A Second True Defense of the Nonconformists, Treatise · Chapter 15
CHAP. XV. Some Notes on the Book called the Lively Picture of Dr. Lud. Moulin; and his Repentance ſubſcribed by Dr. Simon Patrick, Dean of Peterborough, and Dr. Gilb. Burnet.
§. 1. I Had taken no notice of this Book, had not the Author by citing my words againſt Dr. L. Moulin as juſtifying his Character, made me a party. Therefore I ſhall impartially ſpeak my judgment of him and the accuſation, leſt I be thought to own all that the Writer ſpeaketh of him, and ſo to be as guilty of uncharitableneſs as he ſeemeth to me to be. I honour the name for the ſake of his famous Father, and his worthy Brother Peter, yet living, who by his Anſwer to Philanax Anglicus, &c. hath well deſerved of all Proteſtants: And his worthy Brother Cyrus, and his very worthy Son now dead: And I truly believe that Dr. Lewis was a ſincere honeſt-hearted man, though Dr. Stillingfleet ſeem to diſlike my giving him that title. And I will tell you why I think ſo.
§. 2. I ever obſerved that his faults lay in his weakneſs, and not in wickedneſs: 1. He was not a man of an accurate diſtinguiſhing head, and ſo was apt to take verbal Controverſies for real. 2. And it was no ſingular thing in him, that hereby he was led by the authorities which he moſt valued, to think that the differences between the Remonſtrants and Contra▪remonſtrants were much greater than they are, and Arminianiſm as it was called, to be a more heinous thing than indeed it is. 3. And when he thought that God's Cauſe (as Bradwardine called it) was ſo deeply engaged againſt ſuch Opinions, who can wonder if he was zealous againſt them? 4. And then he had a haſty raſhneſs in ſpeaking what he thought was true and neceſſary, when ſometimes it was not well tryed▪ and ſometime it was in an imprudent manner and time: And ſo in his haſt ran into the temerities and miſtakes which Mr. Daillé and I did blame him for. But I never perceived that he had more paſſion (much leſs fury) than other ordinary diſputers, but a more ra…h and bluſtering way of uttering his mind, ſometimes and in ſome Caſes, where he thought Religion much concerned. He h… ſo servent … love to truth▪ that he ſometime ruſht upon miſtakes that wore the vizor of it, and then truth (real or ſuppoſed) whatever it coſt him he would ſpeak. 5. I ever obſerved it was in his too extreme oppoſition to ſome real errour or crime, that he was carried into his temerities. 6. And I never found that he was a worldling, nor ſinned by the preference of worldly intereſt; And doubtleſs the love of worldly profits, honours and pleaſures, are more dangerouſly contrary to the love of God, than ſome raſh uncharitable words and cenſures in a Cauſe which he thought was Gods.
§. 3. Yea I found him more patient of confutation, contradiction and reproof than moſt men that ever I diſputed with, his Zeal which you call fury being far more for God than for himſelf. I began with him about 24 years ago, confuting his Latine Book of Juſtification againſt his Brother Cyrus. I wrote a ſecond time againſt him in the Preface cited by his Picture-drawer, about Univerſal Redemption, (and had ſaid much more in a Book of Univerſal Redemption, going to the Preſs, which I caſt by becauſe Mr. Daillés came then out, which had the ſame teſtimonial part and more which I intended.) Yet I never heard that the Dr. gave me any uncivil or uncharitable word, nor did he ever reply to either of theſe Books; nor ſignified any abatement of his love. And I think this ſhewed a forgiving mind.
§. 4. But it's intimated, that this was becauſe we agreed in other things? I anſwer, we diſagreed alſo even about Church-Government, which was the dividing Controverſie of thoſe times. The Dr. was zealous for the Magiſtrates Power in Eraſtus ſenſe, and went rather further than Dr. Stilling fleet in his Irenicum: And as I was before againſt him, ſo after this, about 12 years ago, I wrote that Book againſt him about the Magiſtrates Power in Church-matters, in which I called him My ſincere friend, thinking ſincere friendſhip conſiſtent with ſuch a difference and an open Confutation. (And if the contrary muſt be repented of, I hope ſuch charity is no crime.) This third Book againſt him alſo he took patiently, and without breach of Love.
And when I laboured to perſwade him to retract his Writings againſt Excommunication, though he held ſtill to his Concluſion, and thought that the great work that God called him to in the World, was to diſcover the Papal and Prelatical Uſurpation of the Magiſtrates power under the name of Eccleſiaſtical, yet I made him confeſs all the matter that I pleaded for, and he made me ſee that his errour lay moſt in meer ambiguous words, which he had not …ateneſs enough to explicate. All this patience ſignified not uncharitableneſs, rage or fury. And I obliged him not by praiſe, but … him for his eagerneſs for his own indigeſted conceptions; nor gave him any thanks for his indiſcreet and exceſſive praiſes afterwards given me in his Patronus bonae fidei. Upon all this I would put ſome queſtions to the ſober thoughts of the Author of his Picture.
1. Whether there be not as great ſigns of ſincerity, humility and patience in ſuch a behaviour, and in that great love which he had to all that he thought Godly men, (though he too hardly judged of others for that which he thought great errour and ſin) as in thoſe that cannot bear a juſt defence of diſſenters againſt their unjuſt accuſations, nor endure men to tell why they rather ſuffer than Conform.
2. Whether he that maketh him ſo very bad a manPage 22. A vain Writer and malicious, if not mad and diſtracted. p. 11. he will magnifie the very worſt of men, if they be of his mind, and vilifie the beſt if they be of another. p. 27. He hath full liberty to vie with the Devil himſelf in his Calumnies: with more ſuch. and incredible a lyar for too raſh cenſoriouſneſs of diſſenters, and ſome untruths vented in raſh zeal, do not tempt men to give as odious titles to thoſe Reverend perſons who go very far beyond him in untruths and uncharitable cenſures? And whether they that were for the ſilencing and utter ruining of about 2000 Miniſters, and call'd to Magiſtrates to execute the Laws againſt them, and that unchurch all the Reformed Churches which have not a continued ſucceſſion of Dioceſan Biſhops, ſhew not as much uncharitableneſs as he did that deſcribed ſome too hardly? And whether moſt of the Books written againſt me by Conformiſts, (ſuch as the Biſhop of Worceſter's Letter, the Impleader, Mr. Hinkley, and many more) be not much fuller of untruths in matter of fact than the Drs? But yet I think it a ſin to give them ſuch a Character as this, and render the perſons as incredible lyars, becauſe errour, intereſt and faction made ſome ſo unadviſed.
3. If it deſerve ſuch a Character to cenſure Arminians as dangerouſly erroneous and befriending Popery? whether you do not conſequently ſo ſtigmatize the old Church of England, before Biſhop Laud's time? Even Arch-biſhop Whitgift, Biſhop Fletcher, and the reſt who drew up the Lambeth Articles, Arch-biſhop Abbot and the Church in his time (except ſix Biſhops, &c.) King James, and the whole Church as conſenting by ſix Delegates to the Synod of Dort: And alſo that Synod and all the Forein Reformed Churches that conſented to it? And is not this more than Dr. Moulin did?
4. And are they not then to be accordingly ſtigmatized, who on the other ſide make the Calviniſts as odious, accuſing them of Blaſphemy, Turciſme, and doing as much againſt them as Dr. Heylin in the Life of Arch-biſhop Laud tells us was done in England on that account.
5. And if ſuch hard thoughts of Arminians as furthering Popery deſerve your Character, whether by conſequence you ſo brand not all thoſe Parliaments who voted againſt it accordingly, and made it one of the dangerous grievances of the Land? And is not that as faulty as for Dr. Moulin too much to blame you?
6. Yea I doubt you ſtigmatize thus ſo great a part of Chriſtians in all the World as I am loth to mention: ſo rare is it to hear of any Country, where they are not ſo much guilty of ſects and factions, as by education and intereſt to run in a ſtream of uncharitable cenſures of one another, ſpeaking evil of more than they underſtand, as I have proved in my Cathol. Theolog. about this ſubject.
7. Seeing it is above 20 years ſince I wrote that againſt Dr. Moulin which you cite, and he never found fault with it, nor juſtified his miſtakes, may I not think that he was convinced and repented? And you that praiſe his death-bed repentance, ſhould not Characterize him by failings twenty years repented of?
8. How do you know that the Dr. repented not of his too hard words of you till his death-bed? You are miſtaken? In his health I more than once blamed him, 1. For his cenſure of Dr. Stillingfleet and the other particular perſons, whoſe worth was known, and had deſerved well of the Proteſtant Churches; 2. For his extending thoſe cenſures to the Conformiſts and Church which belong to ſome particular perſons, and the moſt are not guilty of, And 3. For his Book of the fewneſs of the ſaved, as preſumptuous: And as far as I could then diſcern he repented of them all, but laid the ill Title-page of the laſt on the Book-ſeller: And he ſtill thought of Cauſes and Parties as very different, he owned not his harſh words or cenſures aforeſaid. I found him not raging nor impenitent.
9. Doth not your own deſcription of his great readineſs to beg forgiveneſs, and lothneſs to own any thing uncharitable, ſhew a better ſpirit than your picture doth deſcribe?
10. Is not he as like to be a ſincere man who asketh forgiveneſs of his faults (raſh cenſures and words) as he that repenteth of his former duties, his Pacificatory principles and Writings. Surely to repent of evil is a better ſign than to repent of good.
11. Becauſe you call us to acquit our ſelves by diſowning Dr. Moulin, may we not diſown both his faults and our own, without diſowning God's grace and mens piety and worth? would you be ſo diſowned for your own faults? 2. And how ſhould I diſown his raſhneſs better than to write what I wrote againſt him, and ſay what I ſaid to him? would you have a Synod called to reprove every raſh word?
12. Becauſe you juſtly value mens repentance, I will be thankful to you to further mine, and give me leave to further yours. Only I foretell you that your words ſhall not offend me by their hardneſs, if they have but truth, and you call me to repent of my ſin and not of ſerving God. I do not repent of defending Truth and Duty: nor of ſeeking to ſave the Reader from the infection of falſe accuſation and arguings which would deſtroy his charity and innocency, by the fulleſt manifeſting the falſhood and evil of the words and deeds which are the Inſtruments. I take it to be a wrong to thoſe that I would preſerve, to extenuate the danger of the ſnare or poyſon, on pretence of gentleneſs to the Writer. But I deal with the Cauſe and deſire none to hate the perſon: nor would I diminiſh the honour due to him for his parts or vertues; but rather have all men love and magnifie all the good, while they diſlike the evil; and would ſave the Reader at as eaſie a rate to the Writer as I can: But that he ſhould not be related to his falſe or ſinful words or deeds is not in my power to effect. But though I repent not of neceſſary truth, if I any where miſtake, or ſpeak more truth than is profitable, or in language by ſharpneſs more apt to do hurt than good, of this I repent, and ask forgiveneſs of God and man; As I do if I ſpeak ſo ſhort of truth, as with Eli to make ſin ſeem ſmaller than it is.
And now I hope you will love your own duty of Repentance better than another mans, and will not be angry if I ſeek to help it.
1. Do you not perceive that while you paint the Dr. as an incredible raging diſtracted lyar, and praiſe his repentance for raſh words of others, that you commit the ſame raſhneſs your ſelf againſt him? If you cannot ſee your own face, let any impartial Reader be your glaſs, and ask him whether you do not that which you are condemning?
2. You ſeem to vindicate the Book called the Friendly Debate, I ſhall ſhortly further tell you of ſomewhat in it to be repented of. And if partiality made not repentance a very difficult work you would have no need herein of a Monitor. But you may think me partial, though I acknowledg your civilities to me: I can ſhew you a Manuſcript of one both impartial and truly judicious, even the late Judge Hale, expreſſing ſo great diſlike of that Debate and the Eccl. Policy, as tending to the injury of Religion it ſelf, that he wiſheth the Authors would openly profeſs that they write for themſelves, and no more ſo abuſively pretend it is for Religion.
3. You ſay in this Picture that [If L. du Moulin had that honeſt zeal in him to which he pretends, he would have handled Mr. Baxter as ſmartly, &c.
Anſw. There may be other reaſons than want of honeſt zeal: But do you not here ſhew that it is the perſons more than his act that offended you in his reproof? Could you judge it honeſt zeal had it been to others? pag. 16.
4. You ſay, p. 17. He hath ſomething of the Nonconformiſts in him, and for that reaſon he ſpareth him:
Anſw. Do not Nonconformiſts differ from Eraſtians? Did not I write againſt his opinion of Church-Government? And did he not bear 22 years ago when Conformity was not in our Controverſies.
5. You ſay of [the party that come neareſt the doctrine of Calviniſts and Puritans, (though you ſay you mean ſuch as D. M. your Reader muſt ſuppoſe you mean the Nonconformiſts) that [they are the true Cauſes of all our preſent evils.—For the late War was raiſed,—by the very beſt of you, &c.] If you mean, as you ſeem, it's ſomewhat extraordinary to perſwade men to believe this in the ſame Land and Age that the War was raiſed in; And for one to do this that had the firſt General of the Horſe in the Earl of Eſſex Army, his Patron a few doors from him, and the Lord Hollis a Colonel nearer him till lately, and the Lord Preſident of his Majeſties Privy-Council a Colonel not far off him, and many more known Conformiſts, who could all quickly have ſatisfied him how few Nonconformiſts were Members of Parliament or Commanders in the Army when the War began, and that it was betwnen two parties of Conformiſts that the Wars began, as I have proved againſt Mr. Hinkley, and can fullier do when there is need. Which party is moſt obliged to repentance you may diſpute with thoſe that are fit for it: But if your intimation be untrue, it is of another nature, and degree than any of Dr. Moulins. I confeſs one party did in many Parliaments before, and in that, accuſe Biſhop Laud and his new followers, 1. Of Innovations, 2. Of Arminianiſm, 3. Of promoting abſolute arbitrary Government againſt the Subjects Property and Liberty, 4. And of promoting Popery. But if this party were not Conformiſts of the Church of England, the Biſhops, Clergy and Gentry were not the Church in Arch-biſhop Abbots days before Biſhop Laud.
As to the Reaſons of their accuſations, and the publiſhing the Articles for Toleration in order to the Sp. and Fr. Match, &c. I paſs them by. But becauſe you may ſay ſome ſuch think of me as you do of D. M. for what I ſay in my ſearch for the Schiſmaticks, I only add, 1. That I hope we may tranſcribe mens own words, 2. And may judge that there is ſome difference between the Biſhops that judged the Pope Antichriſt, &c. and thoſe that would have us as the way to unity, to obey him as Patriarch of the Weſt, and principium unitatis, and the firſt 6 or 8 General Councils, and that ſay our concord muſt be in obeying unum Collegium Paſtorum, ruling the whole Church per literas formatas, and that ſay the Roman Church is a true Church, but ſo are none of the Reformed that have not Biſhops, and a continued ſucceſſive Ordination by ſuch.
A Copy of a Letter written by Mr. Lewis Du Moulin to the Worthy Dr. Tho. Coxe; With the Drs. Anſwer occaſioned by ſome Reports that concerned Dr. Lewis Du Moulin.
Worthy Sir,
KNowing the natural inclination you have to oblige all men and the perticular experience I have of your unwearied goodneſs to my perſon and family did incourage me to write both before and now; The occaſion of both was the Reports ſpread abroad of my Father, being informed you had made him the object of your Care during his ſickneſs, I rejoyced that Providence had ordered it ſo that a Perſon of your approved worth and Integrity was concerned about him. I ſhall not trouble you with the Relations Fame has brought into this Country, but ſhall only deſire to know how he died; Was there any advantage taken of his weakneſs of body or mind; How far did his Reported Recantation extend? Reach'd it to any material thing of his Tenets, or only in reference to perſonal Reflections; This is what is humbly deſired by,
Honoured Sir, Your moſt Humble and obliged Servant, Lewis Du Moulin. From my Houſe at Malton in Yorkſhire, October the 7th. 1680.
The Drs. Anſwer to Mr. Lewis Du Moulin.
Sir,
I Had not delayed to return an Anſwer to your firſt Letter, had I known how to direct mine to you, which indeed I had forgotten how to do; This is therefore to let you know that your Father (my honourèd Friend) Dr. Du Moulin, Dyed as he had Lived, a truly pious man, a great hater of the Romiſh Superſtition, and of ſo much of the Engliſh Ceremonies as he thought approached thoſe of Rome; He loved all good men of what perſwaſion ſoever, agreeing in the Fundamentals of the Proteſtant Religion. When ſome worthy and Learned men did on his Death bed intimate to him that he had faln too heavy upon many Pious and Learned men of the Church of England: He profeſſed himſelf never to have born any malice in his heart againſt the Perſon of any of them, but that his intention was only to blame them for having too much gratified the Enemies of the true Proteſtant Religion, by their condeſcentions to them, and their too great compliances with them: He never recanted nor retracted any thing material that he had Profeſſed and Printed of late years; if he had uſed any ſharp expreſſions, or by any reflections given any offence to any truly pious man, he heartily prayed their pardon, and as heartily forgave all men, as he deſired them to forgive him. And this he had often before expreſſed to me both in publick at my Houſe, and in private between himſelf and me, and alſo after that ſome worthy men had been with him, which gave occaſion to this diſcourſe. This for your ſatisfaction is with truth and ſincerity atteſted by
Your Affectionate Friend Tho. Coxe. London, Octob. 29.