View of Some Exceptions Made by a Romanist, Part 2 · Subpart 3
C. 1. Anſwer to C. 1.
To the exceptions made againſt the title of the Lord Viſcount Falklands diſcourſe, I anſwer, by ſaying theſe few things,
Section 1 Firſt, that it is no news to heare of the Catholique Roman Church; it hath frequently beene uſed and avowed by your owne writers, and as I conceive, is by your ſelfe acknowledged, when you ſay, the perfection of being infallible it not claimed by her (i. e. the Church Catholique) as ſhe is the Church of Rome, but as ſhe is the Catholique; which words by the rules of diſcourſe muſt ſuppoſe you to thinke the Catholique Church to be capable of a double appellation, Roman and Catholique, though the perfection there ſpoken of, belong to it onelyonly under the ſecond notion. And beſide you ſay in another place, that the Roman Church is the Catholique; whence it will follow, that the Catholique is the Roman; And if this be not propriety of ſpeech, his Lordſhip is not to be blamed for it, but you, whoſe dialect he is faine to uſe.
Section 2 This then being preſumed to be granted by your writers, and, as I conceive alſo by you, that the Roman Church is the Catholique Church, or that the Roman and Catholique are two names for the ſame Church, it will certainly follow, that he that affirmes the Catholique Church to be infallible, muſt affirme the Roman Church to be ſo too, though not quatenus Roman. For any particular man being affirmed to be a Chriſtian, whatſoever will be true to be ſaid of this Chriſtian, will be true to be ſaid of this man (by the rule of quicquid praedicatur de praedicato, praedicatur de ſubjecto) if this Chriſtian have a promiſe made, a priviledge inſtated on him, this man hath ſo alſo, and if any that yeilded the former, ſhall deny the latter, it will never be ſufficient ground or authority for ſuch denying, to affirme, that it was made to him as a Chriſtian, and not as a man; for the whole man being a Chriſtian, and not onelyonly ſome part of him, even that which belongs to him onelyonly for Chriſtianities ſake, doth as truly belong to him, as that which his humanity gives him title to.
Section 3 Or 2… y. If you have ſprang a ſubtlety, and by helpe of that meane to diſclaime the expreſſion of other your friends, and therefore will not allow the Roman Church, to be in propriety of ſpeech, the Catholique Church, and yet will agree with them in all but in the expreſſion; truly you have revealed no great myſtery to the world. And as long as you define (as you do) the Catholique Church, (as it is the ſubject of the pretended Infallibility) to be that which is governed by Saint Peter and his Succeſſours, we that meane no more by the Roman Church then that which is ſo governed, ſhall aſſoone beleive the Roman Church to be infallible, as the Catholique under your notion of it.
Section 4 The ſhort of it is, we ſhall never agree upon any thing till the equivocall tearmes be explicated, and one ſingle ſence of this, as of all other phraſes, agreed on betwixt both parties. Tell us then plainly that by the Catholique Church you meane the Ʋ niverſall all the world over, without any kind of reſtriction, and not that onelyonly which is governed by the Pope of Rome, which is a great reſtriction of the word Catholique, (and muſt be not onelyonly affirmed but proved by you to be none) And then I ſhall thus farre conſent with you;
Section 5 Firſt, that the Ʋniverſall Church is in fundamentals infallible (not from any thing inherent in it ſelfe, but by a prerogative acquired, i. e. by the promiſe of Chriſt, that his ſpirit ſhall leade them into all truth, and that he will be with them to the end of the world, and the like;) but then this Infallibility muſt ſignifie no more, or be no farther extended, then that Chriſt doth and will ſo defend his Church, that there ſhall be for ever, till the end of the world, a Church Chriſtian on the Earth, i. e. that the whole Church ſhall not at once make an univerſall defection, erre from the foundation, or doe any thing by which there ſhall ceaſe to be a Church on earth.
Section 6 But then 2dly. I ſay that this very Ʋniverſall Church, though it be in the ſenſe infallible in fundamentals, is not yet a rule, or Canon, or guide, or Judge infallible, even in fundamentals; viſible it is, infallible it is, but 'tis not a viſible judge, or rule infallible. And the reaſon of this aſſertion is this, that its Infallibility, explained as we have explain'd it, is all that can be certainly inferred from Chriſt's words, (and that belongs not at all to judicature) and ſo any other Infallibility that ſhall be pretended to belong to judicature, muſt be inferred from ſome other tenure, or elſe it will not be inferred.
Section 7 If you cannot be thus liberall to us, and tell us that by Catholique in this queſtion, you meane that Catholique without reſtriction; Tell us then Secondly, that you meane a repreſentation of that Catholique, i. e. a Councell Generall, Oecumenicall, and then I ſhall acknowledge many priviledges to belong to that; An humble, though not an abſolute obedience, and in a word, that nothing is to be preferred before it, but the Word of God, or the Church truly Ʋniverſall. Yet after all this, that it is not infallible or inerrable, I have the judgement of Panormitan, and ſhall adde his reaſon alſo to back it; Becauſe, ſaith he, *Licet concilium generale repreſentet totam eccleſiam Univerſalem, tamen in veritate ibi non eſt vere Vniverſalis eccleſia, ſed repreſentative, quia univerſalis eccleſia conſtituitur ex collectione fidelium, & iſta eſt ea eccleſiae quae errare non poteſt. C. ſignific. ex…: de Electio.the Generall Councell is not truly, but onelyonly by repreſentation, the Ʋniverſall Church, and ſuppoſing ſuch a Councell to erre, it would not yet follow, that the Ʋniverſall Church or multitude of all Chriſtians doe erre, becauſe 'tis poſſible that ſome out of the Councell doe not erre, yea, and in the Councell too, though a major part overcome the better. In this I have the concurrence of Occam. dial. p. 3. tr. 1. l. 3. c. 5. Cardin. Cameracenſis. c. 1. Waldenſis Doctrin. fid. l. 2. artic. 3. c. 26. & queſt. veſp. arg. 3. ad lit. O. Antoninus, to. 1. de ſacram. l. 2. c. 19. Card. Cuſanus in ſummarum par. 3. tit. 23. de concil. general. c. 2. ſect. 6. l. 2. Concord. Cathol. c. 4. Et Nic. de Clemangis, Collat. 2. p. 64, & 73. with this farther confirmation of it from the opinion of the †Antiquis patribus concilium celebraturis ſolenne ſuit jejuniis, orationibus, ſpiritûs aſſiſtentiam implorare, inutili ſa…è diligentiâ ſi exploratum habebant ſe non poſſe falli aut deficere in his propter quae fuerant congregati.Ancient Fathers, evidenced by their practice; In that (ſaith he) it was ſolemnly accuſtomed by them at the beginning of ſuch a Councell, by fasting and praying to implore the aſſiſtance of the ſpirit, which had beene a piece of uſeleſſe diligence, if they had been before aſſured, that they could not be deceived or faile in thoſe things for which they were aſſembled. Which argument, if it doe not infallibly induce the concluſion to thoſe that pray for thoſe things which they are ſure of; yet is it an evidence, that they that uſe it are of the opinion which they inferre by it, and will be of force to thoſe, that from the mention of ſome of the Ancients praying for the dead, conclude them to be in a mutable ſtate; as I conceive ſome of your freinds are wont to doe. To this aſſertion of ours I might alſo cite the Concordance of the Jeſuits generally, who that they may faſten all Infallibility in the Pope alone, attribute nothing at all to a Councell but this, that the errour of a Councell cannot be confirmed by the Pope, which is in effect no more, then that Councells begin to be infallible, when the Pope confirmes them, i. e. when the Councell is at an end (which kind of Infallibility they will afford, I preſume, to every Heretique, (and to me while I thus write) that my errour cannot be confirmed by the Pope) unleſſe they will be ſo bountifull to adde alſo, that ſuch a Councell cannot erre, if it follow the inſtructions of the Pope, which will alſo be acknowledged true of any the meaneſt Lutheran, or Calviniſt, as well as of that Councell.
Section 8 If neither of theſe two be it you meane, then be ingenuous, and tell us, you either mean the Pope of Rome, as the Jeſuits doe, or elſe that you meane thoſe parts of the Catholique that are governed by him, and then as we ſhall tell you, that it is the very thing which we learn't from you to meane by the Roman Church, ſo you that affirme that to be the notion of the Catholique Church, muſt acknowledge to affirme the ſame thing to be Infallible, which we ſay you doe affirme, when we propoſe the Queſtion of the Roman Churches Infallibility; and in this there is no matter of deceit or difficulty, but that that Church under the government of the Pope, which we affirme to be fallible, even in the higheſt degree, fallible in fundamentals, you undertake and conteſt to be infallible. 'Tis true, this we call the Roman Church, conceiving it to be your Dialect, and if you ſay it is not, we will conſent to you, and in obedience to your example, call it ſo no more; on condition you will be but as reaſonable, and give it ſome other title; whether that of the Westerne Church, which were a good large Province, (and yet of that Saint Baſil complaines in no lower ſtile then this,Ep. 10. That they neither know nor endure the unity of Faith) or any other title, beſides that of the Catholique Church, which we are ſure cannot properly be allow'd it, unleſſe it appear, Firſt, that all Chriſtians ought to be govern'd by the Biſhop of Rome; and Secondly, that all they which are not ſo governed, are no longer members of the Catholique Church; and if you affirme both theſe, we profeſſe to deny them, and then that muſt be the matter of debate; and till that be agreed, there will be no other queſtion ſeaſonable to be propoſed in this matter, and wen it is, there will be no other needfull.
Section 9 And for the parallel of the Canterburians, which you uſe to prove the unfitneſſe of the queſtion under theſe termes, it is but a thin fallacy (eaſily ſeene through) if it be thought to conclude any thing. To the clearing of which, be pleaſed to obſerve, that the Biſhop of Canterbury may be conſidered in a three-fold relation: Firſt, to his particular Dioceſſe of Canterbury, of which he is Biſhop; Secondly, to the whole Province of Canterbury, of which he is Metropolitan; Thirdly, to the whole Nationall Church of England, of which he is Primate; his two former relations are terminated in Canterbury, under the two ſignifications of the word, but the third is terminated not in Canterbury, in any notion of that word, but in all England; and thence it followes, that the Church of Canterbury (whether as a Province, or a Dioceſſe, which are the onelyonly two Notions we in England have of it) being not of the ſame latitude with the Church of England, it will be improper to call the Proteſtants of England Canterburians: But then on ſuppoſition that there were a third notion of it, whereby the Church of Canterbury, and the Church of England were of the ſame latitude, or to him that were confidently perſwaded that they are ſo, it were no impropriety at all to call all Engliſh Proteſtants by that denomination; and if to prove it were improper, it ſhould be affirmed that 'tis but an accident that he that is Primate of all England ſhould be Biſhop of the particular See of Canterbury, there would be no force in that proof; Firſt, becauſe that which is true per accidens, is nevertheleſſe true, and denominations being ad placitum, are many times accidentall; yet for all that denominations as much, as if they had been by nature or per ſe; and Secondly, becauſe we are now upon a ſuppoſition (though it be but a ſuppoſition) that there is a Nationall Church of Canterbury, as well as a Province and Dioceſſe. And therefore I ſay on this ſuppoſition, if it had ſo happened, or been agreed on, that all that are under the Primate of Canterbury ſhould be called the Church of Canterbury, as it hath been agreed on, that all that are under the Metropolitan of Canterbury, ſhould be called the Province of Canterbury, we ſhould never challenge any man of improper ſpeaking, that ſhould call us Canterburians. As for the Scotch Puritan you ſpeak of, that calls us ſo by way of reproach; you cannot be ignorant of his meaning, or think it pertinent to the purpoſe, to which you apply it; It was uſed by him onelyonly in relation to the preſent doctrines of the then Biſhop of Canterbury, (and onelyonly ſome men ſcoffed at under that title, as followers of his (as they erroneouſly conceived) particular, or perſonall doctrines) which is quite another notion of the word, then that which you have occaſion to ſpeak of.
Section 10 From all this it will conſequently appear to be as unreaſonable for you, who acknowledge a notion of the Roman Church equipollent with Catholicke, and affirme the whole Catholicke Church to be govern'd by the Primate, or Pope of Rome, and urge the neceſſity of Chriſt's precept, that the Church which you pronounce infallible, muſt be ſo governed, (or elſe that it is no longer Catholicke) to make any difference between the ſtile of Catholicke, and of Roman Church, or of Catholicks and Romaniſts; no man among us fetching the denomination of Roman, or Romaniſt (when he thus ſpeaks) from the relative Dioceſſe of Rome, as the Pope is a Biſhop, or from the relative Province of Rome, as he is a Metropolitan, but from the relative Church of Rome; the whole number of thoſe Chriſtians who acknowledge the Pope their Primate or Partriarch, which you that affirme him to be Primate of all Chriſtians by full right and ſucceſſion from Saint Peter, muſt acknowledge him to be of the whole Catholike Church; In which acknowledgement becauſe we agree not with you (but contend that his Patriarchate is limited as well as his Dioceſſe or Province) as we cannot therefore ſpeak throughout in your language, and call that the Catholicke Church, which is but a part of the Catholicke, or debate the Infallibility of the Catholicke Church with them, that meane by that phraſe onelyonly that are under the Roman Communion, or government of the Pope of Rome, whil'ſt we mean Catholicke without any reſtriction, (or if we ſhould ſo ſpeak, ſhall be guilty of leaving a maine equivocation in the words of the queſtion, which ought of all things to be avoided by diſtinguiſhing, before we goe about to debate any thing, and after diſtinction made and agreed on, that by Catholick is to be meant onelyonly thoſe which are in Obedience to the Pope, we will then debate it under that title alſo) ſo may we very reaſonably uſe your dialect, when we agree in the meaning of it, as in the phraſe [Roman Church] we doe (meaning both of us, all thoſe who are govern'd by the Pope) of which Church in that notion we now enquire, whether that be infallible or no? And ſo much for the phraſe of the Queſtion, or Title of that Treatiſe.
Section 11 And then I ſhall adde no more to the ſecond part of the firſt Chapter, then by acknowledging the treatiſe of that excellent Lord to have beene written many yeares ſince, and now not unſeaſonably publiſh't at a time when ſome arts were uſed (though, bleſſed be God, improſperouſly) to pervert unſtable minds, and this pretended Infallibility a maine auxiliary call'd in for that purpoſe; As for any anſwer long ſince framed to it, I am perſwaded that that Lord thought it not ſuch, as that his reputation ſhould be concerned in providing an anſwer for it; And for the Publiſher 'tis very poſſible that he might never heare of any ſuch, (which I gueſſe alſo by my ſelfe, who had long ſince a copy of the one, but till I read it here, never heard of the other,) or if he did, had reaſons which he can juſtifie to any ingenuous man, why he did not publiſh it alſo. Which being now ſaid to you (and which you had before no ground of thinking to be otherwiſe) you will hardly give a civill account, why you ſhould charge (and now not aske pardon for charging) on the Publiſher a frivolous officiouſneſſe, by which that anſwer is forced to ſtay behind (though it were alſo ſufficient to tell you, that when you ſet out all your Bookes at Rome or Doway, with our anſwers annext to them, we will then publiſh this of yours at Oxford) or on the Edition, the ſtile of a m…ane an… creeping faſhion of appearing to the world; which words being ſo contrary to truth, (which is punctually this, the Booke was licenſed by the Vice-chancellour; Printed by the Printer to the Ʋniverſity; the Authour's name put in the Title page; and all this proclaimed on every wall and corner of the City, on purpoſe that every one that had kindneſſe to the Romane Church might read it) if they ſignifie any thing, have onelyonly this interpretation of which they are capable, that he that wrote them cared not how abſolutely groundleſſe his accuſation was, but onelyonly was willing to accuſe.
Section 12 What you mean by the next words [that no notice hath been taken of giving licence for any other anſwer to be made hereafter, or if made to be publiſhed in print, and have the advantage to be diſperſed abroad in many copies.] I profeſſe I cannot tell, and yet was inſolent enough to thinke, that I could have conſtituted a piece of plaine Engliſh, of which I underſtood every word ſingle, but now finde, I had overvalued my owne abilities, and ſhould be more modeſt hereafter, but that by finding in the *The place to which theſe words reply, are upon this admonition mended by the Apologiſt in his reviſall, by putting in after the word [Metropolitan] theſe words [is the Pope, who] and two lines after in ſtead of [it] [His Dioceſſe] he might as reaſonably have mended the other alſo.ſixth line of the Book the nominative Metropolitan without any verb after it, I am inclined to thinke that it is part of your ſtile to neglect thoſe vulgar rules in which I had beene inſtructed.
Section 13 As for the ſad newes that you acquaint us with, [that this other anſwer of yours ſhall lye conſtrained, and in much reſtraint, yea and be in danger to periſh] Though that be a heavy aggravation of the miſery of theſe wicked times, yet ſure this paper is not the onelyonly ſufferer in that kinde, and may both be thought to have deſerved it aſwell, and be as able to beare it with ſome patience, as many other good ſonnes of the Church Catholique have been; and yet if it will but ſue out its habeas Corpus, I doubt not but the law will be open for its plea, and in the meane I have deſigned this preſent paper to offer it baile, and obtaine its enlargement through this City, ſo it will promiſe faithfully not to goe farther, then its ſurety is ready to attend it. By this meanes, if it be accepted, it ſhall have leave to viſite all its Catholique freinds, and others to whom it deſires to performe any civility, or from whom to receive any kindneſſe.
Section 14 In the meane, how his Lordſhip's treatiſe [hath caſt dangerous ſtumbling blockes, which may endanger the ſtability and ſafety not onelyonly of Catholique Religion, but of Chriſtian in generall] I ſhall promiſe to conſider with you when you proceed to any proofe of it, and till then onelyonly adviſe you and all my fellow Chriſtians to conclude no more againſt any creature, then you produce premiſes to juſtify; For by ſo doing you will appeare not onelyonly injurious to him with whom you deale, (in raſh cauſeleſſe anger and cenſure) and ſecretly reproachfull and contumelious to the Reader (by conceiving him ſo tame, ſo unworthy of the reaſonable ſoule, which God hath given him, on purpoſe to diſtinguiſh betwixt reaſon and no reaſon, betwixt proofe and libell, betwixt argument and confidence) but withall you will teach others an evill leſſon againſt your ſelves. If you pleaſe I ſhall give you an Example of each of theſe.
Section 15 That which you adde in the bottome of the Chapter concerning Maſter Chillingworth's Booke, beſides that it is utterly impertinent to the confuting of this, which is the preſent buſineſſe (nay it is an argument on this ſide, both for the ſeaſonableneſſe of publiſhing it (as an Epitome uſefull and gainfull to ſuperſede the trouble of reading the larger Booke) and for the leaving the former anſwer behind, if the Publiſher had knowne there had beene any; becauſe, as you before intimated, the publiſhing of Maſter Chillingworth's Booke then was conceived to have taken away all force and conſiderableneſſe from that anſwer) is firſt, very unjuſt to Maſter Chillingworth, in ſaying without any proofe, that he borrowed his new materials from Baron and Volkelius. Secondly, it is contumelious to the Reader's judgement, who is ſuppoſed to be ſo eaſy, as to conclude that to be an ill Booke, which is affirmed to borrow materials from a Scotch Miniſter, and an impious Author; from which contumely I conceive he is able to vindicate himſelfe, by telling you, Firſt, that what is ſuppoſed to be borrowed from the Scotch Miniſter, is very authentique Engliſh Divinity, and indeed that Baron is content to profeſſe himſelfe to have borrowed (and that in this particular) from our Writers, eſpecially (if my memory faile me not) from Biſhop White, and the firſt edition of the Biſhop of Canterburies Booke under his Chaplaine's name, from whom alſo Maſter Chillingworth might borrow, if he were in any want, and not from him, and yet I believe would not, if he were alive, be aſhamed to have profited by ſo worthy a Scotchman as Baron was. Secondly, that Volkelius his being an impious Author, cannot extend to every part of his worke, nor conclude, that that which is ſuppoſed to be borrowed from him, is therefore impious or poiſonous (if it be, let it be produced and proved to be ſo by ſome other proofe, then that of the impiety of the Author) but rather that Maſter Chillingworth had the skill of diſcerning, and tooke nothing but balſome, and antidote, where if he had been apt to miſtake, he might have faln on poyſon. Thirdly, this will teach others, if they be apt to learn, an evill leſſon againſt your ſelves; I meane not that of repaying evill with evill (God forbid that any injuſtice in others ſhould ſo provoke us, foreign, to be like them) but onelyonly this particular leſſon, which hath coſt us little paines to peirce or conſtrue, that if this Tract of yours be a ſatisfactory anſwer to all Maſter Chillingworths Booke, then a ſatisfactory anſwer to this your Treatiſe, will be ſufficient anſwer alſo to the three great Latine Volumnes, which they ſay, you have written againſt Maſter Chillingworth. And this I ſhall be more glad to have obtained by your owne rule of concluding, then patient to try by reading them over, whether it be truly ſo, or no; eſpecially if thoſe that have taſted them, paſſe a right judgement upon them.
Section 16 Thus farre I have given my ſelfe ſcope to take up almoſt every word you ſay in your firſt chapter, but am unwilling to thinke, that thereby I am engaged to doe the like in all that followes. Truely upon reading on, I ſee the ſubtilty of compoſure, and the particulars incident are not of ſuch weight, as that I can promiſe my ſelfe patience to examine it ſo ſtrictly; I meane not patience, as it is oppoſed to anger or paſſion (for by Gods helpe I ſhall not yeild to any temptation, that ſhall bring me into that) but as it is oppoſed to wearineſſe and laſſitude; and I muſt be pardon'd, if I thinke I could ſpend my time better to my ſelfe and the benefit of others, then in following the exceptions line by line, and giving them a large anſwer; for that any man may be patient to doe ſo, or to reade it when 'tis done; it is neceſſary, that the Text, which muſt beare that Comment, muſt have ſomewhat either of difficulty, or ſubtilty, or profit in it; either of which, whenſoever I can finde, I profeſſe I ſhall be moſt ready to enlarge upon it, (and now acknowledge it an obligation from the Author, if he will point out to me, where I ſhall have fail'd) and in other particulars be more mercifull to the reader, and my ſelfe.