Answer to De Meauxs Book, Title page – Preface
Mr. CLAƲDE's ANSWER TO Monſieur de MEAƲX's BOOK, INTITULED, A Conference with Mr. CLAUDE.
WITH HIS LETTER to a FRIEND.
WHEREIN He Anſwers a Diſcourſe of M. de Condom, now Biſhop of Meaux, concerning the Church.
IMPRIMATUR,
Junii 18. 1687. GƲIL. NEEDHAM.
LONDON: Printed for T. Dring, at the Harrow in Fleetſtreet, at Chancery-Lane-end. MDCLXXXVII.
THE Author's Preface.
AMONG all the Points in Controverſy betwixt us, and the Gentlemen of the Romiſh Communion, it is plain there is not any one wherein they think better of their Cauſe than this, which hath been ſtarted ſince our Reformation, Concerning the Church; and yet, perhaps there is not any one wherein they have leſs reaſon to think ſo. Were this groundleſs confidence obſerved to be predominant among the Vulgar only, who ſeldom look beyond the prejudices of their Infancy; or among the buſy men of intrigue in the Age, who are ever raiſing their worldly Advantages, as a Bulwark againſt the Truth; there would be no great reaſon to be ſurpriſed at it. But the moſt amazing thing of all is, that we continually meet with the ſame Opinion in perſons that want neither Underſtanding, nor ſound Senſe and Judgment; and which otherwiſe ſeem men of Integrity and Sincerity; ſo that there is ſcarce any queſtion to be made, but that they are verily perſwaded of the thing, as a certain undoubted Truth.
Now for the undeceiving theſe Perſons, it will, in my opinion, be convenient, not only to ſet their own Conceptions before them; but alſo to go back as far as the ground and original of thoſe Conceptions, that ſo they themſelves may pleſe to make ſuch Reflexions upon them, as they ſhall judg fit and neceſſary. The ground then of all this miſtake is, that upon pretence of the Churches being a Society, they immediately ſuffer themſelves to be poſſeſt at firſt with an Opinion, That we are to judg of it almoſt in the ſame manner, that we do of a Civil Society; and ſo never give themſelves the trouble of enquiring into the differences by which theſe two are diſtinguiſht from one another. Hence they have fancied, that the Eſſence of the Church conſiſts intirely in ſomething External; and that as a man need do no more to become a true Member of a Civil Society, than only live in an outward obſervance of the Laws; ſo to become a true Member of the Church, no more was required, than barely an outward Profeſſion of the Faith and Religion; and that there was no neceſſity at all of any inward Virtues, ſuch as Faith, Hope, and Charity. This is the very thing that hath made the Definitions of, moſt of their modern Divines, who place it in a meer outward Profeſſion, be entertained with Approbation and Applauſe. And when once theſe Definitions are received, they are under a neceſſity of looking upon, not any one part of theſe Profeſſors, to be the true Church of Jeſus Chriſt; but in general, the whole Body of Profeſſors, whether they be good or bad men, juſt or unjuſt, hypocrites or ſincere Believers.
From hence, by another unavoidable conſequence, they are forced to conceive of the Church, not only as an exterior and viſible Body, but as a Body diſtinctly, and certainly viſible, to ſuch a degree I mean, that a man might point out, without any danger of miſtake, the particular men of whom it is compoſed; as plainly and diſtinctly, as you can point the Perſons that make up any other Society; and declare without the leaſt fear of miſtaking your men, ſuch and ſuch are members of it. Such a viſibility of the Church as this it is, that Bellarmin hath explained thus:*Eccleſia eſt …e…us homi…m ita viſibi…, & palpa…lis, ut eſt cae…s populi Ro…ani, vel Reg…um Galliae, … Reſpubli… Venetorum. …ellarmin. de …ccleſ. Lib. 3. cap. 2. Edit. …ugdum. 1587. The Church is a company of Men as viſible, and as palpable, as the Citizens of Rome, the Kingdom of France, or the Republick of Venice. So that his meaning is, that as the French, the Romans and Venetians, may plainly and particularly be ſingled out; ſo likewiſe may the Perſons that make the Body of the Church be, as particularly, and with the ſame degree of certainty that they were. Indeed, if there be nothing beſides a bare outward Profeſſion required, to make men truly Members of the Church, This Profeſſion is a thing diſcernable by the eye, in every ſingle perſon; and thus the Church will be viſible, ſo as that particular men may be plainly diſtinguiſhed to be of it.
By another neceſſary and unavoidable Conſequence, they were conſtrained to apply all the Promiſes made by God to his Church, whether in the Old or New Teſtament, to this viſible and exteriour Body. And being theſe Promiſes include the Churches perpetuity, that they might keep as cloſe to their firſt Notions as they could, there was a neceſſity of explaining the Churches ſubſiſtence in this ſenſe: That the Church muſt always ſubſiſt after the manner of a ſenſible and palpable body, ſo as to be the object of our ſight, and diſcernable by all the World, even to a plain and poſitive diſtinction of particular perſons. Hence it is, that they have drawn their ſo much boaſted Succeſſion, and which all their diſputes run ſo much upon. Whereby they underſtand a continued train of Prieſts, one after another, in the ſame Epiſcopal Sees, and a continued train of people, making up the ſame Congregations; ſo as that both People and Prieſts always make profeſſion of the ſame Religion, without any change or alteration, except it be perhaps in matters of Diſcipline, which are things that may very well admit of a change, without making the Church to differ from what it was before.
Then carrying theſe Conceptions of theirs ſtill further, they fancied, that as in order to the preſervation of the Civil Society, an abſolute Supreme Authority, to which all muſt bend, is neceſſary, becauſe without ſuch a one there would be no poſſible means of compoſing differences, or preventing Domeſtick quarrels; the ſame was likewiſe neceſſary in the Church: That in this, one Supreme and Abſolute Tribunal muſt be acknowledged upon Earth; that without this and an intire obedience paid to it, even in matters of Conſcience, Diſpute would never be ended, nor Unity preſerved, but at laſt things would come to ſuch a paſs that there would ſtart up as many Churches, and different Religions, as Families. And this gave birth to their pretentions to Infallibility, and a blind implicite obedience to the determinations of Councils, without preſuming to examine them at all.
Laſtly, It is by all theſe prejudicate opinions, that the Gentlemen of the Romiſh Communion ſuppoſe themſelves able to overthrow the Proteſtant-Cauſe, and make that of their own Church impregnable. The pretended Reformed Church, ſay they, cannot be this exterior body, always viſible, and palpable, which muſt have continued in this ſtate of viſibility, and that without any alteration, ever ſince Jeſus Chriſt, and the Apoſtles time, down to ours; becauſe this is not above a hundred or ſixſcore years old, Therefore it is not the Church of Chriſt. This cannot ſhew a continued ſucceſſion of Prieſts and People, Aſſemblies and Epiſcopal Sees, nor a profeſſion of one and the ſame Religion without any variation, which is exactly what Chriſt promiſed. Therefore this is not the Church of Jeſus Chriſt. This Church hath forſaken the Supreme Authority and Infallibility of the Church of Rome, and refuſed to pay obedience to her deciſions; on the contrary the hath taken upon her to examine thoſe Deciſions, and hath done all that in her lay utterly to ſubvert this Tribunal, which is ſo neceſſary to the ſubſiſtence of the true Church: Therefore ſhe is not the Church of Jeſus Chriſt.
Of theſe Objections eſpecially hath M. de Meaux made his Book to conſiſt; and becauſe this of mine is made publick only with a deſign to anſwer that, it is not fit I ſhould prevent the reading of it in this Preface, nor foreſtal the judgment men may make of my Anſwers, when they ſee them at large. I ſhall think it therefore ſufficient to ſay in general, by way of preparation, That all theſe pretended Principles which the Gentlemen of the Romiſh Communion take the freedom to ſuppoſe, are every one of them falſe and ſophiſtical, and capable of being confuted more ways than one, becauſe all built upon a falſe and vain foundation. For in truth what greater vanity can there be, than to go about to form an Idea of the Church, after the pattern of a Civil Society? The Civil Society is a humane contrivance, that owes its birth to natural inſtinct, under the Government of a General Providence, and is kept up and preſerved by Rules of Juſtice and humane Policy. The Church is a Divine and Supernatural work, born only of the Blood of the Son of God, and animated only by his Spirit. His hands have made it, and his particular Providence watches over it, and preſerves it. The Laws of the Civil Society do not properly reſpect any more than the outward man, they never make it any part of their End or buſineſs to regulate mens hearts, or alter the inclinations, or inward motions there; all within, they leave perfectly free, and are ſatisfied with an outward obſervation, which comes within the reach of man's power. The Laws of the Church do chiefly regard the inward man, their deſign is to ſanctifie the heart, and fix themſelves eſpecially in the ſoul, which are effects above any power of man, and can belong to none but God only.
The matters in which the Civil Society is imployed, are meerly temporal, ſuch as we call the Goods of Fortune, Honour, Trade, the Exerciſe of Arts and Sciences, and other things of this kind, which may be cogniſable by men, and brought under their Juriſdiction. But the matters in which the Society of the Church is concerned, conſiſt in Myſteries conveyed to us by a Supernatural Revelation; in Laws impoſed upon the Conſcience; in the internal and external practice of Chriſtian Vertues. Now all theſe things are Heavenly, Spiritual, unchangeable, having no dependance upon the will, authority, or declaration of men, but ſolely and immediately upon the will of God, and his declaring them to be ſuch. To make a man a true member of the Civil Society, there is no more required than to ſeem ſo in the eyes of the world, who can paſs a judgment only on the outward appearance, without being able to dive into the heart. To be a member of the Church, it is required that a man be ſo, not in the eyes of men only, but of God too, who a… the Scripture expreſſes it, trieth the very hearts and reins, and will not be ſatisfied with a pare outſide. The deſign of Civil Societies, is, that every man may according to his quality and ſtation, enjoy the publick Priviledges, that his Perſonal Rights and Properties may be preſerved intire, that each particular perſon may live quietly and peaceably under the protection of the whole Body; and theſe are Advantages not out of the power of men to give. The end for which the Church is deſigned, is everlaſting Salvation, a Heavenly Paradiſe, the happineſs of a life to come, which are all Advantages not within the power of men to confer. In the Civil Society, private men ought rather to ſuffer injuries that are put upon them, than diſturb the peace of the whole Body, becauſe ſuch injuries may be endured, and yet not approved; and beſides if they do it, the evil is not paſt all redreſs; for God who protects the innocent and oppreſſed, is able to right them, and recompence their loſſes with intereſt: In the Church it is far otherwiſe, where the Conſcience muſt acquieſce, and a quiet ſubmiſſion cannot be given to a lye, an error, or an unjuſt thing, without approving it; and when it is approved, the evil is paſt redreſs, for God will avenge that fault, and nothing can make us amends for the loſs of our Eternal Salvation: Beſides, that the peace we hereby allow the whole Body, is ſo far from a Bleſſing, that it is the worſt of Evils, being, in truth, no better than a War againſt God. I repeat it therefore once again, That there is not in the World a greater falſity, nor a more ſophiſtical impoſture, than the framing ſuch a notion of the Church, after the model of Civil Societies.
The caſe ſtanding thus, who does not perceive that all the concluſions from this falſe ſuppoſition fall to the ground, and utterly vaniſh? A man muſt not after this, fancy the Church to be a Body merely external, nor that all its eſſence conſiſts in a bare Profeſſion; nor that theſe Definitions given us of it, which run upon an outward profeſſion of the ſame Faith, a participation of the ſame Sacraments, a ſubmiſſion to the ſame Pope, without allowing internal Graces any ſhare, are good and valid definitions; nor that wicked men, worldlings and hypocrites, are Members of Jeſus Chriſt's true Church. All this would do, if the queſtion were concerning a Body, or contrivance merely humane, as the Civil Society is. But when we diſcourſe of a thing that is the work and contrivance of God, and muſt bear ſome proportion to the excellency of its Author, we muſt affirm that Faith, Hope and Charity, and in one word, all the parts of true Regeneration are eſſential to it; and that this conſiſts of the Faithful and Elect only, excluding thence the Hypocrites and Reprobate. We muſt not afterwards fancy the Church ſo be a body or company of men, viſible at the ſame rate that Kingdoms and Commonwealths are; Li…an, ſo as to diſtinguiſh plainly, and without danger of miſtake, the very perſons whereof it is compoſed. This were allowable, provided the Church conſiſted in an outward appearance, and bare profeſſion only. But we muſt affirm it to be viſible in the midſt of diſſemblers, as honeſt men are viſible, when mixt with thoſe that act otherwiſe; or to make uſe of a Scripture inſtance, as the good Corn is viſible, tho mingled in the ſame field with Tares that look like it. The Promiſes of Jeſus Chriſt muſt no longer be applied to all the exterior Body made up of a mere profeſſion, nor muſt the perpetuity of the Church be imagined to mean a continuance of this exterior Body in the ſame condition, without undergoing any alteration; or a conſtant equal ſucceſſion of Prieſts, People, Sees and Councils. This might be admitted, if all this exterior body were the true Church of Jeſus Chriſt, if that were not mixt with worldlings and wicked men, who change the Church as to outward appearances; or if it's Miniſtry were ſure to be always intruſted in the hands of good men. But the caſe being otherwiſe, theſe Promiſes muſt be confined to the true Believers, and the Church conceived to ſubſiſt for ever in this mixture of wicked perſons, and conſequently, that it ſhall ſubſiſt ſometimes among the publick corruptions of the Miniſtry, to which Almighty God ſets bounds, as his wiſdom ſees fit for the preſervation of his Children. We muſt not any longer believe a ſupream, viſible, and ſpeaking authority in the Church, to be neceſſary for putting an end to differences and diſputes; nor upon this pretence allow Eccleſiaſtical Aſſemblies to be infallible, or forbid the faithful to examine their determinations. This might paſs, if the Church were I reſerved, as Civil Societies are, by rules of humane policy; or if ſome temporal advantages were the only thing enquired after; or if the matters ſo determined, required only an outward compliance, as thoſe in Civil Societies do. But now, that the Church is under a protection infinitely more effectual than all the wiſdom of Man; now that Salvation is the thing in queſtion, and a ſubmiſſion of Conſcience the thing required, it muſt be confeſt, that ſince Divine Revelation ceaſed, there is no further need of any other ſupreme infallible: Authority, beſides that of the Scripture, which is the Churches Law, its Oracle, and perpetual Rule; a Rule plain and clear in what it expreſſes in all things neceſſary to be believed; plain and clear in its ſilence with relation to other things not neceſſary to be believed: It muſt be owned, that ſince God does not call men to Miniſterial functions immediately, and by himſelf, it may happen that theſe Functions may generally be exerciſed by Reprobates; and to ſuppoſe that ſuch people as theſe, who can challenge no ſhare in God's Promiſes to his Church, are infallible, would be the moſt palpable abſurdity in the World. We muſt acknowledg, that ſince it is ſo uncertain, whether the men that make up theſe Aſſemblies, are themſelves really of Jeſus Chriſt's Church, it would be not only raſh, but wicked, to receive their Decrees implicitly, and ſubmit to them without any Examination at all; becauſe this were really to put our Salvation upon the venture, which ought to be infinitely dearer to us than any thing in the World, and which, if once loſt, can never be made amends for again. Laſtly, we muſt not upon theſe pretended Principles take up Prejudices againſt the Proteſtant Churches, nor tax them with Novelty, becauſe they are not united to this viſible, exterior Body, which was before the Reformation; or becauſe they do not ſhew that uniform ſucceſſion of Sees, and Councils, and the profeſſion of the ſame Religion, without any alteration at all, and every thing as was practiſed before; nor pretend they have ſubverted a Tribunal neceſſary for the ſubſiſtence of the true Church, becauſe they refuſe to acknowledg the Church of Rome's Authority, and to comply with her determinations. Theſe ſeveral charges upon us might be tolerably well laid, if a man could aſſert that the Church conſiſts of all this exterior body, as it might be aſſerted, if a Civil Society were the matter in queſtion. But being that body muſt be diſtinguiſhed into two parts, the one conſiſting of good, the other of ill men; the one of good Corn, the other of Tares; the Proteſtant Church cannot be called new, if it only oppoſe this latter part, which had gotten poſſeſſion of all the outward advantages, to wit, the Miniſtry, the Sees, the Churches, the Councils, the Schools, and in one word, the Exterior Profeſſion, and which had changed and corrupted all theſe. For is there any neceſſity that a Church ſhould groan under the ſame oppreſſion, in order to being the ſame with a Church that was before? Is there a neceſſity of lying under the Tares that choak'd and encompaſſed the Corn, in order to being of the Corn? And are not men the ſame Children of Jacob, without being among the ſame ſtrangers among whom that Family hath been? The Proteſtants have not one jot the leſs really, and truly, a ſucceſſion of Sees, of Councils, and the profeſſion of Religion, for not having that part of them which was earthly and unclean. I acknowledg they have given quite another aſpect and appearance to the Houſe of God, by this cleanſing; but ſtill there is the ſame Miniſtry, the ſame Sees, the ſame Aſſemblies, the ſame Profeſſion, not with reſpect to the corruptions that appeared in them, but in regard of the Chriſtian Order which ſtill continued under all this filth and naſtineſs. The veſſels of the Temple are ſtill the ſame, only they are waſhed, made clean, and reſtored to their natural uſe. And as for that pretended Tribunal of the Romiſh Church, which the Reformation has ſubverted, it never having any more foundation than what was imaginary, and merely humane, there is no reaſon to complain of the Proteſtants, for not ſubmitting to it, becauſe they would thereby have done wrong to that of the Scripture, which is Jeſus Chriſt's true Tribunal, fixed, and to continue for ever, in the midſt of his people.
But this ſhewing the many differences between the Church and Civil Societies, is not the only method of confuting theſe Gentlemen's Principles. Take which way you will, their falſity and weakneſs is eaſily diſcovered, and they are likewiſe attended with this inconvenience, that as ſoon as one of them is overthrown, all the reſt fall with it. Overthrow for inſtance but that one principle, that the true Church muſt be an exterior viſible Body, even to the pointing out of the particular perſons whereof it is compoſed, and at the ſame time you overthrow all thoſe definitions. they give of it, which include bad men as well as good, and make reprobates to be no leſs members than the Elect; you overthrow their application of God's Promiſes to this whole Body; you overthrow its perpetuity in this Condition, by virtue of thoſe Promiſes; you overthrow the neceſſity of this pretended external Succeſſion, upon which they lay ſuch mighty ſtreſs; you evacuate the ſupreme Authority, and Infallibility of Church Aſſemblies, and the blind obedience required to their determinations. The caſe is the ſame with all their other principles particularly, which muſt of neceſſity, either all ſtand, or all fall together.
I might truly ſay, that you can no where obſerve a Syſteme more effectually deſtroyed in the ſeveral parts of it, than this is in the Book now publiſhed by me: For there is not any one of the propoſitions that help to make that Syſteme, but I have confuted it ſubſtantially, by Arguments that amount even to a Demonſtration. Which way can any one maintain that Definition of the Church which goes upon a bare outward profeſſion, and makes it conſiſt of bad as well as good men; and which Stapleton, Bellarmin, Cardinal du Perron, and ſome other Controverſial Divines look upon as a principal point, after having obſerved what I have written on this ſubject, in the ſecond queſtion of the Letter to my Friend, and the Examination of M. de Meaux's ninth Reflection? What pretence can men have for carrying on the Churches viſibility ſo far, as to a plain, particular, and conſtant deſignation of mens perſons that help to make up that Body, after having conſidered what is ſaid to this purpoſe in my Third Queſtion, and in the Examination of M. de Meaux's Eleventh Reflection? How can men fancy that Jeſus Chriſt's Promiſes belong to this exterior Body compoſed of good and bad men promiſcuouſly, after what I have written to this purpoſe upon the fourth Queſtion, and the Examination of the Twelfth Reflection? Which way can the External Succeſſion be defended, in the ſenſe theſe Gentlemen underſtand it, after having weighed my anſwer to the Second Part of M. de Condom's Diſcourſe, and compared it with my Examination of the Eighth and Thirteenth Reflection? What can be ſ…d in behalf of the Supreme Authority Church Aſſemblies pretend to, and the ready Obedience to them, without any trying their deciſions, which theſe Gentlemen would make us believe ought to be paid them, after having compared the Relation of our Conference, with what I have written on the Six firſt Reflections? I muſt confeſs the ſtrength of my Reaſons may poſſibly receive ſome diſadvantage from the manner of my delivering them; and that it required a more skilful hand than mine, which might have ſpoke with all the elegance, and addreſs of my renowned Adverſary. But yet I dare aver, that even in my plain way, and in the midſt of all my bluntneſs, there will be found enough to ſatisfy and convince my Readers, That the Syſteme treated of is upon many accounts quite deſtroyed, both as to the whole, and as to each of its parts.
I am ſenſible, this Syſteme is a thing contrived with abundance of cunning and skill, that it was never the invention of one ſingle Brain; that they have made it look as ſpecious as the thing could poſſibly bear; But all the skill and cunning in the World can never give a thing ſo great a luſtre as Truth; and it is plain, that That Syſteme can never be true, which is repugnant to the evidence both of Scripture and Reaſon. I may add too, that notwithſtanding all the pains taken to contrive it as ſtrong as might be, they are forced to leave it with many weakneſſes, which it was impoſſible for them to conceal. Nay, ſuch a Syſteme particularly is This, which contradicts experience, and contradicts it ſo far too, that were the Church of Rome it ſelf, for whoſe advantage it was firſt eſtabliſh'd, to be tryed by theſe Principles that compoſe it, ſhe could not make her party good. Let us, if you pleaſe, venture an experiment upon that principle which aſſerts the perpetuity of the ſame Exterior Body. Will you take the confidence to call that of the three firſt Ages, the ſame Body with the modern Church of Rome, where there is not the leaſt tittle to be found of direct Invocation of Saints and Angels in the publick ſervice of the Church; where there is not the leaſt addreſſing to Images and Pictures in their worſhip; where there is no prohibition of the Cup to the Laity; nor of the uſe of Scripture in the vulgar Tongue, without leave granted by the Ordinary; nor of Praying in a Language which the people do not underſtand; where we find nothing to the contrary, but that the Scripture is the only, and the ſufficient Rule of Faith, in all things neceſſary to Salvation; where we meet with no ſuch number of Sacraments as ſeven, no uſe made of Papal Indulgences, no neceſſity of Auricular Confeſſion, no Elevation of the Hoſt that the people may proſtrate themſelves in adoration to it; no Tranſubſtantiation, nor Real preſence made Doctrines; no mention of the Church of Rome's being the Mother and Miſtreſs of all other Churches, nor of I know not how many things beſides which are of very conſiderable importance? Will you call the Church of Rome, as it ſtands at this day, as it looks upon the opinion of the M…llenaries to be erroneous, as it prohibits giving the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper to little Children, as it believes the beatifick viſion of God antecedent to the laſt Judgment, as it forbids the Clergy to Marry; will you call this, I ſay, the ſame Exterior Body with the Primitive Church, which believed and practiſed directly the contrary? To call this the ſame Body, is like Theſeus his Ship, which was always called the ſame Ship, tho there was ſcarce a Plank in it all, that had not been changed.
A Second experiment may be made in that Principle which relates to the Succeſſion in Epiſcopal Sees, as theſe Gentlemen are pleaſed to underſtand it: For how can they ever maintain this Succeſſion in the See of Rome, which they look upon as the very Original and Centre of Church-Unity, while they agree, as they do, that many of thoſe Popes were intruders againſt all Law and Cuſtom, and conſequently falſe Popes, ſuch as Baronius calls*Baronius, ad Ann. 900 de Stephano ſeptimo. Stephanus Apoſtolcae ſedis invaſo—& paulo poſt, facinoroſus homo, qui que ut fur, & latro ingreſſus eſt in o…le ovium.—Ad ann. 908. (de Sergio primo) Perpetrata ſunt iſta ab invaſoribus, & intruſis in Apoſtolicam ſedem, Pontificis nomen uſurpantibus, & illegitime thronum Apoſtolicum invadentibus.—ad Ann 912. (de Joanne decimo, qui poſt Landonem Petri cathedram aſcendit, Theodorae, ſcorti tunc temporis potentiſſimi auſpiciis) Quae tunc facies Eccleſiae Romanae? Cum darentur Epiſcopi, intruderentur in ſedem Petri meretricum amaſii Pſeudopontifices, qui non ſint niſi ad conſignanda tantum tempora in Catalogo Romanorum Pontificum ſcripti. Annal. Tom. 10. Edit. Antverp. Violent ſeizers of the Apoſtolick See, unlawful Ʋſurpers of the Papal Name and Chair, Falſe Popes which only ſerved to make the times they lived in notorious? And now ſeeing this intruſion continued for almoſt one whole Age, and the call to all Eccleſiaſtical Functions depends upon the See of Rome, what muſt we think of thoſe which proceeded from theſe falſe Popes, and thoſe that followed after them? How can they make good this Succeſſion in the perſon of Vigilius, who by their own confeſſion was an Uſurper of the See over Sylverius, and a Schiſmatick, excommunicated, he and all his party that adhered to him, by Sylverius the rightful Pope? Which adherents were not only all the Clergy of Rome, but all the Archbiſhops and Biſhops of the Empire, excepting only four Biſhops that were baniſht with Sylverius, and joyned with him in ſigning the ſentence of Excommunication; Sylverius dyed, Vigilius kept the Papacy ſtill, and yet the Excommunication was not taken off. It is acknowledged to be a juſt and valid ſentence, and yet from theſe excommunicated perſons are all the Popes, Patriarchs, Primates, Archbiſhops and Biſhops deſcended ever ſince.
†Baronius ad Ann. 540. Se à Pontificatu abdicâſſe Vigilium, ex ſpatio vacationis ſedis Silverii dicendum omnino eſt; nam quomodo potuit, ſecundum Anaſtaſium, ſedes vacâſſe ſex dies, ſi Vigilius, ipſo vivente Silverio, intruſus ſemel, ſedere poſt ejus obitum perſeveràſſet? Annal. Tom. 7. Pag. 301. Edit. Antverp.Baronius in the relation of this Accident, endeavours all he can, to deprive us of the Concluſions we draw from it. He tells us therefore, that he gueſſes Vigilius acted a part all that while, and that being informed of Sylverius his death, he of his own accord reſigned the Popedom uſurped by him before, and at the ſame time got the Clergy of Rome to chuſe him into it again. This conjecture he grounds upon four words in Anaſtaſius, that the See was vacant ſix days. But this is a very idle ſtory: There is not any Author mentions this voluntary reſignation of Vigilius, nor his being choſen in again by the Clergy of Rome, as is pretended; 'tis all a pure fancy of Baronius, without any manner of probability for it; and the five or ſix days which the See continued vacant, are to be underſtood to follow, not Sylverius his death, but the time of his being depoſed by Beliſarius illegally and by force, who took away his Pallium, and compelled him to reſume a Monks habit. He lived after that a year in exile in the Iſland of Palmenia; there he excommunicated Vigilius and his faction, to wit, the Clergy of Rome, that very Clergy which choſe Vigilius to ſucceed him; ſo that the Excommunication being juſt and valid, as Baronius owns it was, we cannot look upon Vigilius and his Clergy, and all the Biſhops in the World then, any otherwiſe than as men degraded, and cut off from the Church: And then according to M. de Meaux's principles, there was no way left, but for Chriſt to come into the World once more, to re-eſtabliſh the call to the Miniſtry. The truth of what I aſſert, may be tryed a third way, in that Principle of the ſupreme Authority, and Infallibility of Councils, and the blind implicit obedience they pretend is due to them. For ſuppoſing this Principle to take place, the Church of Rome hath ceaſed to be a true Church long ago. I ſhall not here produce all thoſe Councils heretofore that decreed in favour of Arrianiſm; ſuch as that of Antioch, of Sardica, or of Philippi, that of Milan, of Sirmium, of Arimini, of Seleucia, or of Conſtantinople. I will not inſtance in the ſecond Council of Epheſus, where the Biſhop of Rome's Legates aſſiſted, which eſtabliſht the Eutychian Hereſy; nor that of Dioſpolis, which acquitted Pelagius the Heretick. Nor will I ſpeak of thoſe which have at ſeveral times determined things directly contradictory to one another, in the matter of Images, ſuch as the Council of Conſtantinople under Conſtantine Copronymus; the ſecond Council of Nice, under the Empreſs Irene, the Council of Franckfort under Charlemagne, and the Council of Paris under Lewis the Debonaire. Nor will I inſiſt upon the Councils held in the Tenth Age, which contradicted one another upon this queſtion, whether Formoſus could be lawfully preferred to the Papacy, contrary to his Oath, which a Pope had diſpenſed with; and whether all the perſons ordained by him ought not to be reordained: Without troubling our ſelves with things ſo far off, we need only deſire theſe Gentlemen to tell us, if they really and ſincerely believe theſe few late Councils to be infallible? That of Rome under Gregory the ſeventh, where Baronius ſays, it was determined,aBaronius ad Ann. 1076. Privilegia Apoſtolicae ſedis, & Romani Pontificis Quòd Papae …eat Imperatores deponere. Quòd ſententia illius à nullo debeat retractari, & ipſe omnium ſolus retractare poſſit. Quòd à fidelitate iniquorum Subjectos poteſt abſolvere. Annal. Tom. 11. Pag. 485. Edit. Romae 1605. That the Pope hath power to depoſe Emperors and Kings; That what he hath once determined, no man can afterwards bring to a rehearing, but that he alone can rehear, and alter the determinations of all other perſons; That he cannot be judged by any man whatever; That he may abſolve the Subjects of wicked Princes from their Oaths of Allegiance. That of Lateran under Alexander the Third, whichbRelaxatos autem ſe noverint à debito fidelitatis, & hominii, ac totius obſequii, dum in tantâ iniquitate permanſerint, quicun que illis aliquo peccato, (pacto) tenentur annexi. Conc. Lateran 3. Cap. 27. Anno 1179. Collect. Labbe. Lut. Paris. 1671. Tom. 10. Pag. 1523. relèaſes Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance, which they have ſworn to their Governors, if thoſe Governors hold any correſpondence with Hereticks. That of Lateran under Innocent the third, which enjoyns,cSi vero Dominus temporalis requiſitus, & monitus Eccleſiâ, terram ſuam purgare neglexerit ab haereticâ foeditate, per Metropolitanum, & caeteròs comprovinciales Epiſcopos Excommunicationis vinculo innodetur. Et ſi ſatiſfacere contempſerit infra annum, ſignificetur hoc ſummo Pontifici, ut extunc ipſe Vaſſallos ab ejus fidelitate denunciet abſolutos, & terram exponat Catholicis occupandam, qui eam exterminatis haereticis ſine ullâ contradictione poſſideant. Conc. Lateran. 4. Ann. 1215. Cap. 3. de Haereticis Collect. Labb. Tom. 11. Part. 1. Pag. 148. That if Temporal Princes neglect to root out Hereticks, there ſhall be notice given of it to the Pope, that ſo the Pope may pronounce their Subjects abſolved from their Oaths of Allegiance, and diſpoſe of their Countries to Catholicks who may diſcharge their duty better. That of Lyons under Innocent the fourthdSee Innocent the fourth's ſentence againſt the Emperor Frederick, paſt in the Council of Lyons. It is at large in Labbe 'sCollection of Councils, Tom. 11. part. 1. Pag. 640. in the Cloſe are theſe words. Nos ſuper praemiſſis—memoratum Principem—omni honore & dignitate privatum à Domino oſtendimus, denunciamus, & nihilo minus ſententiando privamus. Omnes, qui ei Juramento fidelitatis tenentur adſtricti, a Juramento hujuſmodi perpetuo abſolventes, autoritate Apoſtolicâ …irmiter inhibendo, ne quiſquam de caetero ſibi tanquam Imperatori, vel Regi pareat vel intendat. Et decernendo quoſlibet, qui deinceps ei, velut Imperatori▪ aut Regi, conſilium, vel auxilium praeſtiterint, ſeu favorem, ipſo facto excommunicationis vinculo ſubjacere. which depoſed the Emperor. Frederick the Second, releaſed his Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance, and forbid them upon penalty of being Anathematized, to acknowledg or obey him. That of Conſtance, which in the Bull of Martin the fiftheUniverſas poteſtates, & dominos temporales, & Judices antedictos exhortando requirimus, & mandamus eiſdem,—ut pro defenſione fidei—inquiſitoribus Haereticae pravitatis—pareant & intendant, praebeant que auxilium, & favorem Labb. Collect. Concil. Conſtant. Bulla. Inter cunctas paſtoralis Curae, &c. Tom. 12. Pag. 259. containing the Clauſe de ſacro approbante Concilio, ſubjects not only Patriarchs, Archbiſhops, and Biſhops, but even Kings and other ſupreme Governors, of what quality ſoever they be, to the judgment of the Inquiſitors, even to a deprivation from their honours, and all other worldly poſſeſſions. That of Lateran, under Leo the Tenth, which ſets the Pope's Authority above that of ‖Cum ſolum Romanum Pontificem, pro tempore exiſtentem tanquam authoritatem ſuper omnia concilia habentem, tam Conciliorum indicendorum—plenum jus & poteſtatem, nedum ex ſacrae Scripturae teſtimonio, dictis ſanctorum Patrum—habere manifeſtè conſtet. Conc. Lateran. 5. Seſſ. 11. Bulla. Paſtor aeternus. Labb. Collect. Tom. 14. Pag. 309.Councils, directly contrary to what was defined by the Council of Conſtance, with the approbation of Pope Martin the Fifth, and to the Council of Baſil, with the approbation of Pope Eugenius the Fourth.
In a word, the endeavouring to aſſert that Councils are infallible, and giving them ſuch an Authority as ſupercedes all examination, is ſo bold an undertaking, that many eminent perſons in the Church of Rome it ſelf, thinking it could never be effected, have not ſcrupled to declare for the other opinion. Among theſe was the famous Abbot of Palerma, principal of the Canoniſts, whoſe words are ſo very conſiderable, that I cannot omit repeating them. *Puto tamen quod ſi Papa moveretur melioribus rationibus & authoritatibus, quam Concilium, quod ſtandum eſſet ſententiae ſuae. Nam & Concilium poteſt errare, ſicut alias erravit, ſuper Matrimonium contrahendam inter raptorem & raptam. Dictum Hieronymi melius ſentientis poſtea praelatum fuit ſtatuto Concilii. Nam in concernentibus fidem etiam dictum unius privati praeferendum eſſet dicto Papae, ſi ille moveretur melioribus rationibus novi & veteris Teſtamenti, quam Papa. Nec obſtat, ſi dicatur quod Concilium non poteſt errare, quia Chriſtus oravit pro Eccleſiâ ſuâ, ut non deficeret; quare dico, quod …icet Concilium generale repraeſentet totam Eccleſiam Univerſalem, tamen in veritate ibi non eſt verè Univerſalis Eccleſia ſed repraeſentativè: quia Univerſalis Eccleſia conſtituitur ex collatione omnium fidelium, unde omnes fideles orbis conſtituunt iſtam Eccleſiam Univerſalem, cujus caput & ſponſus eſt ipſe Chriſtus. Papa autem eſt Vicarius Chriſti, & non vere caput Eccleſiae. Et iſta eſt illa Eccleſia, quae errare non poteſt. Unde poſſibile eſt, quod vera fides Chriſti, remanſerit in uno ſolo, ita quod verum eſt dicere, quod fides non deficit in Eccleſiâ, ſicut jus Univerſitatis poteſt reſidere in uno ſolo, aliis peccantibus. Panormitan. ſuper S. Decret. Tit. de Election. Can. Significâſti. Fol. 86.I am of opinion, (ſays he) that if the Pope have better reaſons, and better authorities than the Council, he ought to ſtick to his own judgment. For the Council may, and ſometimes actually has erred, as particularly in the caſe of a Raviſhers marrying with the woman on whom the Rape was committed. Saint Jerom's opinion was preferred before the Decree of a Council, becauſe it was really better. For in matters of Faith, a ſingle private mans judgment ought to be preferred before the Pope's, if this private judgment be grounded upon better reaſons, taken out of the Old and New Teſtament. It ſignifies nothing to alledg the Council cannot err becauſe Jeſus Chriſt hath prayed for his Church that it fail not. In anſwer to this I ſay, that although a General Council do indeed repreſent the Church univerſally, yet it is plain the Ʋniverſal Church is not there really, but only by way of repreſentation. For the Ʋniverſal Church is made up of the company of all the Faithful, ſo that they are the Faithful throughout the whole world, that conſtitute the Church Ʋniverſally, of which Chriſt is the Head, and the Spouſe. The Pope is Chriſts Vicar, but he is not truly the Head of the Church. And this Church it is, that cannot err. Thus then it may ſo happen that the true Faith of Chriſt may continue entire in a ſingle perſon, and then the true Faith would not fail in the Church, as the right of a Community may be preſerved in a ſingle member of it.
See now what the force of truth made one of the greateſt Doctors of his Age ſay: The Catholick Church in his opinion conſiſts only of the Faithful, it is of them only that Chriſt is the Head and the Spouſe, to them alone he hath promiſed that they ſhall abide for ever. Councils may repreſent the Church, but it does not follow from thence that they are the Church. They may fall into Errors. The true Church which refuſes to fall with them, may ſubſiſt in a very few, and theſe few by preſerving the true Faith, will alſo preſerve all the Priviledges of Jeſus Chriſts Church. All this is exactly what we aſſert in this caſe.
The Abbot of Palermo's opinion was likewiſe common to many of the Schools. Occam a famous Doctor among the Schoolmen, of the fourteenth Age hath compoſed a Dialogue on this Subject, where among other queſtions he diſcuſſes theſe ſix principal ones: 1.†Occam. Dialog. Lib. 5. Quaeritur, utrum Papa canonice electus haereticari poſſit. cap. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Utrum Collegium Cardinalium poſſit haereticâ pravitate maculari. Cap. 6. &c. Utrum Papa cum Collegio Cardinalium ſimul poſſit hereticâ pravitate maculari. Cap. 10. Utrum Eccleſia Romana ſe… ſedes Apoſtolica valeat in…ici haereticâ pravitate. Cap. 11. Utrum Concilium Generale Eccleſiae in haereticam pravitatem labi poſſit. Cap. 25. Utrum tota multitudo fidelium haereticari poſſit. Cap. 29. Whether a Pope that is Canonically, choſen can afterwards turn Heretick? 2.Whether the Colledg of Cardinals may fall into Hereſie? 3. Whether it be poſſible for the Pope and Cardinals together to fall into it? 4. Whether it be ſo, for the Church of Rome, and Apoſtolick See to fall into it? 5. Whether a General Council may fall into it? 6. Whether even the Body of Chriſtians may fall into it? He affirms, that as many held the Negative in theſe Points, ſo there were a great many too, that held the affirmative; and he gives you the reaſons urged by both ſides for their ſeveral opinions. I know very well, that he was engaged in that ſilly quarrel between John the 22d, and the Franciſcan Friers, which took up almoſt the whole life of that Pope, to know whether the Friers had any proper right to the bread they eat, or only the bare uſe of it; and whether Jeſus Chriſt and his Apoſtles had likewiſe any proper right to the things they uſed. But this is no argument why ſuch an Authors Teſtimony ſhould not be unexceptionable, when he aſſerts as matter of fact that the ſix forementioned queſtions were diſputed pro and con, among the Learned men of his time.
There is likewiſe a teſtimony of John Francis Picus Mirandula, which flouriſhed in the beginning of the Fifteenth Age, which he gives us in his Theoremes concerning the Faith. After having ſaid ſomething to their opinion, who make either a Pope or a Council Infallible, he adds theſe words: †Reſtiterunt alii, affirmantes errare poſſe Concilia, & jam errâſſe, ut Ariminenſe illud tam celebriter damnatum, Epheſinum quo que ſecundum, item Conſtantinopolitanum, de ponendis imaginibus, ſed & Aquiſgranenſe cujus ſententiae de Matrimonio raptae Hieronymi determinatio praeponitur. Propterea, ſi haec aberraverunt alia quoque errare poſſe dicunt. Quâ de re fatentur nonnulli, Concilia ea, ſive Univerſales Synodos, in quibus Authoritas Pontificis ſummi non praeſidet, errare poſſe; non autem ea quibus intervenit. Inſtant illi ex adverſo Epheſinum ſecundum legitimè fuiſſe congregatum, praeſidentibus etiam Legatis Pontificis; nihilominus in everſion…m fidei agitatum, & in ejus correctionem à Leone Pontifice Chalcedonenſem Synodum inſtitutam. Rurſus quia dari remedia videntur, dum Concilia diſcrepant cui videlicet ſtandum adhaerendumque magis, innuitur, aiunt, & apertè etiam ſignificatur, aberrare Univerſalia Concilia poſſe. J. Fran. Picus Mirand. de Fide & Ord. Credendi, Theorem. 4. Tom. 2. Pag. 259. Edit. Baſil.Others there are that oppoſe this opinion, by ſaying that Councils may err, and actually bave erred, as for inſtance, the Council of Arimini, the ſecond Council of Epheſus, that of Conſtantinople concerning Images, and that of Aix la Chapelle, about the marriage of Virgins that were forced. And if theſe (ſay they) have erred, others may err as well as they; whereupon ſome hold, that ſuch General Councils as the Pope does not preſide in by his Authority, may err, but thoſe where he does, cannot. To which others return, that the Council of Epheſus was lawfully convened, that the Pope's Legates preſided in it, and yet the Faith was ſubverted there, and the regulation of this very matter was it that moved Pope Leo to call the Council of Chalcedon. They ſay further, that their pretending to find out remedies for knowing when two Councils claſh, whether of the two a man ought to hold to, is an evident ſign that General Councils may err.
It is certain then, that the Doctrine we now aſſert, when we affirm, that even the moſt numerous Aſſemblies are liable to error, that they may conſiſt of ſuch men as ſhall not be of the true Church, and conſequently may fall off from their function, is neither a new Doctrine, nor any opinion we are driven to for the juſtfying our Reformation; but an old Doctrine, which the evidence of Truth hath always ſuggeſted to ſincere and unbiaſſed men. So that if M. de Meaux had but pleaſed to reflect a little upon this, he would not have ſaid, as he did, That it was a Monſter, the birth whereof was reſerved for the time of the New Reformation. It is convenient ſometimes to be a little more adviſed and ſparing in paſſing ones judgment. It would queſtionleſs be very foul to conclude form what hath been juſt now ſaid againſt the abſolute Authority and Infallibility of Eccleſiaſtical Aſſemblies, that we quite caſt off all theſe humane Orders, for the external guidance and government of the Church. To ſix any ſuch opinions as this upon us, would be the unjuſteſt thing in the world. Our Confeſſions of Faith; our Diſcipline, and the Writings of our Authors, as well as our conſtant practice in all places, are a vindication of us in this particular, beyond all ſcruple or exception. Firſt then, we hold the Miniſtry to be of Divine Inſtitution, and conſequently become neceſſary by the neceſſity of a Command; and that tho the uſe of it is not abſolutely neceſſary by the neceſſity of the means, for the Exiſtence of the Church; it is however of ſuch excellent uſe and advantage in order to the preſerving and propagating of the Church, that to go about to take it away, would be a manifeſt impiety. Secondly, We are of opinion, that in matters of Diſcipline relating to the publick, ſuch as the manner and form of Religious Aſſemblies, of Adminiſtring the Sacraments, and others of this kind, theſe ſhould be left to the determination of Eccleſiaſtical Aſſemblies, and provided they bring in no Rite offenſive to the Conſcience, or contrary to the nature of the Evangelical Worſhip, an abſolute obedience is due to them. Further yet, We allow theſe Eccleſiaſtical Aſſemblies a power of Cenſuring private perſons, and proceeding to the laſt and higheſt Cenſure, that of Excommunication. And although we make no queſtion at all, but this power may ſometimes be abuſed by them, and unjuſt ſentences pronounced, yet we think that out of veneration for the Order, a man ought to ſuffer ſuch to be executed upon him, provided this do not engage us in any thing that may wound a good conſcience.
As for matters of Faith, Worſhip, and general Rules for ordering mens Manners, we are perſwaded that theſe Aſſemblies continuing the ſubordination to one another, may not only attain to the knowledg of them, by the Word of God, but that they muſt and ought to do ſo, for preventing the encreaſe of error, and the preſerving Gods truth in its genuine purity. It is part of their office and buſineſs to reſtrain the exorbitances of mens minds, to help the weak, and to the utmoſt of their power, cheriſh and maintain publick peace in the midſt of this Society. But becauſe on one hand the perſons making theſe Aſſemblies are neither inſpired, nor infallible, nor have any power over mens conſciences; and on the other hand, becauſe no body can be ſure, that they are good men, and will diſcharge their duty faithfully, there being ſo many ſeveral ſorts of by-reſpects that influence men, when the Spirit of God does not guide them; we think it a very faulty indifference, and a manifeſt ſlighting a man's own ſalvation, to reveive their deciſions blindfold, and upon truſt, without any trial or examination of them at all. But ſtill, though we think this examination highly juſt, and indiſpenſably neceſſary, yet we think withal it is to be uſed with abundance of caution. Beſides, that it muſt be undertaken in the fear of God, and with a diſpoſition full of modeſty, and Chriſtian humility; beſides that we muſt beg for grace from above, and not preſume upon our own abilities; beſides that, we muſt bring along with us, not only charitable, but reverent, and reſpectful thoughts of ſuch Aſſemblies, and judg favourably of them, till we have manifeſt conviction of the contrary. Beſides all this, I ſay, the ignorant ſort of people muſt not be too raſh in offering to interpoſe their judgments about matters which either are not plainly expreſt in Scripture, or naturally and neceſſarily deduced from thence. They muſt ſatisfie themſelves with uſing theſe two ways, The Scriptures being ſilent, And the clear and plain inſtructions to be met with there. From its being ſilent, they muſt learn to reject what it does not teach, for ſtrange and novel Doctrines. For whatever is not in Scripture, is not of Divine Revelation, and nothing that is not revealed by God, can be the object of Faith. By the clear and plain Inſtructions to be met with there, they muſt learn to embrace the Doctrines neceſſary for Salvation, and to reject all things contrary to the ſame, as dangerous and deſtructive Errors. And this is ſufficient for the more ignorant ſort of people.
As for other particulars, for which no certain rule can be given, neither from the Scriptures being ſilent, nor from the plain and clear inſtructions contained in it, nor by natural inferences deduced from thence, before they either receive them, or condemn them, they muſt endeavour to get information by ſuch means as God hath diſcovered, and eſtabliſhed in his Church; and in the mean time entertain a good opinion of the Aſſemblies determinations. Thus they will preſerve their Faith incorrupt, and ſufficient for Salvation; they will pay to Aſſemblies their due reſpects, and keep themſelves in the peace and unity of the Church.
If the Gentlemen of the Romiſh Communion are not content with this, but ſtill would have us believe whatever ſuch Aſſemblies may determine blindfold, we muſt beg of them to conſider, That to exclude thus all manner of amendment, is to open a mighty inlet to Error and Superſtition; 'tis an expoſing believers to a manifeſt danger of having their Faith corrupted, and themſelves damned; in a word, 'tis perfectly to ruine Chriſtianity, unleſs the goodneſs of God interpoſe with ſome remedy. Will not theſe Gentlemen, who are ſo ready at exclaiming againſt the inconveniencies that may poſſibly proceed from our principle, at laſt open their eyes, and take a view of what their own hath actually produced already? Tranſubſtantiation, Purgatory, Indulgences, Merit of Good-works, worſhipping of Images and Relicks, Service in an unknown Tongue, and a thouſand other devotions, which have no great appearance of wiſdom in them: Theſe are the products of their pretended Infallibility, and all this they are forced to defend now, becauſe they would not loſe the point of an implicit obedience.
And now if I were ſpeaking any thing here concerning the occaſion of this diſpute between the Biſhop of Meaux, and me, or the Circumſtances that went before, or followed after our Conference, the world will eaſily perceive I do it, becauſe this Biſhop hath already been at the trouble of giving the publick a ſufficient account of them. One word only I muſt ſay, which reſpects one of our Auditors, Mr. Cotton, who no doubt would have received a better Character from M. de Meaux, had he been ſo happy, as to be known to him more particularly. Mr. Cotton is a Gentleman of great honour, and wants neither apprehenſion, nor judgment; he underſtands his Religion; and though diſpute be no part of his buſineſs, is well verſed in the main Controverſies between us. If his modeſty, or ſome other conſiderations prevailed upon him to ſay ſomething that lookt like declining to engage in diſpute with M. de Meaux, I do not think he ought to have taken his words in their ſtrict and literal ſenſe.
As for the difference between our two Relations, I leave it as M. de Meaux hath done, to the Reader's judgment. He hath obſerved very wiſely, that let him ſay what he would of me, it was in my power to ſay the ſame of him: That all our Auditors were intereſted on one ſide or other; and that the world hath nothing at all to do with our proceedings. To all which let me add, that I will not give any occaſion for any private quarrel with a perſon I honour to that degree, that I do M. de Meaux.
The only thing I need ſay more, is concerning the method I have obſerved in this Book. It is divided into Two Parts. The firſt contains an Anſwer to the Inſtruction given Mademoiſelle de Duras, by this Biſhop, the day before our Conference; together with an Examination of his Reflexions upon that Anſwer, beginning at the ninth, and going on to the thirteenth, incluſively. The ſecond part contains a Relation of what paſt in our Conference, with an Examination of M. de Meaux's Reflexions thereupon, which are his eight firſt. This method in my opinion is very natural.
And now, as I have made it my buſineſs to be very exact, and paſt nothing in his whole Book over, without giving a direct Anſwer to it; ſo I hope that when he ſhall think fit to ſet Pen to Paper againſt me next, he will be as exact, and apply himſelf as cloſe to the pinch of the Queſtion; and not imagine, as men commonly do, that provided they can but pick up here and there ſome looſe paſſages, and from thence ſtart a few difficulties and objections, there need no more be done, and this muſt go for a full Anſwer. I beſeech God to ſhed forth his Bleſſing upon an undertaking, wherein the only Ends I propoſed to my ſelf, were his Glory, and the Illuſtration of the Truth. Thus much I am encouraged to hope from his mercy; and that as he hath hitherto preſerved his little Ship the Church, in the midſt of the billows and ſtorms of the world, he will ſtill continue to preſerve her, as he hath promiſed, even to the end of the world.