The Design and Nature of Historical Mistakes Found in Stillingfleet, Argument 6
Argument 6.
The Diſſenters, ſince the Diſcovery of the late Horrid Plot did cloſe with the People in an over-fierce oppoſing the Papiſts. For (ſaith the Dr.) now the Diſſenters tack about, and ſtrike in with the Rage of the People, and none ſo fierce againſt Popery as they, whereby they mar a good buſineſs by over-doing it. Praef. pag. 34.
This is ſuggeſted more than once, but becauſe of the ſtrangeneſs of the medium at this juncture, and its unmeetneſs for its deſigned end, I'l not be over-curious in conſidering it; It being well known that Popiſh Plots are laid ſo deep, the Plotter ſo cruel, yea, and ſo reſolv'd for Proteſtant Blood, the Blood of our Prince, our Nobles, our Gentry, our Miniſtry, and People, that unleſs we by a ſerious and humble Repentance return to God, putting our Truſt in the Lord, and aſſume an undaunted Courage, we are a loſt People. To be at ſuch a time cold and indifferent, is to relinquiſh and abandon our Religion. For if there be any Fire of Zeal againſt Papiſts in the houſe, it cannot but flame out at the Windows at this time; for the ſtormy winds of Popiſh Cruelties and Treaſons, deſolating Threatnings, and implacable Fury, are ſuch as muſt cauſe the leaſt ſpark of Zeal for God, and the King, &c. to break out into a flame, that cannot be hid; Which may be, even when our Zeal doth not tranſport us to any Irregular or Illegal proceedings, which can only deſerve the Epithets of Indecent and Inhumane; with which Proteſtant Diſſenters cannot juſtly be charg'd, and therefore the Surprize is the greater to find ſuch an Intimation in ſo Judicious, and Wiſe a Perſon as Dr. S. In what reſpect doth, or can the Dr. accuſe them? Are the Diſſenters too Zealous in Declaiming againſt Popiſh Principles, and Practiſes? Do they repreſent Papal Treaſons to be more hainous than they are (i. e.) more bloody, or more Inhumane and Cruel? What acts of Inhumanity have they exerciſed? or in what reſpects have they been tranſported beyond the juſt bounds of Prudence, Decency, or Humanity? Why is not the Dr. more particular in his Charge, ſeeing Dolus latet in Generalibus? 'Tis their Joyning with the People (the Dr. adds) but in what? In Petitioning his Majeſty for the Sitting of the Parliament, ſurely the Dr. wo'nt now judge that to be ſeditious? Is it our Readineſs, when call'd thereunto to hazard our lives to ſave his Majeſtie's? or what? ſeeing the Dr. doth not faſten any particular crime on the Diſſenters, and the Diſſenters being Innocent, have no guilty Conſcience to accuſe them, nor are they able to divine; It cannot be expected, that we ſhould be more full in the Conſideration of it, neither is there any need, for enough hath been ſaid to clear the Diſſenters from the Ʋnbecoming Reproaches, the Dr. would faſten on them; Yea, enough hath been hinted to evince the Dr's. Miſtakes to have been Great and Many.
III. I'le now proceed to the third Particular, and give a Summary Account of the Unhappy Tendencies of theſe Great and Many Miſtakes, as they are adjuſted for an Advance of the Papal Intereſt.
§. 1. 'Tis Remarkable, That Notwithſtanding the Honourable Apprehenſions the Dr. may have of the Reformation, very little, if any thing, is hinted concerning the moſt Principal part thereof, namely, Proteſtant Doctrines: The which I do the rather obſerve, becauſe it hath been of late years, the ſole care of our Eccleſiaſticks to ſecure Proteſtant Religion, without uſing any Mean for the preſervation of Proteſtant Doctrines; and accordingly new Declarations, Subſcriptions and Oaths have been offered for the more firm eſtabliſhment of Church-Government, even when our Doctrines have been ſadly vitiated by ſome of the Sons of the Church, without any other notice, than the Complaints of a Few, ſuch as are Dr. Tully, &c.
§. 2. That Epiſcopacy, and Ceremonies are conſidered by the Dr. as the Glory of the Engliſh Reformation, the Bulwark of Proteſtant Religion, even Epiſcopacy and Ceremonies, as diſſented from by the Nonconformiſts, (i. e) That Epiſcopacy, and thoſe Ceremonies unto which the Diſſenters cannot conſcientiouſly conform. 'Tis this that cannot be diſſented from without great diſhonour unto Proteſtant Religion, viz. The Reformation; which, ſtrictly conſidered, is no part of the Reformation, (i. e.) as much of theſe things as Diſſenters agree not unto, cannot be juſtly called Reformation. For what parts of the Papal Epiſcopacy and Ceremonies are rejected, the Diſſenters heartily in their rejection cloſe with the Epiſcopal; that is, ſo far as there is a Reformation; But, as to the Particular wherein the Difference lies between the Conformiſt and Non-conformiſt, there is no Reformation on the Conformiſts part. I am not now diſputing againſt Epiſcopacy or Ceremonies, but ſuppoſing them Apoſtolical; yet I aſſert, they cannot be conſidered, as a part of Reformation: For Reformation doth preſuppoſe ſome Anteceding Corruption of the thing to be Reformed; Reformation conſiſting in the removing the Corruptions, and therefore we do not ſay, that the Proteſtants Reform'd what was never Corrupted; for inſtance, The Doctrine of the Trinity, not being corrupted by the Church of Rome, the Proteſtants are not ſaid to Reform it, even ſo, That Part of Epiſcopacy and Ceremonies, which is conſidered as Apoſtolical, and hath been, and ſtill is maintain'd by the Church of Rome, that part if adhered unto, as Apoſtolical by Proteſtants, is but the Retaining an Ʋncorrupted part of our good old Religion, and not a Reforming it, Thus even do the*Becan. Opuſc. Tit. II. Queſt. 9. Hanc Hierarchiam ex parte retinent Calviniſtae in Anglia — extra Angliam penitus rejiciunt. Quo nomine male audiunt ab eodem Rege, qui in Monitoriâ praefatione ad Imperatorem, Reges & Principes, de hac re ita ſcribit; Quo ſtudio in Epiſcoporum & Eccleſiaſticae Hierarchiae defenſionem ſemper incubui, eodem in confuſam illam Anarchiam, & parilitatem Puritanorum invectus ſum. Et infra, Mihi praecipuus labor fuit, dejectos Epiſtopos reſtituere, & Puritanorum Anarchiam repugnare. Et rationem addit, quia cum in caeteris rebus ordo quidum de diſpoſitio ſit, etiam in Eccleſia eſſe neceſſe eſt. Jeſuits conſider it. But granting that the Retained part of the Hierarchy, &c. may be conſidered as Reformed, it ſtill muſt be aſſerted,
1. That 'tis no Part of the Lutheran, and Tranſmarine Proteſtant Reformation; for, they conſider it as what ſtands in need of a Reformation.
2. That the Dr. making this the Great Part of the Engliſh Reformation, doth but exalt a part of the Papal Hierarchy under the name of Reformation, for which Reaſon, even other parts of the ſame, may deſerve his Applauſes under the ſame Notion, and what is this but to reflect on all Proteſtants beſides themſelves.
§. 3. This Reformation in Conjunction with the Papiſts, an adhering unto the Praelacy of Biſhops, and in Oppoſition unto moſt other Proteſtants, an exploding Godly Peoples Right of chooſing their own Paſtor. And Thirdly, an introducing ſuch little Ceremomes as do but prepare the way for greater.
§. 4. All this is moſt admirably accompliſhed with the Help of Bellarmine, and other Jeſuites in that, this Noble Superſtructure is faſtned on the Foundation of Antiquity, and Ʋniverſality, the ſure Notes of what is Apoſtolical; for, (ſaith the Dr.) if this ſhould be a Corruption how comes it to be ſo Antiem, and ſo ſoon Ʋniverſal, even inſenſibly without any noiſe.
§. 5. This is a Receeding from the Church of England, and a Rebuilding what the Church hath demoliſhed, a ſetting too great an Honour on thoſe Jeſuitical Arguments, which have been exploded by the Church, as appears out of Mr. Chillingworth; and therefore as one Apprehenſive of their weakneſs, the Doctor doth proceed.
§. 6. To the old Argument, vide Miſchievous Impoſitions, as what cannot but moſt effectually compaſs his end, that is, under the notion of oppoſing a Toleration, to introduce a ſmart Proſecuting of Paenal Laws againſt ſuch, as cannot receive Convictions from the foregoing Arguments. That the Dr. writes againſt ſuch a Toleration as conſiſts in the ſuſpending thoſe Paenal Laws, which are againſt Diſſenters, is evident: And what is the meaning of this, if he deſigns not the urging a Proſecution of Paenal Laws? Doth a ſuſpending the Paenal Laws any otherwiſe diſpleaſe him, than as it prevents a Proſecution of the Law againſt Diſſenters? And if by theſe Laws Diſſenters muſt be proſecuted, for not aſſenting unto what they cannot conſcientiouſly aſſert. Is not this laying our Faculties under Violence, or a Forcing Religion, an introducing blind obedience with a Whip? That ſuch Doctrines are pleaſing to the Papiſt, might be eaſily proved from the advantages they have taken from Mr. Hooker, and ſome others; who have expreſs'd themſelves too liberally in their Invectives againſt Diſſenting Proteſtants, and that the Dr hath no way gratified the Epiſcopal Proteſtants by Relinquiſhing their Doctrine, is to be ſeen in Mr. Chillingworth, who hath ſhewn the pernicious conſequences of ſuch Impoſitions. Namely,
1. As it may occaſion an Ʋniformity in ſome particular Churches; even ſo it doth Immortalize the greater and more Lamentable Diviſions of Chriſtendome, and the World.
2. As it may in the judgment of Carnal Policy advance the temporal benefit, and tranquility of Temporal States, and Kingdoms; even ſo 'twill be followed with the Infinite Prejudice, if not the deſolation of the Kingdom of Chriſt; and therefore this is a Doctrine that becomes none, but ſuch whoſe Creed is Regi aut Civitati imperium habenti nibil injuſtum, q…od utile, who dread the change of State, leaſt it ſhould change their Fortunes. But
3 This cannot be profitable unto any King or State, becauſe Ʋnjuſt, for nothing is more evidently Ʋnjust, than to force weak men by the profeſſion of a Religion, which they believe not, to looſe their own Eternal happineſs out of a vain and needleſs fear, leaſt they may poſſibly diſturb their Temporal quietneſs.
I hope, ſeeing the Dr. will find theſe Arguments in one of the Church of Englands diſcourſes, he will give ſome heed thereunto, and perceive how he hath unawares given advantage to the Papiſt.
Thus the Dr. in his pretences againſt Popery, falls into the Errour for which he reproveth the Diſſenters, which I have evinced out of his own Preface, as compar'd with the Jeſuits with whom he accords, and with the Old Proteſtants, from whom in ſome of theſe things at leaſt, he diſſents, The which I have done with the greateſt fairneſs and integrity, without any deſign of forcing his words to ſpeak what is not according to their Grammatical ſence, and common acceptation, omitting the inſiſting on ſeveral points, that might be ſpoken unto with greater diſadvantage unto the Dr. But aiming principally at the clearing the Innocent, who are by him accuſed, and the ſhowing into what Miſtakes his tranſport hath carried him, I hinted no more than what was neceſſary in order thereunto, carefuly ſhunning as much as the Subject matter would permit any ſuch expreſſion, as might be judg'd by the Dr's own intimates Indecent; humbly apprehending that the Dr's Miſtakes are but evincements of the emotions of that Corruption, which in part is in the beſt of Saints on Earth, which calls rather for our Compaſſion than Triumph, knowing that we our ſelves are but men of like paſſions. For which reaſon I will draw to a cloſe in ſpeaking to the Fourth thing.
4. That to the end the Dr. may do himſelf, and the Proteſtant Religion but right, 'tis neceſſary that he be either more diſtinct, and full in a further explication of his ſentiments, if he be miſapprehended, or that he will be ſo Candid, as to go on in following Bellarmine in one thing more, namely, in that it deſerves due eſteem and regard by a ſecond Retractation, if theſe miſtakes appears to be ſuch as they are by me repreſented.
1. If the Dr. hath not wrong'd the Diſſenter, nor clos'd with the Jeſuit in his arguings againſt Diſſenters, 'tis moſt apparent, that his words need an Expoſition, for whatſoever unprejudiced Perſon conſiders, what hath been ſaid in the foregoing Diſcourſe, may eaſily perceive, that if we muſt judge of his meaning by his writing, 'tis as I have ſaid; But, if not ſo, I beſeech the Dr. to exerciſe his Candour in inlightning us, aſſuring him, as ſoon as I can underſtand that I have in any reſpect miſrepreſented him, I will be ſo Juſt, as to acknowledge ſo much, and do my utmoſt for the clearing him, and in order thereunto have this onelyonly to add, That I do not ſay, the Doctor hath conſulted the Jeſuits, for what he aſſerts ſo agreeably unto their writings (God forbid I ſhould aſſert what I do not know) But this I ſay that the Agreement is as great in thoſe inſtances I have mentioned, as if he had, and that if he hath not conſult'd them, I know not what can be aſſigned as the true Reaſon of this ſtrange agreement, unleſs it be, that ſometime great Wits jump, or, that ſuch is the State of the Controverſie between Him, and Diſſenters, that there is no way ſo effectual for the confuting us, but by proceeding on Jeſuitical Principles, and uſing Popiſh Arguments. But
2. If I have neither miſtaken, nor miſrepreſented the Dr. as, I verily believe, I have not, ſeeing the Dr. is fallible, and may ſee cauſe to alter his Sentiments unto theſe particulars, as well as he hath done with reference unto ſome others, the He would be ſo Self-denying on his receiving Convictions, as to intimate ſo much unto the World.
1. That the Dr. changeth his judgement concerning ſome Notions relating to Religion, is neither a wonder to the World, nor ſhould it be a Reproach unto him, or any other Perſon, that for ſufficient Reaſons doth ſo. Yet
2. Whenever any conſiderable Tract is with the ſhew, and ſeeming ſtrength of much Reaſon publiſhed to the World, through the Varniſh of which, in proceſs of time, the Author eſpies Miſtakes and Errour, as the Author acts ingenuouſly in Publiſhing ſo much unto the World, even ſo he ought to do the World that piece of Juſtice, as to be at the pleaſing Trouble of confuting it himſelf, ſeeing otherwiſe, much miſchief may be done the poor weak Reader, who thinks the diſcourſe to contain the ſame Reaſons, ſince a a Retractation, which it did before, may through the Influence of of thoſe Arguments, that are in it, be oblig'd to adhere unto Errour. Moreover as to the Dr's. Caſe, 'tis preſum'd he doth not retract the whole, and every part of his Irenicum, and therefore 'twould be neceſſary ſomewhat be done to ſhew, what needs Explication what a Retractation, and for what Reaſons a Retractation; and the like as to this preſent great Book, a part of whoſe Prefaced I have Animadverted on, which Animadverſions are of ſuch a Nature, as cannot but engage the Dr. to do ſomewhat of this kind; even as†Bellarm. Recog. Scripſi, Deo teſte, quod verum eſſe exiſtimavi, non gratiam hominum, vel propriam utilitatem, ſed Honorem Dei, & Eccleſiae Commodum reſpiciens. Ne que in ſcriptis meis aliquid a divinis literis …aut ſanctorum Patrum Regulis alienum, ſciens, poſui. Quin tamen ſcriptumeſt Prov. 10. in multiloquio non deerit Peccatum, quod etiam de multa ſcriptione dei poſſe non dubito S. Auguſtinum imitatus, &c. Bellarmine himſelf in a like Caſe hath done, who, in the End of his Diſputations hath his particular Recognitions, prefacing it in theſe words, God is my VVitneſs, that what I have written is no more than what I judg…d to be the Truth, which I wrote not on any unworthy deſign of pleaſing others, or profiting my ſelf, but with an Aim at Gods Glory, and the Churches Benefit. Nor have I knowingly receeded either from the Rule of the Scriptures or Holy Fathers, However, ſince 'tis ſaid, Prov. 10.19. In the multitude of words there wanteth not ſin, which I Queſtion not but may be ſaid of much writing, I will therefore imitate St. Auſtin, i. e. in his Retractations, &c.
That we may exerciſe the Charity in hoping that the Dr. doth not at any time publiſh That to be a Truth which he believeth to be an Errour, and with all finding the Dr. to miſtake, yea ſometimes ſenſible of his Miſtakes. I have preſum'd to recommend unto him not onelyonly St. Auſtin, but alſo the great Bellarmine as a Pattern for his Imitation, it being an Honour to follow him in what is Right, when no way ſo as to thoſe particulars, wherein he is an Enemy unto the Churches of Jeſus Chriſt and the True Proteſtant Religion.
FINIS.
End of the text · John Humfrey, The Design and Nature of Historical Mistakes Found in Stillingfleet (1681)