Historical Defense of the Reformation, Part 2 · Chapter 3
CHAP. III.
That our Fathers, not being able any more to hope for a Reformation, on the part of the Pope, or his Prelats, were indiſpenſably bound to provide for their own Salvation, and to Reform themſelves.
VVE come now to inquire what our Fathers were bound to do, in ſo great a Confuſion. They were perſwaded, not only, that it was poſſible for the Latin Church to have within it a great many Corruptions and Abuſes, but that it really had a very great Company of them; that falſe worſhip, Errors and Superſtitions had broke in as an Inundation, upon the Chriſtian Religion, and that thoſe abuſes growing more groſs, and growing every day more ſtrong, put Chriſtianity into a manifeſt danger of Ruin: Moreover, there was not any hope of Remedy, either on the part of the Pope, or on the part of the Prelats; For the Court of Rome with all its Aſſociates, had loudly declared againſt a Reformation, maintaining that the Church of Rome could not Err, that ſhe was the Miſtreſs of Mens Faith, and not to believe as ſhe believed was a Hereſie, worthy of the Flames; and as to the Prelats, they had all ſervile obedience to the wills of the Popes, beſides that Ignorance, that Negligence, that Love of the things of the World, and thoſe other Vices in which they were plunged.
How be it, the buſineſs was not about matters of ſmall Importance, nor about the Queſtions of the School, moſt commonly unknown to the People, nor about ſome ſpeculative notions, which could not be of any Conſequence to the Actions of true Holineſs. The Controverſy was about divers things eſſential to Religion, which not only fell within the knowledge of the People, but which likewiſe conſiſted in matters of practice, and which by Conſequence being wicked, as our Fathers could make no doubt that they were, could not but be very contrary to the right Worſhip of God, and mens Salvation. For the debate was about a Religious Worſhip which they were to give not to God alone, but to Creatures alſo, to Angels, to Saints, to Images, and to Relicks; about certain and infallible Springs from whence they ought to draw their Salvation, in building their confidence upon them; for beſides the mercy of God through the Merit and Satisfaction of Jeſus Chriſt, they joyned to that, the merit of our good-works, our own Satisfactions, the over and above Satisfactions of the Saints, and the Authority of the Biſhop of Rome in diſpencing of Indulgences, They Treated of other works which they held that we ought to do through the Obligation of our Conſciences, and with aſſurance that they were good, and thoſe they made a part of our Sanctification, for they added to thoſe that God had commanded us, thoſe that the Popes and their Prelats commanded out of their meer Authority. They Treated of ill actions, from which we ought to abſtain out of the motions of our Conſciences, and which one could not commit without ſin, for beſides thoſe that God had forbidden us, they likewiſe placed in this Rank, thoſe which it ſhould pleaſe the Church to forbid us. They Treated about a certain and infallible Rule of Faith upon which the Minds and Conſciences of Chriſtians might ſtay and reſt, for they would have that principle conſiſt in the Interpretations, in the Traditions and Deciſions of the Church of Rome or its Prelats. The Controverſy was about Jeſus Chriſt himſelf; for they ſaid that the Sacrament of the Euchariſt was the very Perſon of the Son of God, and they adored it under that Quality. the Queſtion was about divers Cuſtoms, introduced into the publick Miniſtry, or generally eſtabliſht by the Cuſtoms of the People that our Fathers thought very contrary to the Spirit of the Goſpel, and true Piety. In fine, in all thoſe and other ſuch like things they Treated about the peace and juſt rights of the Conſcience, the glory of God, the hope of Salvation, and the Preſervation of the Church of Jeſus Chriſt upon Earth. Let them tell us then preciſely what our Fathers ought to have done. Was there any thing in the World of greater concernment then thoſe things which I have ſet down? Or to ſpeak better, was there nothing that could any ways ſtagger them, or hold the minds of all honeſt men in ſuſpence, for ſo much as one moment? Were they bound to renounce their Conſcience, their God and their Salvation, under a pretence that the Flatterers of the Church of Rome ſpeak of her, what the Holy Scripture ſays of the Godhead, That if ſhe pulls down, there is no perſon that can build up, if ſhe ſhuts, there is none can open, if ſhe retains the Waters Decret. 1.all is dried up, if ſhe lots them out they ſhall overflow the Earth. Part. Diſt. 40.Can. 6. in not is.Do they believe that, they ought to have precipitated themſelves into a inevitable Damnation, and to have precipitated others by their Example, to conſent to the Ruin of the Chriſtian Religion, and utter extinction of the Church, and that leſt they ſhould have been wanting in that reſpect, and blind Obedience that the Court of Rome, and its Prelats require of all the World? This would be in Truth to ſet that obedience at two high a price, and it would coſt us very dear: but they will find but few perſons of good underſtanding, who will not confeſs that that would be to puſh on things a little too far.
They will ſay, it may be, that we ought not alſo to ſuppoſe a thing ſo much in Queſtion; that that prodigious corruption of the Latin Church whereof we ſpeak, and thoſe pretended Intereſts of the Chriſtian Religion, and Mens Salvation, which according to us obliged our Fathers to Reform themſelves, without having any regard of the Court of Rome or its Prelats, were nothing elſe but Chimaera's that we our ſelves have formed at our pleaſure, or ſpecious pretences that our Fathers took, for occaſions to ſeparate themſelves, and that we take after them to defend them with.
To anſwer to this Objection, I will not ſay, that there is no appearance that our Fathers made uſe of thoſe motives, as a pretence to cover their other Intereſts with. They can ſcarce know how to imagin any intereſts interwoven in a buſineſs that evidently drew after it a Thouſand perſecutions, and a Thouſand afflictions, and wherein they were neceſſarily to go through the moſt violent ſtorms, as the ſequel will juſtify. In effect, let them ſay as much as much as they will that Luther was hurried away by his reſentments, it belongs to thoſe who Treated him with ſo much injuſtice, to diſpute that matter with him before the Tribunal of God, who will one day render to every man according to his works. But as to our Fathers, who had no part in thoſe perſonal Quarrels, they can no ways be ſuſpected to have had an intereſt of Paſſion, or Animoſity. I will not likewiſe ſay, that if our Fathers themſelves had had other intereſts then thoſe which they have ſet before us, which is contrary to all appearance, that yet it cannot be ſaid in reſpect of us, that we do not follow them in the True Faith, ſince we have had leaſure enough to acknowledge what our Reformation has drawn along with it, and what it has coſt us. But I will only ſay, that I make that ſuppoſition only to let our Adverſaries ſee, that without amuſing us any more with thoſe formalities, and thoſe perplexing ways which they make uſe of continually which are proper for nothing, but to defend Errors, and to deſtroy the Church by the Tyranny of thoſe who govern, they ought to come to the bottom, and to Determine with us thoſe Fundamental Articles upon which we ground the right that our Fathers had to Reform themſelves. I do not then prejudge any thing by my ſuppoſition, I explain only the ſentiment of the Proteſtants, and the perſwaſion that they entertain. If what they ſay, is not true, it is certain that they have had Reaſon to Reform themſelves for without any more Reaſoning, a man ought always to prefer God, and his own Salvation before a hundred Popes, and before ten Thouſand Biſhops. We ought then to come to an Examination of thoſe Matters.
This is what the Author of thoſe Prejudices, as hot as he is in his Controverſy, has been forced to acknowledge. For to In Chap. 7.diſintangle himſelf from an Argument, to which he ſays the whole Book of the Apology of Mr. Daille is reducible, [and which he repreſents in theſe words.] We ought not to remain united to ſuch a Communion as binds us to profeſs Fundamental Errors againſt the Faith, and to practiſe an Idolatrous and Sacrilegious Worſhip. But the Church of Rome binds us to profeſs divers fundamental Errors, and to practiſe Idolatrous and Sacrilegious Worſhip diverſe ways, as in the Adoration of the Hoſt, &c. Therefore we ought not to remain in her Communion, &c.] He diſtinguiſhes between two ſorts of Separation, one of which he calls ſimple and Negative, which, ſays he, conſiſts more in the Negation of certain Acts of Communion, then in Poſitive Acts against that Communion from which we ſeparate. The other he calls a Poſitive Separation, which includes the Erecting of a ſeparate Society, the Eſtabliſhing of a new Miniſtry, and the poſitive Condemnation of the former Communion, to which it had been Ʋnited. Upon that Diſtinction, he ſays, That it is to no purpoſe that the Calviniſts ſay, That their Conſciences will not any more allow them to be united with the Catholicks ſheltring themſelves under that Ambiguous Term of Ʋnion, That their Conſciences cannot any further hinder them from taking part in ſome Actions, which their falſe Principles make them look upon as criminal; but they would no ways engage them to all thoſe exceſſes to which they are carri'd out. That in fine, if it were true, that without betraying your Conſciences, they could not give that honour which we pay to the Saints and their Relicks, they ought to content themſelves not to give it. But that it will in no wiſe follow from thence, that they ought to go about to ſet up a body apart. That it is this latter ſort of Separation whereof they accuſe us, and that it is that kind of it that we ought to juſtify our ſelves from. And a little lower, If ſays he, the Calviniſts ſhould make what ſuppoſitions they pleaſed upon the State of the Church of Rome, if they ſhould as much as they had a mind to do, accuſe it of Error, and Idolatry; it would be enough to Anſwer them in one word, That if thoſe pretended Errors ſhould give them any right to refuſe to profeſs them, and to practiſe thoſe actions which ſhould include them, yet they no ways gave them any night to ſet up themſelves againſt the Church of Rome, to anathematize her, to ſet up a body a part, and to take to themſelves the Quality of Paſtors, although they had neither Authority nor Miſſion.
I do not now meddle with that poſitive Separation, which the Author of the Prejudices makes ſo great a Crime in us. We ſhall ſhew in the end, that our Fathers did nothing in that reſpect, but what they were bound to do in their Conſciences, and with the neglect of which they could not diſpence without Sin. But this we ſhall come to conſider in its proper place, it may be enough for us at preſent, to know, that with the conſent of the Author of Prejudices we may ſuppoſe it as a thing indiſputable, That our Fathers, obeying the Dictates of their Conſciences, had right to reſuſe to profeſs thoſe Errors, in which they believed the Church of Rome to be entangled, and no more to take any part in certain actions that involved thoſe Errors. I profeſs it were deſirable that the Author of Prejudices had told us a little more clearly his own thoughts of that Negative Separation; But howſoever he has carried himſelf in his Expreſſions, I may ſay, if I am not miſtaken without fear of any oppoſition, that that which he has here granted us is not one of thoſe Conceſſions, which are ſometimes given to adverſaries, only to cut off the Diſpute; but that indeed he has ſpoken according to his real thoughts. For when in a Controverſy of this nature a man diſtinguiſhes about this general Theſis; That one ought to ſeparate from a Church which binds one to profeſs Error, in noting, that it may be ſaid in two ſences, the one That one ought to ſeparate ones ſelf Negatively, in not medling with that which would wound the Conſcience: and the other, That one ought to ſeparate poſitively, that is to ſay, that one ought to ſet up a Society ſeparate from that, and to eſtabliſh a new Miniſtry. That he quitted the former ſence, in ſaying only, that it was very ill applied to the Catholick Church, reſtrained himſelf only to the latter, that he would ſay, that it was this latter kind of Separation whereof he accuſed us, and about which we ought to juſtify our ſelves, that our Conſciences could not any further hinder us, then from taking part in thoſe actions which our Principles ſhould make us look on as Criminal; that if we could not without betraying our Conſciences, render that Honour to Saints and Relicks which they give them, we ought to content our ſelves with not doing it. When a man, I ſay, ſpeaks as the Author of Prejudices after this manner in the heat of a diſpute, which he believes to be as weighty as that; there is a great likelyhood, that it is not a meer condeſcending to his adverſaries, but a true and lively expreſſion of that which he finds in himſelf to be very Juſt and Reaſonable. Howſoever it be, without informing our ſelves further about a thing wherein we are little concern'd, we will ſuppoſe it, ſince he will have it ſo, as a propoſition not to be diſputed, That our Fathers could lawfully ſeperate from the Church of Rome, by a Negative Separation, that is to ſay, in not to taking any part in that which would wound their Conſciences. But that ſignifies, in our ſtile, that they had right to reform themſelves, ſince we call nothing elſe preciſely Reformation, but that publick Rejection, which they made of divers things, which they judged to be ill, and contrary to Chriſtianity. Whether they did ill to go further and to proceed to a Poſitive Separation, that is a Queſtion apart, which does not in the leaſt hinder, that their Reformation taken only as a Negative Separation, might not have been done with Juſtice and according to that right, that Conſcience gives to every man.
But now, methinks, this point being ſo well clear'd, clears a multitude of others, and we may, by that conceſſion of the Author of Prejudices, very well decide ſome Questions. In the firſt place, They ought no further to ſet before us that abſolute obedience to the Orders and deciſions of the Church of Rome in the matters of Faith and Worſhip, to which they would hitherto have all the Faithful indiſpenſably obliged. For if thoſe, whoſe Conſciences ſhall tell them, that, That Church binds them to believe Errors and to practiſe a falſe worſhip, may refuſe to profeſs to believe thoſe Errors, and to performe that Worſhip, who ſees not that that abſolute obedience is overthrown? Since it will depend on the dictates of the Conſcience of every one, and that the Conſcience of each one will give it its bounds, and ſuſpend it, in reſpect of ſome certain things and actions. 2. The Church of Rome can no more treat thoſe as Diſobedient and Rebellions, who through the dictates of their Conſciences refuſe to profeſs to believe that which ſhe decides and to practiſe that which ſhe ordains, nor perſecute them as ſuch, and whatſoever ſhe ſhould make them ſuffer upon that pretence of Rebellion and Diſobedience, would be but an unjuſt perſecution, of which ſhe will be bound to give an account to God and men. 3. They cannot alſo any farther demand of us what Call our Fathers had to reform themſelves, that is to ſay, to reject their Superſtitions, and the Errors which were to be found in the Church of Rome in their days; for they needed nothing elſe but the motions of their Conſciences to give them a Right to refuſe to profeſs them. 4. They ought alſo to acknowledge that the Authority of the Church, how great ſoever it may be, is it yet far leſs then that of the Conſcience, ſince it is not only limited, but ſurmounted, and that whenſoeveer they ſhould be in oppoſitian, a man would have right to leave the Authority of the Church, and to follow his Conſcience. 5. And ſince even an erronious Conſcienes, ſuch as the Author of the Prejudices ſuppoſes ours, and that of our Fathers to be, could ſuſpend Acts, commanded by the Church, it follows neceſſarily from thence, that to reconcile the Church and the Conſcience when they ſhould be ſet in oppoſition, we muſt come to the Foundation, and diſcuſs the things themſelves, for there is no other way to free the Conſcience from Deſ-abuſer.Errors. And how much more are we obliged to do it, when the Church abuſes her Authority, in teaching thoſe things which are really falſe, or in commanding thoſe actions which are indeed unjuſt and criminal. All then depends on the diſcuſſion of thoſe matters by themſelves.
But, they will ſay, your Fathers ought to have been contented to have made uſe of their rights, each one in particular, they could have kept themſelves from making any profeſſion of believing thoſe pretended Errors, and not have taken any part in thoſe actions which they diſapproved, and yet nevertheleſs have kept ſilence. Wherefore did they diſturb the publick peace by their Tumults? Why did they divulge by their out-cries the Judgment which they made of the Tenets and Cuſtoms of their Church? Did they not in that, ſin againſt that reſpect which they owed to their Prelats, and that Charity which they owed to their Brethren?
To anſwer to this Objection, I ſay, That the keeping ſilence is not always equally juſt, it has its bounds and its meaſures according to the weight of the things that are treated of, and to the Circumſtances of Times and Perſons. If the buſineſs had been only about ſome meer Queſtions of the School, upon points of Speculation, or about ſome unprofitable Ceremonies, or ſome bad order in the Government, or even about ſome popular Superſtitions, which ſhould not have proceeded ſo far as to corrupt the ſaving Efficacy of the Goſpel, I confeſs our Fathers had been more obliged to have kept ſilence, then to have encountred their Prelats, and raiſed thoſe troubles through the diverſity of their Opinions. The Love of Peace, reſpect for Order Chriſtian Charity, bidds us to bear things of that nature well, which we do not ſo well approve of our ſelves, and even there to follow the Faſhion as far as we can, without wounding our Conſciences, and if we happen to ſpeak or write of them, it ought to be done in a gentle and prudent manner, with a regard had to the Times, and the diſpoſitions of Men, always remembring that the Church of God will never be in a State of compleat perfection upon Earth, and that God himſelf bears with the defects of his Children through his mercy. But we ought alſo to take heed how we ſtretch the keeping of that ſilence too far; for there are certain Seaſons, wherein one cannot hold one's peace, without betraying of God, without weakly abandoning the true intereſts of the Church, and without falling into that deteſtable Sin, which Saint Paul calls, holding the Truth in unrighteouſneſs. Such was the Time of the Triumph of Arrianiſm, in the fourth Centuey, for there the matter being a capital Hereſy, which had then took hold of the publick Miniſtry, there was not any more place for ſilence, there was a neceſſity on the contrary of crying out, and of crying very loud, without any regard had either to the compleaſance which they owed to their Brethren, or to the Love of peace, or the Dignity of the Prelats, or the Authority of Councills, or to all thoſe falſe reaſons of ſilence which humane prudence ordinarily ſuggeſts. Therefore it was, that a ſimple Monk of thoſe Times, called Aphraates, although he neither had any other Call, or Office, then that of the concern that every one has for the Conſervation of the Truth, yet could not contain himſelf within his Cell, nor be hindered from oppoſing himſelf with all his might to that Hereſy; and the Emperor Valens, who favoured the Arrians, having check't him for that boldneſs, in telling him, that he ought to have kept himſelf in his Cell, and to have applied himſelf only to pray to God, according to the Conditions of that Religious Life into which he had entred, Aphraates anſwered him, If I were a maid, and ſhould keep my Chamber with my Father, and if I ſhould ſee Fire take hold of the Houſe, ſhould I not be bound to go out of my Chamber, and run on every ſide to bring water to put out the Fire. Meaning by that, That when the ſafety of Chriſtianity was in danger of being deſtroyed, it was a Crime to hold ones peace and ſit ſtill in quiet.
But this is exactly the Caſe wherein our Fathers found themſelves. For they beheld the Chriſtian Religion, and by conſequence, The Latin Church ready to be Ship-wrackt, as a Veſſel that takes in water on every ſide. They ſaw in that miſerable Church, Divinity falſified and corrupted by a thouſand vain and ridiculous Queſtions. The Schools infected with the Art of Sophiſtry and Cheats, the Pulpits proſtituted to Tales, Jeſts and Legends, Benefices filled with perſons unworthy and uncapable. Church Dignities ſold to thoſe who bid higheſt, good Learning baniſht, and perſecuted, Religion loaded with a rabble of childiſh Ceremonies, the People abuſed by a thouſand Follies, Church-Government changed into an intolerable Oppreſſion. The Worſhip of God transferred to Creatures, and even to thoſe Creatures that were dead and inſenſible, the ſaving Truths of the Goſpel neglected, Errors and Fancies of Mens minds Preached up in ſtead of them. The Study of the Holy Scripture abandoned, the Actions of true Piety, altered by falſe Ideas, the Commands of God broken, his Soveraign Authority uſurped, his mercy ſet in partnerſhip with Satisfactions of men, his Laws aſſociated with the Laws of men, and his Grace with our Free-will, the only Sacrifice of his Son multiplied, the Vertue of his Interceſſion communicated to Saints and Angels. The Subſtance of Bread adored as his Divine Body, his Soveraign Prophetick and Kingly Offices Tranſported to the Pope, and his Prieſtly to the Prieſts, his Sacraments altered, his cleareſt words eluded by their Gloſſes, and raſh Diſtinctions, and his Miniſtry changed into a Deſpotick Empire over mens Conſciences. In a word, they ſaw nothing that remained intire in that Religion. Whether their Sentiments, in that regard, were juſt or unjuſt, Reaſonable, or ill grounded, it is what a diſcuſſion will juſtify, when they will ſeriouſly come to conſider it. But nevertheleſs our Fathers were perſwaded of all that which I have mentioned, and under that perſwaſion who can doubt that they ought not to have loudly declared themſelves, and that a deep ſilence would not have rendred them Criminal before God and men? And they were the more Obliged to ſpeak, in that as we have ſhewn in the foregoing Chapter, they had nothing more to look for from their Prelats, and in that the injuſt and violent Proceedings of the Court of Rome againſt Luther, made them ſufficiently know that the Evil was not to be Remedied on that ſide, and that the Time for each man to Reform himſelf, was already come.