyond exception, and would accordingly have defin'd, if they doe not, then this certain way of yours, cannot keep falſe opinions out of a Church, which makes not that their Rule.
You may alſo ſee that opinions firſt unknown, after but particular, may come not onely to be generall, and to have Tradition claim'd for them, but even to be defin'd; ſince if a Generall Councell ſhould now meet about this point, it is plain (without Gods immediate working to the contrary, of nay, I am confident, that as it is obſerved of the68 Romans that they were twice as long in firſt conquering Italy, as (after) all the world; and as my Lord Bacon tels us of one, who was wont to ſay, That he had firſt with much paines gotten a little eſtate, and after with little a great one; ſo it is a much more ſhort, and eaſie work to bring this to a Definition, then it was before to bring it thus far on the way towards one.
Which if it were brought (it being already almoſt defined, and ready to topple into a Doctrine neceſſary to ſalvation, the contrary being forbidden to be either printed or publikely taught) then (if you forſake not your Religion) you muſt forſake the Principle, and joyn with Turnball, who tells us, That the Churches ſupreme definition of matters of Faith is the infallible word of God, and together with the ancient Revelation made to the Prophets and Apoſtles makes up one Object, which is to be held by the Catholike Faith: By which it is plain, he thinks more may be reveal'd (and then muſt be held) then was to the Apoſtles and (by conſequence) could be delivered by them, which is contrary to what you now ſay.
And indeed the current of Writers of your own ſide either knew not this opinion and Argument of yours, or conſideringly balk it; elſe they might ſave themſelves and their Readers the labour of writing, and reading ſuch infinite Quotations: for though they ſpeak often of Tradition, yet they thinke themſelves bound to prove it better then by the pretence of your preſent Church; they pretend to receive it from the Ancient Writers,69 (not, ſay they, that Verball Tradition hath in all Ages been taught to all men, to teach it their children, and that it never ſlept,) and you are the firſt whom I have met with, who build upon this; Indeed they know the Greeks have as much claim to ſuch a one (in truth to any) as they, and if they ſhould ſay with you, that it is incompatible for two to have it, the Greeks may as well argue upon thoſe grounds, that the Romans claim it not, becauſe they doe, as the Romans can, that the Greeks lay no claim to it, becauſe their Church does. And indeed direct experience ſhewes that this is not, nor hath alwayes been the ground of Chriſtians, that it is not (even amongſt you) we ſee by thoſe multitudes who cry out to have a Doctrine defined; which is ſo far from having any Tradition, (much leſſe your kind of one for it,) that they labour with little ſucceſſe to ſhew that there is none againſt them, and make it plainly appear, that upon your grounds they build not, but prove out of Metaphoricall places of Scripture, ſome at moſt but probable reaſons, and the Revelations of S. Bridget, which are contradicted by thoſe of Saint Katharine,Wadding p. 334. (ſo ill do your Saints agree in heaven, that me thinks, we may bee forgiven, if we have ſome differences upon earth:) That this hath not been alwaies the way, we ſee by the exam-of Origen, who having been eſteemed by all Chriſtians, as almoſt a Prophet, no man in his time diſcovering that he taught contrary to what their Fathers had taught them,Vincent Lir. was yet condemned many yeers after, his deceaſe, and his followers70 counted Hereticks, by the name of Originiſtae, which had been impoſſible, if the following Ages had thought Tradition the onely fit Rule to judge by, and accompted nothing Tradition, but what they received from their Fathers in expreſſe termes: But if the opinions of Doctors, counted the Gnomons and Canons of Truth (for to that purpoſe ſpeakes Nazianzene of Athanaſius,Wadd. Pag. 282 and Saint Auſtine of Nazianzene, and Pope Pius the fifth of Saint Thomas, calling his doctrine, the certaineſt rule of Chriſtian religion, a title deny'd to Scripture) the definitions of Councels counted the higheſt Tribunals upon earth, aſſiſted by the power of Emperours, which might doe much, when almoſt all were under one (as may be ſeen by the multitude which followed Conſtantine, to Chriſtianity, and Julian from it, and by Conſtantius (as is complain'd) 〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉in the twinckling of an eye, transforming an Orthodox world into an Arrian) if theſe waies, I ſay, might make a Tenet generall, though no Tradition had come down at all concerning it; and after it pleaſe to claim by a Tenure, by which it came not in at firſt, encouraged by ſome Rule of ſome Fathers to that purpoſe (as ſome Frenchmen ſay of Cardinall Richelieu, that ſince he had that title, he claimes to have come from better Anceſtours then he aimed at, being an ordinary Perſon; and Harry the ſeventh, though he came to the Crown by his Wives right, yet would hold it by his own) and none after oppoſe that claime, ſome not doing it, becauſe they thinke the opinion true, and then71 care not though it be beleev'd upon falſe inducements, ſome as being ignorant that ever it was leſſe generall (which before the late and happy reſurrection of learning, the beſt read Perſons of their time might often be) how deceiving a way is yours, to diſcover what all ages have thought, by what now a part of the preſent teacheth, upon what pretence ſoever, which when you have conſidered, and not onelie that, what I have ſaid may be, but by ſeverall examples (whereof I will touch ſome) that ſo it is, and hath been, then I hope you will be ſo farre from expecting that I ſhould be moved by your Arguments, that your ſelfe will wonder that ever you were.
Firſt then, that the Chiliaſts are Hereticks, or your Church not infallible, which counts them ſo, is moſt certaine, and moſt plaine, and if you be in the right, and that ſhe teacheth nothing, but what ſhe hath received uninterruptedly downe from the Apoſtles, then they muſt alwaies have been eſteemed ſo by Chriſtians; whereas their doctrine is ſo farre from having any Tradition againſt it, that if anie opinion, whether controverted, or uncontroverted (except that Scripture which never was doubted) may without bluſhing pretend to have that for it, it muſt be this of theirs. My Reaſons are theſe:
The Fathers of the pureſt Ages (who were the Apoſtles Diſciples but once remov'd) did teach this, [as receiv'd from them, who profeſſed to have receiv'd it from the Apoſtles, and who ſeem'd to them witneſſes beyond exception, that72 they had done ſo, they being better Judges what credit they deſerv'd, then after commers could poſſibly be.
All other opinions, witneſſed by any other Ancients to have Tradition, may have been by them miſtaken to have been, ſo, out of Saint Auſtin's and Tertullian's rules: whereas for this, and for this alone, are delivered the very words, which Chriſt us'd when he taught it.
Of the moſt glorious and leaſt infirme building, which ever in my opinion was erected to the honour of the Church of Rome, Cardinall Perron was the Architect (I mean his book againſt King James) and that relies upon theſe two pillars, that whatſoever all the Fathers (he meanes, ſure, that are extant) witneſſe to be Tradition, and the doctrine of the Church, that muſt be receiv'd for the doctrine of thoſe ages, and ſo reſted upon: If theſe rules be not concluding, then the whole book being built upon them, neceſſarily becomes as unconſiderable for what he intended it, as Bevis or Tom Thumb: If they be, then this doctrine, which is now hereticall in your Churches beleife was the opinion of the Ancient Church. For if being taught by the Fathers of anie Age, none contradicting it, be ſufficient, this all for above two Ages (and thoſe the firſt) teach, not anie Father oppoſing it before Dionyſius Alexandrinus (250, yeares after Chriſt at leaſt) that we know, or Saint Hierome, or Saint Auſtine knew and quoted; wherein I note, beſides, that both theſe Fathers, either thought that no ſigne of the73 opinion of the Church, or cared not though it were.
And if Fathers ſpeaking as witneſſes will ſerve, let Pappias and Irenaeus be heard, and believ'd, who tels us it came to them from Chriſt by Verball Tradition, and Juſtine Martir, who witneſſeth that in his time all Orthodoxe Chriſtians held it, and joynes the oppoſers with them who denied the Reſurrection, and eſteemes them among the Chriſtians like the Sadduces among the Jewes: which proves that you have the ſame reaſon expalleſcere audito Eccleſiae nomine, to grow pale at the mention of the Ancient Church,Camp. (the neareſt to the Apoſtles) as we have to ſtart at that of two hundred years agoe, and to be aſham'd of your Dionyſius Alexandrinus, as wee of Luther: Thus that great Atlas of your Church hath helpt us to pull it down the ſame waies, by which he intended to ſupport it, and though he have beſt of any undergone the burden of proving that to be infallible, which is falſe, yet he muſt have confeſt, that either theſe are not proofes, or they prove againſt himſelf. And this advantage we have, that unleſſe you prove your own infallibility (which you will never be able to do) in what point ſoever you confute us, that falls like a Pinacle without carrying all after it; whereas if we diſprove any one of your Religion, we diſprove conſequently that infallibility, which is the foundation of it all: ſo that (like them who vſe poiſon'd weapons) whereſoever we wound, we kill, but we are like thoſe creatures, which muſt be killed all over, or74 elſe their other parts will remaine alive.
Neither muſt you think that you have anſwer'd the Chiliaſts by tying them to the Carpocratians and the Gnoſticks, (which is but like Mezentius his joyning Mortua corpora vivis, dead bodies to the living) ſince the opinions of the two latter, aſſoon as they were taught, made the teachers accounted Hereticks and were oppos'd by allmoſt all, whereas that of the firſt, found in above two ages, no reſiſtance by any one known and eſteemed Perſon, and the teachers of it were not onely parts, but principall ones of the Catholique Church, and ſuch as ever have been, and are reputed Saints; though, by I know not what ſubtlety you diſpence with your ſelves for departing from what doctrine was received from them as come down from the Apoſtles, and yet threaten us with damnation if we will not believe more improbable Tenets to be Tradition upon leſſe Certificate. For as Ariſtotle ſaith〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Ethicks.Wine meaſures to buy with are great, and to ſell by are ſmall; ſo when you are to put a doctrine to us, how ſmall a meaſure of Tradition would you have us take? one place of one Father, ſpeaking but as a Doctor, ſeemes enough: but when you are to receive any from us, how large and mighty a meaſure will yet give you no ſatisfaction? Neither can I find out what it is by which you conclude, that their Tradition was gathered the Hereticall way from private diſcourſe with the Apoſtles: Irenaeus indeed tells us, that Presbyteri meminerunt, one of which Pappias was, but not a word that it75 was deliver'd in ſecret, or the auditors but few, nor that others had not heard other diſciples teaching the ſame doctrine; and me thinkes that if you had evinced what you deſire (as you ſeem to me not to do, unleſſe to affirm be to prove) it would make more againſt you; ſure if from ſo ſmall a ground as the word of one onely diſciple, that he in private diſcourſe was taught this by the Apoſtles, a falſe doctrine could ſo generally be received by all the firſt Doctors of the Chriſtian Church, and that ſo long after Dionyſius Alexandrinus had uſed his great Authority to deſtroy it: Saint Hierome was yet halfe afraid to write againſt it, as ſeeing how many Catholiques he ſhould enrage againſt himſelfe by it, as he teſtifies in his Proem to the eighteenth Book of his Comment upon Iſaiah; what ſuſpitions muſt this raiſe in the mindes of thoſe of your own party, leaſt what they eſteemed Tradition, had at firſt no greater a beginning, and no firmer foundation, but onely better fortune; for why might not the ſame diſciple have cozn'd them from whom their beliefe is deſcended in twenty other things, as well as in this? and why not twenty others as well as he? eſpecially ſince you confeſſe ſome of your doctrine not to have had Vniverſall Tradition, but onely Tradition enough; which if thoſe Fathers did not think they had had, for this, they would never have receiv'd it, but have excepted againſt the Hereticall way of their delivery, if they had known that to be a private one, and a private one to be ſuch, and if they were ſo deceived in this way, might not they,76 and more have been ſo too in other points, and in time all?
If you ſay (as it hath been ſaid to me by one whoſe judgment I value, as much as any one of your Party) that if this opinion had indeed had Tradition, it could never have been ſo totally extinguiſh'd. I anſwer, that I affirm not, that it had, but onely that if the rules of your part be good and valid, then it had; I am ſure it hath better colour to plead upon, then any of thoſe other doctrines, which you impoſe upon us: Beſides although it had, yet when Doctors of great authority with the people, had won upon many, firſt not to think it Tradition, and then not true, and laſtly their courage encreaſing with their multitude, (for Saint Hierome durſt not call it) had made it accounted an Hereſie, it is not ſtrange that none ſhould riſe to oppoſe it; for by that time burning was come in faſhion, which was a ready way to anſwer all objections, and end all controverſies, eſpeciall Piety being grown more cold, and ſo men leſſe apt to ſuffer for opinions, and the times more ignorant, and ſo men leſſe able to examine what had been beleeved before them. But you who affirm, that your Church receives nothing, but what hath come to her by Verball Tradition down from the Apoſtles, muſt not onely deſtroy the Arguments, which prove this to have had Tradition, (which you, or any elſe will be never able to do) but muſt affirm, that the contrary hath ſuch, which yet their moſt ancient oppoſers never pretended too, but77 ſcoft at the opinion as rediculous and ſavouring of Judaiſme, which as wiſe men, and as good Chriſtians, as they, before them beleeved to be Orthodox.
Let us next conſider that controverſie which more afflicted the Church, and for a longer time then any other, that between the Arrians and their Adverſaries, and let us ſee, whether even againſt thoſe there were any ſuch. Tradition as you ſpeak of. Firſt then I pray mark what Cardinal Perron confeſſeth,Lib. Con. R. Jac. Pag. 633. that an Arrian will be deſirous to have his cauſe tried by thoſe Authors we now have, which lived before the Queſtion aroſe; for there, ſaith he, will be found the Son is the inſtrument of his Father, The Father commanded the Son, when things were to be made, the Father and the Son are aliud & aliud, which who ſhould at this day ſay, now the language of the Church is better examin'd, would be accompted an Arrian. Now though there be no reaſon for you to disbelieve ſo learned a Prelate in a matter of Fact (eſpecially ſince〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) yet if you pleaſe to reconſider thoſe Authors ſeriouſly, if you have not mark't it before (as Praejudication blinds extreamly) you will then confeſſe it; Sure then if Fathers in the firſt ages taught their Children, that ſo they had receiv'd from theirs, as the doctrine of the Apoſtles, how could the chiefe Pillars of Chriſtianity have been ignorant of it? or if they knew it, how would they ever have written ſo directly againſt their knowledge. For that anſwer which Saint Hierome gives (as Saint Auſtine to the Pelagians)78 that before Arrius aroſe, the Eccleſiaſticall Writers ſpoke minùs cautè, with leſſe circumſpection, though it brings ſome ſalve to the preſent objection, yet it is a weapon againſt Tradition in generall, for if through want of care the beſt and wiſeſt men vs'd to contradict Tradition, (as you muſt grant they did) then ſure much more likely, when they taught by word of mouth, when leſſe care is alwaies us'd, then in Bookes, and how then can any age be ſure, that by this reaſon (of minùs cautè loquuti ſunt) their Anceſtors have not miſtaken their Fathers, and miſlead their Poſterity? Look but into Athanaſius, and ſee but what he anſwers to what is brought againſt him out of Dionyſius Alexandrinus, truly in my opinion when he ſtrives to make it Catholique Doctrine, he doth it with no leſſe pulling, and halling, then Sancta Clara uſeth to agree the articles of the Engliſh Church with the Tenets of the Roman. Conſider what eighty Biſhops, and thoſe Orthodoxe, decreed againſt Paulus Samoſatenus, and if you make it conſent with Athanaſius his Creed, I ſhall believe that you have diſcouer'd a way how to reconcile both Parts of a Contradiction: This I ſay, not as intending by it to prove the Arrian opinion to be true, but that the contrary Party inſiſted not upon your grounds, but drew their beliefe out of Scripture, for if there had been ſuch a common and conſtant Verball Tradition, the chiefe Chriſtians would not through want of Caution have contradicted it, neither could Conſtantine, if it had been then as known a Part of the Chriſtian79 Religion, as Chriſt's Reſurrection, have ever ſo ſlightly eſteemed the Queſtion, when it firſt aroſe, neither would Alexander the Biſhop of Alexandria have remain'd any while in ſuſpence, as Zozomen ſaith he did,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; but this being then a Queſtion newly ſtarted and ſpoken of before but by Accidents, and ſo peradventure minùs cautè, (for the ſame Author ſaies, that they did〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) they were therefore faine to try it by Scripture, (eſteeming Written Tradition, as ſufficient a Rule, as Verball) as you may ſee by Conſtantine's own words at the Councel of Nice,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,Theodoret.〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. The Bookes of the Evangeliſts, and the Apoſtles, and the Oracles of the Ancient Prophets teach us clearly what we are to think of the Divinity. Let us therefore cut of theſe Divinity-inſpir'd diſcourſes, ſeek the ſolutions of our Queſtions, which being the Emperours Propoſition, and paſſing uncontradicted (which the Biſhops would not have ſuffr'd it to do, if they had known yours to be ſo much the beſt, and moſt certaine way, and this ſo hazardous as you ſuppoſe) we have reaſon to believe that they for want of your direction made the Scripture their Rule, and ſought out for Truth by the ſame way, that we damnable Hereticks do, and by that condemn'd the Arrians, as not having ſuch a Tradition as you ſpeak of, (or if they had, which is very unlikely) counting it ſo inſufficient, as that they80 were not to conclude by that. Neither did onely that ancient, (and not yours) Councell, but even your own Modern ones ſhew, that they went upon other grounds, ſince to have had every Biſhop askt what he receiv'd from his Teachers, as receiv'd from theirs, as come downe from the Apoſtles, would ſure have been the ſhorteſt way to find Truth, and if they had thought it the beſt too, it would have ſav'd the Friers at Trent many a long diſpute out of Scripture, Fathers, and Reaſon, and the Biſhops many a weary ſeſſion before any thing could be determined, or the Parties brought to agree. Beſides there is another reaſon (if I may be pardon'd a little inſiſting upon my digreſſion) which perſwades me that your own Councels define not upon your grounds (that is) becauſe ſuppoſe a thouſand Catholique Biſhops meet and define any thing, yet wee know it is not among you believ'd de Fide, without it be confirmed by the Pope; which ſhewes plainly enough, that you think not they went by ſuch a Tradition, ſince of that eighty, ſo many perſons from ſo many ſeveral Parts are witneſſes beyond exception, according to your own grounds, and that their Infallibility is not thought to depend upon an Impoſſibility; that (in the matter of Fact what hath been taught under that Notion) they ſhould either deceive, or be deceiv'd, but upon an infallible aſſiſtance of the Holy Ghoſt, which may be wanting to any company, whereof the Pope is no part, or of whoſe decrees he is no confirmer. Now to return to my proofes, that againſt the Arrians there was no ſuch81 Tradition as you ſpeak of, (at leaſt, that was the ground upon which they were condemned,) conſider, if you pleaſe, that in that Epiſtle which Euſebius of Caeſarea writ to ſome Arrians after the Councell of Nice, he ſaith, Firſt, that they aſſented to the word〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Conſubſtantiall, becauſe alſo they knew〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, ſome eloquent and illuſtrious Biſhops and Writers had us'd the Terme: In which I note, that neither claim'd he any ſuch Verbal Tradition for this as you ſpeak of, and of that ſort which he claim'd, he names onely〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉ſome, as knowing too many had writ otherwiſe to give ſuch a Tradition leave to be generall.
Secondly, He ſaith, they conſented to Anathematize the Contradictors,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to hinder men from uſing unwritten words, by which he ſaith (and that truely) that all confuſion hath come upon the Church. And if it be askt why the ſame reaſon made them not keep out the word〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, I anſwer, That I believe (or elſe he is not conſtant to his own reaſon) that he meant onely thoſe words to be unwritten, which were in Scripture, neither themſelves, nor equivalently, whereas he took〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉to be in the Scripture in the latter ſence: And that by written, he meant in the Scripture onely, appeares by what followes, that no divinely-inſpired writing (〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) uſing the Arrians Phraſe, it was neither fitting to ſay nor teach them: Neither can you ſay that Euſebius being himſelf a ſecret Arrian prevaricated herein,82 for Theodoret makes this Epiſtle an Argument againſt than, which he would not have done, if either it had ſeem'd to him to ſay any thing contrary to the Catholique doctrine, or not to have oppos'd the contrary by a Catholique way, at leaſt without giving his leader ſome Caution concerning it.
All which reaſons move me to think, that the generality of Chriſtians had not been alwaies taught the contrary to Arrius's doctrine, but ſome one way, others the other, moſt neither, as having been onely ſpoken of upon occaſions, and therefore me thinks you had better either ſay with the Proteſtants, that the Truth was concluded (as Conſtantine ſaid it ſhould be) by Arguments from Scripture, or (as ſome of your own ſay of other points) that before the Councell it lay in Archivis Eccleſiae, in the Deskes of the Church, then claime ſuch a Tradition for it, as appeares it can never be defended that it had.
Let us conſider but two opinions more:
That Infants are not to receive the Euchariſt, is now both the doctrine and practiſe of the Roman Church, but ſix hundred yeeres the Church us'd it; Saint Auſtine accounted it neceſſary at leaſt in ſome ſence of the word, if not abſolutely (which laſt is moſt likely, becauſe from the neceſſity of that, which could not be receiv'd but by them who had received Baptiſme, he, and Innocentius a Pope, prove the neceſſity of Baptiſme) and an Apoſtolicall Tradition. If83 therefore both theſe Ages had gone by your Rule, how comes this difference between their opinions, the Sacrament being the ſame it was, and the Children the ſame they were?
This I may conſider, and ſee if the ſame way that this Doctrine hath been altered, whether any other might not have received change?
Next, that Saints are invocable, you muſt ſay, is Tradition taught from Father to Sonne, as deriv'd from the Apoſtles, if you will be conſtant to your own principle, now though I might diſprove this, firſt by the many Fathers that beleeved, the Juſt not to be admitted to the Beatificall viſion before the day of judgement (for upon this your ſide now grounds that) but to be kept in ſecret receptacles, and by the long time which paſs'd before this doctrine was condemn'd: Secondly, by the beginning of it, which was particular Doctors Hipotheticall prayers, with〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and ſuch conditionall clauſes: And thirdly, by Nicephorus Caliſtus his Relation (who in this is a believable witneſſe, becauſe he allowes of your opinion) that prayers to the Virgin Mary were firſt brought into the publick Liturgie by one Petrus Gnapheus a Heretick, about five hundred yeares after Chriſt,Lib. 15. C. 28 yet I will rather chuſe to confute this by the confeſſion of Sancta Clara out of Horantius, who to this objection, that ſub Evangelio (which muſt mean when the Goſpel was preacht) no ſuch precept is extant,Pag. 271. not onely denies it not, but gives this reaſon for it,82〈1 page duplicate〉83〈1 page duplicate〉84leaſt the Pagans ſhould think themſelves brought againe to the worſhipping of Men inſtead of Gods: If upon this or any other reaſon this were not then taught, then have not all your Doctrines ſuch a Pedigree as you ſuppoſe, but allow it were, yet, howſoever it followes, that, ſome, at leaſt, of the learned of your Church have not been taught that they have, or conſequently that it is neceſſary they ſhould have: Though it ſeemes to me little leſs then Montaniſme to believe that any ſince (as it were a Paraclet) ſhould perfect the doctrine which then was delivered by the Apoſtles: Neither can you anſwer that they ſpeake onely of ſuch a Precept, and of being extant, whereas they might teach it lawfull without giving any Precept, and they might have given ſuch a Precept although not extant; for I ſhould readily reply, that the reaſon they give why there is none ſuch extant, ſhewes, that they mean there was none at all, neither Precept, nor allowance, ſince the Pagans would have been ſcandaliz'd at its being accounted lawfull to worſhip men inſtead of Gods, although it were not commanded, and not a whit the leſſe, whether that in after times were extant or not, which they could not foreſee.
The onelie anſwer which I am able to invent in your behalfe, is this, that though ſome of your particular doctrines have not ſuch a Tradition, yet there being a Tradition that the Churches definitions are infallible, whatſoever ſhe at any time define, is then to be believed upon the ſtrength of ſuch a Tradition, and before did latere in cauſis85 as Flowers do in Winter.
Yet to this I may reply by deſiring you to enter with me into ſome few conſiderations.
Firſt, If this were ſo, and that ſo much of Chriſtian Religion depends upon the definitions of the Church, and our Reception of them, upon knowing alwaies which is ſhe, and that ſuch is her authority, can you perſwade your ſelfe, that Chriſt ſending his Apoſtles and Diſciples to Preach the Goſpel, and after four of them writing his Goſpel, (which ſhewes if the Books be true to the title, that they writ all they preacht, at leaſt that was neceſſarie; for elſe they were not Goſpels, but Parts of it) that they ſhould not rather leave out any thing elſe, how important ſoever, then not have imploied themſelves about teaching us, that the Churches Definitions are a Rule of our Faith, and inſtructing us in Markes ſo proper to her, that we might never need to doubt, whether it be ſhe that defines or no, and whether their not having done this, evince not in Reaſon that this your Doctrine is falſe?
Secondly, I pray conſider whether if there were any ſuch continu'd Tradition about the Definitions of the Church, whether that muſt not alſo have taught, (or elſe have been to ſmall purpoſe) when it is that the Church hath defin'd: but yet that is a caſe not fully judged among you, For ſome hold, that the Church hath defin'd when a Councel hath, although unapproved by the Pope, which is denied by others.
Thirdly, Conſider whether (ſuppoſing as was86 before ſuppos'd) it muſt not alſo have taught certaine Notes to know the Church by: but yet about thoſe you are not agreed,Tom. 13. Pag. 193. Salmeron putting Miracles among the falſe Signes of the Church, and Bellarmine and many more among the True ones.
Fourthly, Conſider whether the Church have an eternall ſpring of Doctrines within her, or but a finite number, and onely thoſe which the Apoſtles preacht: and I believe you will pitch upon the latter. Not then to ask how they come to know them, nor, if you anſwer by Tradition, to ask you againe how come men then not to know (before a Definition) what it is they Preacht? for if the Biſhops (of which a Councell is compounded) know it not now, how will they know it when they meet? I will deſire to know why the Church will not at once teach us all the knowes, and not keep us in doubts, which ſhe may reſolve? and did the, Apoſtles teach their Doctrines to be lockt up, or taught to us? And then having conſidered this, you will find I believe, that the Church do with Doctrines, as Fathers with Eſtates, never give their Children all, that they may ſtill have ſomething to keep them in awe with; becauſe if ſhe ſhould, ſhe could never have after pretended a Power to end any new emergent controverſie, keeping in ſecret what ſhe knowes, any that ariſeth, ſhe may ſtill pretend is endable by her.
Fiftly, Conſider that it will appear but a ſhift, if you ſay that there is a Tradition that all the Churches Definitions be true, and ſo excuſe the particular Doctrines, for otherwiſe having none,87 and yet avoid giving us any Rules to know the Church by at all times, and anſwering thoſe Queſtions, which muſt be ended before we can know at any time when ſhe hath defin'd.
Now I confeſſe if you had ſaid Tradition teacheth, that the particular Church of Rome is ſo the Admiral ſhip, that we may know any other if it be of God's Fleet, becauſe then it muſt follow her, that is, be ſubject to her decrees, & theirs which joyn with her, this would have bin plainly to let me know your mind, and we might quickly have examin'd, whether there were any Tradition for the Church in this ſence to be alwaies obeyed when ſhe Teaches, and without you ſay this, you ſay nothing, and will never be able to give any ſuch Note of the Church, as the ignorant may without bluſhing pretend to know it by: Becauſe therefore I gueſſe, that when not I, but your Adverſaries reaſons (for I am but one of the worſt tranſcribers of them) have driven you from your own Fort, you muſt retire to that of your friends, or like them which are drowning, you will rather catch at a Twigg, then ſink: I will conſider this Aſſertion, which I ſuppoſe you muſt lay hold of ſo far forth as to ſhew it to be indeed but an Aſſertion. That there hath no ſuch Verbal Tradition (nor indeed any) come downe, ſeems to me for theſe reaſons.
Saint Cyprian by oppoſing the Church of Rome, and that with many Biſhops about the Rebaptization, ſhewes ſufficiently, that he and they knew of no ſuch Tradition; and then in what Cave muſt it have lain hid, if the chiefe Doctor of that age was88 ignorant of it, and even his Adverſaries claim'd it not? And that he knew no ſuch, appears not onely by his Actions, but alſo by his words; for to them who claim'd Tradition for the particular point propos'd, (though none for the Authority of the Church propoſing) he anſwers, if it be contain'd in the Goſpels, Epiſtles, or Acts, let it be obſerved, at one blow cutting off not onely that (for ſure this authority of the Church of Rome is no way taught in the Scriptures) but all other unwritten Traditions, which Cardinal Perron, thought moſt skilfull in that kind of Fence, was not able to ward, but Du Pleſis objecting it receiv'd no other anſwer, then that the opinion of Cyprian was condemn'd, and that Tradition, although unwritten, maintain'd. Which anſwer though it be as far from befitting the Cardinall, as from anſwering the objection (ſince it is plaine, that this opinion was once held by ſuch as were of chiefe eſtimation among the Orthodox, and conſequently the contrary was not then the generall and neceſſary doctrine of Chriſtians, and the prevailing of the one ſince proves not the other falſe, but rather unfortunate, or the ſpreaders (faulty) yet I confeſſe I excuſe him, for as I have learnt from Ariſtotle, that it is ridiculous to expect a Demonſtration where the matter will beare but a probability, ſo would it be in me to expect even a probable ſolution of an Argument, the evidence of which will ſuffer none at all.
Neither was he (I mean Cyprian) the firſt, that without blot of Hereſie oppos'd the Tradition89 of the Church of Rome, but that courage which he left to others after him, when they ſaw the Chriſtian World joyne in counting him a Saint, and a Martyr, whom the Biſhop of Rome had ſtiled a falſe Chriſt, and a falſe Apoſtle, the ſame had he received by ſeeing that the Aſian Biſhops had alſo rejected, and oppos'd her Tradition; and yet Policrates ever had in great honour, and the reſt never branded with the crime of Hereſie; nay, even the more neighbouring Biſhops, and who joyn'd with the Pope in the time of celebrating Eaſter (as Iraeneus) yet thought the difference not worth excommunication, and for want of skill in the Canon Law, tranſgreſt ſo farre as to reprehend for it, whereas if to that Church all elſe had been to conform themſelves, then Iraeneus ought therefore to have thought the matter of weight enough, becauſe ſhe thought it ſo, who were to ſmall purpoſe made a Judge, if ſhe were not as well enabled to diſtinguiſh between ſlight and materiall, as between Falſe and Truth, though that it ſeemes ſhe was not: for the Church of Rome never refus'd their Communion before, though ſhe knew them to hold the ſame opinion, and ſo (as plainly appeares) counted that materiall in one Age, which ſhe had not ſo eſteemed in others, and therefore (in the degree at leaſt of holding what ſhe held) contradicted herſelf, and followed Traditions.
And as Cyprian imitated them, ſo did the Affrican Biſhops him, for a Queſtion hapning between them and the Biſhops of Rome about Appeales, though they abſolutely oppos'd him, and90 (in vaine I confeſſe) deſired him that he would not bring into the Church Typhum hujus Saeculi, the ſwelling pride of this World, and though he laboured infinitely in the buſineſſe〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that he might bring it to paſſe, yet he, and two of his ſucceſſors were either ſo unready, or ſo unskil'd in the preſent Roman Doctrine, that Feed my ſheeep, and thou art Peter, were either out of their knowledge, or out of their memory, and they alleadged, not any power jure divino, but onely pretended to a Cannon of the Councel of Nice, which when the Affricans found not in their coppies, (for they would not believe the Church of Rome ſo farre as to truſt to hers, though now you generally think the Scripture it ſelfe to have its authority quoad nos, onely for her definitions) they ſent to the Eaſt to enquire there, and finding their coppies agreeing with theirs, they then more reſolutely withſtood the Pretence, which brought at that time nothing to the Popes, but repulſe and ſhame.
And indeed, not to object that it is not numbered among any of the ancient Heriſies, that they differ'd from the particular Roman Church, nor is this Rule, of being ſure at all times to joyne with her, ever given by thoſe Fathers who ſet us waies and Antidotes how to ſecure our ſelves againſt Hereſie, (which could not have been left undone if they had known any ſuch Tradition) nor to ſpeak of the Cannon of the Councell of Chalcedon, which attributes the power of the Popes to the gift of their Fathers, and that againe to Romes91 being the head City; ſetting all this aſide, I will aske your ſelfe if it be not plain that thoſe Fathers, who (upon the impudent pretence of ſome Hereticks) ſend men to ſeverall places to enquire after Tradition, either ſend them to all the Apoſtolicall churches, or (to ſave their labour) to that to which they were neareſt, as eſteeming them all of equall authority (though not jurisdiction) for I may ſay of Rome, and them, as Tacitus doth of Caelius and the other Commanders (Mutato nomine) the name onely chang'd) Pares jure, Roma audendo potentior, for what by watching all occaſions to greaten herſelf, whereof Cardinal D' Oſſat is my witneſſe,Pag. 208. and 687. what by abuſing the reſpect all men had ever given her, in reſpect of the chiefe Apoſtles which founded her, of the Empire which was long ſeated in her, and of her ancient Biſhops, whereof about thirtie together were martyr'd there, what by interpreting what was given to her Authority, as given to her Power, and taking civilities and complements (of which no Court is now ſo full as the ancient Biſhops were) made to Popes for alleagiance ſworn to them, what by forging falſe decretall Epiſtles (which the Tearmed Authors of them would not forgive them for, if they knew it, if it were onely for the barbarous language) what by theſe, and ſuch other waies, ſhe is come at length to that paſſe, that what Avitus a Roman Generall ſaid to the Anſibarians, who gave him reaſons why he ought not in juſtice to diſturbe their poſſeſſions, Id Diis placitum,Tacitus. ut Arbitrium penes Romanos maneret quid darent, quidve adimerent, neque alios Judices92 quam ſeipſos paterentur. It is the will of Heaven, that it be left to the Romans what they will pleaſe to give or take away, and ſuffer not any Judges but themſelves, appeares now not ſo much a Hiſtory of the Pride of the Roman Empire, as a Prophecy of the generall doctrine or the Roman Church.
Having ever marked Error and Confidence to keep ſo much company, that I ſeldome find the firſt, but I miſtruſt the ſecond, makes me loath to affirme any thing over-dogmatically out of theſe objections, or ſay that they cannot be anſwered; Onely (becauſe I muſt not offend againſt Truth, for feare of offending againſt Modeſty) I will take leave to ſay, that if I could have anſwered them my ſelfe, I would not have put you to the trouble of doing it, which you might alſo have ſav'd, if by letting me know your name, you would have enabled me to have found you out, and ſo in a ſhort diſcourſe have tried whether I could have obtain'd that ſatisfaction from your words, which I muſt now expect from your Pen. But ſuppoſing I had none of theſe objections, yet two things beſides would have kept me from aſſenting to what you ſay: The firſt is, that your men, when they aske us how we know Scripture to be Scripture, and this to be the ſence of it, tell us withall, that unleſſe we know it by ſome more infallible way then our owne Reaſon (they mean their Church) it will not ſerve for a beliefe of thoſe things which are to be believ'd by a divine Faith; Now this Argument of yours upon, which you93 build all, (allowing that it appear'd good reaſon) yet at moſt it is but reaſon, and liable to the ſame exceptions, unleſſe the ſame thing be a wall when you leane upon it, and a bulruſh when we doe. The ſecond is, that all you ſay (for as yet you ſpeak not of the Authority of the Particular Church of Rome, though you muſt at length come to it, though by that too little is to be gotten) if it were granted, would but prove thoſe who adhere now to the Church of Rome to be now in the right, but I asked for a guide, which might without new ſearch ſerve me the next yeer, as well as this; For (for all that you have prov'd) ſhe may leave the way you ſay ſhe now pretends to walk in, and attempt to reform too, (which I wiſh were as probable as it is poſſible) or there may ariſe a ſchiſme between two parts of thoſe Churches which now adhere to the Roman, and both may claime Tradition, (for what hath been may be againe) and how ſhall I know then which ſide to take, ſince both will ſeem equally good by that Touchſtone which you appoint me to try with. And if I be then ſent to try by Ancient Writers, it is certaine, that (beſides the fallibility of that way for the learned) this cannot be done at all by the ignorant, and it is probable that both Parties will fall into that abſurdity, into which the Church of Rome daily runs, which is, that although the evidence which ſhe claimes by cannot well be exactlie read over in thirty yeares time, yet ſhe requires us under paine of Damnation to give our Verdicts for her by twenty yeeres old.
Object. THe high and Sage Maſter of our Faith hath in vaine ſpent ſo much ſweat, and paines, if after he paſſed from hence, he hath left no meanes to aſſure mankind, what it was he taught and practiſed.
Reſp. I ſuppoſe this ſpeech is directed at me who (as you conceive) take away all meanes, becauſe I have no Judge; but I would faine know of you, whether Plato, and Ariſtotle have not left us meanes to know what they taught, although they have not left us any living infallible Judge to deliver us their doctrine verbally, or to expound their works: Or if you intended your Accent upon the word Aſiure, and if you mean by that ſome infallible knowledge, I deſire you (out of your own words) to conſider whether humane nature be capable of it. For my part ſuppoſing as I doe, that his Faith is in a ſufficient degree, which brings forth obedience, I require not any motives more, aſſuring (except from them who claime, that they cannot erre) then ſuch as any man unpraepoſſeſt with paſſion or prejudice will beleeve ſufficiently to obey; and ſuch in my opinion are mine: For though I know, you count any way without a guide but groping in the dark, yet if God had nor given us ſo much light as we deſired, we muſt not therefore ſet up falſe lights, and becauſe we would be ſure to have a guide, make one our ſelves: But he ſeemes to95 me, to have dealt with us in Religon not very un-analogically, to what he hath in the world, giving us two lights, Scripture, and Univerſall Tradition, whereof one gives light to the other, and both to us: Univerſall Tradition is our Guide to Scripture (as whatſoever elſe that guided us to we would receive, if there were any ſuch thing) and Scripture is our way to God; By Univerſall Tradition we know much better, that theſe Books were written by Chriſts Diſciples (who are ſufficient witneſſes of what he taught) then the Ariſtotelians know that theſe were Ariſtotles works, or the Academicks knew Plato's, ſince Chriſtians have both kept them with more care, and in the acceptance of them uſed more caution, as thinking them ſo much more important: In the Scripture I conceive, that (according to that rule, which I am ſure I have either read in Chryſoſtome, or very often quoted out of him) 〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, all that is neceſſary is clear, or if any man that ſtrives to ſquare both his actions and opinions by that Rule, chance to fall into any error (for which his underſtanding is onely in fault and not his will) it ſhall not hinder his riſing to heaven: Such an infallible way excludes, if not all uſe, at leaſt all neceſſity of an infallible guide, and is as good as a Judge to keep Unity in Charitie (which is onely needfull) though not in opinions; and indeed ſince you muſt grant, that if any man miſ-interpret the Councell of Trent, it ſhall not damne him, ſo he doubt not of its truth, deſire to diſcover96 what it meant, and be in a Propenſion of beleeving, that when he knowes it, me thinkes (as Cineas told Pirrhus) you had as good doe that at firſt, which you muſt doe at laſt, that is, ſay the ſame with us at firſt concerning Scripture, which after much trouble, you are forced to ſay concerning Councels, and in hard matters let the ſame implicite Faith in God ſerve, which ſerves in them, who can claime no authority but from, and under him: And (which is more then I affirme) that no man, but by his own, being wicked, can come into any error by falſe interpretation of Scripture, ſee I pray, what Saint Auſtine ſaies in his forty ninth Sermon de Verbis Domini, that God hath ſo hedg'd in all his own ſayings, that whoſoever would interpret any place of Scripture falſe, he that hath a circumciſed heart by reading what is before and after, may find that ſence which the other would pervert.
Yet if you can ſhew me reaſon to beleeve that there is any ſtanding guide upon earth (and without reaſon it were unreaſonable to hope to perſwade me to beleeve it) I will never be proud ſo much to my own coſt, as rather to venture looſing my way by chuſing it my ſelfe, then be beholding to him for directing me in it.
Object. Thoſe to whom during his life, he had moſt fully declared his mind, went and told it to others, and all was done; But this way hath the prejudice of humane Fallibility, for ſeldome it hapneth, that a multitude can carry away all in the ſame manner, and one thouſand ſix hundred yeares are paſſed ſince,97 yet if we looke into the immediate joynts of the deſcent, we cannot finde where it can miſſe: for the doctrine being ſupernaturall, and not delivered by any mans skill, or wit, the maine principle of it can be no other, then to know what was delivered them by their Teachers: when therefore an Apoſtle had preached over and over again the ſame Doctrine, not long, nor hard to be carryed away in all the Townes of a Countrey, and let him be gone, and all dead who heard him ſpeake, and ſome queſtions ariſe concerning his doctrine, let us ſee whether error can creep in if Chriſtians keep to their hold, that is, what they were taught by Chriſts Apoſtles. Let therefore the wiſeſt and beſt of thoſe Townes meet and diſcuſſe the controverſie out of this principle, will not there be a quick end of their diſpute? For every man can ſay, Thus my Father heard the Apoſtle ſpeak, and what is here certaine of the Children of thoſe who heard them, may with as much evidence be deriv'd againe in the Grand-children, and ſo in every age.
Reſp. Thoſe writings, whoſe buſineſſe is to prove, ſhould be like the houſes in the Low Countries, for as there they take ſuch care of their, foundations, that what is under ground coſts them more then all above it, ſo in theſe, the greateſt labour ought to be in ſetling ſurely the Principles, becauſe〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉one abſurditie granted, how fertile error is after, what a heard or ſwarme of ſtrange concluſions follow, not onely your ſelfe have obſerv'd, but Ariſtotle alſo hath told all that have read him, and experience daily tels mankind;98 ſince therefore a ſmall miſtake encreaſeth as much, and as ſpeedily as a graine of muſtard-ſeed, I muſt the earneſtlier contradict this〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, this firſt error of yours, as being the Parent of ſo many more already, and being likely in time (if by being confuted it be not us'd as Sature us'd his Father) to have yet a more large and numerous Iſſue.
Then you leave out one thing out of your Hiſtory of the Goſpell, which alone conſider'd, would have much weaken'd what you ſay; For you ſpeak of the Apoſtles, but forget utterly their Writings, a miſ-interpretation of which might ſoon ſpread an error. And certainlie out of them, if Chriſtians had been to receive no Inſtrucions, but onely to remember what was taught them by word of mouth, both they would have ſav'd themſelves the labour of w•iting them, and Traditors, who deliver'd them to be burnt, would have been thought to have committed no greater fault, then if they had done the ſame to any ordinary writing: But if the firſt Chriſtians, and generally their ſucceſſours ſince, have ever carefully and aſſiduouſly ſtudied (what by comparing places, what by all other waies) to underſtand them, and thought themſelves bound to beleeve, and obey whatſoever they found, or thought they found there contain'd, and eſteem'd that they were taught by themſelves, what they learnt from their writings (as they muſt have thought it the ſame thing, unleſſe the Apoſtles authority had vaniſht, by having their inſtructions99 put into paper, which were as if the Kings verball Commands bound us, bat not his Proclamations.) Then here appeares a gate at which errors might enter, which you (at leaſt I am ſure this part of your Treatiſe) did not conſider.
But even their verball might either bee miſ-interpreted, or knowinglie miſ-alledged, even by thoſe who are counted Archi-Catholicks,Socrat. lib. 5. for I pray, muſt not one of thoſe two have been done, or by the Church of Rome, or by thoſe of Aſia (which example I would not ſo often ſpeake of, but that I hope〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉is as good an excuſe, as〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉:) For ſince it is impoſſible, that Saint John and Sain Peter both inſpir'd by the Holy Ghoſt, which is the Spirit of Truth, ſhould teach contradictorie doctrines, whereof one muſt neceſſarily be falſe, what elſe can follow, but that one part (if not both) intended to deceive, or were themſelves deceiv'd in it (and what makes it impoſſible, that ſuch a miſtake by men of authoritie may not generallie ſpread) and after a plaine example your reaſon will be no more able to overthrow experience, then the earthen Pitcher, in the Fable, was to break the Braſen one,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
One of the Arguments you make for the infallibility of the way which you propound, is, That the Doctrine, which the Apoſtles taught was neither long nor hard to he carried away, Out off which me thinkes I can evidently deduce that the Church of Rome is not that, ſince both it appears how long that s, and ſince you tell us your ſelfe, That the cauſe100 of many errors among you is the multiplicity of Catholique Doctrines, which doth not oblige a man o the knowledge of every Part, but to a prompt ſubjection to the Church. Truely if there be no contradiction between theſe two Propoſitions, I will confeſſe that I have hitherto miſtaken what the word ſignifies, unleſſe you mean, that the Apoſtle by teaching ſubjection to the Church induſively, taught all that ſhe teaches, and ſo what they delivered was ſhort, but what implicitely, much; If this were ſo, certainely the Apoſtles, when they included almoſt all their doctrine in the ſubjection enjoyn'd to the Church, taught ſome certaine markes by which men might at all times know her, though you pretend to none hut ſuch as the Greeke Church as much claime (which is enough to ſcruple the ignorant) and rightly too, as the Roman (as Antiquity, Succeſſion, Miracles, &c.) excepting onely communion with the Pope, and ſplendor, whereof neither are proper markes of the true Church, that is ſuch as can never be abſent from her, ſince the Hereſie of a Pope (which hath been, and is not by your owne whole Church held impoſſible) may take away the one way, and a generall Perſecution the other.
It appeares alſo by what you ſpeake of the immediate join es of the deſcent, that you ſuppoſe if any errour come in, ſome one Age muſt joyn to teach it, which by no meanes followes, no more then one Age of them at Rome joyn'd to teach their Poſterity Italian inſtead of Latine, but ſome may have taught a Doctrine to be probable in one Age, more then101 in the ſecond, and all in the third, according to Seneca's obſervation. The error of few (eſpecially when Notable Perſons) begetting the error of a multitude; and againe the authority of a multitude deceiving Particular men, and ſo by degrees it may be thought from Probable, True, from true fere de Fide, from that abſolutely a part of Faith, and conſequently to have come from Tradition, whilſt the contrary opinion being firſt believ'd the more improbable, next falſe, from falſe Temerary, from temerary, Haereſi proximum, and from that abſolutely Hereticall, hath by almoſt inſenſible degrees met with a mighty change, and is arriv'd at Hell before it almoſt misdoubted it. And that theſe progreſſe-Doctrines have travel'd, it is eaſie for any man to ſee who hath been but a little converſant in your own Books, and whoſoever denies it, may as well deny that their is any green in Summer, when there is hardly any thing elſe.
And for the Caſe you put, that the wiſeſt, and beſt of the Townes where Doctrines were delivered ſhould have met &c. I both ſuppoſe, that the controverſie of who were beſt and wiſeſt, would not it ſelf have been eaſily ended, but allowing that it might have been eaſily done, and would have been moſt uſefully done, yet it never was; and ſo ſuppoſe the way never ſo good, it was yet like a Medicine, which be it never, ſo Soveraigne, can never cure if it be never taken; Councells there have been call'd Ancient, becauſe leſſe Modern, and generall, becauſe leſſe particular (for the102 firſt was not till more then three hundred yeeres after Chriſt, nor to the largeſt appeares it, that ever any were ſummon'd from beyond the bounds of the Ancient Roman Empire, though Chriſtianity were much farther extended: Some leſſe meetings or Conciliabula there were indeed before, but none of theſe accounted infallible by your ſelves (though me thinks they ſhould by your grounds) and indeed it would go ill with your own infallibility if you ſhould, for of the two moſt notable, the one defended Rebaptization, and the other condemned Samoſatenus, and in doing ſo taught as plain Arrianiſme, (if we might know mens meaning by their words, which if we cannot, all arguing, eſpecially from what any Authors ſay, is ended) as even Arrius himſelf was condemned for at Nice; If theſe intended to diſcuſſe the Controverſie out of the Principle you ſpeak of, and yet miſs'd Tradition when they meant to have followed it, then ſo might your beſt and wiſeſt men have done too; if they did not intend it, then it ſeemes it hath not been held needfull alwaies by Catholikes to try Doctrines by that Criterium, which you now preſcribe.
Object. Who can be ignorant what he was taught when he was a child, as the ground and ſubſtance of his hopes for all Eternity?
Reſp. Truely the ordinary ſort more then moſt eaſily: For becauſe either their mind wanders, or their Teachers deſcend not to their capacities, they commonly goe away both from publique Sermons and private Catechiſmes, as if they had103 receiv'd inſtructions in a language as ſtrange to them, as that wherein they ſay their prayers: Beſides their own Fathers teach them little or nothing, becauſe that is as much as they have learnt themſelves, (eſperially in ignorant places and times) their Ghoſtly Fathers teach them moſt, but that much more concerning life then opinions; ſo that though they were not ignorant of all they were taught, yet they are abſolute ſtrangers to the greateſt part of what your Church teaches; And it now no more of their Religion be delivered by Verball Tradition, what was then, when many points, which are now often taught (though not conſtantly and in all places but upon occaſions) were not thought of in many yeeres? Suppoſe that about the Queſtion of what makes a Prieſt, a convocation of men had met (I mean of ſuch who knew not what was taught in Bookes) before Luthers time (and what I ſay would be true in ſomewhat a leſſe degree of this more inſtructed Age) what account could they have given what they had been taught when they were Children? Truely they could have ſaid, we know it to be the cuſtome for our Biſhops to make Prieſts, and ſome of us have heard he onely is to make them, what is done and taught in other places we know not: Very far would they have been from all agreeing that they were taught when they were Children (as part of the ground of their hopes for all Eternity) by their Fathers, as receiv'd from theirs, as come down from the Apoſtles; that he is no Prieſt, to whom in expreſſe tearmes104 Commiſſion is not given to offer for the living and the dead, which now being objected to the Clergy of England, perſwades me, that your Church teacheth more then generally men are taught when Children, or indeed at any time by any Verball Tradition: For not onely the Ordinary ſort, but even your moſt learned men knew not what is Tradition, if that be ſtill your Rule of Faith; for they diſagree among themſelves, whether ſome things be of Faith or no; as for Example, Whether the Pope can erre in the Cannonization of a Saint,Wadd. Pag. 30. for if all Queſtions were that way to be ended, and ſuch Traditions were evident, (as if they were ſuch as you ſpeak of they muſt be) all your ſide muſt be ſoone reſolv'd both in this, and all other ſuch Queſtions; And if you ſay that indeed all Particular Doctrines are not taught by ſuch a Tradition, but that by ſo much as all are taught, they know their Judge and Director concerning them, and ſo are taught them implicitely, I anſwer, that the Vulgar, although they are generally told that the Church is infallible, yet I doubt whether they be either taught that this Doctrine hath had any ſuch generall and uninterrupted a delivery, or have heard much concerning thoſe meanes, by which ſhe her-ſelfe is to he known, or thoſe Circumſtances, by which we are to know when ſhe expreſſeth her opinion: That the Pope is the Head of the Church they know, but whether Tradition teach him to be ſo of Divine, or humane Right, from God, of Councels, or tacite conſent, and what Power is included in that Headſhip,105 a Mahumetan as much inſtructed as moſt of them, and even his head-ſhip is ordinarily prov'd to them but out of ſome place of Scripture, our of which they hear his Infallibility concluded too, without being, told the different degree in which thoſe two Doctrines are to be held. Secondly, For the learned, neither are they taught ſo well ſome of theſe things, but that they differ concerning them, and your ſelf fly wholly ſpeaking of them, leaving them to agree among themſelves,His Opuſc. and (as Cardinall Perron ſaies in one place, he will do us Proteſtants when we differ) ſuffering the dead to bury the dead; If then neither are you all agreed by what to know your Church, nor when ſhe hath defin'd, ſo that even what is of faith is undermined among you, I find cauſe to beleeve, that Tradition is no excellent Director of you, even in your grounds, no not to teach you to know that which ſhould teach you all the reſt; And if you were, yet at the ſame wicket, and by the ſame degrees, by which I have ſhewd that other errors both may, and have not onely entered into your Church, but aſcended alſo to high places there; this doctrine concerning your Director might have done the ſame.
True it is, that very little is generally and conſtantlie taught in all ages to the people, and that which; is ſeldome, is told them to have been ſo receiv'd from hand to hand by the verball Tradition you ſpeak of; and if they be at any time taught ſo, and remember it, yet they know not whether the next Curate teach the ſame, at leaſt,106 if under the ſame notion and degree of Neceſſitie: Indeed it would not be ſo intricate a worke (as now adaies it is) to be a Chriſtian, if your way had been onely followed: but it is not this Tradition, but the writings of paſt Ages, which tranſmit to poſteritie the opinions of the Doctors of paſt times, many of them being erroneous, and more unneceſſarie; out of theſe works the learned learne, and teach againe in their workes, what the greater part (the unlearned) ſcarce ever heare of; out of theſe they ſettle the degrees your Doctrines are to be held in, ſome as probable, ſome true, ſome almoſt neceſſarie, ſome altogether, and teach concerning others, that ſome are falſe, ſome dangerous, ſome damnable, whereas the vulgar have ſeldome their meat ſo curiouſlie joynted to them, but are told in generall for the moſt part (unleſſe ſome publick oppoſition, or other occaſion perſwade them at ſome time to deſcend to teach them more parcicularlie) that this is ſo good, and this is not ſo: And indeed the degree in which the laſt Age held ſuch an opnion, is both moſt hard to know (not onely becauſe the ignorant are ſeldom taught it by word of mouth, and the learned have ſeldome occaſion, without ſome oppoſition, to explaine themſelves ſo farre in their writings,) but becauſe alſo as many, and as conſiderable Perſons not writings, as doe write, we cannot know by the Authors, what the whole Age thought true (except the acceptation of that Doctrine were a condition of the Communion)107 and moſt neceſſarie to be known, becauſe moſt of our controverſies with your Church are as much, if not more, about the neceſſitie of her opinions, as about the truth of them: For we ſeeing plainlie, that in the pureſt ages many of the chiefeſt Doctors have contradicted ſome of her Tenets, without ſuſpicion of Hereſie, are not able to conceive how a doctrine ſhould, from being indifferent in one age, become neceſſarie in another, and the contrarie from onely falſe Heriticall,
eſpecially if that way had allwaies been walkt in, which you now ſpeak of.
Object. No judicious man can deny to ſee with his eyes, (if he have caſt them never ſo little upon the preſent ſtate of Chriſtendome) that there is one Congregation of men which layeth claime to Chriſt his Doctrine, as upon this title, that ſhe hath received it from his Apoſtles without interruption, delivered from Father to Son untill this day, and admits not any Doctrine for good and legitimate, which he doth not receive in this manner.
Reſp. What the Judicious (of whom I am no member) can do, I know not, but I not onely can, but do deny it, you meaning by that Congregation the Church of Rome, for by ſeeing, that not upon this, but other kind of claim certaine Doctrines have arrived to the very brink of being defined; I have cauſe to think, that if they received none in upon108 on other grounds, theſe would not be ſuffered to ſtand ſo neer the doore. And indeed there being between your ſelfe ſuch differences, that Eraſmus tels us,Praefat. in Hillar. that he who is a Heretick among the Dominicans, is Orthodox to the Scotiſts, ſure one ſide hath admitted of a Doctrine for Legitimate, which hath not been ſo received, and then me thinks this being eaſily endable, which it is, by ſeeing which claimes ſuch a delivery, (for if both do it, then two Parts may, which you deny, if neither do, then your whole Church goes by ſome other Rule) that which doth, upon that which you call the Catholique Grounds, me thinks ſhould have obtained a definition for her, and the other, which refiſts that Principle, upon which they ought onely to build, ſhould have been ſuddenly and abſolutely condemned. This will appeare plainer, if we conſider the opinions of your Church by the Actions of her Head, in a notable and late Example. A great controverſie being riſen between the Dominicans and the Jeſuites, it was heard before Pope Clement, let us ſee then what courſe he took to find which Part held the Truth, ſince he was not likely (eſpecially in a time wherein, by being more oppoſed then uſually, he had reaſons to be conſequently more cautious) to chuſe a new way, by which truth was not wont to be found out by your ſide upon like occaſions; Did he ſend for the wiſeſt and beſt men from all, nay from adjoyning Parts, to enquire of them what they had been taught by their Fathers, to have been received by them uninterruptedly from the Apoſtles?109 did he examine with which of them the firſt and pureſt ages ſided? did he conſider which opinion would make us have the more excellent conceit of God, and work moſt towards the expelling of Vice? None of all theſe were his. courſe, but he appointed both ſides, to prove which of them followed Saint Auſtine, and according to them, he intended to give ſentence, if the advice of Cardinall Perron had not prevailed to the contrary: But many days they ſpent in examining what he thought, who thought ſo variouſly concerning it, that he ſcarce knew himſelf which, whereas before him all the Ancients that I could ever meet with, were with the Ieſuites with an Vnanimous conſent, and by them (if they muſt be tried by men as fallible as themſelves) it would have better agreed with their own Principles to have had both Parts judged.
After the Pope, let us hear Biſhop, and allmoſt Cardinall Fiſher, who being one of your own Authors and Martyrs, cannot be thought to praevaricate againſt that Church, for whoſe defence he imployed not onely his Inke, but his Blood.
His words are theſe,
There are many things of which was no enquirie in the Primitive Church, which yet upon doubts ariſing, are now become perſpicuous, by the diligence of after-times. And that you may ſee, that he ſpeakes of points of Faith, He addes,
No Orthodox man now doubts,Pag. 496. whether there be a Purgatory, of which yet among the Ancients there is no mention, or exceeding rarely: It is not believed110 by the Greeks to this day — Neither did the Latines conceive this Truth at once, but by little and little.
And for an Epiphonema he cloſeth it thus, Considering that Purgatory was a good while unknown; after,Pag. 497. partly by Revelations, partly by Scripture came little by little to be believed by ſome, and ſo at laſt the beliefe of it was generally received by the Catholique Churches — Who can wonder concerning Indulgences, that in the Primitive Church there was no uſe of them? Indulgences therefore began, after men had trembled a while at the Torments of Purgatory.
See I pray how will you two agree? You ſay the Church of Rome receives, but what ſhe claimes to be come down to her from the Apoſtles without interruption: He ſaith ſome of her Doctrines were long unknown, and came in by Revelations and Scripture; you ſay new Doctrines cannot come into a Church that, holds this Principle: He ſaith, Doctrines have come in by little and little: So either ſhe held not allwaies this Principle, or for all that they might come in: To be ſhort, all, which he hath ſaid, ſeemes to me, as if he had purpoſely intended to frame a Ram to batter down that fortification, which you have built about the Roman Church.
Now though he be of ſo great an Authority that he needs no backing, yet I will deſire you to look into Alphonſus de Caſtro, where he ſpeakes of Indulgences, and ſee if he mend the matter. He confeſſeth, that the uſe of them ſeemes to be late received111 into the Church, yet would not have them contemned, becauſe many things are known to after-commers, of which thoſe ancient Writers were wholly ignorant. Amongſt whom there is rarely mention of Tranſuibſtantiation, more rarely of the Proceſsion of the Holy Ghoſt from the Son, of Purgatory almoſt none; For though he ſpeaks after as if he meant onely that the names of theſe were unmentioned, and not the things, yet it is plaine, that if he brought them into any purpoſe, it was to prove, that ſome Doctrines are after of neceſſity to be believed, which once were not, and Doctrines conſiſt in the Things, not in the Name.
I could next tell you of Eraſmus his ſaying,Epiſt. Pag. 1164. Res deduct a eſt ad Sophiſticas contentiones, & Articulorum Miriades proruperunt. Religion is come down to Sophiſtry, and a Miriad of Articles are broken out. But knowing that his words will not find ſo much reſpect, (becauſe he himſelf finds leſſe favour) as thoſe of others more allowed among you, let us mark theſe words of Sancta Clara,Pag. 296. 1 Edict. The Church, when it is ſaidto define any thing, ſhe reſts not upon any new Revelations, but upon theancient, lying hid in writings and words of the Apoſtles, which he ſayes not as his private opinion, but the conſtant beliefe of Doctors: By which it appeares plainly, that there are at leaſt interpretations of what the Apoſtles taught, drawn forth by Reaſon, not received: by Tradition, which makes now apart of the preſent Roman Religion. a ſufficient Gappe for Errors to enter at, when112 either miſtakings, or ends may become new opinions, and ſtile them but interpretations of the old. Salmeron a Voluminous Jeſuite, one, neither by his order, nor his inclination an enemy at all to the Roman Church, being preſs'd by the opinions of the Ancients, affirmes, Doctores quo juniores, co perſpicaciores eſſe,Tom. 13. Pag. 467. That the more modern Doctors are, the more preſpicatious, that perincrementa Temporum nota facta, ſunt Divina myſteria, quae tamen ante a multos latuerunt: In proceſſe of time Divine Myſteries have been made known, which before lay hid from many; That it is infirm arguing from Authority, and anſwers to the multitude of them, who in times paſt had oppoſed him, with theſe words of Exodus, That the opinion of many is not, to be followed, leading us out of the way, with ſome other very Anabaptiſticall anſwers, and very contrary to your Tenets, (for ſure it were a ſtrange Tradition, which had ſo many Orthodox Oppoſers) and nothing inferiour to that ſaying of Zuinglius, ſo much exaggerated, Quid mihi cum Patribus, potius quam cum Matribus?
The ſame Author in ſame place ſaies, that Saint Hierome durſt not affirm the Aſſumption, but Saint Auſtine durſt; and by that meanes, the Church perſwaded by his reaſon believes it: Such a notable Tradition have all her opinions; for even this affirmation, which he confeſſeth, brought in this beliefs, is it ſelf not now believed to be Saint Auſtines, for I take it, he muſt mean his tract of the Aſſumption, counted not his by your own Divinity-Criticks, the Lovaine Doctors, which have113 ſet it forth at Cullen.
And becauſe I am willing to ſpend no more time in the proofe of ſo apparent a Truth, I will not urge Poſa, who, to perſwade the defining of an opinion, which hath a great current of the Ancients againſt it, (ſo farr it is from having any Tradition for it) reckons many other opinions condemned by your Church,In Elucidar Deiparae Pag. 1113. and defended by the Ancients, unlelſſe you will believe his impudent Aſſertion, that they are all corrupted, and will paſſe to the Concluſion of this, which ſhall have for a Corollary, the Confeſſion of a Spaniſh Arch-Biſhop, who is to be thought to ſpeak with more authority then his own, becauſe being imployed to bring that to paſſe, which was deſired by ſo great a Part of your Church, he can ſcarce be ſuppoſed not to have had the advice and conſent of many of them in what he ſayes.
He then tells us, Firſt,Wadd. Pag. 125. every Age either brings forth, or opens her Truth: Things are done in their times, and ſeverall Doctrines are unlockt inſeverall Ages.
Secondly,Pag. 270. To ſhew that though his opinion had no ſuch Tradition as you ſay your Church claimes for all her Doctrines, yet it may, and ought to be defined; he deſires to know who ever taught the Aſſumption of the Virgin, before Saint Auſtines and Hieromes time, and by whom was that opinion deduct from the Apoſties: Nay, he abſolutely affirmes, that before Nazianzene, no man ever taught any thing of her delivery without paine, yet many thought the contrary.
114Thirdly and laſtly,Pag. 202. For your abſolute confutation, he confeſſeth, that we believe and hold in this Age many things for Myſteries of Faith, which in former Ages did waver under ſmall or no Probability, and many Things are now defined for Articles of Faith, which have endured a hard repulſe among the moſt and the weightieſt of the Ancient Doctors, and no light contradiction among the Ancient Fathers; and having reckoned up five Particulars,
He ſhuts it up thus,Pag. 203. Many of theſe kinds of Opinions there are, which ſometimes declined to one Part, ſometimes to the other, and contrary Favourers, according to ſeverall times, untill a diligent and long diſquiſition being praemitted, the Truth was manifeſted either by Pope, or Provinciall, or generall Councels, nay, and ſaies that the diſquiſition is made by conferring of Places of Scripture and Reaſon, which is the way which you miſlike.
Theſe things conſidered,Pag. 204. whoſoever ſhall after ſay, that your Church claimes all her Doctrines to have come by a Verball and conſtant Tradition to her from the Apoſtles, I will not ſay that he is115 very, impudent, but I cannot think that a ſmall matter will put him out of countenance; for your part, I eſteeme you ſo much, that I am confident you have not ſo little Noſe as not to find the contrary, nor ſo little Forehead as not to confeſſe it, having received the Affidavit of ſuch a cloud of Witneſſes.
Object. Whoſoever pretend Chriſt his Truth againſt her, ſaith, that true it is, ſhe had once had the true way, but by length of times ſhe is fallen into groſſe Errors, which they will reform, not by any Truth which they have received from hand to hand from thoſe, who by both Parts are acknowledged to have received their leſſon from Chriſt, and his Apoſtles, but by Arguments, either out of Ancient Writers, or the ſecrets of Reaſon.
Reſp. This is no farther true then as it concernes the Proteſtants, for the Greek Church will not ſuffer your proportion to be generall, but forbid the Banes.
They pretend not to have made any Reformation, but to have kept ever ſince the Apoſtles, what from them was received: Barlaam ſaier, they do〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉keep ſafe and whole the Tradition of the Catholique Church, nay, he proves his to be the found Part, becauſe by them〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Nothing was ever more eſteemed then her Tradition: And he objects it to your Church that ſhe doth〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, diſanull the Tradition of the Catholique Church, and ſetting them at116 naught, bring in ſtrange and undenizon'd opinions: And that Greeke, who is joyned to Nilus, and Barlaam in Salmatius his Edition diſputing againſt a Cardinall, chargeth you, that you do〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, ſow Tares among the Tradition of the Apoſtles and Fathers: if when they make this claime they either ſay ſo, and think not ſo, or think ſo, and erre, then this proves, that though the Roman Church did make that claime which you ſay ſhe doth, yet ſhe too might either claime it againſt her Conſcience, or againſt Truth: For this claime of the laſt cannot be denyed but by him, who will imitate that Hamſhire Clown, of whom you give me warning, and believe no more then he ſees himſelf, eſpecially ſince your own Authors, when they diſpute for Traditions, prove their authority from this profeſſion of the Greeks: but I cannot blame you to forget them, (if we would ſuffer you) ſince they cannot be remembred but by your Religions diſadvantage; For I verily believe, that if they had but one Addition which they want, (I mean Riches) not onely moſt of them who leave the Proteſtants, would ſooner go to them then to you, (unleſſe they would take their Religion as we take Boates, for being the Next) but money among you, who (though they diſlike your pretended Infallibility, that the Popes uſurpations upon the rights of other Biſhops, his (not ancient) claime of power to deliver Soules out of Purgatory, &c, And yet are frighted from joyning with the Proteſtants, by want of Succeſſion,117 Vocation, and ſuch like Bull-beggers) would goe over to them (as I have heard Spalato meant to doe) if they were not kept, by an unwillingneſſe to change the ſpirituall tyrannie of the Pope, for the temporall of the Turke.
But (although there were no ſuch Churches, or they made no ſuch claime, yet having ſhew'd out of your own Authors, that ſome opinions have not been conſtantly delivered by Tradition, but have entered into the Church upon the grounds (which might at leaſt poſſiblie deceive them) of Scripture, Reaſon, and Revelation, and others knockt apace to be let in) I hope we may be excuſed for making a reveiw of all, and examining what doctrines have been brought in, if not by Scripture (which we think reaſonable) at leaſt by comparing what this age teacheth and requires, with what the firſt Ages did; to which we are encourag'd by your ſelves, who make agreement with Antiquitie, the chief mark of the Church, unleſſe you meane your ſelves to be onelie Judges, even of thoſe things by which you bid us to judge you: For our examinations by reaſon, I cannot tell why you miſlike it, ſince thoſe who truſt their own reaſon leaſt, truſt it yet to chuſe for them one whom they may truſt, againſt which, all Arguments drawn from her fallibilitie without queſtion lie. Your Religion is built upon your Church, her authoritie upon reaſons, which we think ſlight and fallacious, and your ſelves think but prudentiall and probable; ought we not then, nay, muſt we not examine them by Reaſon,118 or receive them upon your word? And allowing them probable reaſon, yet I have ſtill cauſe to examine further, whether your ſuperſtructions be not more unreaſonable then your foundations are reaſonable, for then I cannot receive a more, unprobable doctrine, then that is probable, which it is prov'd by: Yet (in reſpect of things appearing divers, at divers times) I doe not like my own way ſo well, as to eſteem it abſolutelie infallible, but though I keep it, becauſe I account it the beſt, yet I will promiſe to leave it, when you can ſhew me a better, which will be hard to doe, becauſe you cannot prove it to be better but by reaſon, againſt which proofe (and conſequentlie againſt whatſoever it proves) your own Objections. remaine; For to be perſwaded by reaſon, that to ſuch an authoritie I ought to ſubmit it, is ſtill to follow reaſon, and not to quit her. And by what elſe is it, that you examine what the Apoſtles taught, when you examine that by ancient Tradition, and ancient Tradition by a preſent Teſtimonie? Yet when I ſpeake thus of finding the Truth by Reaſon, I intend not to exclude the Grace of God, which I doubt not (for as much as is neceſſarie to Salvation) is readie to concurre to our Inſtruction; as the Sunne is to our ſight, if we by a wilfull winking chuſe not to make, not it, but our ſelves guilty of our blindneſſe: Indeed if we love darkneſſe better then light, and inſtead of eſteeming it, ſhut it out, it were but juſt in God, if we ſo continue long hardened, not to ſuffer it to ſee after when119 we would, ſince ſo obſtinatelie we would not when we might, like to that which happened to thoſe Engliſhmen, of whom Froiſſard ſpeakes, who having long bound up an eye, and made a fooliſh vow, never to ſee with that till they could ſee their Miſtreſſes, when they returned, and unbound them, they ſaw nothing, but that they could not ſee.
Yet when I ſpeake of Gods grace, I mean not, that it infuſeth a knowledge without reaſon, but workes by it, as by its Miniſter, and diſpels thoſe Miſts of Paſſions, which doe wrap up Truth from our Underſtandings. For if you ſpeake of its inſtructing any other way, though I confeſſe it is poſſible (as God may give us a ſixth ſence) yet it is not ordinarie, and ought not to be brought to diſpute, becauſe ſo we leave viſible Arguments to flie to inviſible, and your Adverſarie, when he hath found your play, will be ſoon at the ſame locke, and I beleeve in this ſence, infus'd Faith is but the ſame thing, otherwiſe apparell'd, which you have ſo often laught at in the Puritans, under the title of private Spirit.
Object. This being ſuppoſed, either this Principle hath remain'd unto her ever ſince her beginning, or ſhe took it up in ſome one Age of the ſixteen, if ſhe took it up, ſhe then thought, ſhe had nothing in her, but what ſhe had receiv'd a from her fore-fathers, and if ſhe thought ſo ſhe knew it.
Reſp. This Principle is not yet taken up by her, and ſuppoſe it were, yet ſince ſome other opinions are confeſs'd to have been receiv'd by her, not from120 a conſtant Tradition, but Scripture, and Revelations, and not at once, but by little and little, this very Principle of receiving nothing but from Tradition, might it ſelfe have been receiv'd not from Tradition: nor need it have been in any one Age of the ſixteen, but ſome might have taught it in one Age, more in another, and all at laſt, and this ſo farre from being an impoſſibilitie, that it were no wonder.
Object. Let us adde, that the multitude of this Church is ſo diſperſed through ſo many Countries, and Languages, that it is impoſsible they ſhould agree together upon a falſe Determination, to affirme with one conſent a Falſity for Truth, no Intereſt being able to be common to them all, to produce ſuch an effect.
Reſp. Although ſo many Countries could not ſo well agree upon it at once, yet ſome might ſo perſwade others, that in time and by degrees the diſeaſe may be grown epidemicall: And trulie, conſidering in everie Countrie how few there are, who thinke of Religion at all, or of them againe, who walke in it by the directions of their owne eyes, even of them who take upon them to ſhew that way to others, but for the moſt part (which they did much more in more ignorant times, when Scriptura ſacra cum vetuſt is authoribus frigebat) are lead by ſome few, whom they reverence for their Piety and learning,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, whoſe words are accounted lawes,Theodoret. and they againe by a Thomas, or a Scot, or at beſt by Auſtine, or Hierome, and thinke it Tradition121 enough to have it from them (for elſe why thinke they to beare us downe with the Authoritie of one or two Fathers, if they thinke that not ground enough to goe upon themſelves) it ſeemes little ſtranger to me, what whole Countries ſhould let in not ancient opinions, then that a few ſhould, ſince a few in all places have ever govern'd all the reſt; of this I will bring two very known examples out of the Eccleſiaſticall Hiſtorie.
The firſt is of Valens the Emperour, who, being himſelfe an Arrian, and making peace with a Nation which was not ſo, and ſuppoſing that they would never have firme concord with him, to whom in Faith he was ſo oppoſite, was adviſed to perſwade their Biſhop to change his beleife, for which end having employ'd both words and money, and effected it, the Biſhop,Theodoret lib 4. directlie contrarie to Saint Peter, being himſelfe weakened, weakened his brethren, who yeelded to communicate with the Arrians (which before they abhorr'd from) and to eſteeme the Father greater then the Sonne.
The ſecond, is of that Macedonian Biſhop, who, being perſecuted by the Catholique Biſhop of the ſame place (who was then gone to Conſtantinople to fetch Souldiers, by whoſe aſſiſtance he might afflict the Hereticks the more) reſolved to turne Catholicke, and perſwaded all his followers to joyne with him in that Act, and this in ſo ſhort a time, that when the other returned, he found him choſen Biſhop unanimouſlie by both Parties, and himſelfe (for his crulelty,122 not undeſervedlie) excluded.
There is beſides another thing which helpes to lett in great errors, which is, that men naturally neglect ſmall things, and ſmall things in time naturally beget great; for which cauſe Ariſtotle ſhewing to us ſeverall cauſes of the Changes of Government, one of them is〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, adding, that〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, often a great chang comes ſtealingly in, when what is little is not conſidered.
Yet beſides the generall careleſſneſſe; The Authority of the Teachers, the Flexibility of the Taught, and the ſmallneſſe of the Things themſelves at the beginning, even Intereſt it ſelfe (which conſiſts of two Parts, Feares, and Hopes) is able to produce great effects: Of this me thinkes your ſelves may be witneſſes, who uſe to call ours, a Parliamentary Religion, as thinking, that the Will of the Prince, and both Houſes, onely made it to be received: Whereas in the beginning of Queene Elizabeths Raigne, of many thouſand Livings which were in England, the Incumbents of not a hundred, choſe rather to loſe their Benefices for your opinions, then to keepe them by ſubſcribing to ours; all who (for the greateſt Part) of neceſſity muſt be ſuppoſed for private intereſt, to have diſſembled their Religion, either then or immediately before.
Secondly, In the Third Booke of Evagrius we find, that above five hundred Biſhops ſubſcribed againſt the Councell of Calcedon, which we have reaſon to think moſt did unwillingly, (eſpecially123 if the Infallibility of a generall Councell were ſo famous a Doctrine for Catholiques as now it is) becauſe we know it was upon Baſiliſcus his commands, and that a conſiderable Part of them (the Biſhops of Aſia) profeſs'd after they were forct to it, though before they had been very angry in another Epiſtle with thoſe, who ſaid that they had done by force, rather then Free-will.
And over, and above all this we may ſee by Eraſmus his words, that many might not oppoſe a Doctrine brought in by great Power, in hope of a time to do it in, when there might be more likelyhood of prevailing: For he ſaith in one place of his Epiſtles, that thoſe who reſiſt opinions, when there is no probable meanes of doing good by it, are like thoſe, who out of ſeaſon attempt to break Priſon, who gaines nothing by it, but to have their Irons doubled upon them: And the ſame cauſe which he thinks ſhould move them to ſtay (outwardly) contentedly in Priſon, may have made many others not reſiſt, when they were firſt by violence and crowd carried thither, who might feare leaſt their oppoſall might not help their cauſe, but beget a definition againſt it. And there being thus many ſeverall motives which may work upon ſo many ſeverall kindes of men, it is no wonder, if an error may ſoon over-runne all men, or ſeem to do ſo.
Next, Whereas you ſpeak of ſeverall Countries, and Languages, I muſt deſire you to remember, that the Clergy of your Church are as it were all of one Language, (Latine either being, or124 being ſuppoſed to be, as much theirs, as that of their own People) and being under the Dominion of one, that is the Pope, which makes them as it were one Country, and from them the Laity receive all their opinions: Nay in ancient times almoſt all conſiderable men ſpoke the Language of the governing Nation, (as all of the better ſort of the Iriſh) do Engliſh) and the greateſt part of Chriſtians were governed by one man, the Emperour, and ſo a new opinion may eaſily have been received generally, no ſuch barres being ſet up to hinder it, as you alleadge.
Object. Chriſtian Doctrine is not a ſpeculative knowledge inſtituted for delight, but it is an Art of living, a Rule of attaining to eternall bliſſe; hence it followeth, that no error can fall, even in a point which ſeemeth wholly ſpeculative in Chriſtian Faith, but ſoon it breedeth a Practicall effect, or rather defection in Chriſtian behaviour.
I wonder much to heare you ſay this, who certainely have a Religion conſiſting of many points, which are no wayes reduced into Practice: Eſpecially from the degrees in which they are held, (which I conceive introduced) could ariſe no change in Chriſtian behaviour; I confeſſe that Chriſtian Religion being a Covenant between God, and Man by the entermiſe of Chriſt, we Chriſtians are properly concerned, but in the knowledge of what are the Conditions and Reward propoſed and promiſed, what wee are to obſerve, and what to hope for; and in ſo farre forth underſtanding the Nature and Attributes125 of the Covenant-maker and bringer, as we may be made ſure, that whatſoever God hath promiſed or threatened, that indeed he hath: But though this principally concernes us, yet the neceſſity of beleeving the veracity of God, obligeth us moreover to give our Aſſents to any thing, how little ſoever it have to doe with practiſe (as Saint Pauls having Parchments) if it be once made to appeare to us either by Scripture-reaſon, Tradition, or any way to have been ſaid by God either immediately, or mediately by Chriſt and his Apoſtles: And do not your ſelves count the Greekes Heretickes for denying the Proceſſion of the Holy Ghoſt from the Son, (though many Fathers deny it too) though, I pray, what hath that to do with Practice or Chriſtian behaviour, and if you ſhould now change your opinion in this point, what outward change would it breed, except onely the blotting out of one clauſe in a Creed in your Liturgy, wherein it was not at firſt? And not ſo much outward change would there be,Cap. 6 Lib. 3 de Romano Pontifice. if you ſhould turne to believe Enoch and Elias, not bo be ſtill alive, the contrary to which Belarmine ſaies all Catholiques hold now with a certaine Faith: And many more are of this kind.
Object. Whether man have Free-will or no, ſeemeth a Queſtion belonging to ſome curious Philoſopher; but upon the Preaching of the Negative part, preſently followed an unknown Libertinage, men yeelding themſelves over to all kind of Concupiſcence, ſince they were perſwaded they had no power to reſiſt, Freewill126 being taken away.
Reſp. At this time it is not my own cauſe which I plead,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, ſince in this point I confeſſe, I ſhould rather be a Pelagian, then a Calviniſt, ſince the firſt doth not wholly overthrow Gods grace, (for whatever we have by Nature, His grace gives us) but the ſecond wholly overthrowes His juſtice, beſides the direct contrariety of their Doctrine to Scripture, they ſaying in effect, that the Kingdome of Heaven is to take us by violence, whereas that teaches us, that we are to take it ſo: But yet give me leave to ſay thus much for them, that though it be true, that ill life followes very conſequently from that Principle, and thoſe who hold it, muſt be ill Logicians, if they be good men, yet it is plaine, that very many of them live as good lives, as any who believe the contrary.
Beſides, this in my opinion concernes as neerely your Dominicans, as our Calviniſts, ſince they uſe Free-will, as Tully ſaith Epicurus did the Gods, verbis aſserunt, re negant, aſſert it in words, but deny it in deed; yet I think you will not ſay that they are the more licentious, for (by direct conſequence) denying Liberty; If therefore an opinion, which is ſo neerely tyed to action, produce no more effects, how much fewer would thoſe other ſo much more unconcerning Tenets bring forth?
Object. I need not inſtance in Prayer to Saints, worſhipping Images, Prayer for the Dead &c. which it is evident could not be changed without an apparent127 change in Chriſtian Churches.
Reſp. Without change (which though it muſt be then apparent, yet need it not be ſo to us) I confeſſe they could not come in, but with little oppoſition they might: The doubtfull eſtate of the dead after this life, before the day of Judgment-audit, being much better that they ſhould have our Prayers, though they want them not, then miſſe of them if they want them, may not unlikely (and peradventure not unreaſonably) have brought in that Cuſtome without either giving ſcandale, or being received by Tradition; Though if it had, you would have gotten little by it, for unleſſe ſuch a Purgatory, out of which Indulgences may deliver, will follow out of it, the Pope will not care for the other, as being〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, nothing to profit: And though he did eſtabliſh a Purgatory, yet it might be one after the Reſurrection, for ſuch a one, more then one Father ſpeakes off: But it need eſtabliſh none, (no not any third place, which is leſſe) for the Prayers might be firſt intended for the encreaſe of the happineſſe of the Bleſſed, and relaxation of the torment of the Curſed, which latter effect, that the Prayers for the dead have, is ſaid by Prudentius, and confeſs'd to have been ſaid, both by him, and others, by your own Heroe,Lib. Con. Reg. Iac. Pag. 892. Cardinall Perron.
Of the worſhip of Images I ſhall ſpeake hereafter.
Praying to Saints may have come in upon conſequences drawne out of miſtaken places of Scriptures, or others, which inducing the opinion,128 that they enjoy'd the beatificall viſion before the day of judgement, ſome might conclude, that then they ſaw all in it, and at firſt pray to them but conditionallie, till their number increaſed, and with it the degree in which they held the opinion, till now to deny it is accounted Hereſie, though I know no Father which juſtifies our invocating of them (although they ſpeake of their interceding for us) before Nazianzene, whoſe example alone being of ſo great authoritie might ſpread it much: though, I pray, remember, who (as ſaies Nicephorus Caliſtus. ) it was that brought it firſt into the publick Liturgie.
Object. It is not poſsible, that any materiall point of Chriſtian Faith can be changed, as it were, by obreption, whilſt men are on ſleep, but it muſt needs raiſe a great ſcandall, and tumult: For ſuppoſe the Apoſtles had taught the world it were Idolatry to pray to Saints, or uſe reverence to their Pictures, how can we imagine this honour brought in but by a vehement conflict and tumult in a people, which did ſo greatly abhorre Idolatry, as the Apoſtles and Diſciples did.
Reſp. 〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: I ſpoke cheiflie, not of changing a point of Faith, but of creating one, not of contradicting a doctrine delivered from the Apoſtles, but of introducing one, of which they were wholly ſilent, either as theirs at firſt (as yee muſt ſay Pappias did) or onely as True, till being rooted and ſpread, it be beleeved Apoſtolicall upon Tertullian's Argument, that elſe how could ſo many Churches, errare in unam129 fidem, erre into the ſame beleife, which (becauſe leſſe time had then been allowed error to diſperſe it ſelfe in) was then, though no concluding proofe, yet a better then it was the next Age, and ſo ſtill grew the worſe for the wearing, till now it is worth juſt nothing.
But as Himerius ſaith,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, I ſay, tis moſt eaſie to anſwer that which is not imputed, for I am ſo farre from ſaying that the Apoſtles taught theſe two things to be Idolatrie (ſince on my Conſcience they ſpake not of them directlie at all) that I my ſelfe will not ſay they are. For Prayer to Saints (ſet aſide your Idolatrie-like Expreſſions, ſeeming to beg that of them, which you profeſſe, you meane onely to have them beg for you) I ſuppoſe the Queſtion to be but this, whether they heare us or no (which Martyrs might poſſiblie doe, and yet no other, how holy and canoniz'd ſoever, becauſe many Fathers held that none elſe ſee God yet) If they doe, I beleeve you may as well (or better, becauſe you are more ſure of their being in favour with God) deſire them to intercede for you, as you may deſire the Prayers of any living Friend, but if they doe not, then I will not ſay in Chryſoſtomes phraſe,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, what Thunder-bolts doth it not deſerve, but how unreaſonable is it to caſt men out of the Church, and ſend them out of the world, for not aſſenting to an opinion, which you cannot prove.
For reverence to the Pictures of Saints, if you130 meane onely ſome outward civill reſpect, to teſtifie the great honour and love which you beare the Prototypes, It is, I beleeve, no more Idolatrie, then keeping off our hats in the Preſence-Chamber to the Cloth of Eſtate.
Yet this I am ſo farre from eſteeming neceſſarie, that I thinke they had better never come in, then have occaſion'd ſo much un-chriſtian turmoile about ſo indifferent a thing. The firſt and pureſt Ages did well enough without theſe Pictures (we heare onely of a Parabolicall one of Chriſt in a Chalice) after they came to be made,Tertul. after to be ſet in Churches, after to be prayed before, nay, at laſt they are come to ſo great an exceſſe, that not onely againſt Scripture, but all Antiquitie, they are now come to picture God the Father himſelfe: Upon a Popes Letter to an Emperour, wherein he defends the picturing of Saints and Chriſt, and ſpeakes improbablie of the Antiquitie of their Pictures, and addes the reaſon why they pictured not God the Father, Baronius ſaies in the Margent. Yet it hath after happened, that they pictured him as he hath appeared; a way which the Church of that time could eaſily have found out, had they thought it lawfull, as it is plaine Saint Auſtine did not,De fide & Symb. unleſſe Nefas eſt be an Approbation: This alone may ſerve to ſhew that beleifes may come in, even contrarie to that of former time (and yet we not know when they entered) unleſſe you will oppoſe a ſuperficiall reaſon, that a thing cannot be to a plaine example that it is, and force me to anſwer with Barlaam,131〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, you tell me, it is impoſſible for him to die, whoſe Corſe I look upon.
Object. We remember in a manner as yet, how change came into Germanie, France, Scotland, and our own Country, let theſe be a ſigne to us, what we may think can be the creeping in of falſe doctrine.
Reſp. This is but a continuance of the ſame Paralogiſme: For at this time, in theſe places, a ſetled Religion being contradicted, the caſe is very different from an Opinions prevailing in the mindes of men, when they were yet white Paper, and not filled with any doctrine to the contrarie, either becauſe though once the contrarie had been taught, yet it had ſlept a good while, or becauſe nothing had before been ſpoken concerning it: We know, that nothing makes Noiſe but Oppoſition and Reſiſtance, and if that be not much, it will not laſt long, and the memorie of it as little: Beſides moſt of theſe points making for the power and wealth of the Clergie, you muſt not expect, that there ſhould have been as great an out-crie and hubbub when they were introduced at firſt, as when expelled after long prevailing, it being a worke, both more ſhort, eaſie, and ſecret to plant an Acorne, then to cut down or remove an Oake (〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) although thoſe men which governe the reſt, were not in this caſe ſo much intereſſed.
Object. There is no point of doctrine contrary to the Catholicke Church rooted in any Chriſtian Nation, that the Eccleſiaſticall Hiſtory doth not mention, the times132 and combats, by which it entered, and tore the Church in peices.
Reſp. The combats wherein it tore the Church, peradventure it doth, but of the times wherein many entered, they are altogether ſilent. All take notice of Arrius his words, when by reaſon of Alexander's hot oppoſition there grew diviſions, but of what the Orthodox-counted Authors (which we have) before the Councell of Nice ſaid (though aske Perron, and he will tell you, how like Arrianiſme they look) no Eccleſiaſticall Hiſtorie makes any mention, becauſe they made no bounce like the other, and ſo in likeliehood tooke no more notice of other opinions, which made none neither. And what is ſaid of this point, may be ſaid of Eutychianiſme (ſee the ſame place of Perron) for we know how Dioſcorus called upon the Fathers of the Pelagians, and others, whoſe opinions were certainlie in the Church before them, who are now counted the Authors of them.
Nay, even of opinions rooted (as you call it) are not the Proceſſion of the Holy Ghoſt from the the Father onely, the communicating Infants, the admitting none to the Beatificall Viſion but Martyrs, and other ſuch rooted in the Greeke Church? or can you tell when they entered? at leaſt was it not long before any combat concerning them? But ſuppoſe this were true, it is but accidentally ſo, for ſome of thoſe writings which deliver this to us, might as well have been loſt, as many others which were, ſo that no man can conclud that, of whatſoever133 no beginning can be ſhewed in Eccleſiaſticall ſtory, that hath not been introduced, (eſpecially ſince I ſpeak not ſo much of opinions oppoſing the Ancient Tradition, as of Superfaetations, not onely of pointes indeed Materiall, but of ſuch as in continuance of time, have grown to be thougt ſo) for how can I tell, many of them having been loſt, but ſome of thoſe would have given me notice of it, if I now had them.
Object. Let it therefore remaine for evidently conſtant, that into the Chriſtian Church can come no Errors, but it muſt be ſeen and noted, and raiſe ſcandale and oppoſition.
Reſp. Here Sir not onely〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, you reſolve upon a Truth of a concluſion before you have proved the Premiſſes; but even that is ſuch a one as followes not out of them, although they were granted: For how followes it, that becauſe all heretofore have been noted, therefore all at all times muſt be ſo, nay, that though at the comming in they found ſcandale and oppoſition, we neceſſarily (many centuries after) muſt know they did ſo. For the knowledge, which we have of theſe things, is but Reliquiae Danaum, what was overſeen by the zeale and negligence, and how much we want of what we might have known, had the reſt ſcap'd, no man can tell who pretends not to Revelation, and to the ability of knowing what was in Books, whereof he never ſaw any, and never heard of moſt: But though it followes not, ſuch a thing hath been done, therefore it muſt ever be, yet it followes (in ſpite of134 the moſt ſevere exception) ſuch a thing hath been done, therefore it may be; As for example, ſince Valentinian the Emperour bringing in ſo contrary to Chriſtian Religion, as you will confeſſe Polygamy to be, and eſtabliſhing it with a law which allowed it, and yet thoſe who tels us both of his actions and his Edict; ſpeaking no tittle of any oppoſition which was made to it, but he ever accounted a very good and pious Emperour, and his Son by his ſecond wife (his firſt ſtill living, and undivorced from him) being eſteemed Legitimate, and ſucceeding him in a part of his Empire; think you whether his authority could not have drawn the Principall men, (and incluſively the reſt to ſubſcribe almoſt any opinion, who could keep them from oppoſing ſuch an Act, or ſuch a Law: And if though this be now counted unlawfull, yet we find not, that either any Biſhop adviſed him againſt it, or excommunicated him for it, or indeed any man diſliked it: If any falſe opinion backt by great Power, have been not onely (like this) introduced, but ſpread and ſetled, how unlikely is it that we ſhould now know what ſcandals it raiſed, ſuppoſing it raiſed any.
Object. As in our Naturall Body, the Principall parts are defended by bones, fleſh, skins, and other defences, that no outward Agent can come to offend there, before having annoyed ſome of theſe; ſo in the Catholique Faith, there are in ſpeculations, thoſe which we call Theologicall Concluſions, and other pious opinions, and in practice, many rights and ceremonies, which ſtoppe the Paſſage unto the maine Principall135 Parts of Chriſtian beliefe, and Actions.
Reſp. Either theſe Theologicall concluſions, and pious opinions are derived from the ſame Tradition, or they are not; if they be, then ſure they are equally matters of Faith, and ſo need ſome other courſe to defend them, and you muſt find Quis cuſtodiet ipſos cuſtodes: If they be not, but were onely Deductions either of the firſt Ages Logick, (which was not alwaies excellent) or of that of more Modern times, then may they ſo eaſily be falſe themſelves, that I know not how they can ſerve to preſerve the reſt certainly from all corruption indeed to ſecure any Truth: But I believe many may be miſcounted Hereticks, for onely oppoſing ſome of theſe, what through the over-caution, and too much ardor of ſome Primum mobile, and of the greater part lead by a few ſuch, what through their being come (having been long) from pious opinions, to be matters of Faith, as in great Families Servants, who haue waited long in meaner places, are rewarded with higher: Beſides I verily believe, that many Doctrines, which you account neceſſary, have no ſuch redoubts about them, or at leaſt have not alwaies had, and indeed you onely affirming it by Tullies Rule, (who was no ſmall Maſter of Reaſon) Sat erit verbo negare, It will be enough for me barelie to deny it. And for Rites and Ceremonies which you ſuppoſe guard your Doctrines, (many uſed among the Ancients being not now in uſe amonſt you) either ſome Tenets, which thoſe did guard, and they did hold, yee hold not; or if you do ſtill, at leaſt they are how unguarded.
136But ſtill, I ſpeaking moſt of the eaſineſſe, that falſe and new Doctrines not contradicting the old, may be brought into the Church, what anſwer is it to tell me, how the Principall of Chriſtian Religion are ſure guarded, ſince ſo they may be, and yet ſuch other may be brought in: As Chriſts Promiſes, and chiefe injunctions may be retained, and yet praying to Saints, and Purgatory, and ſuch like, be ſuperinduct.
Object. Let any diſcreete man conſider, what further evidence he can deſire, or peradventure what greater aſſurance Nature can afford.
Reſp. Sir, I wiſh you ſo well that I cannot but give you warning, that this ſaying of yours doth Sapere Haereſin, ſince it ſeemes as if you diſclaimed any abſolute Infallibility, and pretend onely to grounds of moſt poſſibility, which the Proteſtants doing too, uſe yet to be accuſed for making nothing certaine, and having no firm foundation to build any thing upon: But as you claime leſſe, then by your own Rules you ſhould, ſo you claim ſtill more, then either you are able to prove, or we likely to grant.
Object. The Philoſophers ſay, it is indiſciplinati ingenii, to expect in any Science more exactneſſe then the Nature of it affords.
Reſp. I confeſſe this to be true, but I deſire you alſo to remember, that as it is abſurd to expect as exact a proof in the Politicks, as in Geometry, ſo it is abſurd to expect as high a degree of Aſſent to the firſt, as to the ſecond of my objections, being intended againſt thoſe, who will be infalliblly believed to be infallible upon probable grounds, for137 they themſelves give them no higher a Title, and indeed that it ſelf in my opinion, is more then they deſerve.
Object. What ſhall we expect then in Religion, to ſee a main advantage on the one Party we caſt our ſelves upon.
Reſp. Truely ſuch Advantage on your part I cannot ſee: Neither if I did, could I in reaſon joyn with you. A maine advantage it is to have more Truth then any other Society of Chriſtians, but ſuppoſing you had ſo (which is but a ſuppoſition, for I verily believe, if the Queſton were but, who had moſt Title to ſo much, yee would appear to a diſpaſſionate man,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Neither third nor fourth, according to the anſwer of the Ancient Oracle) yet you withall require, not onely that I ſhould believe you erre in nothing, but that you never can, and then I had rather remaine in their communion, I ſay not, who themſelves erred not, but whoſe conditions of Communion were leſſe rigorous, and exacted not of me to profeſſe they could not erre, when I believe they do. And if you anſwer, that it would neceſſarily follow, that if they had feweſt errors, they muſt have none, becauſe ſome ſociety of Chriſtians muſt be allwaies free from all this; I ſhall abſolutely deny, and the more earneſtly, becauſe I know this is a trappe, wherein many have been caught, who taking this for granted, have examined the Doctrines of the moſt known Churches of Proteſtants, and finding (as they thought, and peradventure truely) ſome errors in them, ſome Doctrines no way to be proved but upon Popiſh grounds, and by that juſtifying138 thoſe, and ſome imputations impoſed upon their Adverſaries, wherein their Tenets, or the conſequences from them were miſtaken, they then by the Doggs Logick have run over, without ſmelling to the Church of Rome, as knowing no other Society but theſe, and being praepoſſeſt, that one of neceſſity muſt be free from all error: Whereas for my part, as the〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, thoſe who bound not themſelves to believe abſolutely the whole Doctrines of any Sect, but pickt out what they thought accorded with reaſon out of them all, were a wiſe ſort of Philoſophers, ſo they ſeem to me reaſonable Divines, who ſpeak Gods will as they did Truth, (for it is not to chuſe by reaſon, and Scripture or Tradition received by Reaſon, which makes a Hereticke, but to chuſe an opinion which will make moſt either for the chuſers Luſt, or Power and Fame, and then ſeeking waies how to entitle God to it) For ſince it would be a Miracle, if the Errors of the Roman Church being long gathering could have been all diſcovered in a Day, or if it had been poſſible for the firſt Reformers, (who having their eyes but newly open, it is not ſtrange if (like the man in the Goſpel) they ſaw at firſt men walking like Trees, and had but an imperfect apprehenſion of Truth, eſpecially being in Tullies ſtate Quem fugio habeo, Quem ſequar non habeo. I ſee whom to fly, but not whom to follow, not to have left ſome opinions untaxt, which yet were errors, nor to have expurged others, which yet were none; I cannot ſee why we may not in ſome points joyn with the one, and with others in other,139 and beſides find ſome Truths which ly〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, well in the mid-way betweene the Parties,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, nay in ſome points differ wholly from both: Which Liberty, if it were generally allowed, and generally practiſed, if particular intereſts were trod wholly under foot, eſpecially by the greateſt, and if ſuch ſpirits as thoſe of Caſſander and Melancton were more common, no conſiderable things would in a ſhort time be left, but all would flow againe in the ſame Chanell, whereas this opinion, that allwaies one part erres not, is both prejudiciall to Truth, and the beſt Unity, which is, that of Charity, for it perſwades them who have feweſt errors, to believe thoſe to be none, and to hate all oppoſers as Hereticks; and of this your Church is moſt guilty, which not onely affirmes that there is ſuch a one, but that ſhe is it, and propheſies as much of her ſelfe allwaies for the future, as ſhe promiſeth for the preſent, and upon this ground (like him who having won nineteene games at Tables, threw the Dice in the fire for not winning him the twentieth) though we ſhould yeeld to her in all points but one, and that the leaſt conſiderable, ſhe would yet throw us into the fire as Hereticks, for diſſenting from her in that.
Object. You are bidden to put what yeare, or age, ſuch an error entered, and it is evidently true, that then that yeare, or age, the Church conſpired to tell a lie, and deceive their Poſterity.
Reſp. You would never be loved, if you were a Poſer, and uſed to aske ſuch hard queſtions, for either you muſt mean by [an opinion entering] when firſt140 any man pofeſſed it, or when firſt by all in communion with your Church it was aſſented unto: If you mean the firſt, it is impoſſiible to be anſwered, for if one ſhould ask, who taught firſt that Chriſt was not begotten by God, before he was conceived by the Virgin Mary, (through his power and the over-ſhadowing of the Holy Ghoſt) one who knew little of Antiquity, would anſwer Socinus, a more learned Perſon would ſay Photinus, another Paulus Samoſatenus, another might find before him, Artemon and another yet before him, Theodorus〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, (with whom curious Logicians, and great Readers of Euclid, Ariſtotle, Galen, and Theophraſtus were joyned) and yet that he was the firſt we have no certainty, for if a little of Euſebius had been loſt, Theodorus, and Artemon had not been now heard of, which may as well have happened to others before them, either by want of being taken notice of by an Hiſtorian, or by the loſſe of the Hiſtory, and not onely is this ſo in this, but in all other points.
If you mean the ſecond, (for ſo you muſt by your Inference, though the words of the Queſtion will bear both ſences) it is as impoſſible for you to receive an anſwer. For how ſhall I know when all it is granted? For ſuppoſe no Author to have been loſt, and me to have read and remembred them all; yet (as in England when the Calviniſts opinion prevailed moſt, as wiſe and learned men, as thoſe who writ, though differing in opinion from the Authors, yet oppoſed them not ſo publiquely, but that many might believe the more generall141 Tenet to be received by all) how ſhould I know that the opinions of the Authors of ſeverall Ages, did agree with that of all equally wiſe and learned in the ſame times, for if there be no greater certaintie of the opinions of all of one Kingdome in our owne Age, think what Infallibilitie can we have concerning an abſolute generall conſent a thouſand years agoe. And of this, France may as well be an example as England, wherein many called Caſſandrians, diſſent from the publiquely received Doctrines, though with ſo little ſtirr, that our Poſterity will not know that there now are ſuch; So that all which any man can anſwer to this Queſtion, is, that ſuch a one was the firſt that he knowes of, who taught ſuch a Doctrine, and ſuch a time the firſt, wherein he knowes not that any contradicted it, or that your Church defines it for a neceſſary opinion, and exacted aſſent to it, as a condition of their Communion; which anſwer will be nearer to Truth or Falſhood, according to the meaſure of the anſwerers learning; And indeed if you pleaſe to remember, that when learning roſe againe, and the Reformation began, moſt Manuſcripts of conſiderable Books, had long layn unreguarded by the generallity in Popiſh Libraries, and out of them onely had ſome few been Printed, you muſt confeſſe, that it was in the power of your Church, what anſwer we ſhould be able to make to that Queſtion which you propoſe, which then it is nowonder if it were not anſwered, for your willingneſſe to keep men in darkneſſe concerning this,142 even in times of moſt light, is to be ſeen by your expurgatory Indexes: For there, though you profeſſe to meddle with none but Moderne Authors, (whereas it is plaine you go as high as Bertram) yet both that will ſerve to deceive our poſterity concerning the generall opinions of theſe times, and if your Church in former Ages uſed any courſe ſomewhat Analogicall to this, upon thoſe Authors who then were moderne too, (as likely enough they did, or you have cauſe to hope they did for your more juſtification) then how can I know when any opinion entered, that is, either firſt was at all, or firſt by all taught: ſince in all times (how little mention ſoever be made of it) there may have been ſome Doctors of that opinion, though either no Authors, or allthough Authors, yet by this Stratageme may be kept from us.
Neither indeed can you anſwer this Queſtion your ſelf, for you know not in what Year, or Age, did either the giving the Euchariſt to Infants begin, or end, at leaſt Saint Auſtine knew not the firſt, who believed it an Apoſtolical Tradition; Neither was this a bare Cuſtome, but implyed an opinion of good which Children received, which the change ſhewes plainely to have altered, and certainely either the firſt opinion was a Superſtition, or the latter a Sacriledge.
But howſoever your Conſequence followes not, for though your Church conſpired, and deceived their Poſterity, yet it might not conſpire to deceive their Poſterity, but to inſtruct it, being themſelves deceived. And therefore when you143 reckon up the Motives which men have to ſpeak falſe, I wonder to ſee Hopes, and Feares put in, and error left out.
Object. It is Gods courſe deeplier to root and ſtrengthen thoſe things which he would have moſt flouriſh. Now Chriſtians know, that he made mankind for his Elect, the world for mankind, and therefore he hath rooted thoſe things, which more immediately belong to his Elect (as his Church, Faith, and Holy Spirit in it) then the principles either of mans nature or of the world, which was made for it, himſelfe aſſuring us of it, when he told us, That one tittle ſhould not periſh of the holy Writ, though Heaven and Earth ſhould be diſſolved, and ſo ſeeing the latter principle relyeth upon the not failing of God to his Church, which ſhould ever watch upon their actions, that nothing ſhould creepe into Chriſtian life, which preſently the zeale of the faithfull ſhould not ſtartle at. I thinke it needleſſe, to ſeeke further to qualifie the ſtrength of that part, which receiveth it from the quality of ſo good a workman as the Holy Ghoſt.
Reſp. 〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, I muſt therefore obſerve, that this word [Church] hath ſo many ſignifications even among your ſelves, that it ſeldome comes into the mouth of a Romane Arguer, but there comes withall, foure Termes into his Sillogiſme, I could wiſh therefore, that you would ſtill ſet downe your Definition of it, and put that (inſtead of the word Church) into what you ſay, leaſt what your late Graecian Defender Cariophilus ſaies of Hereticks,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,144 that they delight in doubtfull expreſſions, may ſeem more properly to belong to you: Certainlie in ſome ſence the Elect are Gods Church, and in that ſence, the Church belongs not to his Elect, but is it, neither indeed know I (define it as you pleaſe) how it doth, ſince you confeſſe, that men may oppoſe any companie of men, whomſoever you will call the Church, without being obſtinate, or conſequentlie by hereſie excluded from Heaven, and ſo may, for all that, be elected. Neither indeed know I, how God hath made mankinde for his Elect: It is true, that having elected thoſe who ſhall perſevere in Faith and Obedience, and given man Free-will, which (joyned with Grace univerſallie offered) might bring him to the condition, and in that to election, and by that to Heaven; God may be ſaid, to have made mankinde for his elect, that is, to be his elect, if they ſhut not themſelves out of the way to be ſo; And all men (eſpeciallie Chriſtians) I beleeve have, and alwaies ſhall have meanes enough to performe theſe conditions, in ſuch a meaſure (all things conſidered, I meane, either naturall defects, as in Ideots, never having heard of Chriſt, as in many Pagans, not having Chriſts will ſufficientlie propoſed, as in many Chriſtians, and whoſoever is not by ſome fault in his will hindered from aſſenting, to him it is not propoſed ſufficientlie) as ſhall by God be from them required.
145But this hinders not, but that all Chriſtians may ſee what they ſhould, if they ſtand not in their own light, or wilfullie winke, and if they neglect Chriſts Inſtructions or Commands, and make themſelves deafe againſt his voice, charme he never ſo wiſelie, they then may fall from neceſſarie Truths (much more from others) unto error, as well as from good life into wickedneſſe, from which, without queſtion, Gods Spirit is as readie to keep men that will be kept, as from the other, and which is no leſſe (if not more) part of the conditions required (for in that epitomie, which Chriſt hath given us of the day of judgement, men are onely mentioned to be puniſhed for want of Charitie, and not miſ-interpretations of doctrine) though I grieve to ſee ſo many of all parts (whereof I am too much one) live, as if God were ſo obliged to them for their Faith, that he were bound to winke upon their workes, and not to be an Idolater, or not a Heretick, were enough not to be damned.
And certainlie to ſay, That one tittle of Gods Word ſhall not paſſe away, is not to ſay, that God will keepe here alwaies a knowne companie of men to teach us all Divine Truths, which from them, becauſe of their authoritie, we may without more adoe accept (for unleſſe you meane the Church in this ſence, it concernes not our differences) till you can prove that this word makes ſome ſuch promiſe. For this ſeemes to me onelie to ſhew the veracitie of Gods Word, without ſpeaking at all of any Churches continuall obedience146 to it, or true interpretation of it, or the impoſſibilitie of her receiving the Traditions of men for the will of God.
Beſides in this Paragraph I obſerve three things:
The firſt, That you now draw your Arguments from the ſtedfaſt Truth of Holie Writ, whereas you neither quote out of it any thing to prove your maine Aſſertion, and in that way, which you laid before to finde out Truth by, you tooke no notice at all of Scripture, but would have all differences decided, by onely comparing what men had by verball Tradition, like that Dominican, of whom Eraſmus tels us in his Epiſtles, that when in the Schooles any man refuted his concluſion, by ſhewing it contrarie to the words of Scripture, he would crie out, Iſta eſt Argumentatio Lutherana, proteſtor me non reſponſurum; This is a Lutheran way of Arguing, I proteſt I will not anſwer to it.
Secondlie, You now bring the proofe of your certaintie from Gods spirit never failing his Church (though you neither define what is there meant by Church, nor doe you bring any proofe, or ever can, that Gods Spirit will ſtay with any unleſſe they pleaſe it, or that this will not conſiſt with the leaſt error in divine matters) whereas before you made it a Phyſicall, or rather ſuperphyſicall certaintie, that Traditions muſt be delivered from Age to Age uncorrupted, and this, not becauſe of any other aſſiſtance, but ex neceſsitate Rei.
147Thirdlie, You ſeeme to thinke, that aptneſſe to ſtartle in the faithfull, will ſerve to ſecure them from all error, whereas I muſt profeſſe my ſelfe, of opinion, that in ſome times, and ſome caſes, that may ſerve to induce it; for (it being trulie ſaid, that there is as much follie beyond wiſedome, as on this ſide of it, and Nazianzene telling us trulie, that〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the marke is equallie miſſed by over ſhooting, as by ſhooting ſhort) I doubt whether over much caution may not have made ſome doctrines, and their Abetters condemned (eſpeciallie when they appeared ſomewhat new) ſome Truths rejcted for feare, leaſt they did by conſequence contradict ſome point of Faith, when indeed they did,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,Ariſt. Ethick. as Dogs often barke at a friend for an enemie, upon the firſt noiſe he makes, before having conſidered which he is: This made the Ancients ſo earneſt againſt the now-certaintie of the Antipodes, this in after times, for the ſame opinion, coſt a Biſhop his Biſhopricke, and truth in all probabilitie, would have then beene defined a hereſie, if a generall Councell had been called about it: Since then this aptneſſe to ſtartle hath inclined Orthodox Chriſtians to condemn, not onely thoſe who had affirmed in termes the contrarie to Tradition, but even thoſe, from whoſe opinions they thought it would reſult, and conſequentlie to exact an Aſſent, not onely to direct Tradition, but alſo to whatſoever elſe ſeemed to them reaſonable148 deductions from it; This ſeemes to me a way by which Errors may have entered by ſhoales, the firſt Ages (I mean then, Cum Auguſtinus habebatur inexpugnabilis Dialecticus, quòd legiſſet Categorias Ariſtotelis) not having been ſo carefull and ſubtile in their Logick, as theſe more learned times both Arminians and Catviniſts, Dominicans and Jeſuites, Papiſts and Proteſtants, ſeeming to me to argue much more conſequently to their owne Principles, more cloſe to their preſent buſineſſe, and every way more rationally then the ancient Doctors uſed to do I mean thoſe which I have ſeen: And I am confident, that if two or three Fathers ſhould riſe againe unknown, and ſhould return to their old. Argument againſt the Arrians, from Cor meum eructavit verbum bonum, both Parties would be ſo farr from receiving them for Judges, that neither would accept of them for Advocates, nor truſt their Cauſe to their arguing, who oppoſed their common enemy no better.
Now that this way of making Deductions out of Tradition, and thoſe both very haſty, and falſe ones is very ancient, appeares even by an example in the end of the Goſpell of John, for there out of Chriſts words falſly interpreted, a concluſion was drawn and ſpread among the Bretheren, that Saint John ſhould not dye, and what they did out of theſe words of Chriſt, other in other times may have done out of other words of his, and their Collection paſſe for his Doctrine; which ſhewes the great advantage which we have by Gods Word being written ſince, if it had not, we could149 not alwaies have gone to a new examination of the very words, which Chriſt or his Apoſtles taught, and conſequently a conſequence of them ſpread in the place of them, would have been more incurable then now it is. I will alſo deſire you to look in the five hundered eighty fourth Page of the Florentine Councell, ſet out by Binius, and there you will find, that the Latines confeſſe, that they added the Proceſſion of the Holy Ghoſt from the Son, to the Creed, becauſe the contrary opinion ſeemed to them by conſequence, contrary to a confeſſed Tradition of Chriſts eternall Divinity, to which, yet it will appear out of what Cardinall Perron hath excellently ſhowne,Con. Reg. I•c. Pag. 708. (though upon another occaſion) that it doth not contradict, but that this conſequence was ill drawne, which may have been in other points too, and have brought, in no ſmall multitude of Errors fince, neither was their Logick certaine to conclude better, nor were they leſſe apt to add to their Creeds accordingly, at any other times then they were at that.
Object. I doubt not but whoſoever ſhall have received ſatisfaction in the diſcourſe paſt, will alſo have received in the point we ſeek after, that is, in being aſſured both that Chriſt hath left a Directory in the World, and where to find him, there being no doubt but it is his holy Church upon Earth: Nor can there be any doubt which is his Church, ſince there is but one that doth, and can lay claime to have received from hand to hand his holy Doctrine.
Reſp. That which makes you expect that your Reader ſhould have received ſatisfaction by what you have150 ſaid, is, that ſince Chriſt hath a great care of his Elect, he muſt conſequently (moſt ſtrongly of any thing) have rooted his Church. Now I having ſhewed, that by your own confeſſion, men may be of his Elect, that are out of your Church, I ſeemed to my ſelfe to have likewiſe proved, that there is no neceſſity of any Churches being their Director. I know you generally think this the more convenient way, to have left ſuch a guide, that becauſe otherwiſe Dominus non fuiſſet Diſcretus, or in Epictius his Phraſe,Arrian.〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, you conclude that he hath: but we (though indeed in ſuch caſes where our〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉the common Notions concerning God, teach us that ſuch a Thing were contrary to Gods maine Attributes to do, ſome of us conclude upon that ground, that this he hath not done) in theſe caſes which onely concerne convenience, of which we have much leſſe certaintie, begin at the other end, and conſidering firſt what he hath done, conclude that to be ſufficiently convenient, and ſo finding no infallible guide by him inſtituted, ſuppoſe it convenient that there ſhould be none: Truely if convenience were the meaſure, and our Underſtandings the meaſurers, we ſhould reſolve that God hath made every Particular man, at leaſt every Pious man Infallible, and ſo to need no outward guide, which yet it is plain that he hath not done. Though in my opinion, in ſome ſence, he hath made every man (who pleaſeth) Infallible, in reſpect of his journys end, though not of all Innes by the way, certaine to find Heaven though he may151 miſſe many Truthes in Divine matters: For the beliefe which God requires of being to be thought true of his word, and that man be ready to believe and obey what he ſaies, as ſoon as it ſhall appear to him that he hath ſaid it, and every man being able (according to his meanes) to examine what he hath ſaid; It followes, unleſſe God ſhould damne a man for weakneſſe of underſtanding, (which were as ſtrange, as if he ſhould damne him for a weak ſight, or a feeble arme) that every man is Infallible in his way to Heaven, ſo he lay no blocks in it himſelf, (at leaſt is undoubtedly ſecur'd of any danger of Hell) For if they neither deſire to avoide the trouble of enquiry through unwillingneſs to find that to be true, which is contrary to what he now thinks, and ſo to hazard either the affection of deare Friends, or the favour of great Friends, or the feare of ſome other humane Inconvenience, as want of preſent meanes, Improbability to get more, or of that, diſparagement ſo terrible to fleſh and blood, of deſcending to confeſſe that they have ſo long erred, (like Frobenius, qui potuiſſet vivere, niſi puduiſſet aegrotare,Eraſ. Ep. who might have lived, but that he was aſhamed to confeſſe himſelf ſick) If I ſay none of theſe or the like things, either keep him from ſeeking what is Gods will, or from daring to profeſſe it when he hath found it, then ſuch an Error having no reference to the will, which is the onely fountaine of ſin, cannot by a juſt God be puniſhed as a ſin, and the proofe of the neceſſity of an Infallible Director drawn from Gods care of his Church, for152 his Elects ſake, is eaſily avoided.
But ſay you, if there be a director, it muſt be the Church, and againe, becauſe you know that all congregations of Chriſtians, pretend to that Title in ſome ſence, (as even the worſt men call themſelves by better Names then they deſerve, as Ariſtotle ſaith,Rhetor.〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) and I may miſtake our enemies Camp for our friends, and ſerve againſt Chriſt, whilſt I think I fight under his Banner (though even then, I beleeve, I ſhould have a ſhare in that prayer of his, to whom none is denied, Father forgive them, for they know not what they doe) unleſſe you gave me ſome certaine marks to know the Church by; you therefore ſay, what you have before ſaid, that yours is it, becauſe that alone pretends to Tradition, to which I anſwer, what I before anſwered, that the Greeks ſerve me to diſprove the ſufficiency of this Mark, who profeſſe, that they hold the conſtant Tradition, and that under that Notion, they have both received what you deny, and not received what you propoſe.
Object. Let us conſider in her Preſence or Viſibility, Authority, Power; As for the firſt, her multitude and ſucceſsion make the one, that ſhe is ever acceſsible, ever knowne.
Reſp. What you now ſay, is not to prove your Church a Directreſſe, but having (as you think, and I think not) proved that already, you now mean to ſhew, that ſhe hath the Conditions requiſite in a Directreſſe: But this I deny, for neither is her preſence or Viſibility, (for all her153 multitude and ſucceſſion) ſuch as were in a Directreſſe required: For ſhe (beſides that ſhe muſt bring notice and proofes with her, to prove that ſhe is inſtituted by God to direct men, and thoſe plain and evident, if ſhe require meerly but our aſſent, but if ſhe require us to aſſent Infallibly, then thoſe Infallible, which yours cannot do) muſt alſo be ſo viſible, as to be known to all men, if not as a Directreſſe, at leaſt as a Company of men, which yours ſure was not to thoſe Nations, which were lately diſcovered by Columbus: But if you except and ſay, ſhe need onely be viſible to all Chriſtians, (though this exception need a proofe) yet even this Condition your Church hath not allwaies had, for I believe, to thoſe Chriſtians whom Xaverius found in the Eaſt-Indies, your Church had been as little viſible, as to thoſe Pagans whom Columbus diſcovered in the Weſt: Beſides beyond the Abiſsins, how farre Chriſtian Religion may be propagated, and yet your Church unknown, who can tell? Beſides, even to moſt of them (for any credible Teſtimony that appeares) ſhe may not be very viſible. But above all, that reaſon being anſwered, upon which you conclude, that there is ſome Director, and that ground being taken away upon which you build, that yours is that, me thinks it will be unneceſſary to diſpute long upon the Conditions required to that, which hath no entity at all.
Object. For Authority, her very claime of Antiquity and Succeſsion, to have been that Church which received her beginning from Chriſt and his Apoſtles, and never154 being all united under the univerſall government of ver fore-went it, giveth a great reverence to her among thoſe who believe her, and amongſt thoſe who with indifferency ſeek to inform themſelves, a great Prejudice above others. And if it be true, it carrieth an infinite Authority with it, of Biſhops, Doctors, Martyrs, Saints, Miracles, Learning, Wiſedome, Venerable Antiquity, and ſuch like.
Reſp. There is no Queſtion, but any Church, true or falſe, which claimes to have ever kept the Apoſtles Doctrines uncorrupted, and is infallibly believed to have done ſo, muſt among thoſe Chriſtians who thus beleeve, have even equall Authority with the Apoſtles. But me thinks that this claime before proofe, ſhould to others be any prejudice for her, (eſpecially to thoſe who have great Arguments againſt her) is unreaſonable, and if after conſideration it appears otherwiſe, ſhe hath then onely helpt to weaken her Teſtimony, and hath deſtroyed her Infallible Authority in any thing elſe.
Object. There remaineth Power, which no man can doubt but he hath given it moſt ample, who conſidereth his words ſo often repeated to his Apoſtles: But abſtracting from that, who doth not ſee that the Church hath the nature and proportion of ones Country to every one. As in a mans Country he hath Father and Mother, Brothers, Siſters, Kinsfolkes, and Allies, Neighbours and Country-men, (anciently called Cives and Concives) and of theſe are made his Country; So in the Church finds he in way to ſpirituall Inſtruction, and Education, all theſe digrees nearer and further off, till he come unto that furthermoſt of155 Chriſt his Vicar: and as he in his Country finds Bearing, Breeding, Settling in Eſtates and Fortunes, and laſtly, Protection and Security; So likewiſe in the way of Chriſtianity, doth he find this much more fully in the Church, So that if it be true, that a man oweth more to his Maſter then to his Father, Bene eſſe is better then eſſe; certainly a man alſo (as farr as Church and Country can be ſeparated) muſt owe more to the Church, then to his very Country; Wherefore the Power which the Church hath to Command and inſtruct, is greater then the Power of the Temporall Community, of which he is part.
Reſp. I wiſh you would have ſet down theſe words of Chriſt, ſo often repeated to his Apoſtles, in which Power to the Church (I mean ſuch a one as yours pretends) is undoubtedly given; For my Part, Truely I remember none; For I ſuppoſe not that the Power given to the Apoſtles can reaſonably be claimed by any Society of men now, no not though you ſhould extend the Definition as largely as Eraſmus, (who ſaies Eccleſiam voco totius Populi Chriſtiani concenſum, I call the Church, the Conſent of the whole Chriſtian People) unleſſe that be meant too in all Ages, and ſo the Apoſtles would come in; They were ſo ſigned, and ſealed to (as I may ſay) from Heaven, by having moſt converſed with Chriſt, and been moſt beloved by him, and choſen eſpecially to teach the World his Will, that it is impoſſible any men could be indeed Chriſtians, and not receive their Doctrine, as that of Chriſt, without any other Proofe, but there is no other Church that hath156 ſuch a Priviledge, The Power of propoſing ſhe hath, and ſo have you, and without Queſtion, if you can convince any Chriſtian that what you ſaid, Chriſt ſaid firſt, he is bound both to believe and obey it, and againe let all Churches joyne in propoſall, yet till he be ſo convinced, (unleſſe his own fault hinder it) it binds him not, neither is it ſufficiently propoſed, allowing it true, which it is not alwaies neceſſary that it ſhould be, although ſo atteſted. For as a Naturall Foole is not bound to obey any Doctrine or Precept, taught or impoſed by God himſelf, becauſe his underſtanding cannot diſcover it to be ſo: ſo in my opinion, whoſe underſtanding ſoever is not convinc'd of the ſame, (how plain ſoever to others the thing be) he is for as much as concernes this point, in the ſtate of a Naturall Foole, and no more to be condemned.
Neither ſee I what you prove out of the Proportion between the Church, and every mans Country, (for if any Church be intended by God to be ſo our Director, that her propoſitions are to be received, becauſe they are hers, then indeed we owe her much more obedience then to our Country, which if it ſhould require of us to believe an opinion true, becauſe that hath defined it, I believe no man would obey, and he who ſhould preſs us to it, would be accounted ſo mad, that we ſhould ſend him, not to a Doctor of Divinity, but to a Doctor of Phyſick, to be confuted.
And that any Church is ſo intended, appeares not at all by this propoſition, ſince the ſame is even amongſt the Church of the Turkes, which is Eccleſia157 malignantium, for there they find their Metaphoricall Fathers, Mothers, Brothers, Siſters, Kinsfolks, Allies, Neighbours, (which all Hereticks do too among themſelves) all theſe degrees neerer and further of, till at laſt they come to that furthermoſt, of being united under the Univerſall Government of Mahomets Vicar, the Mufty. But to them you would ſay, that this proves not Truth, but at moſt Concord, and that is Factio inter Malos, which is Amicitia inter Bonos,Saluſt. therefore the ſame we anſwer you, ſince Pyrats, and Theeves, have as ſtrict bonds among themſelves, as the honeſteſt perſons, and often gerater conſpiracies, and〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to deſtroy theſe, then they make to defend themſelves. And whereas you ſay, that we owe more gratitude and obedience to the Church, then to our Country, I have told you, that this may be true without owing obedience to all ſhe teaches; But yet even this in ſome ſence is True; To the generall Tradition of Chriſtians of the firſt Ages who lived with the Apoſtles, and could not in any likelyhood but know their writings; I owe the knowledge of the Scripture, and to that, the knowledge of Gods will, and to that, Heaven, if I conforme carefully to it both my Life and my Beliefe; and to the Church in this ſence, I owe both as much gratitude as you pleaſe, and believe whatſoever this, as generally, witneſſeth to have received from the Apoſtles: But this concerning any preſent Church, doth as little concerne your preſent purpoſe: For let us mean by the Church, that company158 of men which hath kept Tradition wholly uncorrupted, (and ſuppoſe there is ſuch a one) yet to know that ſhe hath done ſo, I muſt examine her Doctrine; and compare it either with Scripture, or the firſt Antiquity, and ſo rather receive her for it, then it for her: Beſides, that the whole Church teaches nothing, and if ſhe did, yet by the ſame waies from any ſingle learned Orthodox man, I may receive the ſame inſtruction, to whoſe commands nevertheleſſe (except when he delivers Gods) I owe no obedience.
Thus too, when the Orthodox company commands as they are Orthodox, that is ſomething of the will of God, then they are to be obeyed, and ſo am I, and ſo againe, when the choſen governours for that purpoſe, command indifferent Things, but if they exceed their Commiſſion in commanding, no man is longer bound to obey, no more then if a Mayor of a Town ſhould command the People to make his Hay, they were bound to obedience, ſince commanding more then his Magiſtracy authorizeth him, he in that caſe is no Magiſttate.
Object. This Church can ſatisfie both learned and unlearned. For in matters of Faith, above the reach of learning, whoſe ſpring is from what Chriſt and his Apoſtles taught, what learned man can refuſe in his inmoſt ſoule, to bow to that which is teſtified by ſo great a multitude to have come from Chriſt? and what unlearned man can require more for his faith, then to be taught by a Miſtreſſe of ſo many prerogaives and advantages above all others.
159Reſp. The learned cannot reaſonablie be ſatisfied with this (eſpeciallie ſo farre forth as to beleeve it infalliblie true.) Firſt, becauſe they ſee great multitudes have and doe teſtifie contrarie things. Secondlie, becauſe they muſt have obſerved with Salmeron,Tom. 13. Pag 468. that a multitude of ſome opinion may proceed from ſome one Doctor, eſpeciallie, if he be Illuſtrious; and ſome againe, taken with a pious and an humble feare, chuſe rather againſt their mind, to approve what hath come from others, then to bring forth any new thing out of their own underſtanding, leaſt they may ſeem to bring ſome thing unwonted into the Church. This they muſt needs ſee, may bring an undelivered opinion to be generall, and then the generallitie may bring it to be thought to come from Tradition, according to Tertullians rule, Quod apud multas eccleſias unum invenitur, non eſt erratum ſed Traditum, and that of Saint Auſtine, that of whatſoever no beginning is known, and yet is generall, is to be beleeved to have its originall from the Apoſtles. By this way (ſuppoſing that all your Church did witneſſe, all their doctrines to have had ſuch a lineall ſucceſſion, which they know to be falſe) they ſee, that opinions falſlie and illogicallie deduct from true Traditions, may be equallie beleeved to be ſuch themſelves, Vincentius Lirinenſis allowing the following Church to give light to the former, which they might miſtake in doing, at leaſt, the certaintie of her Illuſtrations cannot have their force from Tradition: By this way they ſee, that in time, ſuch doctrines may160 come to have ſuch a generall atteſtation, which had their firſt ſpring from Scripture miſ-interpreted, either by publicke miſtakes, or by Councels miſlead, either by feare, error, or partialitie, and what proceeded either from conſent, or definition, may ſeem to have been deduct from Tradition: In this they will be confirmed, by ſeeing plainlie, that more is now required to be beleeved by the Church of Rome, then in all times hath been, that now among you contrarie parties urge for or, expect a generall Councell to end queſtions, concerning which, neither ſide claimes any continued verball Tradition, and that the greateſt part are ready to receive ſuch a definition, in as high a degree, as any Tradition whatſoever; They will be alſo confirmed by your denying Infallibilitie to a Councell, how generall ſoever, unapproved by the Pope, by ſeeing, that if (as you ſay) no man can be ignorant what he was taught when he was a childe, as the ground and ſubſtance of his hopes for all eternitie, and if in this, all your Religion were compriſed (or elſe to what purpoſe ſay you this) then no man bred in the Orthodox Church could erre, or ever have erred in matter of Faith, without knowing that he had departed from the very Baſis of Chriſtianitie, and for Inſtructions in theſe points, not onely all Authors, as Commenters upon Scripture, and the like, were wholly uſeleſſe, but it were alſo a vaine thing, to goe for inſtruction even to Chriſts Vicar, and S. Hierome might have reſolved his own queſtion, about the〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, every whit as well as161 Damaſus, or Saint Peter himſelfe: And for the ſame reaſon, it were wholly impoſſible, that at the ſame time the Popes, and moſt notable, and moſt pious, and moſt learned Papiſts living, ſhould have juſtified, and applauded Eraſmus for the ſame workes (the one by his printed Diplomas, and the reſt by their Letters) for which, at the ſame inſtant, the greateſt part of the Monkes counted and proclaimed him a more peſtilent Heretick then Luther, if they had all weighed hereſie in the ſame ballance, and more impoſſible if in yours; which the learned will yet leſſe approve of, when they ſee how ſoon the worſe opinion, and leſſer authoritie may prevaile, as how that of the Monkes hath done againſt that of the Popes, and Biſhops, and that ſo much, that Eraſmus is now generallie diſavowed as no Catholicke, and given to us (whom wee accept as a great preſent) that Bellarmine will allow him to be but halfe a Chriſtian, and Cardinall Perron (which I am ſorry for) gives a cenſure upon him, which would better have become the pen of a Latomus, a Bedda, a Stunica, or an Egmundane, then of ſo learned and judicious a Prelate.
Now for the Ignorant, I am ſure you will never be able to prove infalliblie to them, that your Church hath any prerogatives above others; the ordinarie way cannot be taken with them, becauſe they not underſtanding the languages, in which the Fathers and Councels are written, cannot be preſs'd by what they cannot conſtrue, and your way as little, becauſe they are not more162 (though totallie) ignorant of the Authors of paſt Ages, then they are of the ſtate, opinions, and claimes of the preſent time; ſo that I know not how you can attempt them, if they have but a moderate underſtanding to their no knowledge.
Object. The body of our Poſition ſhoots forth the branches of divers Queſtions, or rather the Solutions of them: And firſt, how it happened, that divers Heretickes pretended to Tradition, as the Chiliaſts, Gnoſticks, Carpocratians, and divers others, yet they with their Traditions have been rejected, and the Church onely left in claime of Tradition; For if we looke into what Catholicke Tradition is; and what the Hereticks pretended, the queſtion will remaine voided. For the Catholicke Church cals Tradition, that Doctrine, which was publiquely delivered, and the Hereticks called Tradition, a kinde of ſecret Doctrine, either gathered out of private converſation with the Apoſtles, or rather pretended, that the Apoſtles, beſides what they publiquely taught the world, had another myſticall way, proper to Schollers, more endeared, which came not to publique view, whereas the force and energie of a Tradition, reſiding in the multitude of hearers, and being planted in the perpetuall life and actions of Chriſtians, it muſt have ſuch a publicity, that it cannot be unknown amongſt them.
Reſp. Of the Carpocratians and Gnoſticks, I have ſpoke before, but ſure for the Chiliaſts this is onely ſaid and not proved: Howſoever this undeniablie appeares, that either Pappias and Irenaeus thought163 not this Tradition to have come ſuch a way as you ſpeake of, or elſe they thought it no hereticall way, but ſuch a one, as was (at leaſt reaſonablie) to be aſſented to; and both what was the way by which Traditions ought to come, and by which this came they were more likely to know, then thoſe of following ages; which proves, that this Objection (as much as concernes them eſpeciallie) remaines ſtill ſo ſtrong, that (in ſpire of Fevardentius) it will be better to anſwer it, Scalpello quam Calamo, with a Pen-knife then with a Pen, and no Confuter will ſerve for it, but an Expurgatory Index, no non ſi tuus afforet Hector, if Cardinall Perron were alive.
I muſt by the way take notice of what yon ſay here, that Tradition muſt have ſuch a Publicity as cannot be unknown among Chriſtians, and deſire you to agree this with what you ſay in the next Paragraph, that the Apoſtles may not have preached in ſome Countries ſome Doctrines, which we now are bound to receive as Traditions, for ſure thoſe Doctrines were then unknown among many Chriſtians; and if they had been neceſſ•ry, ſure the Apoſtles would no where have forgot (with ſo good a Prompter as the Holy Ghoſt) to have taught them; If they were not then neceſſary, how have they grown to be ſo ſince? Beſides, I appeal to your Conſcience, whether it appear that the doctrine of the Exchequer of Superabundant merits, of which the Pope is Lord Treaſurer, and by vertue of which he diſpenſeth his pardons to all the Soules in Purgatory, appear to have been known even to164 any of the beſt Chriſtians, and whether if it had been known to them as a Tradition, (being a Doctrine which neceſſitates at leaſt Wiſdome and Charity, a continuall practice of ſueing for them, and of giving them) it were poſſible, that of what they knew, ſuch infinite Volumes of Authors ſhould make no mention.
Object. Suppoſe ſome private Doctrine of an Apoſtle to ſome Diſciple ſhould be publiſhed, and recorded by that Diſciple, and ſome others, this might well be a Truth, but never obtain the force of a Catholique Poſition, that is, ſuch as it would be a damnation to reject, becauſe the deſcent from the Apoſtle is not notorious, and fit to ſway the body of the whole Church.
Reſp. I confeſſe, that to have been no more generally delivered, will prove that the Apoſtles thought not ſuch a Doctrine neceſſary, elſe their Charity would not have ſuffered them to have ſo much concealed it, but yet to any ſuch Doctrine, it is impoſſible that any Chriſtian, who believes the teſtimony, that it came from the Apoſtles, ſhould deny his aſſent, becauſe it were to deny the Authority, upon which all the reſt is grounded; for the Church pretends to her Authority from them, and not they from her, and howſoever, ſuch a Doctrine (although not neceſſary) could not be damnable as you make this: Beſides here will firſt ariſe a Queſtion not eaſie to be decided, how great a multitude of Witneſſes will ſerve to be notorious, and fit to ſway the body of the Church, eſpecially ſo many having not for a long, while been thought fit even by Catholiques, though atteſting doctrines165 ſince received by you all, and conſidering that multitude of your Church, which believe the immaculate Conception in as high a degree, as it is poſſible without excommunicating the deniers, who either walk not by that which you count the onely Catholique Rule, or elſe claime ſuch a Tradition, who yet are not thought fit to ſway the reſt.
Secondly, I pray obſerve how eaſie it was for the two firſt Ages, at leaſt the chiefe of them, and all that are extant, to have given aſſent to Traditions ſo unſufficiently teſtified, or to have miſtaken Doctrines under that notion, (for ſo they did to this of the Chiliaſts) and then after for it to ſpread till it were generall, and laſt as long as men laſt upon their authority, and when once it is ſo ſpread, how ſhall we then diſcover how ſmall an Originall it had, when peradventure the head and ſpring of it will be as hard to find, as that of Nilus, ſo that the greateſt part of what you receive, might poſſibly appear to be no certainer, nor better built, if we could digg to the foundation: Wherefore, ſince the delivery of a Tradition by ſubſequent Ages hath its validity onely from the authority of the firſt, me thinks you ſhould either think that they received none but upon better grounds, or elſe think theſe grounds good.
Thirdly, I know not why you reſolve this opinion of the Chiliaſts, to have had onely ſuch a private Tradition, for though they name John the Diſciple, and mention certaine Prieſts who heard it from him, yet they deny not a more general delivery166 of it, but peradventure leaſt men might think that the generall opinion (that it came from the Apoſtles) might ariſe from places of Scripture, (which fallacie, their teſtimony when not ſo fully expreſſed, was ſtill in danger of concerning any point, but that theſe books were written by theſe men) they therefore thought it fit to name to us their witneſſes, that it came from Chriſts owne mouth, and in what words: And if they had done ſo much on your ſide, for the differences between us, I believe you would now have few Proteſtant adverſaries left, for you would have converted the greater part, and by that have been enabled to burn the ſmaller.
Object. The ſecond Queſtion may be, How it cometh to paſſe, that ſome things, which at firſt bindes not the Churches beliefe, afterwards commeth to bind it? For if it were ever a Tradition, it ever muſt needs be publique, and ever bind the Church, and if once it were not, it appears not how ever it could come to be, for if this age for example have it not, how can it deliver it to the next that followeth? But if we conſider that the ſcope of Chriſtian Doctrine being great, and the Apoſtles preaching in ſo great varieties of Countries, it might happen ſome point in one Country might be leſſe underſtood, or peradventure not preacht, which in another was often preacht, and well both underſtood and retained, we may eaſily free our ſelves from theſe brambles: For the Spirit of Tradition reſiding in this, that the teſtimony be exceptione majus, and beyond all danger of deceit. It is not neceſſary to the efficaciouſneſſe of Tradition, that167 the whole vniverſall Church ſhould be witneſſe to ſuch a truth, but ſo great a part as could be a warrant againſt miſtaking; ſo that if all the Churches of Aſia, Greece, or Affrick, or Aegypt, ſhould conſtantly affirm ſuch a Tradition to have been delivered them from the Apoſtles, it were enough to make a Doctrine exceptione majorem: Whence it enſueth, that if in a meeting of the vniverſall Church it were found, that ſuch a part hath ſuch a Tradition concerning ſome matter, whereof the reſt had either no underſtanding, or no certainly, ſuch a Doctrine would paſſe into a neceſſary bond of Faith in the whole Church.
Reſp. Your ſword is ſo ſharp, and your ſhield ſo weak, that I can hardly believe they came out of the ſame forge, but when I obſerve how much you have a better right hand then a left, and that not onely you have raiſed an objection which you cannot lay, but your anſwer to it multiplies more, I cannot but compare you to him in Lucian,Philoſ. who travelling with a Magician that had no ſervant, and inſtead of one was daily wont to ſay to a Peſtle, Peſtle be thou a man, and it would be ſo, and when his occaſions were ſerved, would bid it return to be a Peſtle, and was obeyed, thought one time to imitate the Magitian, he being abroad, and made indeed the Peſtle a man, and draw water, but could not make it return to the former ſtate, but it continued ſtill to draw, wherefore angry and afraid, he took up an axe and clove the Peſtle-man in two, whereupon〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in ſtead of one water-drawer there lept up two: For firſt I pray168 conſider, what could you have found more certaine to deſtroy all, which you had before laboured to ſettle, about the Infallibilitie of your Tradition, then this diſtincton of Exceptione Major, ſince, if not a generall one, but one which ſeemed ſuch, were required, how eaſie was it for falſe opinions to get in, under that colour, teſtified but by a few reputed honeſt men, and ſo received by, and tranſmitted from others of great and generall authoritie. Secondlie, how could you have found a better way to anſwer your owne Objection againſt the Chiliaſts Tradition, for want of being ſufficientlie publique, ſince if that had not ſeemed to them to have had this condition (I mean, if they had thought they ſhould for this cauſe have excepted againſt it) it had been impoſſible theſe Saints ſhould have received it, and concerning the publicitie of it, and the number and authoritie of the deliverers, they muſt of neceſſitie have been the beſt Judges who then lived, and who were the more conſiderable Doctors of the moſt conſiderable Ages: ſo that you muſt either confeſſe, that a Tradition bindes not unleſſe indeed generall, or confeſſe that this doth, ſuppoſing this not to have been generall, which you cannot prove.
Object. A likely example of this may he drawn from the Canonicall Bookes.
Reſp. I deny it to be now neceſſarie to Salvation, to admit of any Bookes for Canonicall, which it was lawfull for Chriſtians in paſt ages to doubt of, and which had no generall Tradition; and againe, this169 anſwer helpes againſt your ſelfe: for it is plaine by Saint Hieromes Teſtimonie, that the Roman Church received not the Epiſtle to the Hebrewes, which the Eaſterne Churches received (whoſe Teſtimonie, according to your grounds, ſhe then ſhould have beleeved to be beyond exception) and it is plaine by Perrons Teſtimonie, that the Eaſterne Churches received not the Macchabees, when he ſaies, the Church of Rome did. Now it is plaine, that the Receivers pretended to Tradition, becauſe nothing elſe could make a booke thought Canonicall, whereas other opinions might be brought in by a falſe Interpretation of Scriptures, and after being ſpread, might be thought to come from Tradition: So that according to your grounds and theſe teſtimonies, not onely the Weſterne Church ought to have beleeved the Eaſterne about the Epiſtle to the Hebrewes, and the Eaſterne the Weſterne about the Macchabees, but alſo they ought to have required this aſſent from each other, which they not doing (as they would have done, if they had thought their teſtimonie ſo valid as you doe) it followes, that you doe differ from the Churches of the fifth and ſixth age, about what is exceptione majus, you thinking that to be ſo, which they thought not, and againe, from all the extant Doctors of the two firſt ages, you thinking that not ſo, which they thought was, as alſo thoſe two times agreed about it, as little with each other, as you with them both.
Object. The third queſtion may be, how Chriſtian Religion (conſiſting of ſo many points) is poſsible to170 be kept uncorrupted by Tradition, which depending upon Memory, and our memory being ſo fraile, it ſeemeth, cannot without manifeſt miracle conſerve ſo great a diverſity of points unchanged for ſo many ages. But if we conſider, that Faith is a Science, a thing, whoſe parts are ſo connexed, that if one be falſe, all muſt needs be falſe, we ſhall eaſily ſee, that contrarily, the multitude of divers points is a conſervation, the one to the right, the other wherein we doubt.
Reſp. As in Judges, when a battell was to be fought between the children of Iſrael and the Midianites, the Midianites deſtroyed each other, and left nothing to doe for Iſrael, but onely to purſue them: ſo truly, your Objections worke ſo ſtrongly upon your own Party, that I have nothing left me to preſſe, and much to applaud: For for this very reaſon, I beleeve, that all neceſſarie points were given in writing, and onely the witneſſing, that theſe were the Apoſtles writings, was left to Tradition, which was both much leſſe ſubject to error (as being but one point, and that a matter of fact) and could no other way be done, becauſe no writing could have witneſſed for it ſelfe ſo ſufficientlie, that we ſhould have had reaſon to have belleved it upon no other certificates, and to this your anſwer ſeemes to me no way ſatisfactorie, ſince, firſt, I deny Faith to be a Science, it being nothing but an aſſent to Gods Revelations, neither are thoſe ſo connexed as you liberallie affirme, and ſparinglie prove; Nay, ſuppoſe they were, yet though errors would be the leſſe likely to enter,171 yet when any one, by any meanes were got in 'then this connexion would be a ready way to helpe it to let in all its fellowes. Beſides, thoſe opinions which may be ſuperinduct as Traditions, which ſuch a connexion could not hinder, if they were not contrarie to the true ones; and of this ſort is chiefly our queſtion.
That therefore you are no better able to wind your ſelfe out of this inextricable Labyrinth, is no wonder to me, and no diſgrace to you, ſince a man may as well be good Logician, though he cannot ſolve an unſolvable queſtion, as he may be exceedinglie skilled in Phyſick, and yet not able to cure an incurable diſeaſe; Beſides, that theſe Objections aroſe ſo at the firſt ſight, out of what was to be conſidered, that it was as impoſſible for to avoid them, as to anſwer them.
ObjectLet us conſider in conſtant Nations, their language, their habits, &c. how long they continue among them.
Truly there is no Nation that I know, whoſe language hath not,Note: PLACE = "marg" Reſp. and doth not daily palpablie ſuffer change. Conſider, that of theſe Engliſh hourely denizoning words of all kinde of languages, theſe of the Spaniards, Italians, and French, almoſt made up out of Latine, and that of the ancient Greekes, unknown to thoſe of this Age, unleſſe they learn it at Schoole: Habits indeed ſome Nations alter leſſe, but ſome daily, and none change not ſometimes: But this is little to the purpoſe, ſince thoſe Nations which have remained very conſtant in things, which no conſiderable172 cauſe appeared to them why they ſhould alter, may yet have received new opinions (eſpecially if not contradicting the old) taught them by ſuch, in whom they wholly relied, (as moſt go more hood-winkt in theſe matters, then in thoſe which are indifferent, out of a Vitious humility) or proved by Arguments which perſwaded. For when the reaſons are probable (as they may be for a falſhood) the Perſons preſſing them, in themſelves of authority (as they may be and yet erre) and the people to whom they are preſt, full of eſteeme of their Teachers, then meet the three waies of working perſwaſion which Ariſtotle mentions, whereof〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: Eſpecially when beſides all theſe, the rewards of beliefe propoſed, are more then extraordinary, as alſo the danger of disbeliefe. Wherefore I count it by no meanes reaſonable,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, like ſheep (without more examination) to walk in the ſteps of thoſe, who have gone before us.
Object. See that forlorn Nation of the Jews, how conſtantly it maintaineth the Scripture, and how obſtinately their Errors.
Reſp. Truely I thank you Sir for this example, ſince it puts me in mind of an Objection, which elſe I. had utterly forgot: Many of thoſe errors which they hold, (as the Cabala and others) I pray, upon what other ground hold they them then this, that they have been taught. Moſes delivered them to their Fathers, as unwritten Traditions, and that under173 that Notion they have deſcended: Now may not they defend themſelves in them, by the very ſame Arguments which you uſe in this Treatiſe for the Church of Rome: May not they ſay that they have received them from their Fathers, who received them from theirs, who muſt either have joyned in miſtaking their Anceſtors, or in intending to deceive their Poſterity, whereof neither is credible: May not they ſay, what is ſaid of theſe laſt Ages, may be ſaid upwards and upwards, till they come to that, wherein their Fathers received theſe Doctrines from Moſes, who was〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as worthy of credit in the delivery of theſe, as in that of the ten Commandements, and their Fathers witneſſes beyond exception, that theſe Doctrines be delivered: May they not ask you in what year or age, theſe errors entered among them, and ſay it is evidently true, that then their whole Church conſpired to tell a lie. May they not bid you beſides conſider the Notoriouſneſſe of the lie? ſuch as he is very rarely found, who is ſo wicked as to venture upon, beſides the greatneſs of the ſubject and the damage enſuing to himſelf and his deareſt Pledges: May they not adde, that the multitude of their Church is ſo diſperſed through ſo many Countries and Languages, that it is impoſſible they ſhould agree; together, upon a falſe determination, to affirm a falſhood for a truth, no Intereſt being able to be common to them all to produce ſuch an effect: This they may ſay, and if they do, and retort your own words upon your ſelf, I know not truely what new ones you will find to174 anſwer them in, unleſſe you change the whole courſe you now ſteere, and come about the ſame way which I now uſe to you, that is, ſhewing by what waies ſuch an opinion may have ſpread among them, although not at firſt received, and proving out of their owne Authors, that this hath not been alwaies held a Tradition among them, though now ſo accounted, which is ſometimes (as I remember) your owne Galatinus his way, and the beſt that is: But if to that they ſhould againe reply out of your own words (the Names onely changed) that if what Moſes delivered were certainely true, and what he delivered be to be ſeen in what they beleeved who heard him, and ſo till now, it is evident, that they who ſeek for truth in learned diſcourſes, muſt needs forego the moſt certaine and eaſie way of attaining what they aime at: That Jew, who ſhould retort this, and much more of this kind upon you, and keep you to Tradition, and make their preſent Tradition (upon your grounds) the Judge of that, I am of opinion, would make you as ſilent, as if (according to the Proverb) you had ſeen a Wolf firſt, or were a Pithagoricall-Freſhman, and you would wiſh you had never put into an enemies hand ſuch a weapon againſt your ſelf, as this preſent diſcourſe: So that in Anna Commenas Phraſe〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, you have digged a ditch on either ſide of your ſelfe: For either you muſt grant theſe Arguments not to be ſufficient for your Party, or you muſt allow them to be ſufficient for a Jew.
Object. Whereſoever Chriſtians labour to convert Idolaters,175 they find the onely Argument for their errors that they received them from their forefathers: The King of Socotora thinking to pleaſe the Portugalls by reducing a Nation that had the Names of Chriſtians to true Chriſtianity, he found them obſtinately proteſt to him, that they would ſooner looſe their lives, then part with the Religion their Anceſtors had left them.
Reſp. This is no newes to me who lived ſeven yeares in Ireland, where, this is all the reaſon the Vulgar either have or give for their Religion, and it is the leſſe ſtrange, when I remember Ariſtotle's Ethicks, where he tells us of one, who defended the beating of his Father, thus,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, becauſe it had been the lineall cuſtome of his Familie to do ſo. Yet for all this, that thoſe who earneſtly deſire to keep the Religion of their Forefathers, and think they have done it, may yet be deceived, may appear to a Chriſtian by the example of the Jews, and to any Romaniſt, by the example of the Grecians.
To your example of the anſwer to the King of Socotora, I anſwer,
That either thoſe heterodox Chriſtians had been at firſt convened by Hereticks, or by Catholiques; If by Catholiques, (and your Church be that, and your grounds be hers) then it is plaine, that men may grow in••great error, who hold faſt, as they think upon Tradition, and may ſwerve from that Rule, whilſt they think they walk by it: If by Hereticks, then it ſeemes Catholiques (as you call them) are not the onely Religion that have176 converted Nations, and that note of the Church which isſo daily and ſo eagerly preſt, appeares common to more then it: And ſo you may take which horne of my Dilemma you pleaſe.
Object. To come at length to give an anſwer to him that demands a guide at my hands, I remit him to the moderne Viſibe Church of Rome, that is, her who is in an externe ſenſible communion with the externe ſenſible Clergie of Rome, and the externe ſenſible Head, and Paſtor of that Church. If he ask me, how he ſhall know her, I muſt counter interrogate him, who he is. Is he an ignorant man? is he unlearned, yet of good underſtanding in the World? Is he a Scholer, and what Scholer? A Grammarian, whoſe underſtanding hath no other help then that of Languages? Is he a Philoſopher? Is he a Divine? (I mean an Academicall one, for a true Divine is to teach not to ask this Queſtion) Is he a Stateſman? For he that can think one anſwer can, or ought to be made to all theſe, may likewiſe expect, that one cauſe may produce all effects: Yet I deny not but all muſt have the ſame guide, though they are to be aſſured of that guide in divers manners.
Reſp. I confeſſe Sir, you come to the Demander but at length, for till I had read further, I had not known that your Treatiſe was intended for an anſwer to mine, if I had not been told ſo when it was given me. For hitherto, as Baaſh a King of Iſrael, in the Chronicles, when he came againſt Judah, aſſail'd not their Cities, but built Ramoth againſt them, ſo you have not attempted to deſtroy what I had ſaid; but raiſed another conſideration, a177 City, a Ramoth of your own; againſt which I have brought ſuch battery, as ſeemes to me ſufficient to demolliſh it.
Now for your directions to a guide, I anſwer, ſuppoſing that there is one, and that this you ſpeak of be now it, (for you will not ſay ſhe alwaies is) and not to quarrell with you for giving me an accidentall and mutable guide, that being a thing which you ſuppoſe ſo neceſſary to be alwaies known, I will joyn iſſue upon this with you, whether ſhe be to be known to be a guide by any Infallible Notes, for ſuch are required by reaſon to beget ſuch an aſſent, as is required by you, all other being tearmed by your ſelves, not Faith, but Opinion. To your Contra-interrogation therefore who I am, that is, in whoſe Name I ſpeak, I anſwer and profeſſe my ſelf one of the notably ignorant, but though I act my own part onely, when I ſpeak in his perſon, yet for once I will adventure to anſwer you, in the name of the ſeverall perſons you ſpeak of, and will ſhew, that none of them have ſufficient cauſe to receive the guide which you propoſe upon the reaſons which you alleadge.
Object. If the ignorant man ſpeaketh, I will ſhew him in the Church of God decencie, and Majeſtie of ceremonies, above all other Sects and Religions, whereby dull capacities are ſweetly enſnared to beleeve the truth they heare, from thoſe whom they ſee to have the outward ſignes of Vertue and Devotion.
Reſp. To this I anſwer, in the ignorant mans perſon (that is in my own) thus, I for my part, neither ſee what you ſay you ſhew me, (for in all decency and178 Majeſtie of ceremonies, the Kings Chappell ſeems to me to equall the Queens, and our Cathedrall Churches, much to ſurpaſſe your cock-lofts) and if I did, yet the decency of them would not prove your Church to be a good guide, ſo well as a good miſtreſſe of ceremonies, and if by their majeſtie you mean their Magnificence, then that would onely prove her rich and not orthodox, ſince this is ſuch a note, that (her doctrine remaining as true as it is) one perſecution would ſerve to deſtroy it, and with it, all that meanes which you allow the Ignorant to find his guide by; And whereas you ſay, that dull capacities are by this ſweetly enſnared to beleeve the Truth; I anſwer, that by the ſame meanes they may be as ſweetly, and as eaſily enſnared to beleeve falſhoods, unleſſe you could ſhew that Majeſtie and Truth are inſeparable Companions.
Object. If the unlearned ask, I ſhew him the claime of Antiquity, the multitude, the advantages of Sanctity, and Learning, how the World was once of this accord, and thoſe who oppoſed, when they firſt parted, firſt began the contrary Sects, how the points of difference be ſuch, as on the Catholique ſide help devotion, and on the contrary ſide diminiſh the ſame, and ſuch like ſenſible differences, which will clearly ſhew an advantage on the Catholiques ſide, which is the proportionall motive to his underſtanding.
Reſp. I ſee indeed you claime Antiquitie, but do you think it reaſonable that I ſhould take your word. Our Divines (whom becauſe I know more, I have more cauſe to truſt then you, in a caſe of which I179 my ſelf can take no cognizance) abſolutely deny it, and to me you cannot diſprove them, unleſſe I had at leaſt ſome learning to enable me to judge, who quotes that trulie which now I cannot conſtrue: For multitude, I find not what that proves, it may work upon my feare rather then upon my aſſent, yet I am told, that many more Chriſtians diſagree from your Church in this maine Queſtion of her being a guide, then ſhe conſiſts of; that the Turks are more then both, and the Pagans more then all three, ſo that if they relate the ſtate of the world aright, multitude muſt rather ſeem an argument againſt truth then for it: And forasmuch as I can ſee my ſelf, your Religion is the leaſt in this Kingdome, and I know no other: For the advantages of ſanctitie and learning, to the firſt I anſwer, that ſince in a Countrie where the State is their adverſarie, and where for feare of ſcandale, and hope of gaining numbers to their Church, (to help both to the ſuretie and ornament of it) by commending their Doctrine by their lives, in likelyhood they are more vigilant againſt vice, then where they have no ſuch thornes againſt their breſts to keep them awak, even here I can find no ſuch advantage as you pretend, I have no cauſe to gueſſe that I ſhould find it where the incitement of emulation and ſuch like, are abſent, and the charmes of greatneſſe, wealth, power, and by conſequence likelyhood of impunity are preſent: For the advantage of learning, I anſwer, that ſpeaking to me with the fore-knowledge of my being unlearned, I wonder you ſhould make180 uſe of ſuch a motive, which (how true ſoever it were in it ſelf) I am not capable of diſcerning to be ſo, any more then a blind man is likely to aſſent to an argument drawn from Colours, of which he could have no poſſible notion. Now whereas you ſay that the world was once of this accord, it is more then I know: we are told that whole Churches in the Eaſt, had long denied this, when Luther firſt left you, and howſoever, that it could not be brought in time by arts, propt by power to accord in an error, is more then you have proved. Whereas you ſay, that thoſe, who oppoſed this, when they firſt parted, firſt began the contrary Sects: I anſwer, that our men pretend that they began no new Doctrine, but onely ſcoured off the ruſt which time and worldly ends in ſome, and negligence in others, had ſuffered to grow on. Which Queſtion againe remaines to be tried, (if you refuſe Scripture, as your ſide uſeth to do) by a Jury of ſuch who are for the moſt part untranſlated, or thoſe which are by Parties) and whoſe language I cannot ſpell, nor conſequently determine by their evidence: Now whereas you ſay, that the points in controverſie on your ſide help Devotion, and on ours diminiſh it, I wiſh you had inſtanced which, and wherein, for I for the moſt part ſee nothing towards it, they being meere ſpeculative opinions, and not reduceable to life, as eſpecially this whereof we moſt differ, which is your Churches being a generall guide: Thoſe, which moſt may ſeem ſuch, are either Confeſſion, (which yet we denie onely to be neceſſary, not profitable, if well uſed,181 which is practiſed by ſome of us, and recommended to all, and which as you have tempered it, making contrition ſufficient for his ſalvation, who hath till his hour of death lived in all ſin, and making attrition with abſolution of the ſame force as contrition, and requiring to attrition, (as I am told you do) onely ſorrow for ſin, though ariſing from the feare of Hell, ſo ſome love of God being joyned to it, which none can want but an Infidell) will not help Devotion much, but rather diminiſh it) or Monaſtick life, (which was grown into great exceſſe and diſorder, which yet many wiſe and moderne Proteſtants think might as well have been reformed as the other parts of the Church, without totall obolition, and ſo upon this is left no Queſtion) or Faſting, (which if you think Proteſtants are againſt, I pray read Biſhop Andrews his Lent Sermons, and which if it be not ſo much uſed among us as it ſhould, is not ſo much the fault of the Religion, as of the Men) and all theſe things conſidered, I find none of your motives to ſhew a maine advantage on your ſide, and therefore I have yet no cauſe to leave my owne: And if in ſome of theſe things you ſhould ſeeme to have more Truth then we, yet that would not free you from having more error in other points then this comes to, much leſſe from having any at all, without the beliefe of which, I ſhould not be received among you, though I were willing to come: And this lieth upon you to prove, and that not by probable, but by infallible arguments, if you require (as they ſay your ſide uſeth to do) an aſſent of that Nature.
182Object. To the Grammarian I will give two Memorandums; firſt, that ſeeing the Catholick's were firſt in poſſeſsion both of the Scriptures, and the Interpretations: The adverſe part is bound to bring ſuch places as can receive no probable Expoſition by the Catholickes. For who knoweth not, that is converſant in Criticks, how many obſcure and difficult places occurre in moſt plaine Authors, and the Scripture of all Bookes (the greater part of the men that wrote them, eſpecially the New Teſtament, being not eloquent, and writing not in their native Tongue) for the moſt part, are ſubject to much impropriety: The other Memorandum is, that, to prove a Catholique point by Scripture, it is ſufficient, that the place brought, beare the Expoſition the Catholique giveth, and if it be the more probable by the very letter, it is an evincent place. The reaſon is, becauſe the queſtion being of a Chriſtian law, the Axiome of the Juriſts taketh place, that Conſuetudo optima Interpres Legis, ſo that if it be manifeſt, that Chriſtian practiſe (which was before the controverſie) bee for the one ſence, and the words be tolerable, no force of Grammer can prevaile to equalize this advantage: The Grammarian therefore, who will obſerve theſe Rules, I turne him looſe to the Scriptures and Fathers, to ſeeke there what is the Faith of Chriſt and proprieties of her Church to know her by.
Reſp. To your firſt Memorandum, I anſwer, that you have grounded it wholly upon begging the queſtion: for if thoſe of your Religion had firſt been in poſſeſſion of the Scriptures, then the Chriſtians had been of it in the Apoſtles times,183 which if you could prove, you would need to prove no more, but all would eaſilie follow: and then for your conſequence, that is equallie falſe, for though I confeſſe, to make any Doctrine a point of Faith, it is required, that the place be as plaine as you pleaſe, yet to the making it the more probable opinion (and conſequentlie excluding the contrarie from being neceſſarie) ſo much is not required. The greateſt cauſe of the obſcuritie of thoſe bookes, in which Criticks are converſant, is the negligence and ignorance of Tranſcribers, ſo that ſome Authors would ſcarce know their own Bookes, if they were revived, whereas the great care of Chriſtians about ſo deare a pledge, hath much, if not wholly hindered, the ſame cauſe from perverting, and ſo obſcuring Scripture: At leaſt, if it have not, it ſeemes your Church is not ſo faithfull a Guardian of her depoſit, as her deare friends (moved by partiallitie or ends) would make us beleeve: Beſides, till now I ever thought, that Eloquence rather lead men to ſpeake improperlie, then the want of it, ſince ignorant perſons keepe themſelves within the bounds of what preciſelie they meane, whereas the eloquent wander into figures, which are ſo many, and have gotten ſuch footing in language (whilſt in the ſearch of ſignificancie proprietie is loſt) that thoſe, who uſe them, are obliged to thoſe who will pleaſe to underſtand, becauſe all they ſay may beare two ſences, the one proper, the other improper: And though it be true, that they have over-flowne, even into the language of the ignorant, yet it is as true,184 that both they are much leſſe uſed among theſe, and that they had not hence their beginning, but from Eloquence: And though the Apoſtles write not in their native Tongues, yet they write in an inſpired language, ſo that they were not likely to commit, at leaſt, any ſuch ſoloeciſmes as ſhould deſtroy the end of the Inſpirer, which was, that they ſhould be underſtood by it.
To your ſecond Memorandum I anſwer, that ſince every man is free till ſome thing binds him, you (who pretend, that we are bound to receive more doctrine as neceſſarie, then appeares to us to be ſo) are in all reaſon to give us plainlie evincent proofe, that what you thus require, God requires too, for till then (to returne you to another Axiome, for yours) praeſumitur pro libertate; whereas wee (the burden of the Negative proofe not lying upon us) if we bring probable Arguments, we doe it ex abundanti, and bring more then we need to bring; And whereas you ſtand upon Cuſtomes, having power in Law matters, I anſwer, that in all caſes that is not of force, for we hold, that it muſt not prevaile againſt a Statute, which ſhewes, that they may be contradictorie, and as Nullum tempus occurrit Regi, is thought to be a good civill topicall Law, ſo me thinkes, Nullum tempus occurrit veritati, is a good publique divinitie Law, your owne Scripture too telling us, that Truth is ſtronger then the King; Beſides, where it is of force, it is in ſuch caſes as the law hath appointed that it ſhould be ſo, and if you can prove out of Chriſts Law, that there it is ſo appointed185 to be in matters of Divinity, wee ſhall willinglie yeild, but ſeeing that our law, which allowes this force to cuſtome, ſets downe alſo in how long time it is, before it become of force, and I have cauſe to thinke, that Chriſt would have been〈◊〉carefull as our law, and have ſet down this too, if he had had any ſuch meaning, and if it were ſetled to be a cuſtome of ſuch a ſtanding (as by Saint Auſtine ſometimes is ſpoken of) as that in no time it be known that ever it was otherwiſe; in moſt of your affaires this would ſtead you a little, though one ſide have burnt the evidences of the other, to which in likeliehood you owe it, if this ſtead you in any; of queſtions, whereof Scripture and Antiquitie are wholly ſilent, or meerly ſpeculative, and unreducible unto act (of which ſort are the greateſt between us) or not concerning the lawfulneſſe, but the neceſſity of an Action, to the firſt kind no ancient cuſtome can belong, nor other to the others then a cuſtome of Interpretation of ſome text concerning it, not enough to conclude upon (beſides, that it is not that which you ſpeake of) ſince daily your men differ, and defend their differing from all that went before them, about more then many texts, as Cajetane, Salmeron, and Maldonate ſhall beare me witneſſe, unleſſe, like Sampſon, you may breake thoſe Ropes by which others muſt be bound: And adding to all this, that our cuſtome may ſerve to ſhew the meaning of the law, when our ſelves were Authors of it, though not when God is, and that our generall cuſtome arguing our united conſent (which186 onely gives force to our lawes) may be as fit to bind, as a law in civill caſes, and yet not in divine, where the lawes proceed from a higher fountaine, that ſuch a rule may be good in civill reſolutions, which require but probable proofes, and yet not in divine ones, where (according to the grounds of your Party, which requires an undoubting aſſent to her doctrines as infallible) infallible proofes are neceſſary, eſpecially this, like other Topycall arguments, having onely force caeteris paribus, and againe good where it is not ſo neceſſary, that the will of the Legiſlator be followed, as that peace and quiet be preſerved, to which, all alterations, even to the better, are enemies, and yet not in theſe caſes, where we are to prefer the will of our Law-maker before any humane convenience, or good, if the cuſtome paſt unqueſtioned, when the Law was firſt promulgated, but not, if crept in after by negligence, or plainely appearing to have been brought in-by power, all this perſwading me not to be ſo farr ſwaied by your Rules as you would have me, I ſuppoſe you have ſmall hope, that not being ſo, I ſhould find either in Scripture, or the firſt Antiquitie, either that Faith which your Church propoſeth, or theſe properties of Chriſts Church, by which your Church proves, or rather ſtrives to prove, that ſhe it is: Give me leave beſides to aske you one Queſtion, and that is; What we ſhall conclude when the Chriſtian practice of ſeverall places have ever differed; as that of Greece from that of Rome, which it may alſo do in more places then187 we are acquainted with, the extent of Chriſtianitie being unknown to us, as are the cuſtomes of ſome remote Chriſtian Countries which we know.
Object. Of the Philoſopher, I exact to goe like a Philoſopher, and to ſearch out the ſpecificall differences of every Sect, and when he hath found them (if any one but the Catholique hath any rule of faith and good life, which I remit to him to enquire) but at leaſt, when he hath found the Catholicks to be this claime of Tradition before declared, then if this doe not bring him as demonſtratively as he knoweth any Concluſion in Philoſophy, and Mathematicks, to the notice of this, is the onely true Church of Chriſt, for my part I ſhall quit him before God and Man.
Reſp. I have examined the differences between all parts as you bid me, and find the Proteſtants to have a ſufficient rule of Faith, and good life, yea ſuch a one as by Maſter Knotts confeſſion, (Quem honoris cauſa nomino) is as perfect as a writing can be: And ſince a writing may containe all Doctrines, and onely cannot give teſtimonie to it ſelf, nor be〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, I have no reaſon to think it inferior to that of their adverſaries: Your claime of Tradition I ſee plainely enough, and as plainely, that it is but a claime, many of your ſide overthrowing it, and others not of your owne, pretending to it: Biſhop Fiſher confeſſeth, that Scripture and Miracles brought in the Doctrine of Purgatory, and that againe the doctrine of Indulgences.
Eraſmus, who though himſelf no Martyr, yet one who may paſſe for a Confeſſor, having ſuffered,188 and long by the Bigotts of both Parties, and a dear Friend both to Fiſher, and his Colleague in Martyrdome, Sir Thomas Moore, (who were the Deucalions of learning in this our Country) makes yet a larger confeſſion. Non obſcurum eſt quot opiniones invectae ſunt in orbem per homines, ad ſuum Quaeſtum callidos, conflictorum Miraculorum praeſidio: Theſe reaſons alone (allowing for brevities ſake that I had no more) would make me believe, not onely that what you ſay concludes not geometrically, but perſwades not probably, and conſequently, you by your promiſe have quitted me, which without it I doubt not but God would have done.
Object. The Divine, if he hath truly underſtood the Principles of Faith in the nature of a Divine, I mean Trinity, Incarnation, Redemption, Euchariſt, Beatitude, the Creation and Diſſolution of the World, and hath ſeen the exact conformity of the deepeſt Principles of Nature, with an unſpeakable wiſdome of the Contriver: If he doth not plainely confeſſe it was above the naure of man to frame the Catholique Religion, and ſeeth not that onely that is conformable to Nature, and it ſelf, I ſay, he hath no ground ſufficient to be of it.
Reſp. Suppoſing the greateſt part of what you ſay to be true, (for I ſee not how a bare conſideration even of theſe Doctrines will ſerve to prove them to come from Gods Revelation) it might prove the Chriſtian Religion againſt Pagans, but for yours againſt Proteſtants, I can draw out of it no Argument, which if upon your explanation, it appeares189 not to be through the default of the Lymbeck (which I expect) then the better I think of you, the worſe I ſhall think of your cauſe, which would have miniſtred to ſo ſharp an inquirer, better proofes, but that the old Axiom hindered it of, Nihil dat quod non habet: Theſe Principles of Faith you ſpeak of, are agreed on by both Parts, ſo out of their Truth, and the impoſſibility of their being forged, all the other points cannot be proved, which have upon them no neceſſarie dependance: and that your Religion is conformable to the deepeſt Principles of Nature, I am ſo farr from ſeeing, that I conceive your own opinion of Tranſubſtantiation contradicts them almoſt all: Neither ſee I any ſuch unſpeakableneſſe in the contriving, but that ordinary underſtandings by ſeverall degrees, in a long tract of many ignorant negligent ages, egged on by ambition, cloakt over by hipocriſie, aſſiſted by falſe miracles, and maintained by tyrannie, might eaſily both induce and eſtabliſh them, ſo that though we have hitherto differed in our premiſſes, yet we meet in the Concluſion, which is, that I have no ſufficient ground to be of your Religion.
Object. The Stateſman, who is truely informed of the Church, how farr is really of Chriſts inſtitution, and what either pious men have added, or peradventure ambitious men encroacht, if he doth not find a government of ſo high and exotick ſtraine, that neither mans wit dare to have attempted it, neither mans power would poſsibly have effected it; If he find no eminent helpes, and no diſadvantage to the temporall190 government, I ſhall think there wants one ſtarr in the heaven of the Church to direct theſe Sages to Bethlehem.
Reſp. I anſwer now in the perſon of a Stateſman, (a part which but for this occaſion, I am ſure never to have acted) Thus,
I find ſo much policie in your Church, for moſt part really, and alwaies in voto, aimed at, although miſs'd, that of no body of men did ever Ariſtotl's ſaying appear to me truer,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Among ſome men it is the end of the Lawes of their Commonwealth to be maſters of their neighbours, but I find nothing in the government that ſhould prove it, to proceed from a divine fountaine: In Eccleſiaſticall Monarchie you have, ſo have alſo the Turks, the Pope pretends to a power of ending all controverſies, ſo doth alſo their Mufty, and ſince mans wit attempted that, and mans power effected it, why it might not do the ſame in the Weſt it did in the Eaſt, (having the aide of ſome Tinſell-reaſons, and ſome not wholly averſe places of Scripture) I cannot conceive: And what help is by your Church given to temporall government, I ſee not, unleſſe giving the Pope power in temporalls, even to depoſe Kings be the helpes you mean: I know that ſome of your ſide are not concerned in this, but it is grown ſo generall, that though it be as yet no neceſſary part of your Religion, it is like to be ſhortly; And truely throughout I find ſomethings which pious men have added, many, which ambitious men have encroacht, (though191 of your Church I could not be informed in this, who hath not decided the Queſtion) but nothing that you alone hold inſtituted by Chriſt, and ſo to your Bethlehem, for want of a ſtarr I am not likely to travell.
Object. Let every man conſider which is the fit way for himſelf, and what in other matter of that way he accounteth evidence, and if there be no intereſt in his ſoule to make him loath to believe, what in another matter of the like nature he would not ſtick at, or heavie to practiſe what he ſeeth clearly enough; I feare not his choice; but if God ſend him time and meanes to proſecute his ſearch any indifferent while, it is long agoe known of what Religion he is to be of.
Reſp. I ſee yet no cauſe to think that your Religion is that which will be choſen, though we agree about the ſtate, in which every enquirers ſoule ought to be, and in which thoſe of few are; I ſee all parents labour to fix opinions into their Children before they come to an age fit to judge of any greater doubts, then what may happen at ſpan-counter, or cherry pit, and they againe ſeldome labour to ſet right what Education hath ſwaied: Neither are they wrought upon onely by prejudice, but ſome becauſe of gaine like Demetrius,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, becauſe by this craft they have their Gods, ſome becauſe of temporall honour, like the Phariſees,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, leaſt they be caſt out of the Synagogue, loving the praiſe of men more then the praiſe of God; ſome for feare like the High Prieſts,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 192The Romans will come and take away both our Place and Nation; Some becauſe of the contradiction in the true Doctrine to their vaine or wicked deſires, and ſo as ſome Diſciples ſaid, though ſomewhat upon another occaſion, they account it,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a hard ſaying, (which made Epictetus ſay,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, indeed moſt Chriſtians, who oppoſe any of Chriſts Commands, either for ſome of theſe reaſons, dare not enquire whether Chriſt hath commanded them,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or enquiring find, but confeſſe it not, like thoſe I ſpoke of before, who who〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: As Epictetus therefore ſaith, that we ſhould enquire of God, who is our guide, as Travelers do of them they meet,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, having no deſire to turne rather to the right hand then to the left, or againe, as we enquire of our eyes concerning what is to be ſeen,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, not perſwading them to ſhew us one thing rather then another, ſo ſay I, ought we to goe to reaſon to find Gods will indifferent, which is Truth, or elſe we are likely very lazilie to ſeek what we are unwilling to find, and a probable argument for what we deſire, will ſeem a Demonſtration, and a Demonſtration againſt it ſcarce a probable Argument. This I inſiſt upon the more, becauſe I think we have more cauſe to put you in mind of this, then you us, being too little practiſed on both parts, but not moſt by yours, whereof the greateſt part commonly arrives not ſo farr, as at the fault of not193 ſeeking as they ſhould, becauſe commonly they have not leave given them to ſeek at all: for beſides thoſe who neglect to ſeek and may, no Bible being allowed by you to moſt, as no Smith was ſuffered by the Philiſtines in Iſrael, they fearing leaſt the Hebrews ſhould make them ſwords and ſpeares, and you leaſt they ſhould make out of it, Arguments to perſwade them to revolt from you. It is no wonder if your Church, be like the Congregation in the Acts,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the moſt part know not why they are come together. And truely if thus it were not, if all had liberty to ſeek Truth, and if all who ſought it were indifferent in their ſeeking, and their judgments were abſolutely unbridled by their affections, and unſwaied by prejudice, I cannot perſwade my ſelf that ſo many could meet in thinking it fit to receive (for ſo they ſeem to me) ſuch impoſſible Doctrines upon ſuch improbable grounds, or to require a more then probable aſſent to but probable Doctrines, (allowing them to be ſuch) and mould not ſee what is grounded upon them, (if not impoſſible) is at leaſt much more improbable, then the Motives are probable, which kind of Aſſent cannot be expected by God, who as he requires onely〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a reaſonable ſervice, ſo alſo a reaſonable Faith.
Reſp. SPeaking of the Church Rome, as this day it is the true Church of God. I anſwer the doubter, ſhe neither hath, nor can have any error which he need to feare, and be ſhie of.
The which two limitations I adde, for avoiding Queſtions impertinent unto our buſineſſe.
The firſt, for thoſe which concerneth the connexion of the Sca of Rome to the Univerſall.
The latter, to avoide ſuch Queſtions as touch that point, whether the Church may erre in any Philoſophicall or other ſuch matter, which Queſtions are not ſo pertinent to our Matter.
Repl. Meaning by the true Church a companie of men, which hold all (and no more) that Chriſt taught (for other interpretation, I beleeve, you will not give it) then there is no queſtion, but that not onely it hath no dangerous error, but none at all; but that yours is ſuch remaines unproved, and I beleeve, manet aeternumque manebit. For upon examination, I doubt not, it will appeare, that as I have read of a Cohort of Perſians, which they called〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Immortall Cohort, which all died in one battell; ſo your infallibe195 Church will be found to abound in errors, and to belie equallie her title, being troubled her ſelfe, with what ſhe undertakes to ſecure others from, like the Apothecary in Lucian, who undertaking to cure all men of the Cough,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, could himſelfe ſcarce preſcribe his Medicine for coughing the while. Beſides, of what ſort ſoever the error be, yet ſince the Condition of her Communion is to profeſſe a beleife that ſhe hath none, ſuch a one as to them, who indeed beleeve ſo, would not be dangerous, yet to me, who cannot profeſſe this but againſt my Conſcience, how ſlight a one ſoever, may be an occaſion of damnation: Againe, as to me your anſwer appeares falſe, ſo to thoſe of your own ſide it will appeare hereticall; to me it would give no ſatisfaction (though you had proved what you but affirme) becauſe I deſire to know an eternall, not a temporarie Guide, whereas if in your Church there ſhould happen any Schiſme, your anſwer then would give me no meanes to reſolve my ſelfe which part were the guide (that is the true Church) without a new, and peradventure (by the way) an endleſſe ſearch. To them it will give ſcandall, becauſe, firſt, you preſuppoſe that we muſt know the Church by the Doctrine, and the Doctrine by the Church; and ſecondlie, you imply a poſſibilitie, that the Church of Rome is now but by accident (and may come not to be) the true Church, and ſo all their confidence built upon her, as the Directreſſe of all Churches, and the eternall Admirall of Gods196 Fleet will appeare to have a very fallible foundation: Beſides, in the cauſe of your Limitation I find more reaſon to commend your Diſcretion, then your Ingenuitie: for, for the firſt, if you had ſaid, that the Univerſall Church of Chriſt muſt alwaies be connected to the particular one of Rome, which were to allow her Infallibilitie, you knew Antiquitie to have ſaid much againſt you; and beſides, that this being not yet de fide among your ſelves (nor evident in it ſelfe) could not ſerve for a foundation to the whole bodie of our faith; if you had abſolutelie denied it, you knew, that you ſhould incurre the diſpleaſure of the moſt prevailing part of your own men, and that then the maine (and to the Ignorant the onely viſible) ſigne would bee taken away. For the ſecond, if you had affirmed, that the Church could erre in nothing, how ſlight ſoever, you would both have contradicted many of your own ſide, as Stapleton by name, and have aſſerted more then there were any colour of proofe for, and would have wanted this diſtinction to retire to: if you were confuted in any particular, if you had reſtrained her Infallibilitie to things neceſſarie, or weightie, or the like, then the queſtion would again have riſen, which are thoſe (for many errors, which we lay to her charge, concerne not things indeed neceſſarie, though ſhe adde to the error, that other of thinking, that whatſoever ſhe holds becomes neceſſarie by her holding it) and then for all you have ſaid, the doctrine of Purgatorie might be falſe, and yet ſhe the Church, and that infallible,197 as farre as by your Doctrine her Infallibilitie had need to be extended.
Reſp. Neither doe I remit the queſtioner to Scripture for his ſatisfaction, although I hold Scripture a very ſufficient meanes to ſatisfie the man, who goeth to it with that preparation of underſtanding and will which is meet and required. Howſoever this I may anſwer for them who prove it out of Scripture, that becauſe they diſpute againſt them who admit of Scripture, and deny the authority of the Church, if they can convince it, they doe well, though they will not themſelves admit generally of a proofe out of Scripture, as not able to prove every thing in foro contentioſo.
Repl. If you hold Scripture to be ſo ſufficient a mean, I wonder, Sir, why you thinke not fit to remit me to it, unleſſe you thinke, that you have ſeverall ſufficient waies to prove ſo evident a Truth by, or thinke me not to come with meet preparation: Indeed if that be (as among you it is counted) to come reſolved, not to judge of what the Roman Church holds, by what the Scriptures ſay, but to beleeve, that they ſay whatſoever ſhe holds, then I confeſſe, I come not with the Conditions required; but if it be to come deſirous to finde the Truth, and to follow and profeſſe it when I have found it, in ſpite of all temporall reſpects, which might either fright or allure me from ſo doing, then I ſuppoſe, that Charitie (which hopeth all things) will encline you to beleeve, that I come as I ought to come, untill ſome evident reaſon perſwade you to the contrarie: That the Scripture198 cannot prove every thing in foro contentioſo I beleeve, but all neceſſarie Truths, I beleeve it can; for onely thoſe, which it can, are ſuch; I denie not, but that a contentious perſon may denie a thing to be proved, when his own Conſcience contradicts his words, but ſo he may Arguments drawn from any other ground as well as Scripture, ſo that if for that cauſe you refuſe to admit of proofes from thence, you might as well for the ſame, refuſe to admit of any by any other kinde of Arguments: And certainlie, if the Scriptures (I meane the plaine places of it) cannot be a ſufficient ground for ſuch and ſuch a point, ſurelie it cannot be a ſufficient ground to build a ground upon, as the Churches Infallibilitie, and therefore, though it it ſeemes you deſire ſo much that this be beleeved, that ſo it be, you care not upon what proofe, yet a conſidering Proteſtant, who is not as hot to receive your Religion, as you are that he ſhould, may preſentlie ſay, when he is preſs'd by you with Scripture to this, ſince this is a way of proofe which your ſelves admit not of, an Argument from hence may bring me from my own Religion, but never to yours, becauſe it is a beame which that relies much upon, that by any other way, then the authoritie of the Church, no man can be ſufficientlie ſure of the meaning of Scripture.
That they ſay, the Church is made infallible that we may have ſome guide, I thinke it very rationall; for Nature hath given ever ſome ſtrong, and uncontroulable Principle in all Natures to guide the reſt. The Common-wealth hath a Governour not199 queſtionable, our Underſtanding hath Principles which ſhe cannot judge, but by them judgeth of all other verities. If there ſhould not be ſome Principle in the Church, it were the onely maimed thing God had created, and maimed in its Principall part, in the very head. And if there be ſuch a Principle, the whole Church is Infallible by that, as the whole man ſeeth by his eyes, toucheth by his hands.
Repl. Chriſt is our unqueſtionable, and infallible Governour, and his Will the Principle by which we are guided, and the Scripture the place where this Will is contained, which if we endeavour to find there, we ſhall be excuſed, though we chance to miſſe, and therefore want not your guide, (who either is not, or as hard to find as the way: and againe, when he hath defined, the certaine meaning of that definition, as hard to find as herſelf.) Neither is a company of men thus beleeving, maimed in the head, though having no other more uncontroulable Principle: If your guide were evident of her ſelf, as thoſe Principles are by which we judge all things elſe, then your Similitude would hold a little, whereas being neither knowable in her ſelf, nor proveable by ought elſe, what you have ſaid onely ſhewes, what an ill match is made, when Witt is ſet againſt Truth.
Reſp. It is ſufficient for a Child to believe his Parents, for a Clown to believe his Preacher about the Churches Infallibility: For Faith is given to mankind, to be a meanes of believing, and living like a Chriſtian, and ſo he hath this ſecond, it is not much matter in what tearmes he be with the firſt.
200Repl. To what you ſay, I anſwer that I confeſſe that it is not poſſible that without particular Revelations, or Inſpirations, the ignorant, even of the Orthodox party, ſhould receive their Religion upon very ſtrong grounds, (which makes me wonder, that even from them you ſhould exact an aſſent of a higher nature, and a much greater certaintie, then can be miniſtred to them by any arguments which they are capable of) yet if they believe what they receive, with an intention of obedience to God, and ſuppoſall that their opinions are his Revelations, and uſe thoſe meanes which they in their Conſcience think beſt to examine whether they be or no, (though it be when they find themſelves unable to ſearch, by truſting others whom they count fitteſt to be truſted) I beleeve they are in a very ſaveable eſtate, though they be farr from having of me truth of their Tenets any Infallible certaintie; and the ſame I think of thoſe which are in error, for ſince you cannot deny, but that a Child, or a Clown, with the ſame aptneſſe to follow Gods will, may be taught by his Parents, or his Preacher, that what God forbids, he commands, that Chriſt's Vicar, is Antichriſt, or the Church, Babylon, and ſcarce teacheth any truth, though it could not teach the leaſt error; why ſhould ſuch a one be damned for the misfortune of having had Hereticall Parents, or a deceiving Preacher: For no more it ſeemes is required of ſuch, then to give his beliefe to thoſe; (And indeed the ſame reaſon extended, will excuſe him, who though learned,201 impartially aimeth at Gods will and miſſeth it) for though you ſeeme to inſinuate, by the cauſe you give of what you ſay, that ſo men believe and do what they heare God command, he careth not upon what grounds, yet I, who know that God hath no other gaine by our ſo doings then that in it we ſacrifice to him our ſoules and affections, cannot believe, but that they ſhall be accepted who give him that which he moſt cares for, and obey him formally, though they diſobey him materially, God more conſidering and valuing the Heart then the Head, the end then the actions, and the fountaine then the ſtreames; And truely elſe he who through ſtupidity or impotence abſtained from any vice, or through negligence or prejudice miſs'd ſome error, would be as well accepted of by God, as he that by a care of his waies and of obedience to him who ſhould rule them, did avoide the firſt, and by a ſtudious ſearch, the ſecond.
I cannot part from this Theame without one conſideration more, and that is, that if ſo Fallible a Director as you ſpeak of, may be cauſe enough of aſſent to one Truth, why may they not be ſo to another, and why ſhall not the beleefe of our ignorants, upon their teſtimonie, that the Scripture is the Word of God, be as well founded, as that of yours to the Infallibility of the Church upon the ſame? And yet it is daily objected to us, that this beleefe of ours is not ſurely enough founded, ſince not received from their Church, although the unlearned among us receive202 it from their Parents and Preachers, and the learned from Tradition; as from the firſt of thoſe your unlearned do, and from the ſecond of which your learned pretend they do receive the authority, and infallibility of the Church it ſelf: Although we be ſo much more reaſonable then you, that we require them not to be ſo ſure upon it, as they are of what they know by ſence, but onely to give them ſo much credit, that they may give up their hearts to obedience.
Reſp. Neither do I remit him to a generall and conſtant Tradition, as if himſelf ſhould climbe up every age by learned Writers, and find it in every one I take it to be impoſsible teſtimonies one may find in many ages, but ſuch as will demonſtrate and convince a full Tradition I much doubt: Neither do I find by experience, that who will draw a man by a rope or chaine, giveth him the whole rope or chaine into his hands, but onely one end of it, unto which if he cleave hard, he ſhall be drawn which way the rope is carried. Tradition is a long chaine, every generation or delivery from Father to Son being a link in it, &c.
Repl. Of this opinion I was wholly before, Firſt upon my own ſmall obſervation, (which alſo perſwaded me, that no controverted opinions had ſo much colour for ſuch a Tradition out of antiquity, as ſome which now are by both parts condemned. And after, by conſideration of what hath been ſo temperately learned, and judiciouſly writen by our Proteſtant, Perron D' Aille; But though I think that nothing is wholly provable by ſufficient teſtimonies of the firſt ages, to have had203 Primary and generall Tradition, (except the undoubted books of Scripture, or what is ſo plainly there, that it is not controverted between you and us) yet I think the Negative is eaſie to be proved, becauſe any one known perſon deſſenting, and yet then accounted a learned and pious Catholique, ſhews the Tradition not to have been generall, and that the Church of this Age differs from that of thoſe times, if it Anathematize now, for what then was either approved of, or at leaſt thought not ſo horrid but it might be borne with. And again, though we agree upon what will not ſerve to convince a full Tradition, yet we diſagree about what will ſerve; for allowing there were any controverted opinions delivered, with equall Tradition to the Scripture (which I deny to have beene, but would receive if it ſo appeared) yet ſure you beginne at the wrong end, in the examination of what thoſe are, which ought to be done, by conſidering the teſtimonies of the firſt ages, and not of the laſt, for in your own ſimilitude of a rope, though to helpe me to climbe by if, you put but one end into my hands, yet you muſt ſhew me, that the other end is ſomewhere faſtened, or elſe, for ought I know, inſtead of getting up by it, I may onelie get a fall, and this faſtening appeares not to me, till I be ſhewed ſome more certaine connexion between the Opinions of this Age, and thoſe of the Apoſtolicke times, then yet you have done, or till you have anſwered thoſe Arguments, by which, as I perſwade my ſelfe, I have made it appeare, that it cannot be done,
204Reſp. As for the two places concerning the Popes and Councels Infallibillity, it is not to my purpoſe to meddle of them, becauſe of one ſide the way I have begun, beareth no need of thoſe diſcourſes, and on the other, I ſhould engage my ſelfe in Quarrels betweene Catholique and Catholique, obſcure the matter I have taken in hand, and profit nothing in my hearers, more then to be judged, peradventure to have more learning, then wiſedome to governe it withall.
Repl. With your favour Sir, theſe places concerne, not onely queſtions between your ſelves, but between you and us; for I thought you had all agreed (though I knew you had not alwaies done ſo, and though it ſeemes by your declining to ſpeak about it, that you doe not yet) that generall Councels, confirmed by the Pope, are infallible, and the Doctrines defined by them, are to be beleeved de fide, which if you be not, then the Glew, which it is ſo bragged, you have to keepe you ſtill at Unitie, is diſſolved and if you be, then you ſhould both have anſwered upon what grounds you are ſo, and have deſtroyed my Objections againſt the poſſibilitie of certaintie, knowing when it is, that theſe (which uſed to be called the Church) have defined: finding therefore Altum Silentium, where there was ſo much cauſe of ſpeaking, makes me beleeve, that the cauſe why you have not anſwered is, onely becauſe you could not, and then you have a readie Apologie, that Nemo tenetur adimpoſsibilia, which I beleeve the rather, becauſe I know, that to ſo cleare a judgement as yours,205 that place of Scripture, When two or three are gathered together, &c. which is ſo often preſs'd for the Infallibilitie of Councels, muſt appeare to make as much for the Synod of Dort, as for the Councell of Trent, and to ſo great a learning as yours, it cannot be unknown how few (if any) of the Ancients have aſſerted their Infallibilitie, and how many, both of the Ancients, and your Modernes, have denied it; I am confirmed in this beleife too, becauſe you, I know, would never have accepted that as a ſufficient excuſe from me, if I had avoided to anſwer an Argument ſo, becauſe Proteſtants are not agreed upon the point, if you had thought it ſuch, as that they ought to have been agreed upon it, and truelie this is as great and conſiderable a queſtion, as any among us.
Reſp. As for the two places of Fevardentius, which alloweth many Fathers to have fallen into errors, I thinke it will not trouble him who is accquainted with the courſe of this preſent Church, wherein divers, who be thought great Divines, fall into errors, for which their Bookes are ſometimes hindered from the print, ſometimes recalled, or ſome leaves commanded to be paſted up, the reaſon is, the multiplicity of Catholike Doctrine which doth not oblige a man to the knowledge of every part, but to the prompt ſubjection of the inſtruction of the Church, wherefore many men may hold falſe doctrine inculpably, not knowing it to be ſuch, even now after the learned labours of ſo many that have ſtrived to open and facilitate by Method, what is true, and what is falſe;206 much more in the Fathers times, when there was great want of ſo many Compilers as theſe latter ages have produced.
Repl. Firſt, What Fevardentius confeſſeth, proves plainlie that, for which I intended it, which was, the ridiculouſneſſe of proving their Doctrine to be true, by being conformable to that of the Fathers, and yet making themſelves Judges of thoſe Judges they appeale too, and confeſſing, that many of them erred in many points, which if they did, they might as well doe the ſame in thoſe about which we differ, although they agreed with you, and diſſented from us.
Secondlie, What both he confeſſeth, and you confeſſe with him, diſproves that way of knowing divine Truths which you propoſe, for neither the Doctors of the ancient Church (who were ſure more likelie to know what was then taken for Tradition, then any late Compilers) nor of the Modern, who had a mind to deliver truth, and trac'd and followed your way of finding it, could erre in points of faith, if Qui docet ut didicit, he that teacheth as he hath been taught, muſt ſtill be in the right, for publique Tradition, no learned man, at leaſt can be ignorant, not any man (ſay you) of what he was taught when a Childe, as the ſubſtance of his hopes for all eternitie, and ſo cannot in reaſon have his books either forbidden or paſted up, for delivering any thing contrary to it.
Secondly, Who are theſe Cenſors who forbid and paſte up books, certainly not the Univerſall207 Church, nor yet the Repreſentative, the latter is not alwaies in being, nor when it is, at leaſure to conſider and judge all authors, and of the firſt theſe Authors are a part, if then they be fallible, (as they muſt be if they be not the Church) why may not they erre, and the Martyr-books ſpeake truth, which yet will eaſily by this meanes be kept from Poſteritie, if thoſe in the Dictatory Office diſſent from it as they will be ſure to do, if the opinion contradict never ſo little the power or greatneſſe of the Pope, upon whoſe favour theſe Oecumenicall Correctors muſt depend, or they not long remaine in their places: and yet you expect that your adverſary ſhould produce ſucceſſion of their opinions in all ages, though nothing be let paſſe but what a few pleaſe, and though when in time all of you are agreed (as you will ſoon be or appear to be, if one ſide appear to be gag'd) then this conſent, though thus brought about, becomes the conſent of the Church, and a very notable Motive.
And ſince you ſay, that what all are bound to, is onely a prompt ſubjection to the Church, why leave you it ſo in doubt, what is the Church, as if men were tyed to be ſubject, but muſt not know to what; you ſay indeed, that the adherers to the Church of Rome are now the Church, but what they may be, you will not plainely declare; So that if a Schiſme among them ſhould happen, we are all as farrto ſeek as if you had been wholly ſilent, for ſince the infallibility lies not in the particular Church of Rome, and conſequently the adhering208 to her is not ever a ſufficient note of the Church, (as you will not ſay) nor is it among your ſelves de fide, ſince the Univerſall Church (whatſoever ſhe be) can never define any thing, and of the authority of the definitions of the Repreſentative, and of what conſtitutes both her and her decrees, you refuſe to ſpeak, what remaines there, to which this prompt ſubjection is to be the onely everlaſting Note of the true Church, but onely the Truth whenſoever ſhe appeares; Thus as the Prieſts of Apollo (therefore peradventure called Loxias) uſed to ſpread lies, and ſecure his reputation, the firſt by the antiquity, and the ſecond by the darkneſſe of his Oracles, ſo doth your Religion gaine upon many men, and ſecure her ſeflf rom many objections, by the manyfold acceptions, and conſequently difficulty of this tearme Church; For whatſoever is ſaid in Scripture concerning her being free from all ſpot, or prevailing againſt the gates of Hell, or their danger who reſiſt her, the firſt meant (as I believe, and the place denies not by any circumſtance) of the Church Triumphant, the ſecond of the Church of the Elect, and the third, of the Profeſſors of Chriſtianity in generall, or at moſt of thoſe who are in all neceſſary points Orthodox among them; That they without ſufficient proofe reſolve to be ſpoken of the Church in their ſence they have fancied; That is, ſome ever known body of Chriſtians which muſt be ſtill guide to the reſt, and then claime to be that, becauſe no other (all elſe being more ingenious) claimes it beſides themſelves,209 whereas, if (conſidering that〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and the Oraculous truth of my great Lord Bacon's obſervation, that unleſſe men in the beginning of their diſputes agree about the meaning of their tearmes, they muſt end about words, where they ought to have begun) they had marked what other ſence theſe words were capable of, (for if it will here beare another, then this cannot hence be concluded but by leave) they would then ſoon have ſeen the weakneſſe of their building, by the ſlightneſſe of their foundation. Againe, they prevaile much by working upon mens aſſents, by the meanes of their modeſties, and preſſe it to be an intollerable pride to oppoſe their opinions to the conſent of the Catholick Church; whereas, if it be weighed how ſmall a part of it they mean by that word, and yet of them how many follow blindly the decrees of one, and how ſoon thoſe prevaile againſt that few not backed by any power who do not, it will then appeare, that not onely other Churches, but even a John or a Thomas have as much reaſon to be lead by their own underſtandings, as by the opinions and decrees of and Vrban or a Gregory, upon which that conſent is ſo often founded; And as they make their advantage of this word in their offenſive warres, ſo do they in their defenſive, for when they are preſs'd unto the abſurdity of their Tenets, then (though indeed they be generall) yet they pretend, that they are the opinions but of private, though many men, and not of the Church; and againe, when any Fathers (who yet ſometimes they ſay210 are wholly theirs) are ſhewed to contradict ſome of their Doctrines ſo plainely, that none of thoſe ſubterfuges, which in one of their expurgatory Indexes, they confeſſe they often uſe, will ſerve to palliate it; then they ſtrive to ſcape by anſwering, that the Church had not then defined it, whereas if it be examined, how farre they conſent about what is the Church, and what are her Definitions (whereof they are not yet agreed, for ſome ſay, ſhe hath defined what, others ſay, ſhe hath not) this onely will be certainlie found, that it never can be certainlie found, what are her opinions of any point, or when ſhe hath declared her ſelfe: As (beſides manie other Arguments, ſome preſs'd by my ſelfe, and others, by other Pens more fit to treat of ſo weightie a matter) appeares by your refuſing to leave your Latibula; and declare plainlie your opinion concerning it, which if you ſaw defenſible, and you were all agreed about it, you would quicklie have done, and not incurred the reprehenſion of that Axiome, which teacheth, that Doloſus verſatur in generalibus, which makes me thinke, that if this were generallie enough mark'd, you would no longer be able to dazle any mans eyes with the ſplendid title of Sonnes to the Catholique Church, as Alexander hoped to doe thoſe of the Barbarians, with ſtiling himſelfe〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Sonne of Jupiter, although indeed he was ſo much the more moderate then the ſecond, as never to denie, that any other could be Sonne to the ſame Father, whereas you will not allow, that any may have intereſt in your Mother beſides your ſelves.
211To conclude this Paragraph, give me leave to aske one queſtion, and that is, how your ſaying, that Truth is more eaſie to finde now then in the Fathers times, will agree, either with the way which you ſay, is the onely Catholique one to finde Truth by (for ſure ſuch a Tradition was alwaies equallie eaſie to finde, and if the firſt ages had erred in it, we muſt of neceſſitie, following your advice, have followed their error too) or with the ſaying of ſo many of your ſide, that if I ſhould reckon them up, I ſhould make a Catalogue of Authors, equall to thoſe of Photius, or Geſner, or Poſſevine, who all joyne, that Truth was moſt likelie to be moſt certainlie known that time, which was, in Campians words, Chriſto propior, ab hac lite remotior, neerer to Chriſt, and conſequentlie to Tradition, and to which, for that cauſe, all thinke fit to appeale againſt us, or with that cuſtome of your Church, which ſuffers none to take Orders before they have vowed to interpret Scriptures according to the Fathers, which if men now adaies be more likelie to find the Truth, then at that time they were (as they muſt be, if truth in this age be more eaſie to be found; whether through greater abundance of Compilers, or what elſe ſoever) then this Vow is as much, as if they had vowed to leave the beſt way of Interpretation and teaching, to follow the worſt.
Reſp. As for the two points, he ſaith, avert him from Catholique doctrine, I am miſtaken, if he be not miſtaken in both. The firſt is, that the Catholiques doe damne all who are not in the Union of212 their Church. He thinkes the ſentence hard, yet I thinke he will not deny me this, that if any Church does not ſay ſo, it cannot be the true Church. For call the Church what you will; the Congregation of the Elect, the Congregation of the Faithfull, the Congregation of Saints, or Juſt; call it, I ſay, or define it what you will, doth it not clearly follow, that whoſoever is out of the Church cannot be ſaved, for he ſhall not be the Elect, Juſt, Faithfull, &c. without which there is no ſalvation. How then can any Church maintain theſe two Propoſitious; I am the true Church, and yet one may be ſaved without being in me:
Repl. This is, by your favour, a meere Paralogiſme; for though thoſe who define the Church by qualities, which both Parts agree, to be the conditionall Keyes to the Kingdome of Heaven, muſt needs affirme, that none out of the Church can be ſaved, yet what is this to them, who meane by the Church, the Companie of the Orthodox in all points, and by them your ſelves, out of which (allowing that there be ſuch a one, which I doubt of, and that to be yours) I ſhall beleeve, that ſome may be ſaved, till I ſee ſome more cauſe to thinke all error in Religion alwaies damnable, which it is plaine, by what after you ſay, that you thinke not your ſelfe, and the Church taken in this ſence, which is your ſence, may maintaine both Propoſitions; or to ſhew you, how much, what you ſay, would make againſt your ſelfe, thus I argue; The true Church muſt hold that none can be ſaved out of her, but your Church denies not, but that ſome213 out of her may be ſaved, therefore yours is not the Church: My Major is included in your own ſaying, that thoſe two Propoſitions are not maintainable together: My Minor, though falſe, yet is alſo your confeſſion (where you ſay, that the Churches Propoſition is not ſo cruell as it ſeemes, though the words be rough) and therefore ſo ought you to make my concluſion too: Beſides, thoſe who exclude all from Salvation, who are out of the Church in the other ſence, meaning by it the Elect, as they are not like them in the wrong, ſo they are not occaſion of much harme, like them, who ſtiling the Church, a companie of men of ſuch a beleife, and under ſuch a government, affirme an impoſſibilitie of being ſaved out of it; for they giving no viſible ſigne of who is in the Church (for who can know the Elect, but the Electer) cauſe no want of Charitie, nor frequencie of Warre, and perſecutions by it, as the others doe, who having made firſt a viſible partition, leaſt thoſe who are out of it may draw others out too, they ſend them out of the world by way of prevention.
Reſp. But per adventure he is ſcandalized, that the Catholick Church requireth actuall Communion externall with her, which he thinketh may in ſome caſe be wanting without detriment of Salvation. But how would he have the Church ſpeake, which ſpeaketh in common,, but abſtracting from ſuch particular caſes as may change wholly the Nature of the Queſtion.
Repl. I am ſcandalized, not becauſe you require to Salvation214 joining with you in Communion, but becauſe alſo you require joyning with you in opinions, and if it were onely this, yet am not I any whit ſatisfied with what you ſay for it, for with the true Church, that is the Commpany of true believers, in points any way materiall (or rather the trueſt) I conceive it not damnation ſometimes not to communicate: For if they have any never ſo ſlight errors, and which appeares ſo to me, which yet they will force me to ſubſcribe to, if I Communicate with them, my aſſent would be damnable, or if they require the ſame ſubſcription to ſome truths, which yet after my reall indeavours in inquiry, appear errors to me, I doubt not but my refuſall is no way damnable: Neither can I abſolve your Church concerning this her ſaying for your reaſon, becauſe ſhe ſpeakes in generall, wholly abſtracting from particulars, which change the nature of the Queſtion, for why doth ſhe ſo, why doth ſhe not expreſſe her exceptions, or at leaſt tell us, that the rule is not ſo generall, but that it will beare ſome, and not make men (who know not that ſhe intends to reſtraine at all, what ſhe ſo abſolutely pronounceth, and who will find no cauſe to take your bare word for her intentions) many times, at leaſt to hate them as Gods enemies, whom he loves as his friends, and beleeve them to fry in Hell, who ſhine in Heaven? Howſoever if ſhe uſe to expreſſe herſelf in rougher words then her meaning is, how apt may ſhe be to be miſtaken in ſeverall of her reſolutions, and conſequently how eaſie is it for ſome age to have miſunderſtood the paſt, and deceive215 the following: Neither do I like your example, becauſe that is not to differ from the Church, but to miſtake her meaning, though even he, who ſhould denie that there were three Gods, if he thought that by the Trinitie your Church ſo meant, muſt conſequently think her not infallible, and ſo by your grounds be conſequently a Heretick.
Reſp. The current of Catholick Doctors that no man ſhall be damned for infidelity, but he who doth wilfully misbeleeve, and that to do ſo it is required that Faith be ſufficiently propoſed unto him, and what is to be ſufficiently propoſed, is not determined amongſt them. There wanteth not Divines who teach, that even ignorantia affectata, doth excuſe from Hereſie. On the other ſide it is moſt certaine, that no man is damned for not profeſſing, what he is not damned for not believing. Wherefore, profeſsion being that which engrafteth a man exteriorly in the Church, according unto the ordinary opinions of the Catholicks, it followeth, that no man is condemned for not being of the Church, who is not for infidelity, for which it is a very uncertaine Caſe who be damned, and who be not.
Repl. As the King of Spaine, after long calling the Hollanders Rebels, at laſt for his own ſake deſcended to treat with them as free States, ſo thoſe of your Religion, when they hope to gaine a Proſelite, thunder out to him crudelity, and without any of theſe Mollifications which you now uſe, that extra Eccleſiam Romanam nulla eſt ſalus, there is no ſalvation out of the Roman Church. And Maſter Knot peremptorily avers, that no Catholick216 of an entire fame ever taught, that a Proteſtant ſo dying could be ſaved, yet when they are preſs'd with the conſequences, they can (as it ſeems) vouchſafe to give us better words, and find〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉enough to ſoften this opinion, though ſuch as bring them more diſadvantage in other conſiderations, then help in this. For firſt, as before it ſeemed that you are not fully agreed either about the authority of the councels, or what conſtitutes the Church, (by your avoiding to ſpeak concerning it) ſo now it ſeemes, that neither are you reſolved of what conſtitutes an Heretick, and then what remaines there for you to know, if what you account infallible and what damnable, be yet both uncertaine to you.
Secondly, Since you confeſſe none to be a Heretique, but he to whom the truth is ſufficiently propoſed, and when that is, you are not reſolved: what a more then Sythian Barbarouſneſſe is it to make a coale of a Chriſtian, onely upon ſuſpicion of Hereſie? eſpecially ſince the Pagans themſelves had Chriſtian Charity enough to perſwade them, that it was much better that a guilty perſon ſhould eſcape, then an innocent be puniſhed: much more ſhould you rather ſuffer the tares to grow, then venture to pluck up the corne with it, and beleeve the beſt, when the truth lies hid in a place ſo hard to ſearch into, as is the heart of man, into which (as none entered the Sanctum Sanctorum but the High Prieſt) God onelie can have admittance.
Reſp. The other point was of putting Hereticks to death,217 which I think he underſtandeth to be done vindicatively, not medicinally, I mean, impoſed as a puniſhment, and not in way to prevent miſchiefe, and oppreſſe it in the head.
Repl. I ſuppoſe it ſmall ſatisfaction to a poor man, carried to the ſtake for his Conſcience, to know by which member of a diſtinction he is put to death, and that this as little excuſeth you, as it ſatisfies them, I hope to ſhew before we have ended the conſideration of this preſent Paragraph.
Reſp. If the Circumcelians were the firſt, that is, ancient enough for the juſtification of the fact; although for Baniſhment, which alſo he ſeemeth to reprehend, we know the firſt that could ſuffer it did ſuffer it, Arrius I mean, by the hand of Conſtantine, whom he praiſeth for a ſpeech he uttered before he knew the conſequence of the danger, and ſeemeth to reprehend for his after and better witts.
Repl. I wiſh to you what Eraſmus wiſht to Auguſtinus Steuckius, which is, that you were but equall in probando diligens, as you are in aſſeverando fortis: For how unlikely is it that we ſhould give you credit without proofe onely,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that the antiquity of a thing, which began ſo long after Chriſts Apoſtles, were all dead, is enough to prove it lawfull: Howſoever it would at moſt but prove it lawfull, to put ſuch Hereticks to death, as force men to do ſo in their owne defence, for ſuch were they: Beſides I object not onely againſt this cuſtome the not being ancient, (for I conconfeſſe there might have been before a power to do ſo too, though not uſed to the uttermoſt,218 though in likelihood what perſwaded you to uſe it, would have perſwaded them to the ſame, if they had thought they had it) but as being alſo condemned by Hillary, and Athanaſius, and other Orthodox: For though ſome puniſhment of a leſſe degree were inflicted upon others too by their own ſide, (as you trulie inſtance) when their power prevailed; yet Conſtantine ſaies, not onely in an Edict for libertie of opinions, (which he, who was then Pope never appeared to ſtomack, as his ſucceſſor, undoubtedly would now doe the like) 〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, let no man trouble another, but let every one do as his own ſoule will: but alſo gives this concluding reaſon againſt you for it,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. For it is one thing willingly to take upon them this combate for immortality, and another to force them to it with puniſhment; and ſo in whatſoever he did contrary to this in any caſe, wherein this reaſon held his words, condemne his action: And whereas you ſay, that when Conſtantine made ſo ſlight of the queſtion between Arrius and Alexander, it was, becauſe he knew not the conſequence of the danger: I ſhall deſire to know of you whether you muſt not confeſſe, that there is now no King of your Religion ſo ill inſtructed in it, (though none of them be never ſo learned or curious as Conſtantine was, who, if any man in his dominion ſhould ariſe, denying Tranſubſtantiation, would not preſently know the danger of the conſequence, and reſolve him219 for an Heretick, and to the ſtake inſtantly, and not ſpeak againſt his opinion onelie as impertinent, and de lana caprina, and〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and if this had been as reſolved a thing then among Chriſtians, to have come from Tradition, as Tranſubſtantiation is now amongſt Papiſts, he would neceſſarilie as ſoon have diſcovered it too: Howſoever I believe his after-witts to have been his worſer witts, in puniſhing, though not in condemning of Arrius, and to me it yet ſeemes (for to be ſure, not to ſpeak Heretically, I will not ſpeak obſtinately) that to have laboured in ſtopping of diſputes on both parts, and tying them to Scripture Phraſes, and to ſpeak of God onelie in the Word of God, had been at leaſt in reſpect of Unity, not a worſe way, then to have given an example to what after followed, I mean, the frequent explication (with Anathema to boote) of inexplicable miſteries; Neither would then ſo many queſtions have ſo long troubled the Church, which for their ſlightneſſe were unworthy ever to exerciſe the Schooles; But for that or any other meer error, as it may be for ought any one knowes, unlawfull in any to puniſh at all, I by no meanes like not to put to death, for the ſame ſeemes to me it ſelf〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a ſin above meaſure ſinfull, though even the act of it proceeded from an opinion of doing God ſome ſervice, and that opinion from a meer error too, then I conceive but a materiall no formall ſin for the ſame cauſe, and ſo, neither this materiall Murtherer, nor that materiall Heretick, be guilty before God, who onely can diſtinguiſh,220 and to whom it is fit to be left. Howſoever the long doubt of ſome, and oppoſall of other Orthodox to this courſe, and that ariſing not from their Policie or Compaſſion, but their Conſcience, not as thinking it unprofitable or unfit, but unlawfull, ſhews, that there was then no Tradition that the Apoſtles taught it to be lawfull ſo to uſe Hereticks, upon which onelie, all the Infallibilitie, which you claime for any beliefe or cuſtome of your Church, is founded,
Reſp. Saint Auſtine juſtifieth ſuch proceedings againſt Hereticks.
Repl. Truely for putting them to death (unleſſe when they firſt aſſaulted) which makes a wide difference, for then it was not done as to Hereticks, but as to Aſſaſsines, from whom Nature teaches us to defend our ſelves, and conſequentlie to re-offend them whenſoever Religion barres it not, experience ſhewing us the danger of meerly defending, to be neer to that too, of not doing it at all) I know not that ever he did, nor do I beleeve it: That ſome degree of puniſhment ſhould be inflicted upon them, I confeſſe he at laſt conſented, but chiefly to force them to come and ſee what the Church did, (whoſe actions the Hereticks impudently belied; as if they ſet pictures upon the altar, and did what you both doe and defend, and they did not) i. e. denied it. Howſoever we have Saint Auſtine againſt Saint Auſtine, and not onely his authority, but his reaſons more valid by much, then that when he ſaith, that ſuch oppreſſions would make them think themſelves vi victos,221 non veritate convictos, overcome by force, not convicted by Truth, and conſequently diſlikes it, ne fictos Catholicos habeamus, quos apertos Hereticos novimus, leaſt they become from open Hereticks, but fained Catholicks: Reaſons, which (though theſe be not all we have) in my opinion it was as impoſſible for him reaſonably to anſwer when he was living, as it would be now for him to do it when he was dead. Beſides, as he uſeth theſe ſtrong arguments againſt it, ſo he is himſelf a ſtrong example againſt it, for the Church had loſt this her ſo notable Champion, if they then had been as ſevere to the Manichees as you are to us.
Reſp. Saint Gregory vſeth the like againſt Pagans, (if I remember) and the Church laterly hath rather encreaſed, then decreaſed in the practice of it.
Repl. I believe your memory deceives you in this, which you have cauſe to hope it doth, for elſe the Church of Rome differs from that of Saint Gregories times, it being now with her a judged caſe, that Infidels may not be compelled to the Faith, as I am told is ſhewed by Valentia, Saint Thomas, Hartado, and others, the Church having no power over thoſe who are out of it, and therefore they pleaſe to ſay, that (like them who among the Romans were onely Cives ad oncra, liable to the taxes of Citizens, without Intereſt in their Priviledges) Baptiſme hath made us of the Church enough to be liable to her Puniſhments, though not to be benefitted by her Communion: Though indeed the ſame cauſe why you would222 have Hereticks put to death, for feare of harming others with their opinions, me thinks ſhould extend to their puniſhment too, unleſſe you believe us to be as bad as Malefactors, and not them, or that their opinions are ſo irrationall as not likely to ſpread, and ours ſo reaſonable, that againſt them the ſword is the beſt ſhield, and therefore (as Brennus did his) you put that into the ſcales for want of weight, it being of giving Reaſons as the Poet ſaith it is of giving Requitalls, Iraſci quam donari vilius conſtat.
Another reaſon which perſwades me that you are miſtaken in what you ſay of Gregory, (as this miſtake facilitates my beliefe, that you are ſo about Auſtines too) is that Bede tells, that ſome Romaniſts, having converted the King of Kent, that King did not yet force any to become Chriſtians, for (ſaith he) he had learned of theſe his Maſters, that the ſervice of Chriſt (WHICH REASON EXTENDS FARTHER THEN TO PAGANS) muſt be voluntary, and not forced; Now if theſe received what they taught from Gregory, (as you often tell us) then either he did not as you often ſay, or thought that unlawfull which himſelf did; And howſoever this Cuſtome hath encreaſed ſince is very unconſiderable, for unleſſe it have its authority explicitely or implicitely from the Apoſtles, it can give none ſince, and unleſſe it be proved to be well done at firſt, no continuance can give this, or any other action more juſtification then at firſt it had.
Reſp. Moſes ſpeech I believe is miſtaken, the force of223 it being, that the baniſhment of Biſhops ſhewed his faith, becauſe the baniſhed were Catholickes, which ſhewed Lucius to be none.
Repl. If Moſes had meant as you would have him, he ſhould not have ſaid, onely〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, not indefinitelie the baniſhing of Biſhops, but the baniſhing of Orthodox Biſhops, the leaving therefore of that out, wherein, according to you, the whole ſence of his Argument lay, ſeemes to me plainlie enough to ſhew, that he meant what they and you denie: eſpeciallie he adding (as you may ſee in Zozomon) their being puniſh'd by labour, as well as puniſhment, and then ſaying,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which things are whollie, abhorring from Chriſt, and all right Beleevers concerning God, and in Socrates,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉for Gods ſervant ought not to fight, for ſo he counted to puniſh.
Reſp. But what can be ſaid, if the Church uſeth that for the prevention of a greater and more dangerous evill, which all politique Eſtates uſe for the remedies of leſſe, and teſſe dangerous evils, and are commanded for it. For if Faith be the way to Salvation, and Hereſie be the bane of Faith; if Salvation the greateſt good, then the danger of a Countries being over-runne with Hereſie, is the greateſt of dangers, greater then the multiplicity of Theeves, greater then the unſurety of the wayes, greater then a Plague, or Invaſion; why then doth not reaſon force us to uſe meanes to prevent it, which the ſame reaſon and experience teacheth us to be moſt efficacious in this, and all224 other contagious and gangrening maladies of the Common-wealth. I hope reaſon it ſelfe, and the zeale of the Author to his own, and Countries ſalvation, will ſupply my ſhortneſſe in this, point, for ſuppoſing a Church be aſſured ſhe is in the right, and that the doctrine preach'd, as then leadeth to damnation; I know not why Caiphas his words ſhould not be propheticall in this caſe, and that truly it doth expedire, that Unus moriatur pro populo, & non tota gens pereat.
Repl. I wiſh heartilie, you were as good a Caterer as a Cooke, I meane, that you brought as good reaſons as you dreſſe artificiallie what you bring; For I finde there is in your words a verie notable〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, able to ſteale a man into your opinion, before he hath askt himſelfe why; but if he ſtay to doe ſo, then all your excellent embroiderie will not keepe him from diſcerning manie bracks in your ſtuffe: To prove which, I will bring many reaſons (beſides what I have taught alreadie) by which it ſhall, I hope, appeare, why thoſe, whom you call Hereticks, ſhould not be put to death, although Malefactors may, although even the lawfulneſſe of that (ſince other puniſhments, which would not ſhorten their time of repentance, might peradventure ſerve to repreſſe them) is not abſolutelie certaine.
Firſt, Malefactors plainlie offend againſt their Conſciences, at leaſt, thinke not themſelves bound by them to commit their villanies (neither pretend they otherwiſe) which they, whom you call Hereticks, either bona fide follow, or doe for ought at leaſt you can know.
217Secondlie, What are Malefices, muſt be known bef re Malefa ors, and Hereſies before Hereticks; now of the firſt Mankinde agrees, but of the ſecond but you onely, a ſmall part of Chriſtians, and yet you differ too about the waies of knowing them, and conſequentlie, whether ſome things be Hereſies or no (as for example, whether the Oath of Alleagiance containe any) wherein ſince ſome of you are deceived, me thinkes it ſhould incline you to thinke it not impoſſible for you all to doe ſo, in what you all agree to be ſuch.
Thirdlie, Malefactors are not, or ſhould not be puniſhed for ſuch, without a plaine knowledge that ſuch they are; but although there were an impoſſibilitie of miſtaking what is Hereſie, yet there is no poſſibilitie of knowing who are Hereticks, the forme of which is obſtinacie, a ſecret, and (to man) an undiſcoverable qualitie, whom he onelie ſhould puniſh who onelie knowes.
Fourthlie, Malefactors are certaine to hurt others, whereas neither are Heretickes ſure to perſwace any, and if they doe, yet they may hurt none, ſince who receives their beleife bona fide, and through meer error, is unharmed by it.
Fifthlie, Whom they doe harme, it muſt be brough their own fault, and by their own conſent, whereas without either, the Malefactors are cauſe of much miſchiefe, even to the moſt guiltleſſe.
Sixthlie, Malefactors paſſing whollie un••niſh'd, peradventure not put to death, would•ring a certaine deſtruction to the ſtate, which226 temporall Magiſtrates are appointed to watch over, which yet in ſpeculative opinions is not concerned.
Seventhly, The puniſhment even by death, of Malefactors brings not any temptation of ſinning, upon them, the ſame to others is in all probabilitie a cauſe to keep many from a carefull ſearch of Gods Truth, (leaſt they might find the puniſhable beleefe to be the true one) and from profeſſing it, when they think they have found it; both which are ſinns of the firſt magnitude.
Eigthly, This courſe with Malefactors was not, for ought appears, ever thought unlawfull in the pureſt times of Chriſtianity, and was then in uſe, whereas towards errors in beleefe, it was diſallowed of them by the chiefe, and long before death was at all inflicted upon them, though then underſtood as well the danger of Hereſie, and were as carefull to preſerve their flocks from all danger by all lawfull waies, as any ſince.
Ninthly, It no way redounds to Chriſts Glory, that Malefactors be unpuniſht, but it makes much for it, that his Army appears to conſiſt of Volunteers, and not of Preſs'd men, that his Truth ſhould prevaile by no humane force, but onely by the power of the firſt teacher, and the light of the Doctrine, which for us unbidden ſo to aſſiſt, is to think the Arke muſt fall, if we hold not forth our hands to hold it up, and takes from it the honour of ſubſiſting by the way, by which it took roote, when (to borrow Saint Chyſoſtomes words) 〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 227The weak were to hard for the ſtrong, and twelve for the World, and that〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, They being naked, and their adverſaries armed.
Tenthly, That death is the moſt effectuall way to ſuppreſſe Malefactors, you ſay reaſon and experience ſhewes, and it is generally agreed of; but in this caſe it ſeems even to your beſt men the worſt courſe, as appears by Iburranes reſolution concerning the Hyper-Ephanians, by the 267 Page of grave and judicious Cardinall D' Oſſat his Letters, by the Epiſtle of Cardinall Richelieu to his King before a Book of Controverſie, and by Eraſmus his Teſtimonie, who tells us, that a Carmelite having then this power in his hands, Ubicunque ſaevitiam exercuit Carmelita, ibi diceres fuiſſe factum Haereſεων ſementum, whereſoever he exerciſed his crueltie, he ſeemed to have ſowed Hereſie. All which reaſons make me beleeve, that there is much difference between the ſtriving to deſtroy theſe two ſorts of men, and if there were not, yet for fore-touched reaſons, and others which I will touch at, I ſhould as ſoone think it unlawfull to put Malefactors to death, as lawfully to kill Hereticks. For indeed ſince〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, it diſadvantageth what you would aide; to ſeem to beleeve that truth, without other aſſiſtance, would not ſooner roote out falſhood, then that it, that the Orthodox are not more likely to cure the ſeduced, then to be infected by them; and that there is no way to end the Hereſies, but by ending the Hereticks: And thus you runne into three inconveniencies.
220Firſt, You put reaſonable ſcruples into conſidering mens minds, leaſt as a Greek Orator ſaith againſt Ulyſſes for ſtriking Therſites,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. It was a ſigne he could not confute him, that he ſtuck him; ſo that it be want of arguments, which makes you fall to blowes, and cauſe them to ſuſpect, that if you were not (peradventure for ſome better reaſons then appear to them) diffident of your cauſe, you would give your adverſaries leave to ſpeak as loud as them pleaſed, and not ſeek ſo ſuſpiciouſly to ſtop their mouthes, whilſt they diſpute with you at as much odds, and upon tearmes of as much diſadvantage as Saint Paul did with the Grecian Jewes,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, he diſputed againſt them, but they went about to ſtay him.
Secondly, It deſtroies thoſe plauſible Arguments ſo often uſed of Unity, and Tradition, and Multitude, for, firſt Uniformitie may be induced by power, but Unitie and Impunitie can never be parted; all other agreement being but as a theefe and a robbed perſon agreed, the one to take his purſe, and the other to give it againe. Againe Tradition it lames as much, for how can any man tell, but that two parts claiming contraty Traditions, or one part claiming it upon falſe grounds, and the other denying it, the truth may not by this force have been over-born, when we receive not what men would have delivered Poſteritie, but what Power would ſuffer them.
Againe, how ſhall we know but that the greater221 part of your multitude beleeves not as they profeſſ••; no man knowing his Neighbour to be of his mind when it is ſo probable, that many may not think as they ſpeak, when it is not lawfull for all to ſpeak as they think.
Thirdly, By this way you are cauſes, that you ſuffer often where you have not the State on your ſide, as much as you inflict when you have for though you will ſay that none ſhould puniſh but the Church, yet every divided companie of Chriſtians, thinking themſelves to be that, (that is to be the orthodox) will uſe your own cuſtome to your harme, and you will be ſhott like the Eagle in Eſope,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, with your own feathers; and ſo Truth wereſoever ſhe be (if all follow this way) will by force by many parties be oppoſed, and but by one propagated and defended; ſo that not onely in conſideration of Chriſtianity, but even of Policy I miſlike this courſe, as being alwaies wicked, and often hurtfull, and more often uneffectuall: And for my part, I deſire ſo much that good be done for evill, that (though you be moſt fit of any to be ſo uſed, who uſe us ſo where your power extends, and whoſe cruelty will extend with your acquiſition, if you make any, and you hold your ſelves, that impendens periculum is cauſe enough for a warr) yet I heartily wiſh all lawes againſt you repealed, and truſt, that diſarmed Truth would ſerve to expell Falſhood, whereas now they being in force againſt you, give you the honour of a perſecution, and not being executed, give you not the feare of one: It is truely ſaid,230 Militia Chriſtiana eſt Haereſes expellere, but it needs this limitation, ſed armis Chriſtianis, that Chriſtian warfare employ onely Chriſtian armes, which are good arguments and good life elſe if they uſe ſuch a courſe, as is more properly〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and go to force that part of man, which is liable to no power but that of perſwaſion, (which if it do not beget a true and pious aſſent, in likelyhood it will a damnable diſſimulation, and which, if Chriſt had meant for a prop for his Doctrine, he would as ſoon have at firſt made it a part of the foundation, and have charged his Apoſtles not to ſhake the duſt off their feet, but to draw their ſwords out of the ſcabbard at thoſe, who rejected what they taught,) then it often (though ſometimes by reaſon of the different diſpoſitions which reigne at ſeverall times among men, and may happen otherwiſe) miſſeth of the intended end, and works not often ſo much as upon mens tongues, and never upon their Heads and Hearts: A great example of which happened not long ſince, Calvin with all his works ſince the time they were written, having ſcarce made ſo many Proteſtants in France, as I have credibly heard it reported, that the Maſſacre made in a Night, which act though I impute not to all thoſe of your Religion, for many of them I know did, and do miſlike it, yet it both had its fountaine from the Popes Legate, (and conſequently in all likelyhood from the Pope, who gave God publick thanks for it) as one of his ſucceſſors confeſs'd to Cardinall D' Oſſat, Page231 432, and it may be juſtified as well as any judiciall proceeding, upon that reaſon which you give, why Hereſie may be ſtopped with the ſword, leaſt they who are wrought upon by it, may work upon others.
To conclude, I ſhould be better contented with this courſe, if the opinions were infallibly errors, and infallibly damnable, and this were alwaies an effectuall way, (and no other could be found more mercifull) to ſtop their ſpreading, but ſince you have no infallible way of knowing the Church to be infallible in her definitions, and conſequently, that the contrary opinions are falſe, ſince you know not infallibly which is ſhe, (for you pretend but prudentiall Motives) ſince your knowledge having defined, is likewiſe fallible, as depending upon many uncertaine circumſtances, ſince; not onely the matter of Hereſie is thus uncertaine, but the form too: for you confeſſe you doubt whether Ignorantia affectata be it or no, and ſince though the form were certaine, yet in whom, it is by no meanes plaine, but rather impoſſible to be known, (as who is obſtinate, and conſequently to whom it is damnable) ſince this courſe often gives growth, and ſtrength to that, from which it would take even Being and Subſiſtance: I cannot but think you have cauſe to change your proceedings, leaſt not onely you expell not, but leaſt you encreaſe Hereſie, and againe leaſt you oppoſe it not, but miſtake the Truth for it, and applaud your ſelf for cutting off a Gangren'd member, when you deſtroy a ſound one, and inſtead of ending a Heretick224 make a Martyr, and againe leaſt (allowing this to be the Truth) yet you put to death innocent perſons inſtead of guilty; eſpecially ſince if the opinions were damnable in whomſoever they were, yet ſome better way might be found, (as cloſe impriſonment or the like) to keep them from harming with them, rather then (as you do by putting them to death, when elſe they might live to be converted) to damne them certainly, leaſt they may poſſibly damne ſome others; Againe for Proteſtants, who joyne with me in beleeving that there is no way to know the true Church, but by true Doctrine, nor to know that but by the Scripture, (for Univerſall Tradition ſeemes to us to deliver nothing but what is ſo plainly contained there, that it is agreed upon) in them I beleeve it muſt be intollerable Pride, and raſhneſſe, (and the ſame in Papiſts concerning thoſe places out of which they would prove the Churches infallibility) To conclude, this ſeemes to me the ſence of this place of Scripture, therefore this infallibility it is, and no man can denie it, who either gainſaies not his Conſcience, or hath it not miſlead by ſome ſinfull paſſion or affection, and therefore the deniers muſt be damned, and therefore leaſt they damne others, we will ſend them through one fire to another. And this, though it be an equall fault in both Proteſtants and Papiſts to ſay and do, yet it is more Illogicall in the former, as contradicting at firſt ſight all their Principles, and deſtroying the whole Platforme upon which the Reformation was built.
233Reſp. He urgeth afterwards againſt the Unity of the Church, that it is none ſuch as we brag of, And I confeſſe we brag of it, and think we have Reaſon. And if it pleaſe him to look into the difference of our Country of England, and ſome land of Barbarians, as Braſile, or ſuch other, where they live without Law or Government, I think he will find our bragging is not without ground. For wherein is the difference betwixt a Civill Government and a Barbarous Anarchie? Is it either that in a Civill Eſtate there be no Quarrells, or amongſt Barbarians there is no Quiet? The former would prejudice our Courts and Juſtice; the latter is impoſsible even in Nature. What is then the goodneſse of a government, but in a well Governed Country there is a means to end Quarels, and in Anarchie there can be no aſſured peace? This therefore is it we brag of, that amongſt us if any controverſie ariſe, there is a way to end it, which is not among them who parted from us. And Secondly, That there is no aſſured agreement amongſt thoſe who parted from us, for although to day they agree, there is no bond or tie why to morrow they may not diſagree. Theſe two things we brag of, and I think the Author will not denie it. For he confeſſeth that we all agree, in that the Church is an infallible Miſtreſse. Then it is evident, that if in any controverſie ſhe interpoſeth her judegment, the controverſie is ended. He likewiſe confeſſeth, that who part from us have no ſuch definitive authority amongſt them, and that Scripture, whereon they rely, hath no ſuch vertue to take up Controverſies clearely.
234Suppoſing that we agreed much leſſe then you, yet a little, all in earneſt, that is enforced, is more conſiderable, then much conſtrained, and ſo peradventure much of that much but in appearance; Beſides, that you all agree in thoſe points, wherein if any diſagree, he becomes none of you, is no more then is ſo common to all Religions, that even the very. Anabaptiſts may ſay as much for themſelves; For either all the Parts of them remaine of aſſent, inſomuch that they are all ſtill of the ſame Religion, and ſo agree as well as your Dominicans and Jeſuites, or elſe their differences are ſuch, as to make them of ſeverall Religions, and then, why is want of Unity objected to them any more then it is to Chriſtians in generall, among whom are ſo many diviſions, and yet not the whole, but the faulty party taxed? And truely in my opinion ſome Queſtions among your ſelves are as great, not onely as any among your adverſaries, but as any between you and them. I but you anſwer, we have a way of being agreed, we reply, is it a way ſure to lead to Truth as well as to Unity, or elſe ſo might we have by going to moſt at three throwes, and reſolving to ſtand to that. Beſides, if you have, and make no more uſe of it, it ſeemes there is no ſuch need that Queſtions be ended, as for that purpoſe to introduce a neceſſitie of an Ender. But ſay you, neither are all ſuits in the Common-wealth ended; We reply, that yet truely thoſe Judges, who ſhould make no more haſt end them, then your Judge doth theſe, would deſerve to looſe his place, but this they235 do as faſt as the nature of the thing will permit; which being or depending upon matter of Fact, cannot be known enough to be judged before examination of witneſſes, and the like, be ended, and if they willingly deferre the ending, they are confeſs'd to be in fault by all men, but thoſe who hold Perjury to be none. But you ſeem to conceive our grounds faulty, as not leading even to a poſſible Unity, whereas to a poſſible one I am ſure they do, (ſince what is concluded out of them by many, may be by all) nay indeed am confident, that all who receive the Scripture for the onely rule, and believe what is there plain to be onely neceſſarie, would if they truely beleeved what they profeſſe, and were not lead aſide either by prejudice, or private ends, or ſome Popiſh relicks of holding what they have long been taught, or following the authority of ſome by them much eſteemed, perſons either alive or dead) ſoon agree in as much as is neceſſarie, and in concluding no neceſſity of agreeing in more, there being no doubt, but it would ſoone appear plainly what is plaine.
Beſides if no grounds be ſufficient for Unitie, which produce not the effect, then it ſeemes, the grounds of your grounds, thoſe Arguments, by which you prove, that there is a Judge, and a generall Councell is it, are inſufficient, ſince they are not able to make all Chriſtians about this queſtion: Again, although a Judge, and this Judge be received, yet this is ſtill an inſufficient ground for Unitie, ſince the Greek Church agree thus farre with you (which is as farre as you agree with236 one another) and yet are not ſo bound by it to any univerſall Unitie with them, but that they eſteem you Hereticks, and are eſteemed ſo by you: and if you ſay, that it is not, becauſe the grounds, upon which the Infallibilitie of the Church are built, lead not ſufficientlie to Unitie, that we joyne not with you in beleeving them to be infallible, not becauſe the determination of generall Councels is not a ſufficient meanes of Unitie, that the Greek Church admitting their authoritie, admits not of your opinions, but it is the fault of us (and of them) hardening our hearts againſt the truth; then we may as well ſay, that ſome of thoſe, who agree in our grounds, yet diſagree from our doctrine, not that the grounds lead not to Unitie, but that our Adverſaries will not be lead; or if (as you doe, and ſome others of you ſometimes) you confeſſe, that they through an innocent error diſſent from you, and doe this without any imputation in this reſpect to your grounds, I hope it will be lawfull for us to allow the ſame poſſipilitie, without any diſadvantage or prejudice to ours: Beſides, ſay you, though we agree to day, yet we may not to morrow, which to prove, were〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, paines whollie loſt, we confeſſe: For though Tully make it an expreſſion of his contempt to Piſo, in an Epiſtle to Atticus, Ita nihil eſt, ut plane quid erit, neſciat, yet I take it to be a true ſaying of man in generall, who knowes little of preſent things, and nothing of future; but this is common to us both, for if we change not our opinions, we ſhall agree as we doe, and if you237 change yours you ſhall not, which is poſſible, for not onelie that opinion of the Infallibilitie of your judges decrees may it ſelf be altered, which holdeth together all the reſt, but ſome of you may holding that ground (like the Greek, either change their opinions concerning the authority of ſuch or ſuch a Councell, as beleeving it unduelie called, factiouſlie carried, or not generall as is pretended, or not ſo conſenting as is requiſite) or differ from the reſt, concerning the ſence of the decrees: for whereas, you ſay, you agree that the Church is an infallible Miſtreſſe, and when ſhe interpoſeth her judgement, the controverſie is ended.
I anſwer, that, firſt, ſome of you, with whom I have ſpoken my ſelfe, hold, that the Churches authoritie in defining, extends no further then to ſuch points, whereof Tradition is of one part (as in many controverted there is, I beleeve, no ſuch) and that this rule ſhe may tranſgreſſe, and ſo erre.
Secondlie, Neither the Dominicans nor their Adverſaries, are very readie to remain in ſuſpence to await her deciſion, but define all readie concerning her definitions, Cum utraque pars tenax contendat ſuam non aliam poſſe definiri ſententiam, either part tenaciouſlie urging, that the contrarie opinion cannot be defined, which if they did to fright the Pope from defining, leaſt the condemned partie being even before, ſhould after make a Schiſme, they obtained their end.
Thirdlie, What are you the nearer to Unitie for your Infallible Miſtreſſe the Church, when238 you neither agree of any certaine and proper markes to know her by, nor when it is that ſhe interpoſeth her judgement; ſome take it to be the particular Church of Rome, others (of which number you are) all which communicate with her, ſuppoſing the firſt to be true, yet not being de fide, it will ſerve but ill by your rules to build our faith upon, and even when ſhe delivers her opinion is not certainlie agreed, whether the people of Rome be to have Votes, or onelie the Clergie, or of them, onelie the Pope with the Cardinals, or the Pope onelie without them, if the Pope, whether, onelie in his Chaire, and what circumſtances arc required to his decreeing in Cathedra, would beget more queſtions: If all that communicate with her (as you ſay, it is as things now ſtand.)
Firſt, I would know whether they be ſure to be at all times the Church, to that you refuſe to derermine, and ſo incluſivelie denie.
Secondlie, It is not poſſible, that ſuch a multitude ſhould ever give any ſentence explicitelie, nor can we ever know, that it hath even tacitelie done ſo, if they be to decree onelie by repreſentation, then how large a companie repreſents them with all their power, of whom that companie is to conſiſt, how many of them are to agree to make it a binding ſentence, &c. are things yet undefined, and like to be, and if any goe about to determine them, their power being it ſelfe ſtill a queſtion, could not end theſe: Therefore, whereas you ſay, that we have no definitive ſentence239 (beſides that truly to have one, and not to know when we have one, is much alike;) I anſwer, that whenſoever the Scripture ſhall ſeeme to us to have defined, we are according to our doctrine readie to yeeld, and ſo the controverſie is ended (and ſure the Scripture may be ſaid to be a definitive ſentence, as well as the written Councell of Trent) and till then, though we differ about interpretations of not plaine places, we have as much Unitie as you, who are not reſolved upon the ſence of manie decrees of that and other Councels: and if a deſire and diligence to finde the true meaning of them, and an aptneſſe to aſſent when it is found, be thought to ſecure among you, thoſe who miſtake the true ſence of theſe Councels, why ſhould not the ſame diſpoſition in us towards the Scripture, be thought every whit as ſufficient, not onely to keepe us in unitie, but to ſecure us from danger.
To conclude, though unitie be a thing much ſpoken of by you, yet I finde it chieflie onely in your diſcourſe; your differences are many and great, onelie you ſay, you agree in what is neceſſarie, and make the meaſure of things neceſſarie what you agree in, ſo the ſumme is, you agree in what you doe agree (which it is impoſſible you ſhould not, though you had carried away the bayes from Bibrias his Tombe) eager againſt us, and yet divided among your ſelves, like the ſtate of an Armie in Tacitus, Manente Legionum auxiliorumque, ubi adverſus Paganos certandum foret, conſenſu, and if your Church brag of ſuch an240 Unity, I perceive a ſmall matter will make her brag.
Reſp. Againe, I do confeſſe moſt Engliſh-men confeſſe a Trinity, the Incarnation and Paſsion of our Saviour, but if to morrow, any one or more of them light upon ſome Book of an Arrian, Trinitarian, or other Sect, ſo wittily written that he putteth probable ſolutions for the places of Scriptures, ſhewes ſlight waies how our well meaning fore-fathers may have ſlipped into ſuch an Error, what is there to retaine thoſe men from diſagreeing with the reſt of their Bretheren, and betake themſelves to the Arrians? And when the heat is paſt light upon ſome Rabbi, who ſhall cunningly exaggerate the abſurdities, (as he ſhall tearm them) of the Trinitie, Incarnation; Say our Saviour did ſtrange things in vertue of ſome Conſtellation, and delivering theſe things ſo Oratorically, that for a new heat, ſome of theſe things ſhall ſeem more conformable then his Arrianiſme, what then ſhall hinder this man to become a Jew, and at laſt to prove himſelf ſo great a Clerk as to write de tribus Impoſtoribus: Take away the power of the Church, which every man doth who taketh away the Infallibility, what can retaine any man why he ſhould not yeeld to that diſcourſe which ſeemeth faireſt, ſeeing nothing is certaine?
Repl. And if you ſhould meet with a book: which ſhould give probable ſolutions to the places of Scripture, and reaſons which you now think prove the authority of the Church, and bring other (though ſuppoſe but ſlight, yet ſuch as may ſeem ſtrong) Arguments to prove it not infallible, and241 ſhew waies of the ſame kind, how your anceſtors may have ſlipt in that, and by that into other errors, what is there to retaine you with the reſt of your Bretheren, and betaking your ſelfe to us? If you ſay this is impoſſible to be done, ſo think the Proteſtants, that the Arrians can give them no probable anſwer to their places of Scripture, and ſuch as will ſeem ſo to ſome, is no imputation to their grounds, ſince ſo may, and do our Anſwers and Objections to ſome of you, who thereupon leave you, and yet you count not your grounds diſparaged. For my part, I profeſſe my ſelf not onely to be an Anti-Trinitarian, but a Turk, whenſoever more reaſon appeares to me for that, then for the Contrary, and ſo ſure would you be too; for the pretended infallibility of your Church could no longer hold you, if you thought you ſaw reaſon to beleeve it fallible, as you muſt do, if all weighed, more reaſon appeared of her adverſaries ſide, either your proofes of her authority not to be probable, or elſe your Doctrinestaught by her, more contrary to reaſon, then her authority (though probably founded, yet not upon demonſtrations) is ſufficient to caution, and anſwer for; It is true, ſo long as you ſtick to this hold upon the Roman Church, you are ſure to receive no error, but which ſhe offers you, (and indeed you need not, for thoſe are enough) but that deſtroied (which is apter to be deſtroied then moſt of the Proteſtants, as weaklier ſupported by reaſon) then no error that a Proteſtant may fall into, but ſo may you too, and the other is but ſuch a242 Priviledge, as I may have by ſticking to the Engliſh Church, as well as you to the Roman; And though this following your guide, may be able, as long as ſhe keep her ſelf, to keep you from ſome Ditches, into which you might otherwiſe fall, yet it may lead you unto others, and indeed there is no error but by this way you are liable too, yea, even of thoſe which ſhe now condemnes, ſince though ſhe changed her opinion, which is neither impoſſible, nor unlawfull, yet you are by your blind obedience to believe that ſhe had not, and to ſubmit your underſtanding in this Queſtion to ſome diſtinction, though without a difference. Theſe things then I diſlike in what you ſay.
Firſt, Your ſaying, as though there is nothing to retain a Proteſtant from being of any error, when it ſhall appeare more probable to him then Truth, therefore there were nothing to keep him from thoſe errors, whereas you ſhould have conſidered, that the greater probabilities may ſerve reaſonably to hold him without a demonſtration, and the evidence of the thing, without a guide, and that if thoſe be not ground enough for a man to fix upon, in how ill eſtate are thoſe of your Church, in the Queſtion concerning the Church, in which they follow no guide, nor have any demonſtration, but profeſſe they yeeld to her authority, but upon prudentiall motives, which kind of arguments ſure may as well, and as fixedly preſerve a Proteſtant in an Orthodox opinion againſt a Heretick, as the authoritie of the Church no ſurelier founded, can you againſt us: That every man243 ſhould yeeld to that diſcourſe which ſeemeth faireſt to him, I confeſſe, it is alwaies, not onelie ſafe and fit, but alſo neceſſarie, even for them who receive the Infallibilitie of the Church, ſince thoſe who beleeve that, beleeve it, becauſe that appeares faireſt to them, and as you object to us, the poſſibilitie of being perſwaded from the truth by ſome wittie Author, why thinke you not the ſame Author may poſſiblie too, appeare to you to deſtroy your prudentiall Motives, and ſo conſequentlie your whole Faith, which is built upon the Church, which is built upon them.
Secondlie, I diſlike your ſeeming to beleeve, that any grounds, which are not demonſtrative, are too ſlipperie to reſt upon, as not onelie being contrarie to reaſon, but to your ſelfe, who told me before, that no more was required, then a maine advantage on one ſide, and that we had reaſon to be ſatisfied with Probabilities to guide our Actions in Religion, or ſince by them we were content to regulate all the other Actions of our life.
Thirdlie, I diſlike in your own parties behalfe your ſaying, that a Proteſtant is in good likelihood to turne Arrian (for if you meane onelie that it is poſſible, it concernes you as much as them) ſince this ſeemes to inferre, that the Scriptures doe make more probablie for them (which if they did, it is not Hereſie) and to contradict all thoſe, whom both parts call Fathers, who thinke enough plaine in Scripture, not onely to keepe, but alſo to convert men from Arrianiſme, as it appeares,244 by their employing ſo ſolelie thoſe Armes againſt them, that they needed the admonition of a Heretique, to counſell them to the uſe of another.
Fourthlie, I diſlike your ſaying, that after being made an Arrian, he is not unlikelie to turne Jew, eſpeciallie, that he is likelie to be perſwaded by any exaggeration of the Abſurdities in the Trinitie, ſince both Grotius and other Authors, ſeeme to ſay, that the Jewes have their Trinitie too in the ſame Notion, and howſoever the Arrian is ſo fullie perſwaded alreadie, that thoſe are abſurdities (that perſwaſion being almoſt the forme of that opinion which conſtitutes him an Arrian) yet the exaggeration of them can never worke upon him; And for the Conſtellation you ſpeak of, it were ſo irrationall, and ſo unprovable a Crotchet, that no Oratorie could ever make it ſeeme to a reaſonable man, to have any inclination to ſence (and a foole may be made beleeve any thing, how contrarie ſoever to his grounds) unleſſe he be of thoſe, who are given over to vaine imaginations, becauſe they love darkneſſe better then the light, and the fault of no particular mens understanding or will, is to lead any man to condemne his grounds, for they are to be accuſed, not of whatſoever he concludes who holds (or rather in this caſe hath held) them, but onelie of what he concludes reaſonablie according to them. Beſides, for this cauſe it appeares ſtrange to me, that truſting to Scripture alone, and without, meaning the Church, for my certaine guide, ſhould bring a man into danger or parting with his Chriſtianitie,245 ſince nothing can hold a man longer then he beleeves it, and as long as our ground, the Scripture, is by him beleeved, no man can poſſiblie turne either Atheiſt, or Jew; and he who leaves to beleeve your ground, the Church, cannot by that be any more with-held from either: Beſides that, I thinke it is impoſſible (I am ſure it is irrationall) that any of you ſhould beleeve in Chriſt, upon the authoritie of Chriſts Church, ſince beleeving the latter (which claimes no authoritie but from Chriſt) praeſuppoſeth the beleife of him, and ſo Chriſtianitie is not the apter to be overthrown through the abſence of that, upon which it is not built: I feare rather, leaſt your doctrine known to be grounded it ſelfe upon Tradition by ſuch a way, according to which, a Jew would have much advantage of a Chriſtian, may incline a man to Judaiſme, and your ſides generall ſlighting all waies of knowing Gods will, but onely by the Church, and then neither proving her power ſtronglier, nor teaching how to know her plainer, may make men ſinke into Atheiſme, by being perſwaded by you, in letting goe other ſtrong holds upon Truth, and receiving ſuch weake ones from you. Not to ſpeake of your loading Chriſtianitie with ſuch impoſſibilities as the Pillars of it, which are not abſolute Demonſtrations (of which it may be ſcarce any thing is in nature capable but lines and numbers) are able to beare, and uſing all your Wits and Induſtries to perſwade men, that it is equallie unſafe to refuſe any part of your Religion, as to receive none; and ſo inſtead of246 making theſe your beleefs admitted for the ſake of Chriſtianitie, cauſing Chriſtianitie to be rejected becauſe of them.
Reſp. But peradventure ſome may attribute Power to the Church without infallibilitie, whom I would have conſider but what himſelf ſaith. For his Church by the Power it hath muſt either ſay I command you to believe, or I command you to profeſſe this, whether you believe me or no. The ſecond, I think no enemy of equivocation will admit, and the former it is as much as if it ſhould ſay, I know not whether I ſay true or no, yet you muſt think I ſay true.
Repl. We having received a command, that all things be done decently, and in order, and this being to be appointed by them, whom either the Law of the Land, (if that conſiſt of faithfull) or the conſent or cuſtome of Chriſtians hath appointed, for Eccleſiaſticall Rulers in this matter, in every place the Church (thus reſtrained to the Governours of the Church) may have in ſome caſes (though not to your purpoſe) power without the leaſt Infallibilitie. And for inſtruction (which you aime at) no Church can give it, yours eſpecially being too large a body ever to meet or joyn in doing it, and if you reſtraine the Church to the Cleargie, (whereof yet many teach not, and they too are too many for any man to be ſure what they all agree in teaching, and when they differ, how ſhall I know which to follow, otherwiſe then by your Rule which I have anſwered) their duty indeed, but not theirs onely, (though Principally) is to inſtruct us in the way to Heaven, which they247 doing in the Perſons of Embaſſadors between God and us, and having no abſolute Letters of Credence to bid us to beleeve that God ſaies, whatſoever they ſay, he ſaies, (as much as can be wreſted out of Scriptures for any preſent Church, being ſaid of the Scribes and Phariſees, who yet proved themſelves not infallible) our beſt way is in my mind to examine their Commiſſion, and if they can ſhew that they treat according to that, to ſubmit to them, (as in the ſame caſe we muſt to any of the Layetie) or rather to God, of whoſe commands they are but Organs, and if not, to beware of their Leaven. Yet it may be that ſome man may hold that ſuch an opinion is to be beleeved onelie, becauſe ſuch a Church propoſeth it, and yet not believe her Infallible, ſince he may think her authoritie (by reaſon of her Learning, Multitude, Sanctitie, Unitie and Libertie) to be more probable then any contradicting argument, and that men are to aſſent to what is moſt probable, and truelie if he could prove to me his Major, I am alreadie ſo much of the opinion of his Minor, that I ſhould joyne with him in his Concluſion.
Reſp. So that if I underſtand any thing, where there is no Infallibility, there is no Power; where no Power, no Unity; where no Unity, no Entity; where no Entity, no Church.
Repl. How you tie Power to Infallibilitie I gueſſe, but cannot how you tie Unitie to Power: For how many things are all men even at Unitie about, though one have no Power over another in them, onelie cemented together by their clear evidence. 248And how many more do whole Bodies, and Sects of men agree about without any ſuch power, though they differ in other points, as ſo do you too; Do not Proteſtants agree with you about manie, and the chiefeſt credenda, and about almoſt all the meerely facienda? Though not perſwaded to this agreement by the Power of any Judge which they do acknowledge; Nay if men could be at Unitie about no thing, which were not propoſed by ſome Guide, or defined by ſome Judge endued with ſuch a power, how came all you to agree, that there is ſome ſuch Guide and Judge required, ſince ſure you receive not that upon its own authoritie, and if men may find the neceſſitie of a Guide and Judge, without any Guide or Judge, and remain in Unitie about that, why may they not alſo about whatſoever is clearly taught by God, which reaſon aſſures us to be all that is neceſſarie, and if you ſay that all things neceſſarie are not clearlie taught, becauſe we do not (though it proves not that we might not) agree upon them, then I replie, that I may as well ſay, that neither is it cleare that there is a Guide, becauſe we diſſent from you in it, although receiving the authoritie of the Scripture (out of which Cardinall Perron confeſſeth, that Saint Auſtine ſaith, that both the neceſſitie of your guide, the Church, and ſhe her ſelf, are to be known) and reaſon, which as they may be plain in this point for you, and yet perſwade us not, ſo may they be in all neceſſarie points, and yet we who make theirs our ground, not perſwade one another.
249As little ſee I why there can be no Entitie nor Church, where there is no Unitie.
For the firſt, though there be ſmall Unitie among Chriſtians, yet certainly Chriſtians and their Religion have ſome Entitie, indeed if what you ſay were true, there were no Entitie in yours.
For the ſecond, I know not why two parties over-valuing their differences may not conceive each other to be none of the Church, and ſo declare even by excommunications, and yet remain both Parts of it, (for if a Husband miſſe-ſuſpecting his Wife of Adulterie, declare her to be no longer his Wife, this cannot make her give over being ſo, if the bond be indeed not broken) as well as Chryſoſtome and Epiphanius, both excommunicated by each other, and yet both Saints, or as particular men may by your own confeſſion be interiorly in the Church, although ſeeming out of it, even to the Church her ſelf, and ſo thoſe be both of the Church between whom there is no Unity: For not onely in your own Cariophilus his words〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but alſo though the perſons have power, yet if the cauſe have not ſufficiencie, I take you to agree, that an excommunication is but a brutum fulem, as Victors of the Aſian Biſhops: The beſt therefore and ſtricteſt definition (and which I think you will not refute) which I can give for the Church, is (eſpecially in that ſence, as out of it there can be no ſalvation) thoſe who are deſirous to know Gods Will, (or Chriſts at250 the ſtricteſt, for I am not certaine, nor I beleeve is it defined among you, whether an explicite knowledge of Chriſt be abſolutely neceſſarie to Salvation, though I know no guiltleſſe ignorance of him, can bring unavoidably upon any man eternall torments) and ready, when known, to beleeve and follow it; and ſure many of theſe may eternally diſagree even in points which are neceſſarie, abſtracting from particular caſes, and yet their differences not exclude them from the Church, and conſequentlie a Church may be without Unitie, Quod erat demonſtrandum.
Reſp. Now for the Controverſies mentioned, beſides that there is a meanes to terminate them, they be ſuch as bring no breach of the ancient life and action of Chriſtians, which all thoſe opinions do, which for the moſt part are reputed to make Hereticks.
Repl. You ſaw verie well, that if [no Unitie, no Church] were a true Propoſition, yours hath in it differencies enough to deſtroy its being a Church, and therefore are faine to applie what ſalves you can, but all in vaine: For your meanes to terminate them, doth not make them not to be before they are terminated, and conſequently by your Rule yours is no Church till then. Beſides, their bringing to breach of the ancient life and action of Chriſtians proves not but one of them may be a Hereſie, ſince you ſay not your ſelfe, that all Hereſies are ſuch; but onelie for the moſt part; and indeed to prove that, you muſt be able to ſet down what thoſe opinions are, which before a definition may make a Heretick, which I beleeve you251 will not venture to doe in haſte, though we much deſire it at your hands, that we may know if none of them be ſuch.
Reſp. That ſome controverſies amongſt us are not reſolved, is a thing neceſſarie amongſt humane affaires, where things muſt have a time to be born, to encreaſe, to fall, and the greater things are, the greater is their Period.
Repl. It is true, that ſome time to be taken notice of muſt paſſe between an opinions riſing, and being condemned; but that ſo long they ſhould run on, and many of your Councels having ſince been held, is ſure not neceſſarie, and ſhewes, that you eſteem not Unitie ſo neceſſarie as you pretend: ſome opinions I am ſure you can ſoon enough quaſh, as that not long ſince riſen in Spaine concerning Fornication being but a Veniall Sin: And whereas you ſay, the greater things are, the greater their period, though this be ture in ſome things, yet not in this, for ſure the greater a difference is, the greater neceſſitie is there that it be ſoon decided, and ſo if your deciſion have power to effect it, as you pretend among you it hath, it muſt fall as ſoon as it is born, like the〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Creatures that live but a day.
Reſp. Wherefore I do not ſee why this may hurt the Church, more then the ſuits, which hang in our Courts, prejudice the government of the Land.
Repl. If any of theſe opinions be of that importance, as that though uncondemn'd the Holders are Hereticks, as ſome may be, and my definition being concluded of ſuch among you, ſome of theſe252 may be ſome of them, then ſure they hurt the Church much, and more then the Suites hurt the Government, which their hanging hurts not at all, though it hurts (ſometimes unavoidablie) the Parties. But if where there is no Unitie, there were no Common-wealth, as you ſay, where there is no Unitie, there can be no Church, then the Government were much prejudic'd by the Suits, as your Church by this rule, is made no Church by the differences; And indeed if men were not agreed about the power of the Governours (as you are not about ſome of your queſtions) it muſt be a maime to the government of any Common-wealth, as conſequentlie theſe are to the goverment of your Church.
Reſp. The laſt point of the Authors diſcourſe is, to ſhew how errors might have crept in, wherein I ſhall have no oppoſition with him, for I doe not thinke the queſtion is, how they ſhould creep in, but how they ſhould be kept out.
Repl. Here Sir, I cannot but beleeve, that you intended to refreſh your ſelfe with ſome Mirth, as with Muſicke between the Acts; for though both our ends be, that errors ſhould not creep in, yet the queſtion was, whether it were poſſible that they might creepe in, and to my affirmative part it conduced to ſhew thoſe waies, by which either they have entred, or eaſilie might doe ſo, this ſhewing how they may ſteale in, teacheth how to keep them out, as it is an aide to the ſaving of a Town, to diſcover the breaches, which cannot be guarded without they be firſt known.
253Reſp. For the Fluxibility of humane Nature is ſo great, that it is no wonder if errors ſhould have crept in, the wayes being ſo many; but it is a great wonder of God that none ſhould have crept in. This nevertheleſſe I may ſay, if the Author will confeſſe, as I thinke he will not deny, but that it is diſputable, whether any error in ſixteen Ages hath crept in, this very thing is above Nature. For if there were not an excellency beyond the nature: of corruptible things, it would be undeniably evident, that not one or two, but thouſands of errors had quite changed the ſhape of the Church in ſo many yeares, tempeſts, diſ-unions, want of Commerce in the body of the Church.
Repl. The greater wonder it were, if your Church had no error, the greater it is to me, that upon one, at moſt but probable, Reaſon, you ſhould require all men to beleeve ſhe hath none; Neither doth it appeare to me diſputable, whether ſhe have or no, but evident, that ſhe hath, not by Demonſtrations, yet by Probabilities of that multitude, and weight upon which you ſay (and ſay trulie) that in all other caſes we relie, and venture that we moſt eſteem: whereas indeed you, as you are of the impoſing Partie, ought to bring at leaſt ſuch proofes, that you are fallen into none, and as you are of the Infallibilitie-pretending-partie, your proofes are likewiſe to riſe from probable to Infallible: Neither doe I conceive it to be probablie argued, it is diſputable, whether this bodie of men have ever let in any error, therefore it can never let in any, ſince it is at leaſt as diſputable, whether the Grecians have let in any, yet you will not allow,254 that upon this we ſhould adjudge to her Infallibilitie: Nay if it were demonſtrative, that your Church had yet never erred, yet it would but unwillinglie follow, that ſhe never could, ſince all things neceſſarie are ſo plaine (without the confeſſion of which you ſeeme to tax God) and it is naturallie ſo plaine what is plaine, that I cannot but thinke it a miracle, that ſome one bodie of Chriſtians among ſo many, ſhould be free from any ſuch dogmaticallie-defended error, eſpeciallie if Truth were ſo indifferentlie ſought after as it ought to be, and Paſſion were not often called to counſell, and Reaſon ſhut out of doores.
Reſp. But this one Maxime, that ſhe receiveth her Faith by Tradition, and not from Doctors hath ever kept her entire: And he that will ſhew the contrary, muſt ſhew how it ſhould come to paſſe, that thoſe, who lived in ſuch an Age, would ſay unto our Children, this we received from our fore-fathers, as taught them by our fore-fathers, to have been received from Chriſt and his Apoſtles from hand to hand, which if it could not be, the queſtion is reſolved, that no error is in the Church of God, which holdeth her faith upon that Tenure.
Repl. Not to repeat, uſque ad nauſeam, what I have heretofore anſwered, as that others differing from you, hold upon the ſame Tenure that your ſelves have not alwaies held, nor hold not upon it, &c. I will onelie tell you what Cardinall Perron tels me of the Jewes out of Iſidore, and that is, that they ſeeing in the book of Wiſedome ſo cleare proofes of Chriſt, plotted together to put it out of the255 Canon, which ſerves not ſo much his turne, if it were ſo, as it makes againſt yours, and ſhews how that might come to paſſe, which you judge impoſſible, the Poſteritie of the Jewes having been deceived by this Complot; although pretending at leaſt, and for ought appeares, beleeving that the Tradition of their Church is ſtill uncorrupted.
Reſp. And truely if the Author deſires to examine divers Religions, let him look their maine ground wherein they relie, and ſee whether that be good or no: And I think amongſt Chriſtians he ſhall find but two, Tradition, and Scripture,
Repl. Firſt, I allow not of your diviſion, for not to ſay now that you relie not onely upon Tradition, theſe Proteſtants, whoſe part in this I take, depend not onelie upon Scripture, but upon Univerſall Tradition too, from which they receive that, and would more, if more ſeemed as clearly to them ſo to be delivered.
Secondly, I think it reaſonable not onely to examine what their Principles are, but whether they do conſtantly follow them, for a man may write awrie, that hath a ſtreight Ruler, if he obſerve it not carefully.
Reſp. And the Catholiques onely to relie upon Tradition, and all the reſt upon Scripture; and he ſhall ſee, that relying upon Scripture cannot draw to an Unitie thoſe who relie upon it, and more then one cannot relie upon Tradition.
Repl. If all that relie upon Tradition be Catholicks, you muſt admit the Eaſtern Churches into your256 Communion, although you now account them both Sciſmaticks and Hereticks: If all Catholicks do relie upon Tradition as their onelie grounds, and Tradition be ſo ſure and infallible, and unmiſtakable a deliverer, as you would perſwade us, how come ſo manie differences between you, ſome ever counting thoſe things matter of Faith which others do not; which differences ſhew, if they all relie on theſe Queſtions, upon the ground you ſay they do, that more then one may relie upon Tradition, and neither can Tradition, any more then Scripture, draw to an Unitie, thoſe who relie upon it; if either neither part do, or either do not, then Tradition is not the Common Tenure of Catholicks, (not onelie in different opinions, but even in ſuch as are moſt de fide, and as both parts think nothing but a definition (and ſome ſcarce that) to make the Holders of the contrary to them Hereticks) ſince if it were, neither could one part of Catholicks relie upon any other then the Catholick ground, neither is it to be doubted, but that ſide which builds their opinion upon an Hereticall foundation againſt another, beleeved upon a Catholick ground, would long agone have been among you exploded, and the Pope have been not onelie with ſo much paines perſwaded, but even of himſelfe readie to have paſt his cenſure upon them; if not for their ſuperſtructions, yet for their foundation.
Reſp. If I will be a Chriſtian, I muſt be of one ſide.
Repl. If you mean I muſt be of one ſide, that is take one of theſe grounds, I anſwer, That I take both257 one from the other, Scripture from Tradition, though not from the preſent Tradition of a Part, but from the Univerſall one of the firſt Chriſtians oppoſed by none, but by them, who were inſtantlie counted by the generallitie heterodox, and as ſoon oppoſed as known. If you mean that I muſt be of one ſide in points, I whollie denie any ſuch neceſſitie.
Reſp. By falling on the one ſide, I ſee my fortune in thouſands who have gone before me, to wit, that I ſhall be to ſeek all my life time, as I ſee they are, and how greatlie they magnifie verie weak pieces. On the other ſide, I ſee everie man who followeth, as farr as he followeth it, is at quiet.
Repl. I ſee not but the greateſt part of thoſe who take the ground which you miſlike, are yet ſetled and confident enough in their opinion, and if they continued alwaies ſeeking Truth for the love of it, I know not why they ſhould be the leſſe likely to find Heaven: Neither think I that you will ſay (nay it is plaine by your own words, that you will not ſay) that Saint Auſtine had been damned if he had died in his ſearch, nor conſequently any other in his caſe. And whereas you ſay, that all who follow the other, are at quiet as farr as they follow it, I anſwer, So are all who fixedly beleeve themſelves to follow an infallible (although indeed a falſe) Guide, as the Mahumetans, being led by their Mufty,: Which proves Quiet, no ſufficient caution for Truth, nor Securitie for Safetie, and that, ſuppoſing yours the more eaſie and ſatisfying way, it followes not that it is the more reaſonable:258 And for what you ſay of a mans duty to judge himſelf rigorouſly, whether he ſeek as he ought, I ſubſcribe to that opinion, and approve of your Councell.
Reſp. Beſides this, he muſt have this care, that he ſeek what the Nature of the ſubject can yeeld, and not as theſe Phyſitians, who when they have promiſed no leſſe then immortality, can at laſt onely reach, to ſome conſervation of health, or youth in ſome ſmall degree; So I could wiſh the Author well to aſſure himſelf, Firſt, that there is poſsible an infallibilitie, before he be to earneſt to be contented with nothing leſſe. For, what if humane nature ſhould not be capable of ſo great a good, would he therefore think fitting to live without any Religion, becauſe he could not get ſuch a one as himſelf deſired, though with more then a mans wiſh.
Repl. What you now ſay, I confeſſe is very rationall, (as indeed all you ſay, is as much as your cauſe will ſuffer) and I require you not therefore to prove your opinions to be infallible by infallible arguments, as neceſſarie to be done in it ſelf, but as neceſſarie to be done by them, of whoſe opinions their Churches infallibilitie is not onelie a part, but a ground, and that the chief, if not the onelie one, and of which an infallible certaintie is the firſt and main condition of their Communion, and our want of it, one of their maine Objections againſt us.
Reſp. He that will make a judgement in an Art he is not Maſter in, if he be deceived, it is to be imputed to himſelf. The Phraſe commandeth us to believe every259 man in his Art, he who knoweth and underſtandeth himſelfe beleeveth not. Therefore when wee ſee Maſters in an Art, we are not skild in, oppoſe us, we may beleeve we are in the wrong, which will breed this Reſolution in the Author of the diſcourſe, that if himſelf be not skild in all thoſe waies in which he purſues his ſearch, he muſt find himſelf obleiged to ſeek Maſters, who be both well skilled, and the matter being ſubject to faction alſo, very honeſt, and upright men, or elſe he doth not quitt himſelf before God.
Repl. Truelie I am farr from being Maſter either in this or any other Art, but if for this cauſe I ought to doubt, and becauſe much learneder perſons oppoſe me, I ought to beleeve my ſelf in the wrong, then ſo ought thoſe of your part to do; who are as Ignorant as I, we having many much more learned then they who oppoſe them, and take our part, though therefore I think not of my ſelf (what Tully in a Complement would perſwade one of his Friends, that Nemo eſt qui ſapientùs mihi poſsit ſuadere meipſo, yet I dare not chuſe (as you would have me) ſome Maſter to ſearch for me, and beleeve him blind-fold, (though if I would, I ſee no cauſe why to chuſe any from among you, who have ſo many able Teachers at home (for you confeſſing that the matters are ſubject to Faction, and it being certaine, that not onelie who are honeſt is impoſſible to be known, but that eagerneſſe and deſire to have, what they think Truth, prevaile, makes even the honeſt men ſometimes deviate from the line of exact honeſtie,260 and lie for God, which he not onelie needs not, but forbids, (as is to be ſeen too frequentlie in the Quotations of both ſides) I conceive it the beſt way to follow my own Reaſon, ſince I know I have no will to cozen my ſelf, as they may have to cozen me: Eſpecially ſince neither could I build upon ſuch a way, an aſſent of ſuch a degree, as your Church requires, ſince ſuch Maſters, although learned, which I being unlearned may be deceived in, and honeſt, which all men might be deceived in, yet not infallible, could not in reaſon make me infallibly certaine of the Orthodoxneſſe of that ſide, which they ſhould chuſe for me: So that what was ſaid by the Pagan Solomon Socrates, (who yet was no confident man of his knowledge) 〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, is my reſolution too, and indeed in effect if not whollie, yet almoſt every mans, for thoſe who truſt their Reaſon leaſt, yet truſt it in this, that ſome other inſtead of it is to be truſted, and ſo chuſe who they are to truſt, againſt which the Arguments either from the fallibilitie of Reaſon in generall, or in this particular remaine equally, an ignorant man being as likely to be deceived in the choice of his Guide, as in that of his Way, and that courſe being rather the ſhorter then the better, as venturing in the ſame, and no ſtronger a Bark, onelie venturing all his wealth at once.
Reſp. It is not all one not to incurre damnation for infidelitie, and to be in ſtate of damnation; for the man to whom infidelitie is not imputed, may be in261 ſtate of damnation for other faults; as thoſe were, who having known God by his works, did not glorifie him as they ought.
Repl. That men may be damned for other faults concernes not our Queſtion, nor indeed is any.
Reſp. Nay, they may be damned for want of Faith, and yet not be damned for incredulitie, As for example ſake, if when they have ſinned, they know not what meanes to have them forgiven, though they be without fault in not beleeving, nevertheleſſe dying without Remiſsion of ſin, they are not in ſate to come to life everlaſting.
Repl. This concernes no Chriſtians, none of which that I know differs from you in the neceſſarie meanes of obtaining forgiveneſſe for ſinnes, for though you require Confeſſion, yet you allow that Contrition will ſave without it: Neither do I believe, but an imperfect Repentance cauſed through faultleſſe Ignorance, of what it is for it to be perfect, will ſtill be accepted by him who reguards the Heart more then the Action; indeed onelie the Action, becauſe of the Heart, and knowes, that if he uſe not the appointed meanes, it is onelie becauſe he knowes it not, elſe conſidering the manie impoſitions from above the great frailtie within, and the great and manie temptations without, ſo that to fall into no ſin, were morally impoſſible, he who〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, generally obſerved what he counted himſelf bound to obſerve, if for ſome faults which he was after heartilie ſorry for, and had ſincerelie reformed, he ſhould be damned for want of knowing more,262 how to purge himſelf from them then he could poſſiblie know, God would not be deſirous of the Salvation of all men, and it would ſeem agreeable to no Mercy, nor to any Juſtice, except that Summum jus, which ever hath been thought condemnable in man, and conſequentlie incompatible in God.
Reſp. As the man who ſhould venture into a wood without a Guide, although he did his beſt to have a guide, nothing leſſe might fall out of his way as well as he who neglected the taking of one; ſo if God ſent us his Son to ſhew us the way of Salvation, as well is he like not to be ſaved who never heard of ſuch a way, as he that heard of it and neglected it, for neither of the two goeth that way: And who goeth not on the way, is not like to come to the end.
Repl. The way is beleeving and obeying Chriſt, for them to whom He and his Commands are ſufficientlie propoſed, I mean ſo, that it is their fault if they know them not: In generall then, it is ſeeking the Truth impartially, and obeying diligently what is found ſincerely, and who treads this way, though he miſſe of Truth, ſhall not miſſe of his favour who is the Father of it, and if he be excluded Heaven, ſure God meant that he ſhould never come thither, and deſires not that he and all elſe ſhould, elſe he would not have propoſed onelie ſuch a way, which if it were poſſible for any to miſſe without his own fault, and which he knew that many would. Truely, that no opinion, that no error is a ſin without the cauſe of it be one; and that God is not diſpleaſed with any man for not263 ſeeing what it is not his fault that he doth not ſee, is agreeable to the common Notions of Juſtice, and God, and it is a verie good Negative way to trie ſuperſtructions by, to ſee whether they agree with theſe grounds of all Religion, whereof, rather then beleeve ſuch men ſhould be damned, I would beleeve they ſhould be annihilated, or keep your Children companie, and have poenam damni, though not ſenſus.
Reſp. I know God is good and mercifull: But I know his decrees as farr as we know are diſpenced by the order of ſecond Cauſes, and where we ſee no ſecond Cauſes, we cannot preſume of the effects; and how am I aſſured he will ſend Angels to illuminate ſuch men as do their endeavours, that their Soules may not periſh.
Repl. A carefull ſearch of Gods, and incluſively Chriſts will, and readineſſe to obey it, is ſecond Cauſe enough; For, for want of that ſecond cauſe, we muſt not ſuppoſe any thing to the diſhonour of of the Firſt. As to beleeve, that they ſhould be ſo puniſht who do their endeavours, is to lay their damnation to Gods charge: One of the chiefe waies with which the Ancients oppoſed the Pagans, was ſhewing them that their Religion taught ſuch things of their Gods, as no Reaſon would allow not to be diſhonourable to the Diety. Now truely if when by this Argument we have rooted out the Pagan Gods, we lay as ſtrange imputations upon the God of the Chriſtians, what effect is it likely to produce, but onely to make men call for their old Gods againe, and think that we had as good kept thoſe, who delighted in the Sacrifices of men,264 who depoſed their Fathers, and eat their Children, as have changed hardly for the better. It is reported in the Eccleſiaſtical Hiſtory that a Painter for drawing Chriſt in the likeneſſe of Jupiter, had his hand dried up, and certainlie they who figure him to themſelves, and others with Attributes ſo contrary to his, and more fit for a Jupiter, do him much more wrong, then if they had drawn him Tela triſulca tenentem, with a thunder bolt in his hand. What Maſter, Father, or King, would not be eſteemed a Tyrant, who ſhould inflict not onelie an infinite, and an eternall, but a ſlight and a ſhort puniſhment upon a Servant, Child, or Subject, for not doing when commanded, what the Commanders ſaw with all his endeavours, which he had diligently applied, he could not do; and ſhall we lay ſuch an aſperſion upon that God, (who though he be Juſtice it ſelf, is more Mercifull then Juſt, who is〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Father of Mercies) as that like a Pharaoh, he ſhould exact Brick, when there is no poſſibilitie of getting Straw. You may beleeve what you think fit, but rather then I will beleeve that any mans Soule that hath done his endeavours, not onelie ſhall, but that it is poſſible it ſhould periſh, (although not illuminated by Angels, which yet, if Illumination were neceſſarie, I know ſome way or other he ſhould have) rather then I will beleeve, either that any be damned for what is no ſin, or that ſin is〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, ſomewhat out of our power, (which if we thought, it would be ſoon out of our care) rather then when God hath ſo often told us, That265 he deſires not the death of a ſinner, I will give him the lie, and ſay, that he deſires his damnation, even as a Creature without any reference to his ſin, by chalking out onelie ſuch a way from Hell, which it was impoſſible for his ſearch to lead him into, and ſo make him as much a worſe Father then Satan, as to damne is worſe then to devoure; rather I ſay then this, I will make yours, or the Pagan Legend, Ovids Metamorphoſis, my Creed; nor would I be a member of the Chriſtian Church, if this beliefe were a neceſſaries part of Chriſtian Religion, but ſhould crie out with Averroes, (whom Tranſubſtantiation kept a Pagan) Sit anima mea cum Philoſophis, for the excellencie, and puritie of the doctrine in all other points tending wholly to the honour of God, and the common happineſſe of man, he ſanctified life, conſtant ſufferings, and wonderfull Miracles of the Divulgers of it, the wonderfull progreſs of it, (not a much leſſe Miracle then they) the weak things of the World confounding the ſtrong, and Fiſhermen confuting Philoſothers, that a Doctrine to ſtrict and contrarie to humane deſires, and not onelie barring from ſo much pleaſure and glory, but alſo makeing the Sectators liable to ſuch crueltie and contempt, ſhould perſwade ſo manie, and ſo wiſe perſons to leave preſent things in hope of future, all this and whatſoever elſe, any Raimond, Seband, Vives, Pleſiis, Charron, or Grotius, could either more ſharply deſigne, or more eloquentlie expreſſe, would not reaſonablie prevaile, if ſuch a block as ſuch a Doctrine were laid in the way, (of which266 ſort your Religion hath yet more) and that one dead flie would corrupt the whole ointment; the excellencie of the reſt of the Doctrine of Chriſtianitie would be thought the Art, and the great and and manie miracles would be thought the Act of ſome evill Genius, ſuch as befriended Apollonius, to enſnare men by thoſe meanes into the beleef of that opinion, which ſo much derogates from the Maker of things, and the prevailing of it, though a very probable argument, would not ſerve for a Paſſe-Port to ſuch an impoſſibilitie.
Reſp. But farr more do I doubt, whether ever man, who had not the way of Chriſt, or even of thoſe who walked in it, did ever do his beſt (except ſome few, and very few, perhaps not two of Chriſt his greateſt Favourites) and was not ſo culpable, that his Perdition would not have been imputed unto himſelf. God of his mercie put us in the ſcore of thoſe of whom he ſaith, He will take pittie upon whom he pleaſeth, and Compaſſion of them he pittieth.
Repl. How few their number is we will not diſpute, ſince Gods juſtice is in them vindicated, and they, not He, the Author of their damnation. But neither beleeve I, that God is ſo rigorouſly juſt, as to ſtand readie to catch at a ſlip, (like an Uſurer for the forfeiture of a bond) but is of long ſuffering and Patience, and will as well accept our Repentance, (joyned with amendment for this neglect in our ſearch, as for other ſinns: Howſoever I am ſo farre from thinking your prayer needleſſe, that I both thank you for it humbly, and joyne with you in it heartilie; but〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
267To conclude, I am to make two very contrary excuſes; The one that my Paper hath left ſome things in yours unanſwered: The other, that I have anſwered others too often.
Of the firſt, I proteſt (which the Reader will beleeve me in) nothing is left out, in which I conceived any weight of Argument lay, but onelie ſuch things, as though they were ſuperfluous for the Logick, yet conduced to the Rhetorick of your work, an eloquent Treatiſe, being alwaies like a hopefull young Man, in quo aliquid amputandum.
Of the Second, My Method, or rather my no Method was one, and your own Repetitions another Reaſon, ſo that you may the better pardon me that fault, of which your ſelf are a partie-cauſe.
But to ſeale up all, I deſire you, that how little aſſent ſoever you give to my Arguments, you will be pleaſed to give credit to my Aſſertions, when I ſeriouſly profeſſe my ſelfe,
AFter much debate concerning the fitteſt expreſsion of my duty to your Lordſhip, whether I ought by ſilence, ſeek to ſuſpend your beleife of the declaration of my ſelfe, I have made here, or by a clear profeſsion of it, aſſure you of what I may onely feare to preſent you with, as apprehenſive of a miſ-interpreted affection; I conclude, what was moſt ſatiſfactory to my firſt, and immediate duty to God, was moſt juſtifiable to my ſecond; and derivative to Nature. Therefore I reſolved ſo ſoone, to give you this ingenious accompt of my ſelfe: The greateſt part of my life capable of diſtinction of Religions, hath been imployed in places, and converſant with perſons, oppoſite to the Faith I was bred in, therefore it had been ſtrange, if Naturall curioſity, without any ſpirituall provocation, had not invited to the deſire of looking with mine own eyes upon the foundation I ſtood upon, rather there holding faſt blindfold by my education, to agree to be carried away alwayes after it, inſenſible of all ſhocks I met to unfaſten me, and beſides, I was ſolicited with the reproaches Proteſtants270 preſſe upon Catholicks, that they blindly beleeve all the Impoſtures of the Church, without any illumination of the Judgements, this my thoughts injoyned, the cleareſt information of my ſelfe of the differences between us I could propoſe to my capacity.
So at my laſt journey into Italy, I did imploy all my leaſure to a more juſtifiable ſettlement of my beleife, as I then imagined, by a confirmation of my judgement, in what had been introduced by my birth and education. I began with this conſideration, that there were two ſorts of queſtions between the Catholicks and Proteſtants, the one of Right or Doctrine, the other of Fact or Story; As this, whether Luther were the firſt Erector of the Proteſtants Faith, whether it had a viſible appearance of Paſtors and Teachers before his time, I reſolved to begin my enquiry with the Queſtion of Fact, for theſe Reaſons.
Firſt, Becauſe they were ſo few, and ſo comprehenſible by all capacities, and the controverſies of doctrine ſo intricate, and ſo many, as they required much time and learning for their diſquiſition, onely I found my ſelfe unprovided for both thoſe requiſitions for this undertaking, and for the deciſion of the other, I needed not much preſumption to beleeve my ſelfe a competent Judge, when it conſiſteth onely in the peruſall of authentique Teſtimonies.
Secondly, I conſidered, that there was no one point of controverted doctrine whereon all the reſt depended, but that this one Queſtion of Fact was ſuch, as the diciſion of it determined all the reſt, for if271 Luther could be proved to be the Innovatour of the Proteſtants faith, it was neceſſary evicted, of not being the true ancient Apoſtolicall Religion. Therefore I began with this enquiry, which Proteſtants are bound to make to anſwer to this Objection, to find out an exiſtence of ſome Profeſſors of the reformed Doctrines before Luthers time: for finding the Catholicks were not obliged to prove the Negative, it was my part, to prove to my ſelfe the Affirmative, that our Religion was no innovation by ſome preexiſtence before that, but in the peruſall of all the Stories or Records, Ecceſiaſticall, or Civill, as I could chooſe, I could finde no ancienter a diſſention from the Roman Church then Waldo, Wickliffe, or Huſſe, whoſe cauſe had relation to the now-profeſſed Proteſtancy, ſo as I found an intervall of about eight hundred yeares from the time, that all the Proteſtants confeſſe a Unity with the Church of Rome down to thoſe perſons, without any apparent profeſsion of different Faith. To anſwer my ſelfe in this point, I read many of our Proteſtant Authors who treated of it, and I found moſt of them reply to this ſence, in which I cite here one of the moſt authentique, Doctor Whitaker in his Controverſie 2.3. pag. 479. where they aske of us, where our Church was heretofore for ſo many Ages? We anſwer, that it was in ſecret ſolitude, that is to ſay, it was concealed, and lay hid from the ſight of men, and further, the ſame Doctor, Chap. 4. pag. 502. our Church alwayes was; but you ſay it was not viſible, doth that prove that it was not? No, for it lay hid in a ſolitary concealment; to this direct ſence, were all the anſwers272 that ever I could meet to this Objection; I repeat no more, theſe places being ſo poſitive to our point. This confeſsion of Inviſibilitie in our Church for ſo many ages did much perplex me, it ſeemed to me, even to offend Naturall reaſon, ſuch a derogation from Gods power or providence, as the ſufferance of ſo great an Ecclipſe of the light of this true Church, and ſuch a Church as this is deſcribed to be, ſeeming to me repugnant to the maine reaſon, why God hath a Church on Earth, which is to be conſerver of the Doctrine, Chriſts precepts, and to conveigh it from age to age, untill the end of the world. Therefore I applyed my ſtudy, to peruſe ſuch arguments as the Catholicks brought for the proofe of a continuall viſibility of the true Church down from the Apoſtles time in all Ages, and apparance of Doctors teaching and adminiſtring the Sacrament, in proofe of this I found they brought many proviſoes of the Scripture, but this text moſt literall, of the fourth of the Epheſians, Chriſt hath placed in his Church, Paſtors and Doctors, to the conſummation of the Saints, till we meet in the Unity of the Faith, and next the diſcourſe, upon which they inferre this neceſſary viſible ſucceſsion of the Church, ſeemed to me, to be a moſt rationall and convincing one, which is to this effect, Naturall Reaſon not being able to proportion to a man a cauſe that might certainly bring him to a ſtate of ſupernaturall happineſſe, and that ſuch a cauſe being neceſſary to mankinde, which o herwiſe would totally faile of the end it was created for, there remained no other way, but that it muſt be propoſed unto us by one, whoſe authority we could not273 doubt of, and that in ſo plaine a manner, as the ſimpleſt may be capable of it as well as the learned. This work was performed by our Saviour, from whoſe mouth all our Faith is originally derived, but this ſucceeding age not being able to receive it immediate from thence, it was neceſſary it ſhould be conveyed unto them that lived in it, by thoſe that did receive it from Chriſts own Mouth, and ſo from Age to Age untill the end of the world; and in what Age ſoever this thred of doctrine ſhould be broken, it muſt needs be acknowledged for the reaſon above mentioned, that the light, which ſhould convey makind through the darkneſſe of this world, was extinguiſhed, and mankind is left without a Guide to infallible ruine, which cannot ſtand with Gods providence and goodneſſe, which Saint Auſtine affirmes for his opinion, directly in his book de Util. Cred. Cap. 16. ſaying, If divine providence doe preſide over humane affaires, it is not to be doubted, but that there is ſome authoritie conſtituted by the ſame God, upon which going, as upon certaine ſteps, we are carried to God; nor can it be ſaid, he meant the Scriptures onely by theſe ſteps, ſince experience ſhewes us the continuall alteration about the right ſence of ſeverall of the moſt important places of it, that what is contained there, cannot be a competent rule to mankind, which conſiſteth more of ſimple then learned men; and beſides, the Scriptures muſt have been ſuppoſed to have been kept in ſome hands, whoſe authority muſt beget our acceptance of it, which being no other thing then the Church in all Ages, we have no more reaſon274 to beleeve, that it hath preſerved the Scriptures free from all corruption, then that it hath maintained it ſelfe in a continuall viſibility, which Saint Auguſtine concludeth to be a marke of the true Church, in theſe words, in his book Cont. Cecill. 104. The true Church hath this certaine ſigne, that it cannot be hid, therefore it muſt be known to all Nations; but that part of the Proteſtants is unknown to many, therefore canno be the true; no inference can be ſtronger then from hence, that the concealement of a Church diſproves the truth of it. Laſtly, not to inſiſt upon the allegation of the ſence of all the Fathers of the Church in every ſeverall Age, which ſeemed to me moſt cleare; that which in this cauſe weighed much with me, was the confeſsion and teſtimony of the approved Doctors themſelves of the Proteſtant Church, as Hooker in his Book of Eccleſ. Pol. pag. 126. God alwaies had, and muſt have ſome viſible Church upon Earth: and Doctor Field, the firſt of Eccleſ. cap. 10. It cannot be, but thoſe that are the true Church muſt be known by the profeſſion of truth; and further, the ſame Doctor ſayes, How ſhould the Church be in the world, and nobody profeſſe openly the ſaving truth of God; and Doctor White in his defence of the Way, chap. 4. pag. 790. The providence of God hath left Monuments and Stories for the confirmation of our faith; and I confeſſe truly, that our Religion is falſe, if a continuall deſcent of it cannot be demonſtrated by theſe monuments down from Chriſts time; this appeareth unto me a direct ſubmiſsion275 of themſelves, to produce theſe apparent teſtimonies of the publique profeſsion of their faith, as the Catholiques demand; but this I could never read, nor know of any that performed; for Doctor White himſelfe, for want of proofe of this, is faine to ſay in another place in his Way to the Church, pag. 510. The Doctors of our faith, hath had a continuall ſucceſſion, though not viſible to the world, ſo that he flies from his undertaking of a conſpicuous demonſtration of the monuments of his faith, to an inviſible ſubterfuge, or a beleife without apparance; for he ſaith, in the ſame book in another place, pag. 84. All the eternall government of the Church may faile, ſo as a locall and perſonall ſucceſſion of Paſtors may be interrupted; and pag. 403. We doe not conteſt for an externall ſucceſſion, it ſufficeth that they ſucceed in the doctrine of the Apoſtles and Faithfull, which in all ages did imbrace the ſame Faith; ſo as here he removeth abſolutely all externall proofe of ſucceſsion, which before he conſented to be guided by. I cannot ſay, I have verbally cited theſe Authors, becauſe I have tranſlated theſe places, though the Originall be in Engliſh, yet I am ſure, their ſence is no way injured; and I have choſen to alledge Doctor Whites authority, becauſe he is an Orthodox Profeſſor of the Proteſtant Church; the reflection of the ſtate of this queſtion, where I found the Proteſtants defend themſelves, onely by flying out of ſight, by confeſsing a long inviſibility in their Church in apparance of Paſtors and Doctors; the ſame interpretation left me much looſened from the276 faſtneſſe of my profeſſed Religion, but had not yet tranſported me to the Catholique Church, for I had an opinion, that our Divines might yet fill up this vacancy with ſome more ſubſtantiall then I could meet with, ſo I came back into England, with a purpoſe of ſeeking nothing ſo intentively as this ſatiſfaction, and to this purpoſe I did covertly (under another mans name) ſend this my ſcruple to one, whoſe learning and ſufficiency I had much affiance in, in theſe termes, whether there was no viſible ſucceſsion to be proved in the Proteſtant Church, ſince the Apoſtles time down to Luther, and what was to be anſwered to that Objection, beſides the Confeſsion of inviſibility for ſo many ages, to this I could get no other anſwer, but that the point had been largely and learnedly handled by Doctor White, and many other of our Church: upon this I reſolved to informe my ſelfe in ſome other points, which ſeemed to me unwarrantable and ſuſpitious in the Ceremonies of the Romane Church, ſince I had ſuch an inducement as ſo little ſatisfaction in a point that ſeemed to me ſo eſſentiall; and in all theſe ſcruples, I found mine own miſtake in the beleife of the Tenents of the Romane Church, gave me the onely occaſion of ſcandall, not the practiſe of their doctrines, and to confirme me in the ſatisfaction of all them, I found the practiſe and authority of moſt of the ancient Fathers, and in the Proteſtant refutations of theſe doctrines, the recuſations of their authorities, as men that might erre, ſo that the queſtion ſeemed then to me, whether I would rather hazard the erring with them, then277 with the latter Reformers, which conſequently might erre alſo in diſſenting from them: I will not undertake to diſpute the ſeverall Tenents controverted, nor doubt that your Lordſhip will ſuſpect, that I omitted any ſatisfaction in any of them, ſince my reſolution, of reconciling my ſelfe to the Romane Church, is not liable to any ſuſpition of too forward or precipitate reſignation of my ſelfe, my judgement perchance may be cenſured of ſeducement, my affection cannot be of corruption.
Upon theſe reaſons I did, ſoone after my returne laſt into England, reconcile my ſelfe to the Romane Catholique Church, in the beleife and convincement of it, to be the true ancient and Apoſtolic all by her externall markes, and her internall objects of faith and doctrine; and in her I reſolve to live and dye, as the beſt way to Salvation: When I was in England I did not ſtudy diſsimulation ſo dexterouſly, as if my fortune had read it to me, nor doe I now profeſſe it ſo deſperately, as if it were my fortunes Legacie, for I doe not beleeve it ſo dangerous, but it may recover, for I know the Kings wiſedome is rightly informed, that the Catholique Faith doth not tend to the alienation of the Subject, it rather ſuper-infuſeth a Reverence and Obedience to Monarchie, and ſtrengthens the bands of our obedience to our Natural Prince, and his Grace and Goodneſſe ſhall never finde other occaſion of divertion of them from the naturall uſuall exerciſe of themſelves, upon thoſe that have the honour to have beene bred with approbation of fidelity in278 his ſervice, nor can I feare, that your Lordſhip ſhould apprehend any change in my duty, even your diſpleaſure (which I may apprehend upon the miſ-interpreted occaſion) ſhall never give me any of the leaſt receſsion from my duty, in which profeſsion I humbly aske your bleſsing; as
I Was deſired to give my opinions of the Reaſons, and my Reaſon if I miſliked them; having read and conſidered it, I was brought to be perſwaded.
FIrſt then, whereas he defends his ſearch, I ſuppoſe he is rather for that to receive praiſe, then to make Apologies, all men having cauſe to ſuſpect that gold which were given with this condition, that the Receiver ſhould not trie it by any Touchſtone.
Secondly, He ſaith, that there being two ſorts of Queſtions, the one of Right, or Doctrine, the other of Fact, or Story; As whether the Proteſtants Faith had a viſible appearance before Luther, he reſolved to begin his enquiry with the matter of Fact, as being ſooner to be found, (becauſe but one) and eaſier to be comprehended: To this I anſwer, by ſaying, that if they would not appeale from the Right Tribunall, or rather Rule, which is the Scripture, thoſe many might eaſier be ended then this one, (we building our Faith onely upon plaine places, and all reaſonable men, being ſufficient of what is plain) but if they appeal to a conſent of Fathers, and Councells, whereof many are loſt, many not loſt not to be gotten, many uncertaine whether Fathers or no Fathers, and theſe, which we have, and know, being too many for almoſt any induſtrie to read over, and abſolutely for any memory to remember, (which yet is neceſſarie, becauſe any one clauſe of any one Father, deſtroies a conſent) and being281 beſides liable to all the exceptions which can be brought againſt the Scriptures, being the Rule, as difficulty, want of an infallible Interpreter, and ſuch like, and being denied to have any infallibility, (eſpecially when they ſpeak not as witneſſes, which a conſent of them never doth againſt us) by one partie, which the Scripture is allowed to have by both, then I wonder not if he think ſuch a way ſo uncertaine, and ſo long, that he was willing to chuſe any ſhorter cut, rather then travell it: Neither do I beleeve this other to be ſo ſhort, or ſo concluding as he imagines, for if he conſider the large extent of Chriſtian Religion, ſo that we know little from any indifferent Relator of the opinions of the Abiſsins, ſo great a part of Chriſtendome, if he conſider the great induſtry of his Church in extinguiſhing thoſe whom they have called Hereticks, and alſo their Books, ſo that we know ſcarce any thing of them, but from themſelves, (who are too partiall to make good Hiſtorians) if the conſider how carefully they ſtop mens mouthes, (even thoſe of their own) with their Indices expurgatorii, it will then appear to him both a long work to ſeek, and a hard one to find, whether any thought like Luther in all Ages, and that he concludes very raſhly, who reſolves that there was none, becauſe he cannot find any, ſince they might have been viſible in their times, and yet not ſo to us, (for men are not the leſſe viſible when they are ſo, for not being after remembered) as a man may be a Gentleman, though he know not his pedigree: So that as I will not282 affirm that there were alwaies ſuch, becauſe I cannot prove it, ſo neither ought they to make themſelves ſure there were none, without they could prove that which is impoſſible, and therefore no Argument can be drawn from thence; and if it could be proved, that ſuch a no-waies-erring Church muſt at all times be, I had rather beleeve that there were ſtill ſuch, though we know them not, which may be true, then that theirs is it, which in may opinion cannot.
Thirdly, He ſaies that he could find no one point of controverted Doctrine, whereupon all the reſt depended, but that this one Queſtion of Fact was ſuch, as the deciſion of it determined all the reſt.
To this I anſwer, That the Queſtion of the Infallibilitie of the Pope, at leaſt of thoſe who adhere to him, which they call the Church, is ſuch a one, as if determined, muſt determine all the reſt, and not onely to us, but to all men, whereas this (though granted neceſſarie, and determined to his wiſh) would indeed conclude againſt us, but not for them, ſince the Greek Church would put in as good a Plea upon the Title of Viſibility, as that of Rome, and he would be to begin anew with them, when he had ended with us.
Fourthly, He gives his reaſon, If Luther could be evicted to be the Innovator, his Religion is then evicted of not being the true ancient and and Apoſtolicall.
To this I anſwer, by confeſſing the conſequence; but he might be the Renovator, and no•283the Innovator, and then no ſuch conſequence followes.
Fifthly, He ſaies we are bound to find an exiſtence of ſome Profeſſors of the reformed Religion before Luther, which requirie is bound upon his ſuppoſition of the neceſſitie of a continuall ſucceſſion of a viſible, and no-waies erronious Church.
Now I will firſt examine the ſence of his tearms. By the firſt, I conceive by a place he cites out of Saint Auſtine, that he meanes viſible to all Nations, but I pray, hath his been alwaies ſo, I mean at leaſt (for many Centuries) to thoſe Nations, which Columbus hath not long ſince diſcovered.
By the ſecond tearm Church, I ſuppoſe he meanes a Company of Chriſtians holding neither more, or leſſe then Chriſt taught, (for in a more large ſence, no man denies the Church to have been alwaies in ſome degrees viſible) and in this ſence, I not onely deny it neceſſarie, that it ſhould be alwaies viſible, but that it ſhould alwaies be, for I doubt whether there be, or for a long while, have been any ſuch.
Next, That ſuch a one he meanes, appeares, becauſe when Catalogues have been brought of ſome, who in all Ages have differed from them in things which we hold, his ſide would not accept of them, becauſe they agreed not with us in all things, and yet when Campian intends to prove all the Fathers to be his, he uſeth onely this courſe of inſtancing, in ſome things wherein they agree284 with him, (though ſometimes not ſo much, but rather the contrary ought to be inferred, as in the inſtance of Polycarpus, for comparing his words with the Hiſtorie, it will appear, that he concluded him a Papiſt for not being perſwaded by the Pope) though they differed from them in many other, as indeed all the notable Fathers did in more then one point. I will therefore ſay, that if this be required to ſhewing that a Church hath been ever viſible, it is, more then either part can do, and therefore I hope they will come upon better conſideration to confeſſe that not neceſſarie for us to do, which is impoſſible for themſelves. For let any man look into Antiquitie, I will not ſay without all prejudice, but without an abſolute Reſolution of ſeeing nothing in it that contradicts his preſent beleefe, and if he find not ſome opinions of the Church of Rome as unknown unto Antiquity, as either he, or I; as the Popes Indulgences having power to deliver out of Purgatorie, confeſt by Biſhop Fiſher, and Alphonſus de Caſtro, where they treat of Indulgences, if he find not others at firſt unknown, after known, but not held de fide, which are ſo at Rome, as Prayer to Saints, their enjoying the Beatificall Viſion before the day of Judgement,Tom. 9. An. 726. de fide & Simbol. the Aſſumpti of the Bleſſed Virgin, and herbeing free from all actuall ſin, if he find not ſome wholly unknown, and abſolutely condemned, which we condemne, as the lawfullneſſe of Picturing God the Father, whereof the firſt is confeſt by Barronius in the Margent to an Epiſtle of a Pope,2 Lib. C. 2. which ſaies the ſame, and the latter to285 be found in many places of Saint Auſtine, Lactantius, and others, nay if he find not that all the Doctors, Saints, Martyrs of the two firſt Ages (I mean as many as are now extant, and ſpeak of it) held ſomething, which both parts condemne, as the opinions of the Chiliaſts; If I ſay, he find not this, or I ſhew him not that he might have found, it I profeſſe I will be ready to ſpend my life for that Church, againſt which I now employ my Pen: So that this will be the end, neither of your Churches have been alwaies viſible, onely the difference is this, that we are moſt troubled to ſhew our church in the Latter, and more corrupt Ages, and they theirs in the firſt and pureſt, that we can leaſt find ours at night, and they theirs at Noone. And whereas he expects that Doctor White ſhould ſtand to this, to confeſſe his Religion falſe, if a continuall deſcent of it cannot be demonſtrated, if he himſelf will pleaſe to grant as much as he exacts, if he but continue in this reſolution, and in this ſearch, I doubt no more but that he will ſoone leave to be a Papiſt, then I ſhould doubt if I ſaw him now receiving the Communion in the Kings Chappell, that he had done it already.
Sixtly, His Reaſons for the neceſſitie of the Viſibility follow, becauſe the contrary were a derogation from Gods Power or Providence.
I anſer, To ſay he could not keep the Truth exactly in mens beleefe, were to derogate from Gods Power, to ſay he had not given ſufficient meanes to find the Truth, and yet damned men286 for error, the firſt would be a derogation from his Providence, the ſecond from his Juſtice, but to ſay he ſuffers men to erre, who neglect the meanes of not erring, and that he damnes none for a meer error, in which the will hath no part, and conſequently the man no fault, derogates from none of the three, but ſaies he, this is repugnant to the maine reaſon why God hath a Church upon Earth, to be the conſerver of the Doctrine of Chriſt, and to conveigh it from Age to Age.
I anſwer, To conſerve it is every mans duty, but ſuch as they may all faile in, and indeed is rather the the form of the Church, then the end of the Church, an exact conſervation making an exact Church, and a leſſe perfect conſerving, a leſſe perfect Church. As for conveighance of Doctrine, the whole Church conveighs none, whereof many (if his be it) have had but little conveighed to them. Particular Chriſtians (eſpecially Paſtors) teach others, which it is every mans duty to do when he meets with them who want inſtruction, which he can give, and they are likely to receive, yet is not the inſtruction of others every mans maine end.
But Mr. Mountague I know perſwades him, that ſome body of men are appointed to conveigh this Doctrine which men are to receive, onely becauſe they deliver it, and this I abſolutely deny, for we receive no Doctrine from the Church upon the Churches authority, becauſe we know her not to be the Church, till we have examined287 her Doctrine, and ſo rather receive her for it, then it for her. Neither for the conveighance of the Truth, is it neceſſarie that any company of men in all times hold it all, becauſe ſome may conveigh ſome Truthes, and others another, out of which, by comparing their Doctrine with the Scripture, men may draw forth a whole and perfect body of Truth, and though they deliver few other Truthes, yet in delivering Scripture (wherein all neceſſarie Truth is conteined) they deliver all, and by that Rule, whoſoever regulates his life and Doctrine, I am confident, that though he may miſtake Error for Truth in the way, he ſhall nerve miſtake Hell for Heaven in the end.
Seventhly, His next reaſon is their common Achilles, the fourth of the Epheſians, which he chuſeth onely to employ like his Triarios, his main Battle, leaving his Velites, his light-armed Souldiers, ſome places too allegoricall, even in his own opinion to ſtand examination.
The words are theſe, He hath given ſome Prophets, ſome Apoſtles,Verſ. 11.12 13 ſome Evangeliſts, ſome Paſtors, and ſome Doctors. For the inſtauration of the Saints, for the work of the Miniſtery, for the Edification of the body of Chriſt, till we all meet in the Unity of Faith, and the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, and unto the meaſure of the Age of the fullneſſe of Chriſt. That we may be no more Children, toſt and carried about with every wind of Doctrine, &c.
Now out of this place I ſee not how a Succeſſion may be evinced, rather I think it may, if that288 Apoſtle meant none.
For firſt, He ſaith not I will give, but he hath given, and who could ſuppoſe that the Apoſtles could ſay, that Chriſt had given, then the preſent Pope and the Doctors who now adhere to him.
Secondly, Allow that by what he hath given, were meant he hath promiſed, (which would be a gloſſe not much unlike to that which one of the moſt wittie, and moſt eloquent of our Modern Divines, Doctor Donne, notes of Statuimus (i) abrogamus) yet ſince theſe ſeverall Nounes are governed by the ſame Verb, and no diſtinction put, it would prove as well a neceſſitie of a continuall Succeſſion of Apoſtles, Prophets, and Evangeliſts, as of Paſtors, and Doctors, which is more then either they can ſhew, or pretend they can, ſo that it ſeemes to me to follow, that theſe were then given to do this till then, and not a Succeſſion of them promiſed, till then to do this, and ſo we receiving and retaining the Scriptures, wherein what they taught is contained, (as we would any thing elſe that had as generall and ancient a Tradition, if there were any ſuch) need no more, for if he ſay that men are toſt for all the Scripture, I anſwer, ſo are they for all their Doctors, nay, if theſe keep any from being toſt, it is the Scripture which does it, upon which their authoritie is by them founded upon their own Interpretation and Reaſon, who yet will not give us leave to build any thing upon ours out of plainer places, and though they tell us, that we cannot know the Scriptures but from the Church, they are yet faine289 (as appeares) to prove the authoritie of the Church out of Scripture, which makes me ask them in the words of their own Campian, and with much more cauſe Nihilne pudet Labyrinthi?
Eighthly, There followes another reaſon to this ſence, that reaſon not being able to ſhew man a way to eternall happineſſe, and without ſuch a one man would faile of the end to which he was ordained, it muſt be propoſed by an infallible authority in ſo plaine a manner, as even the ſimple might be capable of it, which being performed by our Saviour, it muſt be conveighed to ſucceeding Ages by thoſe, who heard it from him, and whenſoever this thread failed, mankind was left without a Guide to inevitable ruine.
I anſwer, That though all this granted, it proves not againſt us, for we have the Scripture come down to us, relating Chriſts Doctrine, and written by thoſe that heard it, which the ſimple are capable of underſtanding, (I mean as much as is plaine, and more is not neceſſarie, ſince other Queſtions may as well be ſuffered without harme, as thoſe between the Jeſuites and the Dominicans about Praedetermination, and between the Dominicans and allmoſt all the reſt about the Immaculate Conception) and thoſe who are not, neither are they capable out of Scripture to diſcerne the true Church, much leſſe by any of thoſe Notes which require much underſtanding and learning, as Conformity with the Ancients, and ſuch like.
Ninethly, The ſame anſwer I give to this,290 ſerves alſo to the following words of Saint Auſtine, for whereas Mr. Mountague concludeth, that he could not meane the Scriptures as a competent Rule to mankind, which conſiſteth moſt of ſimple Perſons, becauſe there hath been continuall alterations about the ſence of important places.
I anſwer, That I may as well conclude by the ſame Logick, that neither is the Church a competent Guide, becauſe in all Ages there have alſo been diſputes, not onely about her authority, but even which was ſhe, and to whatſoever reaſon he imputes this, to the ſame may we the other, as to Negligence, Pride, Praejudication, and the like, and if he pleaſe to ſearch, I verily beleeve he will find, that the Scriptures are both eaſier to be known then the Church, and that it is as eaſie to know what theſe teach, as when that hath defined; ſince they hold no decrees of hers binding de Fide, without a confirmation of the Popes, who cannot never be known infalliblly to be a Pope, becauſe a ſecret Simony makes him none; no not to be a Chriſtian, becauſe want of due intention in the Baptizer makes him none, whereof the latter is alwaies poſſible, and the firſt in ſome ages likely; and in hard Queſtions a readineſſe to yeeld when they ſhall be explained, me thinks ſhould ſerve aswell as a readineſſe to aſſent to the decrees of the Church, when thoſe ſhall be pronounced.
Tenthly, He ſaith that the Scripture muſt be kept ſafe in ſome hands, whoſe authority muſt beget our acceptance of it, which being no other then the church of all ages, we have no more reaſon to291 beleeve that it hath preſerved that free from Corruption, then it ſelf in a continuall viſibilitie.
I anſwer, That neither to giving authority to Scriptures, nor to the keeping of them, is required a continuall viſibility of a no-waies erring body of Chriſtians; the Writers of them give them their authority among Chriſtians, nor can the Church move any other, and that they were the Writers, we receive from the generall Tradition and Teſtimony of the firſt Chriſtians, not from any following Church, who could know nothing of it but from them, (for for thoſe parts, which were then doubted of by ſuch as were not condemned for it by the reſt, why may not we remain in the ſame ſuſpence of them that they did) and for their being kept and conveighed, this was not done onely by their Church, but by others, as by the Greeks, and their is no reaſon to ſay, that to the keeping and tranſmitting of records ſafely, it is required to underſtand them perfectly, ſince the old Teſtament was kept and tranſmitted by the Jewes, who yet were ſo capable of erring, that out of it they looked for a Temporall King, when it ſpoke of a Spirituall; and me thinks the Teſtimony is greater of a Church which contradicts the Scripture, then of one which doth not, ſince no mans witneſſing is ſo ſoon to be taken, as when againſt himſelf, and ſo their Teſtimonie is more receiveable, which is given to the Scriptures by which themſelves are condemned. Beſides the generall reverence which ever hath been given to theſe Books, and the continuall uſe of292 them (together with ſeverall parties, having alwaies their eyes upon each other each deſirous to have ſomewhat to accuſe in their adverſaries) give us a greater certaintie, that theſe are the ſame writings then we have, that any other ancient book is any other ancient Author, and we need not to have any erring Company preſerved to make us ſurer of it: Yet the Church of Rome, as infallible a Depoſitarie as ſhe is, hath ſuffered ſome variety to creep into the Coppies in ſome leſſe materiall things, nay, and ſome whole Books (as they themſelves ſay) to be loſt, and if they ſay, how then can that be rule whereof part is loſt? I reply, That wee are excuſed if we walk by all the Rule that we have, and that this maketh as much againſt Traditions being the Rule, ſince the Church hath not looked better to Gods unwritten Word, then to his written, and if ſhe pretend ſhe hath, let her tell us the cauſe why Antichriſts comming was deferred, which was a Tradition of Saint Paul to the Theſſalonians, and which without impudence ſhe cannot pretend to have loſt? And if againe they ſay, God hath preſerved all neceſſary Tradition. I reply, ſo hath he all neceſſarie Scripture, for by not being preſerved, it became to us not neceſſarie, ſince we cannot be bound to beleeve and follow that we cannot find.
But beſides, I beleeve that which was ever neceſſary is contained in what remaines, for Pappias ſaith of Saint Mark, that he writ all that Saint Peter preacht, as Irenaeus-doth, that Luke writ all293 that Saint Paul preacht, nay, Vincentius Lirinenſis, though he would have the Scripture expounded by ancient Tradition, yet confeſſeth that all is there which is neceſſary, (and yet then there was no more Scripture then we now have) as indeed by ſuch a Tradition as he ſpeakes of, no more can be proved then is plainly there, and almoſt all Chriſtians conſent in; and truely I wonder, that they ſhould brag ſo much of that Author, ſince both in this and other things, he makes much againſt them, as eſpecially in not ſending men to the preſent Roman Church for a Guide, a much readier way, (if he had known it) then ſuch a long and doubtfull Rule, as he preſcribes, which indeed it is impoſſible that almoſt any Queſtion ſhould be ended by.
Eleventhly, He brings Saint Auſtines authority to prove, that the true Church muſt be alwaies viſible; but if he underſtood Church in Mr Mountagues ſence, I think he was deceived, neither is this impudent for me to ſay, ſince I have cauſe to think it but his particular opinion, by his ſaying (which Cardinall Perron quoted) that before the Donatiſts, the Queſtion of the Church had never been exactly diſputed of, and by this, being one of his maine grounds againſt them, and yet claiming no Tradition, but onely places of Scripture, moſt of them allegoricall, and if it were no more, I may better diſſent from it, then he from all the firſt Fathers, (for Dionyſius Arcopagita was not then hatcht) in the point of-the Chiliaſts, though ſome of them (Pappias and Irenaeus)294 claimed a direct Tradition, and Chriſts owne words.
Secondly, As uſeth this kind of libertie, ſo he profeſſeth it in his nineteenth Epiſtle, where he ſaith, that to Canonicall Scriptures he had learnt to give the reverence, as not to doubt of what they ſaid, becauſe they ſaid it, from all others he expected proofe from Scripture or Reaſon.
Thirdly, The Church of Rome condemnes ſeverall opinions of his, and therefore ſhe ought not to find fault with them who imitate her example.
Twelfthly, He addes two reaſons more, The conſent of the Fathers of all ages, And the confeſsion of Proteſtants.
To the Firſt I anſwer, That I know not of any ſuch, and am the more unapt to beleeve it, becauſe Mr. Mountague vouchſafes not to inſiſt upon nor to quote any, which I gueſſe he would have done, but that he miſdoubted their ſtrength.
Secondly, Suppoſe that all the Fathers which ſpeake of this, did ſay ſo, yet if they ſay it but as private Doctors, and claime no Tradition, I know not why they ſhould weigh more then ſo many of the now learned, who having more helpes from Arts, and no fewer from Nature, are not worſe ſearchers into what is Truth, though leſſe capable of being Witneſſes to what was Tradition.
Thirdly, They themſelves often profeſſe they expect not to be read as Judges, but as to be judged by their and our Rule, the Cononicall Scriptures.
295Fourthly, Let him pleaſe to read about the Immaculate Conception Roſa Salmeron, and Wadding, and he will find me as ſubmiſſive to Antiquity, even whilſt I reject it, as thoſe of their own Party; for they to prefer new opinions before old, are faine to prefer new Doctors before old, and to confeſſe the latter more perſpicatious, and to differ from thoſe of former times, with as little ſcruple as he would from Calvin, (whom Maldonat,6 Cap. St. Johan. on purpoſe to oppoſe, confeſſeth he chuſeth a new Interpretation, before that of all the Ancients, which no witneſſe but my eyes could have made me beleeve) nay, and produce other points wherein their Church hath decreed againſt the Fathers, to perſwade her to do ſo againe, althoug Campian with an eloquent brag, would perſwade us, that they are all as much for him, as Gregory the thirteenth who was then Pope.
To the Second I anſwer, That Infallibility is not by us denied to the Church of Rome, with an intention of allowing it to particular Proteſtants, how wiſe and learned ſoever.
Thirteenthly, He ſaies next, that he after reſolved to inform himſelf in other points which ſeemed to him unwarrantable, and ſuperſtitious, and found onely his own miſtakes gave him occaſion of Scandall.
To this I anſwer, That I cannot well anſwer any thing, unleſſe he had ſpecified the points, but I can ſay that there are many, as picturing God the Father, (which is generally thought lawfull, and as generally practiſed) their offerings to296 the Virgin Mary, (which onely differs from the Hereſie of the Colliridians, in that a Candle is not a Cake) their praying to Saints, and beleeving de ſide that they heare us, though no way made certaine that they do ſo, and many more, which without any miſtake of his might have given him occaſion to be ſtill ſcandalized: For whereas he ſaith that thoſe points were grounded upon the authority of the ancient Fathers, which was refuſed as inſufficient by Proteſtants.
I anſwer, that none of theſe I name have any ground in the Ancienteſt, nay, the firſt is by them diſallowed, and if any other ſuperſtition of theirs have from them any ground, yet they who depart from ſo many of the Ancients in ſeverall opinions, cannot by any reaſon be excuſed for retaining any error, becauſe therein they conſent, nor have the Proteſtants cauſe to receive it from them as a ſufficient Apologie, neither hath he to follow the Fathers rather then Proteſtants, in a cauſe, in which not the Perſons, but the Reaſons, were to have been conſidered. For when Saint Hierome was by this way both brought into, and held in a ſtrange error, though he ſpeakes ſomething like Mr. Mountague, Patiaris me errare cum talibus, Suffer me to erre with ſuch men, yet he could not obtaine Saint Auſtines leave, who would not ſuffer him, but anſwered their Reaſons, and neglected their Authorities.
Fourteenthly, He ſpeakes of his Religion ſuper-infuſing Loyalty, and if he had onely ſaid it deſtroied or weakned it not, I (who wiſh that no doubt of his alleagiance may once enter his mind, to whom we all owe it, but profeſſe my ſelf his humble Servant, and no waies his enemy, though his adverſarie) would then made no anſer, but ſince he ſpeakes as if Popery were the way to obedience, I cannot but ſay, that though no Tenet of their whole Church (which I know) make at all againſt it, yet their are prevailing opinions on that ſide, which are not fit to make good ſubjects, when their King and they are of different perſwaſions. For beſides that Cardinall D' Oſſat (an Author which Mr. Mountague, I know, hath read, becauſe whoſoeuer hath but conſidered State matters, muſt be as well skilled in him, as any Prieſt in his Breviary) tell us, that it is the Spaniards Maxime, That Faith is not to be kept amongſt Hereticks, and more, that the Pope intimated as much in a diſcourſe, intended to perſwade the King of France to forſake the Queen of England; he ſaith moreover, ſpeaking in another place, ſpeaking about the Marquizat of Saluces, that they hold at Rome, that the Pope, to avoid a probable danger of the encreaſing of Hereſie, may take a Territory from the true Owner, and diſpoſe of it to another, and many alſo defend, that he hath power to depoſe an Hereticall Prince, and of Hereſie he makes himſelf the Judge; So that though I had rather my tongue ſhould cleave to the roofe of my mouth, then that I ſhould deny that a Papiſt may be a good Subject, even to a King whom he accounts an Heretick, ſince I verily beleeve, that I my ſelf know very many, very good: yet Popery is like to an ill aire, wherein though many keep their healthes, yet many are infected, (ſo that at moſt they are good Subjects but during the Popes pleaſure) and the reſt are in more danger, then if they were out of it.
To conclude, I beleeve that what I have ſaid may at leaſt ſerve (if he will deſcend to conſider it) to more Mr. Mountague to a further ſearch, and for Memorandums in it, which if it do, he will be ſoone able to give as much better Reaſons for my concluſion, (that ſuch a Viſible Church neither need, nor can be ſhewed) as his underſtanding is degrees above mine. I hope alſo by comparing the body of their beleefe, and the ground of their authority, the little that can be drawn out of the fourth of the Epheſians, with the Miriads of contradiction in Tranſubſtantiation, he will come to ſee, that their Pillars are too weak to hold up any building, be it never ſo light, and their building is too heavie to be held up by any Pillars, be they never ſo ſtrong, and truſt he will return to us, whom he will find that the hath cauſeleſſely left, if he be (which I doubt not) ſo ingenuous, as not to hold and opinion, becauſe he hath turned to it, nor to ſtay, onely becauſe he went.
(EEBO-TCP ; phase 2, no. A85082)
Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 165888)
Images scanned from microfilm: (Thomason Tracts ; 97:E634[1])
Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.
EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.
EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).
The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.
Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.
Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.
Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.
The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.
Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).
Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.
This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this EEBO-TCP Phase II text, in whole or in part.