The True History of Councils, Part 3 · Chapter 4 – Chapter 5
CHAP. IV. Of his Accuſation, that I vainly name Hiſtorians which I never ſaw or read.
§ 1. I Muſt profeſs that it never was my purpoſe to tell the world how many Hiſtorians I have read; nor to abridge all that I have read: And thoſe that I have moſt read I have there made no mention of, as not being for my intended end: And multitudes that ſtood by me, I never opened to the writing of this hiſtory, my deſign being chiefly againſt the Papiſts and thoſe Proteſtants who moſt eſteem their writings, and had rather unite with the French Papiſt Church, than with us Nonconformiſts: Therefore when I was paſt the firſt 400 or 500 years, it was the greateſt and moſt flattering Popiſh hiſtorians that I abriged, as ad hominem being likeſt not to be denyed.
I told the reader that I made not uſe of Luther the Magdeburgenſes, nor the Collections of Goldaſtus, Marquardus Freherus, Reuberus, Piſtorius, &c.] And the Printer having put a Comma between Marquardus and Freherus, he Conjectures that I took him for two men, becauſe I added not the Chriſtian names of the reſt: And he concludes that [whoever this miſtake belongs to, it's plain that M. B. had but little acquaintance with thoſe Collections.] For I name ſome of the Authors therein.
Anſ. Seeing theſe things are thought juſt matter for our accuſers turn, I will crave the Readers patience with ſuch little things while I tell him the truth. It is about 25 years ſince I read the Germa: Hiſtory in the Collections of Freherus, Reuberus and Piſt…rius, and about 30 years ſince I read the Collections of Goldaſtus: The Magdeburgenſes, Oſiander, Sleidan, or any ſuch Proteſtants I thought vain to alledge to Papiſts. About ſeven or eight years ago as I remember, I was accuſed for Preaching, and Fined by Sir Thomas Davis; and the Warrant was ſent by him to Sir Edm. Bury Godfrey to levy it on me by Diſtreſs: I had no way to avoid it but bona fide, to make away all that I had: Among the reſt I made away my Library, only borrowing part of it for my uſe. I purpoſed to have given it almoſt all to Cambridge in New-England: But Mr. Knowles (yet living) who knew their Library, told me that Sir Kenelme Digby had already given them the Fathers, Councils and Schoolmen, but it was Hiſtory and Commentators which they wanted. Whereupon I ſent them ſome of my Commentators, and ſome Hiſtorians among which were Freherus, Reuberus and Piſtorius Collections, and Nauclerus, Sabellicus, Thuanus, Joſ. Scaliger de Emendat. Temp. But Goldaſtus I kept by me (as borrowed) and many more which I could not ſpare; and the Fathers and Councils and Schoolmen I was ſtopt from ſending. Now whether I was unacquainted with thoſe that partly ſtand yet at my Elbow, and which I had read ſo long ago, muſt depend on the Credit of my Memory; and I confeſs my Memory is of late grown weak, but not ſo weak as to think that Marquardus Freherus was not one man, and a Palatinate Councillor, though it be names that I moſt forget; why I gave not the Chriſten names of Reuberus and Piſtorius, whether becauſe I forgat them, or becauſe I minded not ſo ſmall a thing, not dreaming what would be inferred from it, I remember not. But when I wrote that abridgment, I made uſe of none that I thought the Papiſts would except againſt: For the firſt ages I gathered what I remembred out of the Fathers, and out of Euſebius, Socrates, Sozomen, Evagrius, Theodoret, the Tripartite, Nicephorus, Liberatus, Brev. Victor Utic. Beda, and ſuch others as are by them received: Beſides which I principally followed and Epi…omized Binnius, and Crab, and partly Baronius, with Platina, Onuphrius Panunius, Stella, Petavius, and others of their own. And I reſolved I would not ſo much as open Goldaſtus, or any Proteſtant Collector, that they might not except againſt their Credit, and reject them as malicious curſed Hereticks, as Labbe doth Melchior Goldaſtus and almoſt all ſuch others as he mentions; and as Gretſer, Sanders, and other Papiſts commonly do. Therefore even thoſe Hiſtories which be in Goldaſtus, I would not take as out of him, but ſome of them from the books publiſhed by others, and ſome as cited by Binnius, Petavius, or other ſuch. And this is now the proof of my Vanity.
§ 2. It is a miſtake if he think that I intended (as he ſpeaks) to be a Compiler of General Church Hiſtory; When I profeſſed but to acquaint the Engliſh Reader with the true matter of fact out of the Papiſts themſelves, what the ambitious part of Biſhops and Councils have done, and by what degrees the Papacy ſprang up, and whether ſubjection to the aſcendent exort Prelacy be abſolutely neceſſary to Concord and Salvation.
§ 3. As to his ſaying [I am the firſt that ever reckoned Nazianzen among Hiſtorians,] I take the writings of the Fathers, eſpecially Juſtin, Clemens Alex. Tertullian, Cyprian, Euſebius, Baſil, Nazianzen, Hierom, Chryſoſtom, Auguſtin, to be the beſt part of Church Hiſtory, eſpecially their Epiſtles. And of this opinion I am not the firſt.
CHAP. V. Of his Accuſation of my citing Hanmer and other Tranſlators, and being deceived by Binnius and ſuch others.
§ 1. 1. HE accuſeth me for not uſing Valeſius his Edition of Euſebius and thoſe Editions of the Councils which he accounteth the beſt: To which I ſay,
1. I am not Rich Enough to buy them, nor can keep them if I had them. Muſt none write but Rich men? The French Councils would coſt more than many of us are worth: We have had no Eccleſiaſtical maintenance theſe 19 years; and we cannot keep the books we have. Luther wrote his book de Conciliis when it ſeems he had never read many of the Councils Acts, but as related by Euſebius Socrates, Sozomen, and the Tripartite Hiſtory.
2. Dr. James hath long ago warned all Scholars to make much of Crab and other old ones, (and the Fathers as Printed at Baſil by Eraſmus, Amerbachius, &c.) and not to truſt much to new Editions, as coming through untruſty hands.
3. Is Valeſius a man of ſo much credit with you? Do you believe what he ſaith of Grotius as being in judgment for the Papal Church, and only in prudence delaying his viſible Communion with them, that he might draw in many with him? (Valeſ. in Orat. de Petavio:) If he lye in this, and the ſucceſs of Petavius on Grotius, why ſhould he be more truſted than others? If not, I need not tell you what to think of thoſe Biſhops and Drs. who profeſs to be of the ſame mind and Church as Grotius; nor again to tell you who they be.
4. My deſign led me not to make uſe of Criticks, but only to tell the world, what the Papiſts themſelves confeſs, ſuch as I have throughout cited.
§ 2. As for my uſing Hanmers Tranſlation of Euſebius and Socrates, my caſe was …s before deſcribed: Valeſius I had not: Grineus I made uſe of heretofore. But ſince I was by conſtraint deprived both of my books and money to buy more, when I wrote that Abridgment, I had only Hanmers Tranſlation left me. And if that ſort of men that forced me to give away my books, to keep them from being diſtreined on, will make uſe of this to prove me ignorant of them, the matter is very ſmall to me.
If you ſay, I ſhould not then have written, I anſwer, could they ſo have ſilenced us in the Pulpit, they had more anſwered their own judgment than mine. I had no uſe for Criticks, nor for any thing in Euſebius and Socrates that depends on the credit of the Tranſlator.
§ 3. As to his oft noting that in Tranſlations, and ſometime in Chronology I err by following Binnius, I anſwer, had I written a full Church Hiſtory, I ſhould better have examined him and others. But I lay no ſtreſs of my cauſe of any of Binnius his Tranſlations, nor will I undertake for any Hiſtorian that I cite: My buſineſs was but to tell thoſe that believe Binnius and Baronius, and ſuch other, what they ſay. Nor do I yet intend to beſtow any time, in examining whether he wrong Binnius or not, it being nothing to my cauſe nor me, whether he miſtook a year, or the meaning of a word of the Authors whom he citeth.
§ 4. He ſaith I uſe an old uncorrect Edition of Binnius 1606. Anſ. It is that which is in moſt common uſe, entituled, Recognita, Aucta, notis Illuſtrata, dedicated to the Pope, and to C. Baronius, ejus monitu ſcripta, qui veterem illam, mendoſam, mutilam & confuſam compilationem mille locis illuſtravit, &c. commonly Preferred before Crab, Surius, Nicolinus, &c. But any quarrel ſerveth ſome men.