The Design and Nature of Historical Mistakes Found in Stillingfleet, Argument 5
Argument the 5th.
5. The Diſſenters accepted of His Majeſties Gracious Toleration, given them Seven or Eight years ago.
Tis the Advice of the Jeſuit Contzens (faith the Dr.) in his Directions for the reducing Popery into a Countrey, that it be done under a pretence of eaſe to tender Conſciences. The like in a Letter of Seignior Bellarini, that there be an Indulgence promoted by the Factious, and ſeconded by the Papiſts. Yea, and Coleman owned at his Tryal, and after ſentence declared, That poſſibly he might be of Opinion that Popery might come in, if Liberty of Conſcience had been granted, and 'tis acknowledged, that the Declaration of Indulgence, 167… was of the Papiſts procuring. But notwithſtanding this by one of the more moderate party of Diſſenters wrote, A publick vindication of their accepting the Licences, and in the year 1675. There was a book printed, entituled The Peaceable deſign, or an account of the Non-conformiſts Meetings, by ſome Miniſters of London. In an Objection it is thus put. But what ſhall we ſay then to the Papiſts. The Anſwer is, The Papiſt in our account is but one ſort of Recuſant, and the Conſcientious and Peaceable among them, muſt be held in the ſame Praedicament with thoſe among our ſelves, that …ikewiſe Refuſe to come to Common Prayer. To which the Dr. adds, what is this but joyning for a Toleration of Popery.
To all which I ſhall ſpeak diſtinctly, and in doing ſo, conſider theſe ſeveral particulars Couched in this Fifth Argument.
1. That 'tis the Opinion of the Papiſts, that a Toleration might advance their Intereſt:
2. That when a Toleration was given through the Papiſts Inſtigation, the Diſſenters embraced it.
3. That the Diſſenters concurr'd with the Papiſts in the attempts made for a general Toleration.
1. To the Firſt, That the Papiſts apprehended a Toleration advantagious to their Intereſt.
Here it muſt be duly obſerv'd, that there is a difference between a Toleration, and a Toleration, viz. between a Limited and Unlimited Toleration.
2. The manner in which a Toleration may be given unto Diſſenting Subjects, may be different.
1. That a Toleration limited to ſuch Diſſenting Proteſtants as are ſound in the Faith, and Peaceable, ſhould advance the Papal Superſtition, is not eaſie to comprehend, nor is it ſaid that the Papiſts apprehend ſo much. Probably the Jeſuits Contzens, Seignior Bellarini and Coleman might think, that a general Toleration to them, as well as to the Diſſenting Proteſtants might advance their intereſt, but that a Toleration to Proteſtants only ſhould contribute any thing towards the reducing this Land to Popery is unimaginable.
'Tis a known Maxime in the Roman Church, that Ignorance is the Mother of Devotion, which is true only with reference to the Papal Superſtitions. Let the light of the Goſpel be remov'd, and Popiſh Darkneſs will ſoon ſpred it ſelf over the Face of that Land; but as long as the knowledge of the Goſpel remains, 'tis not eaſie to introduce Popery.
For which Reaſon a Toleration to Diſſenting Proteſtant Miniſters is ſo far from advancing, that it deſtroys the Papiſts Intereſt. And this is no more then what the Indulgence granted ſo graciouſly by His Majeſty did effect, it giving as great a blow to Popery, as hath been given it in divers years before. For multitudes who formerly living moſt lewdly, were prepar'd for Popery, being ſince convinc'd of the Truth and excellency of Religious converſation, are moſt firmly engag'd to venture their Lives, yea, their All in the defence of Proteſtant Religion. What then ſhould tempt the Papiſts to conclude a limited Toleration to be an Engine prepared for the accompliſhing a Jeſuitical deſign is to me unknown, unleſs they had a reſpect rather to the manner of its grant, than unto the Toleration it ſelf, fancying that as his Preſent Majeſty indulg'd Proteſtant Diſſenter without his Parliament, according to the ſame Rule the Popiſh S…ſſor they had within their ken, might without his Parliament indulge the Papiſt. But this is only a conjecture of which our States-Men are moſt competent Judges, and which whether right or wrong 'tis not to be inſiſted on by the Clergy of either way, they …, ſo Ʋamcet to treat of State-affairs, which never ſucceeds better than when under the management and Conduct of States-men, nor never attended with more unhappy Iſſues, then when the Clergy like buſie bodies will foreign, i. e. Inſpect the Dioceſs of the Laity, and concern themſelves about what they underſtand not. But what though we grant, that the Papiſts thought a Proteſtant Indulgence would advance their Intereſt, ſeeing their thoughts have no more of Infalibility in them than their Doctrines, why doth the Dr. inſiſt on their fancies? What were they never miſtaken? But the Dr. ſuggeſts that Jeſuits might creep in under the Notion of Diſſenters; And can they not rather ſlide into great preferments under the Covert of a Gown, a Caſſock, a Surplice? The Temptation ſurely is greater, and the way much more eaſie.
2. The Diſſenters 'tis ſaid accepted of this Toleration, yea, and wrote a Publick vindication of their accepting of it. What then? are they therefore Popiſhly affected? What, is Gratitude to our Prince confin'd to Papiſts, or their Inſtruments? I cannot but wonder at the diſcourſes of ſome of our Clergy, who delight in nothing ſo much as in railing on the Diſſenters, as Seditious, Rebellious, and what not, and yet moſt angry with Diſſenters, becauſe they are not ſo, as appears by the many Invectives, that were written againſt our thankful acknowledgments of His Majeſties Clemency. But though this Dr. and ſome others are angry, yet 'tis the Reſolve of Proteſtant Diſſenters to be ready on all occaſions to ſhew their Loyalty and thankfulneſs to his Majeſty for every inſtance of his Bounty towards his diſſenting, but moſt dutifull and loving Subjects.
But wherein is the Papiſt gratified by that Toleration, what did he gain by it? Did he enjoy more liberty after, than before? Methinks, the import of the great cry of our Clergy is this, That the Diſſenters muſt not be permitted to enjoy, as much as the Papiſts, and be on even terms with them, to the advancing the Proteſtant Religion. For this is evident, that when there was no Declaration for Indulging Proteſtants, there was no proſecution of Paenal Laws on Papiſts; yea, when the Clergy were moſt ſevere in proſecuting Proteſtants; the Papiſts knew not practically what a Paenal Statute meant, and yet our Church men very ſilent. But his Majeſty according to the Gracious Propenſions of his heart no ſooner extends his Clemency towards the Poor Diſſenting Proteſtants, but the cry is Popery, Popery, that is, poor Proteſtants in a Bears, the Papiſts skin, are envied and malign'd.
3. The Diſſenters wrote favourably of the Tolerating Papiſts.
Anſw. 1. Before the Diſcovery of the Plot, the Papiſts were judg'd Loyal Subjects, though Saperſtitious, &c. even by our Governours and Clergy. Doth not Dr. Stilling fleet remember, that a R… verend Divine, a Son of the Church, no way inferiour to himſelf, did write ex induſtria in favour of the Loyal Papiſt? Is the Church of England therefore for Popery? How then can Diſſenters he ſo, ſeeing the reaſon for the one and the other is the ſame, with this difference, namely, The Diſſenter gave but an hint, which did rather diſcover a confidence in, and humble de…ercing to the Wiſdom of our Magiſtracy; who did not judge meet at that time to be brisk in a proſecuting the Paenal Laws againſt them for their Recuſancy: but the Plea of the Epiſcopal in favour of the Roman Catholick was more than an hint, it was a conſiderable Treatiſe. But
2. Since the Diſcovery of the Plot the Papiſts are better known, they are now known to be Implacable Enemies to a Proteſtant Prince and Kingdom; to be Turbulent, and Ʋnpeaceable: Whence the Tolerating them, and the Kingdoms peace are become inconſiſtent, and as the one is advanc'd, the other neceſſarily muſt be overthrown: For which Reaſon, our Superiours, Eccleſiaſtical and Civil, do ſee cauſe to paſs another Judgment on the Papiſts than formerly they did, whereby the Diſſenter may with the greater freedom appear againſt them, giving our Soveraign, and the Parliament the fulleſt aſſurances of Loyalty to His Majeſty, and Faithfulneſs to the Proteſtant Religion, being ready to hazard their lives and their all, in the defence of them and it. How then can they be ſuppos'd Favourers of Popery, or rather how can Dr. Stil. Diſcourſe after this manner? For, if ſuch as are under the laſh of Paenal Laws for Conſcience ſake, muſt be thought to be Popiſhly affected, for not animating the Magiſtrate to a Proſecution of Paenal Laws againſt other ſuppoſed Conſcientious, and Peaceable Diſſenters as the Papiſts were then judg'd to be, by many of the Church of England, and this before the Diſcovery of their Horrid Plots, I ſay, if the whole Party of Diſſenters muſt be thus expos'd, ſo ſeverely for ſuch an hint as that was, what ſhall we think of Dr. S., who ſpeaks ſo favourably of the Papiſts, ſuggeſting even now, that when Mens heats againſt the Papiſts, which are ſaid to be beyond the juſt bounds of Prudence, Decency, and Humanity; are over, it will be thought great hardſhip for the Papiſts onelyonly, to be deprived of the Liberty of their Conſciences, when the wildeſt of the Fanaticks are allowed it. What, may the Dr. inſinuate ſo much in their Favour now, and not expoſe himſelf to the Cenſure; and muſt a Diſſenter who ſpake not half as much in other times, be ſo ſeverely treated? But whether the Diſſenters are favourers of the Papal Faction, will more fully appear by the Anſwer that ſhall be given unto his 6th. Argument.