The True History of Councils, Part 3 · Chapter 16
CHAP. XVI. Mr. M's. Obſervations on my Notes of credible and incredible Hiſtory, Examined.
§ 1. I. BEcauſe I ſuppoſe that common ſound Senſes are to be truſted: He 1. Infers that I was aſleep, & thought that I ſaw all that I relate; that is, He that ſaith he muſt believe ſenſe, implies that he ſeeth all that he reporteth: I am one of the unlearned, and this Logick is too hard for me: Let it be his own.
2. He concludes, That we muſt not believe our ſenſes, if they were not Presbyterians but Epiſcopal that begun the late War (in England:) As if he had ſeen not only the Parliament (Lords and Commons) then, and the Army then (forty years ago almoſt) but had ſeen their Religion, or heard or read them then ſo profeſs it: Whereas I cannot learn yet whether he was then born, or of capable underſtanding, and hath neither ſenſe nor reaſon for what he ſaith. The Caſe that we are in is very ſad, when both ſides ſay they have the Evidence of Senſe it ſelf againſt each other; what hope then of Reconciliation? They that are yet living, that were Lords, Commons, and Commanders, ſay their internal Senſe and Self-knowledge told them that they were no Presbyterians, but Epiſcopal; and their daily converſe told them, that their Companions were moſtly of the ſame Religion and Mind. But Young Men that never converſed with them, know them all better, and that infallibly by ſenſe it ſelf.
§ 2. II. Becauſe I ſay, the Hiſtory of the Goſpel is certainly credible; it is ground enough to ſay, That All is not Goſpel that I write; as if I had ſaid it is.
§ 3. III. Becauſe I ſay, Prophets were ſure of their Revelation, he ſaith. It may be Mr. B. heard a Bene ſcripſiſti: As if I had pretended to be a Prophet.
§ 4. IV. I ſaid that Hiſtory is certain even by Natural Evidence, when it is the common Agreement of all men of moſt contrary Intereſts, &c. in a matter of fact and ſenſe to all that knew it. To which he ſaith [The Superiority of Biſhops over Presbyters is acknowledged by Catholicks, and Schiſmaticks and Hereticks, men of very contrary minds, diſpoſitions and intereſts; and yet this Church-Hiſtory would have us believe the contrary.
Anſw. This is our credible Hiſtorian.
1. He doth not tell us in what Ages it was ſo acknowledged; when thoſe who doubt of the matter of fact, doubt but ſome of 100, ſome of 150, or 200 years: Doth any doubt whether it be ſo now?
2. He tells us not either what Species of Biſhops the queſtion is of, nor what Species of Presbyters, nor what the Superiority was.
3. He ſpeaks without diſtinction or Exception, and ſo muſt be underſtood to ſay that this Church hiſtory would have us to believe that even Preſident Biſhops Ejuſdem Ordinis had de facto no Superiority at all over Presbyters in the ſame Churches and of the ſame order with them, which is an untruth ſo groſs as is no Credit to our Hiſtorian. I have named both more than one ranck of Biſhops whoſe Superiority de Jure I deny not: & Popes, Patriarchs, Primates, Dioceſans who depoſed the Biſhops of ſingle Churches, whoſe Superiority de facto I fully enough affirm, in the ages and degrees in which they did aſcend.
If he ſay that he meant it [Even from the Apoſtles time, and that of ſuch Dioceſans as have ſcores or hundreds of true Churches and Altars without their particular Biſhops, or any Presbyters that were Ejuſdem Ordinis with the Biſhops, and were Epiſcopi Gregis, and that had ſuch Power of the Keys over their flocks, as ours have not: or that had ſo many ſuch Aſſemblies that were no true Churches;] if he will be proved a Hiſtorian worthy Credit, Let him give us any proof that all men deſcribed by him agreed de facto that there was ſo long, ſuch a ſuperiority of ſuch Biſhops. But theſe men deride diſtinguiſhing, and baniſh Logick, that is Reaſon, from their Hiſtory.
§ 5. V. The next Evidence of certainty which I mentioned, was from [continued Exiſtent viſible Effects which prove their Cauſes.] And here this undiſtinguiſhing Hiſtorian is at it again. The Superiority of Biſhops over Presbyters is proved by the Laws and Cuſtoms of all Churches. This hath the ſame anſwer, which I will not repeat. Either it falſly reporteth my denyal, or it falſly affirmeth that all Churches in all ages have left us viſible Effects of the foreſaid ſpecies. And I would he would help us that are ignorant therein with ſuch Hiſtory and Evidence from the begining of the Churches in Scotland, and in the Southern and Eaſtern Countries that were without the Empire.
§ 6. VI. I ſaid, that Hiſtory is credible which ſpeaketh conſentingly againſt the known intereſt of the authors: and therefore I named few teſtimonies of the ſins of Popes and Councils but of thoſe that are their moſt Zealous Friends. To this he ſaith that my Characters of ancient Biſhops are taken from their profeſſed Enemies, [as my account of Athanaſius; Theophylus, Cyril, and divers others.]
Anſ. 1. My account of Athanaſius is almoſt all, if not all, in his praiſe, and is not an enemies teſtimony there valid. If I mention the diſpleaſure of Conſtantine againſt him it is not any Character of him, but of Conſtantine the Agent: Nor do I think Conſtantine, or Euſebius Caeſar: meet to be numbred with his Enemies; why did he not inſtance in ſome words of mine?
As to Theophylus and Cyril, I do not believe that he can prove that Socrates and Sozomen, and the Hiſtorians that Concur with them, were their Enemies. And if in reciting the Acts of the Councils I recite their Enemies words, ſo doth Surius, Nicholinus, Binnius, Baronius and all juſt writers of thoſe acts. And I do not find that Chryſoſtom himſelf, or Iſidore Peluſiota had any Enmity to them, nor Pope Innocent neither. Of the reſt before.
§ 7. VII. The next degree of credibility that I mentioned is that which dependeth on the Veracity and fitneſs of the reporter. Of which I named nine things requiſite.
Here he ſuppoſeth me one that is unfit; and particularly ſaith [Whether any hath …ailed with greater intemperance, and leſs provocation] Anſ. 1. I am not the Author of the Hiſtory of the mentioned Councils or Popes or Biſhops, but the Tranſcriber. Let me be as bad as you, or any of your tribe have made me, that proveth not that Socrates, Sozomen, Theodorite, Nitephorus, &c. or Binnius, Baronius, &c. have miſreported what they write. If I have miſreported theſe authors in any material point, prove it and I will ſoon retract it.
As for my railing, I expect that title from all ſuch whoſe faults I name, and call them to repentance: He that calls men to Repent, calleth them ſinners, and that is Railing he it never ſo great.
His firſt inſtanced railing is Pag. 19. [A few turbulent Prelates Perſecute good men] He ſaith thus I call the preſent Biſhops of the Church of England; Doth he mean All or ſome? If All he is an untrue Hiſtorian: He may ſee many named before my Apology whom I except: And if I have named two I have annexed the proof.
The next is Pag. 46. [ſilencing deſtroying Prelates] Anſ. Are there none ſuch? Were not about 2000 here ſilenced? Do we not continue ſo and impoveriſhed almoſt 20 years? Have none periſhed in priſons or with want? Do men call out for the execution of the Law, and plead for our Silencing as a good work, and take it for railing to have it named? Doth not Conſcience recoil in theſe men when in Pulpits, preſs and Conference they maintain it to be a good work, and tell the world how ſinful a thing it is for rulers to ſuffer us out of Gaols? What, are you now aſhamed of your meritorious works? Sure they are ſ…ant good if it be railing to name them. You will not ſay I rail, if I call you Preachers. And why do you ſay ſo, if I call you Silencers, if that be as good?
The next railing is Pag. 73 [If all the proud, Contentious, ambitious, Hereticating part of the Biſhops, had been of this Chriſtian mind (to endure each other in ſmall tollerable Differences) What ſins, Scandal and ſhame, what Crimes, confuſion and miſeries had the Chriſtian world eſcaped?] And is this railing? Hath the Chriſtian world had no ſuch Biſhops theſe 1000 years? Have not whole Kingdoms been forbidden all Gods Publick worſhip by ſuch, even France and England among the reſt? Is it railing to tell for what little things they not only Silenced men, but burned and murdered many thouſands? Were they not proud ambitious Prelates that depoſed and abuſed Lud. Pius, and thoſe that in Council decreed the digging all the dead Biſhops out of their graves to be bur…t as Hereticks, who were for the Emperours power of Inveſtitures? Do I rail if I ſay that Greg. 7. was Proud and ambitious when he threatened the Prince of Calaris with the loſs of his dominions, unleſs he made his Biſhop ſhave his beard? Do not Jewel, and all Proteſtant writers ſay worſe than this of Papiſt Biſhops? Is there any ſuch thing as pride ſilencing, burning, &c. If yea, muſt it never be known, reproved, repented of and ſo forgiven to the penitent? And if yea, than how ſhall it be known without proper names? By what name ſhould I have called Silencing but its own and ſo of the reſt? Gods power over Conſcience is marvellous that ſin cannot endure its own name.
The next railing is the word [Hereticating.] And how could I have known if he had not told me that this word is railing? Did not the Biſhops take it for a great ſervice of God, and is it railing to name it? It's true I uſed one word inſtead of a Sentence for brevity, to ſignifie the Biſhops culpable over doing in proclaiming men Hereticks. He that doth not believe that they did not well, nor do not to this day in Cutting off from the Church of Chriſt all thoſe whole Countreys of Chriſtians called Neſtorians, Jacobites, Melchites and the Monothelites and many ſuch I cannot ſave him from himſelf who will own all ſuch ſin and contract the guilt of it. Hath not Biſhop Epiphanius made us more Hereticks than he needed? Hath not Biſhop Philaſtrius made many more than the Devil himſelf made? Leſt this paſs for railing once more I will name ſome of them.
1. His 11th ſort of Hereticks are thoſe that kept Eaſter-day at a wrong time (as our Brittains and Scots did.
2. The Millenaries are the 12th (ſuch as many of the antient fathers, and our Mr. Mede, Dr. Twiſs, &c.)
3. The 27th Offered Bread and Cheeſe at the oblation.
4. The 28th put New Wine in New Veſſels in the Church.
5. The 29th Put their fingers on their mouths for Silence.
6. The 30th thought that all Prophets ended not with Chriſt.
7. The 33d went without ſhooes.
8. The Novatians are the 34th.
9. The 41th thought the Epiſtle to the Hebrews was not written by Paul, but by Barnabas or Clemens? and the Epiſtle to Laodicea by Luke.
10. The 42th are the Orthodox Miletians that Communicated with the Orthodox and ſome Arians too.
11. The 46th doubted of the diverſity of Heavens.
12. The 47th being ignorant that there is another Common Earth inviſible, which is the Matrix of all things, do think that there is no Earth but this one.
13. The 48th thought that water was the common matter, and was alwaies, and not made with the Earth.
14. The 49th Hereſie denyed that the ſoul was made before the body, and the body after joyned to it: and believed that Gods making them Male and Female firſt was to be underſtood of the bodily Sexes: Whereas (ſaith he) it was the Soul that was made Male and Female, And the Soul was made the Sixth day and the body the 7th.
15. The 50th Hereſie thought that not only Grace, but alſo the Soul itſelf, was by God breathed into man.
6. The 51ſt is Origens (that thought our Souls were firſt celeſtical Intellects, before incorporate (as Mr. Glanvile and many now.)
17. The 52d thought that brutes had ſome reaſon (as Mr. Chambre.)
18. The 54th thought that Earthquakes have a natural Cauſe.
19. The 55th Hereſie learned of Triſmegiſtus to call the Stars by the names of Living Creatures (as all Aſtronomers do.)
20. The 56th thought that there were not many languages before the confuſion of Babel.
21. The 57th Hereſie thought that the name of a [Tongue] proceeded firſt of the Jews or of the Pagans.
22. The 58th Hereſie doubted of the years and time of Chriſt.
23. The 59th thought (as many Fathers) that Angels begat Giants of women before the flood.
24. The 61ſt was that Chriſtians were after Jews and Pagans.
25. The 62d Hereſie ſaith that Pagans are born naturally, but not Chriſtians, that is, that the Soul and body of men are not daily, Created by Chriſt, but by Nature.
26. The 63d ſaith that the number of years from the Creation was uncertain and unknown.
27. The 64 thought that the names of the daies of the week (Sunday, Monday, &c.) were made by God firſt and not by Pagans, and were named from the Planets.
28. The 66th was that Adam and Eve were blind till God opened their Eyes to ſee their nakedneſs.
29. The 67th Hereſie imputeth the Sins of Parents to their Children.
30. The 68 Hereſie was of ſome troubled about the Book called Deuteronomy.
31. The 69 thought that thoſe ſanctified in the Womb wore yet conceived in ſin.
32. The 70th Hereſie thought that the World had been firſt divided by the Greeks, Egyptians, and Perſians.
33. The 71 thought there was a former Flood under Deucalion and Pyrrha.
34. The 72 ſaith that men are according to (or under) the 12 ſigns of the Zodiack, not knowing that thoſe 12 ſigns are divers Climates, and habitable Regions of the Earth.
35 The 74 Hereſie is that Chriſt deſcended into Hell to offer Repentance there to ſinners.
36. The 75 doubted of the nature of the Soul, thinking it was made of Fire, &c. (as many Greek Fathers did.)
37. The 77 is of Gods hardening Pharaoh, (&c. where he deſcribeth the Dominicans.)
38. The 79 is that the Pſalms were not (all) made by David: and it denieth the equality of the Pſalms, as if they were not all written and placed in the order that the things were done.
39. The 80 Hereſie thought that Gods words to Cain [Thou ſhalt rule over him] were properly to be underſtood, whereas the meaning was [Thou ſhalt rule over thy own evil Thoughts that are in thy own free Will.]
40. The 81 Hereſie did not well underſtand the reaſon of Gods Words to Cain, giving him Life.
41. The 82 Hereſie thought that the Stars had their fixed place in Heaven, and their courſe, not underſtanding that the Stars are every night brought out of ſome ſecret place, and ſet up for uſe, and at morning return to their ſecret place again, Angels being Preſidents and Diſpoſers of them,) (that is, as ſervants bring Candles into the room at night and take them out again.)
42. The 83 doubted (as ſome Epiſcopal Commentators) of the Book of Ca…ticles, leſt it had a carnal Senſe.
43. The 85 Hereſie thought, that the Soul of man was naturally G…ds Image …efore Grace.
44. The 87 Hereſie thought, that really four living Creatures mentioned in the P…phe…s praiſed God.
45. The 88 Hereſie thought that the Levitical Feaſts were litterally to be underſtood, not knowing that it was the 8 Feaſts of the Church that were meant.
46. The 90 Hereſie preferred Aquila's Tranſlation before the Septuagint.
47. The 91 preferred a Tranſlation of thirty men before the Septuagint.
48. The 92 preferred another Tranſlation of ſix men before it.
49. Another Hereſie preferred the Tranſlation of Theodotion and Symmachus before it.
50. The 94 Hereſie preferred the Scriptures found in a Veſſel after the Captiv…y before it.
51. The 96th ought that Melchizedeck had no Father or Mother, not knowing that it's ſpoken of him as learning that which his Father and Mother never taught him.
52. The 97 hold that the Prophet Zachariah of Faſts, is to be properly underſtood; when as it is but for the four Faſts of the Church, viz. for Chriſtmas, Eaſter, Epiphany, and Pentecoſt.
53. The 98 H…r…ſie holdeth, that Solomon's great number of Wives and Concubines, is literally to be underſtood; whereas it is meant but of diverſity of Gifts in the Church.
54. The 100 Hereſie thought that the Meaſuring Cord in Zachary, was to be underſtood of meaſuring Jeruſalem literally whereas it meant the choice of Believers.
55. The 101 Hereſie not underſtanding the Myſtical Senſe of the Cherubim and Seraphim, in Iſaiah, are troubled about it, and in doubt (And here he Myſtically tells you the Myſtical Senſe.)
56. The laſt Hereſie thought that one of the Cherubims came to Iſaiah, and with a Coal touched his Lips, and that it was an Angel or Animal with Fire; whereas it is the Two Teſtaments, and the Fire of God's Grace.
To theſe you may add if you pleaſe the Hereſie of holding Antipodes, determined by Pope Zachary, by the Mediation of the holy Biſhop Boniface, I think an Engliſh man. And of what peril it is for Chriſtians to eat Jayes, and Rooks, and Badgers, and Hares, and Wood horſes: And Lard muſt not be eaten before it is dryed in the Smoak, or boiled on the Fire: Or if it be eaten unboiled, it muſt not be till after Eaſter: And there muſt be three great Lamps ſet in a ſecret place of the Church, after the ſimilitude of the Tabernacle, which muſt be kept burning; and at Baptiſm others lighted by them.
Reader, remember 1. That Philaſtrius as well as Epiphanius, was a Biſhop; 2. Yea and a Saint; whereas very few Biſhops of all the Councils had the honour to be Sainted.
Therefore if you ſay that all theſe were not Anathematized by Councils; I anſwer, 1. All theſe are Regiſtred as Hereticks. 2. And they held (as Mr. Dodwell and his Company here do) that he that communicateth with Hereticks, is to be judged a Heretick. 3. And that Hereticks are no parts of the Church.
And forget not above all the Hen…ician Hereſie, which determineth not only our King, but many Papiſt Princes to be Hereticks, for claiming Inveſt…tures.
And now Reader, I un…eignedly hate uncharitableneſs, and therefore deny no good that was in ſuch Biſhops: But I muſt no more be indifferent between Good and Evil, than between Heaven and Hell; not may I judge Chriſt a Railer, for ſaying to his prime Apoſtle, [Get thee behind me Satan, thou art an offence unto me, &c.] If the name of [Hereticators] that is, too raſh pronouncing men Hereticks be railing, I will give thee no Character, cenſure or name of the aforeſaid practice, for I can deviſe no name which may not be called Railing. But judge of it and call it what you ſee cauſe.
And again, if you ſay, Theſe are not the Decrees of Councils, I anſwer, Theſe are but Flea-bitings to the wounds that the Church hath received from Councils, by Anathematizing.
The next Inſtance of Railing in theſe words, which he half repeateth [Either credible Socrates and others were groſs Lyars, or this Patriarch and St was a dow…right Knave.] Anſ. He himſelf is ſo far from denying this, that he makes Socrates and Sozomen not only Lyars, but Lovers of a Lie; for what they ſay of St. Theophilus: And who is it then that is the Railer? Read the Story.
The next Inſtance is, p. 95. that I call Biſhops the [Firebrands of the World▪ ] Anſ. The words are theſe [I take them to be the Firebrands of the World, and unworthy the regard of ſober men, who pretend to know mens Judgments better than themſelves, and allow not mens own a…liberate profeſſions to be the notice of their Faith.] If they will ſay, that you are Hereticks in heart, though your Tongue and Life pr…feſs ſound Doctrine, what means hath any man to clear himſelf againſt ſuch, and keep from their Inquiſition Racks or Flames? Is this Railing?
The next Inſtance is the Word [Self-conceited Biſhops] P. 98. Having mentioned the many Logical Niceties neceſſary to decide the Queſtion between the Noſtorians, Eutychians, and the Orthodox, I ſaid [Is it not p…ty that ſuch Queſtions ſhould be raiſed about the Perſon of Chriſt, by ſelf conceited Biſhops, and made neceſſary to Salvation, and the World ſet on fi…e and divided by them?] Reader, remember the Diviſion made by it con…inueth to this day, to the Separation and Condemnation of a great part of the Chriſtian World! And is the name [ſelf-conceited] in deſcribing the cauſe of this a railing? How much worſe r…ers are they that will call a Drunkard a Drunkard, or a For…cator a Fornicator? Read the ſadder words of Ludolphus.
The next railing is [mercileſs, fur…us Biſhop…, pag. 196] Anſ. There is no ſuch word: When I find where it is I ſhall ſee the occaſion of it. Italy, Piedmont, Ireland, &c. have tried that there have been ſuch.
The laſt is pag. 183. [The Confounders of Churches.] Anſ. I thought I had merited of them by my impartiality and lenity: As after I commend the Wiſdom & peaceableneſs of Pope H…norius, (though a General Council even for that made him an H…retick,) ſo I here juſtly commend the Wiſdom and Peaceableneſs of Pope Vigilius, who adviſed the Council to leave dead men to God (Theod. M…pſ. Theodorite and Ibis] and not dam… them when God hath judged them already, and yet not to admit any of their wrong opinions] I …y T…is was the right way: If they had all dealt as viſely and Chriſtianlike, Councils …ad not been the Conſounders of the C…u…ch… ] Is this railing? At laſt they forced Pope Vig…lius to ſubſcribe to them, and it ſo conſounded the Churches, that a great part of Italy itſelf forſook the Church of Rome for it, and ſet up another head againſt the Pope a… 100 Years. Was not this confuſio…? And muſt it not be known?
Reader, as far as I underſtand them, the Paraphraſe of theſe mens words, is [If we kindle a fire in the Church, name it nor, much leſs call any to quench it: or elſe we'll ſay it's you that kindle it: ſay not you are excommunicate or ſilenced when you are, though it be by Thouſands: elſe we will prove that you are railer…: If we lay you in Gaols and take all you have, do not ſay, you h…rt us, much leſs you wrong us: take not on you to know or feel when you are hurt: elſe we will have an Action of railing againſt you.
§ 8. That w…i…h followeth I anſwered before: But after he finds a notable piece of my ignorance. The Pope inviting the King of Denmark to conquer a Province of Hereticks, I know not who they were unleſs they were the Waldenſes: Well gueſt, ſaith Mr. M. Waldo was in 1160, 80 Years after. Anſ. This will ſerve for men willing to be deceived. It was the Perſons and Religion, and not the name that I ſpoke of. Doth not he know that Rainerius himſelf ſaith, that thoſe Perſons (called Albigenſes, Waldenſes, and other ſuch names) profeſſed that their way of Religion was Apoſtolical, and they derived it down from Silveſters, that is Conſtantines time? If I did not gueſs well I wrong no Biſhops by i…: and I confeſſed my Ignorance that I knew not whom the Pope meant: And why did not this callent Hiſtorian tell us who they were?
§ 9. Next he hath met with my Ignorance for ſaying Vienna near France] which is in the Borders of France. A…ſ 1. Is that any ſlander of Biſhops or Councils? 2 Truly I had many a time read in Councils, that Vienna was in France, and had not forgot it, if Ferrarius and Chenu had not alſo told it me; And whether it was the fault of the Printer, or of my Hand, or my Memory, that put near for in, I leave it freely to his Judgment, for I remember it not.
And if the manner of Binnius naming it made me call Ordo Prophetarum in Gelaſius a Book, it's no wrong to Epiſcopacy.