Brief Account of One Suggestion of the Romanist, Chapter 5 · Section 7
SECT. VII.
His fourteenth Section. Schisme against the whole Church. S. W's Logick of Sacriledge found in every theft. His suggestion of my denying authority of Councels. Power of a Councel of Bishops over one Bishop. Omitting to enlarge of Councels is not leaving out that branch of Schisme. S. W's strange misrepresentation, by inserting of words in my period.
1. HIS 14. Section well provided with ovation and reports of his victories, I most willingly adventure to the Readers judgement, who shall compare it with Repl. Ch. III. Sect. 1. and doubt not but he will believe, that if I vindicate the Protestant from having separated from any one Father or Brother in the whole Christian world, I have freed him from dividing from the whole Church, and from the authority of Councels, it being impossible to separate from the whole without separating from any one part of the whole, or from Councels, which are made up either of all the Bishops, or of a greater or smaller number of them, in ease he be vindicated from having separated from any one of those Bishops.
2. What a gainlesse exerxcise then must it be to the Reader, should I survey his several arts to make this plausible, which is as farre from being possible, as an universal affirmative [communicating with all] is unreconcileable with an universal negative, such is communicating with none (and [separating from the whole Church] is the interpretation of that) or even with a particular negative, there being not any one man in the world, with whom I refuse to communicate; For if there be any such, he must be my Superior, or aequal, or inferior, and that we have not separated from any of these, is the undertaking, confess'dly, of that Tract of Schisme.
3. His first incounter against that which is so palpable may deserve to be taken notice of, as an essay of what is to be expected from the rest. Schisme, saith he, against the whole Church is not comprised in any one head, because it is in an higher nature sinful, and so exceeds it. As if he had said, the Virgin Mary is not comprised under the head of women, because she is more excellent than other women, and so exceeds it. His own instance will clear the matter as well as any could have been pickt out. Sacrilege, saith he, and Parricide according to the common notions are found indeed in every simple theft and murther, but according to their specifical differences they exceed them, and so are not comprised in them. As great a miracle in Logick, as Mr. White is said to be of wit. For 1. is it possible that any man should imagine that sacriledge is found in every simple theft? What sacriledge (in any the most common notion that includes sacriledge, and if it do not so, 'tis bare theft, not sacriledge) is found in stealing a horse out of a Lay-mans Stable, when neither the man, nor the horse, nor the Stable, had any sacred relation upon them? Or what Parricide in each bloudy Duel, that is fought betwixt Strangers, that met and quarrel'd yesterday at the Ordinary? There is one of S. W's rarities of refined Logick, instead of which, he that were guided by ordinary rules would have said that Sacriledge and Parricide according to their common notions are found under the general heads of theft and murther.
4. But had S. W. descended to this puling mean spirited vulgar idiome, he could not have maintained life to the end of his period, for that concludes with a second rarity; that according to their specifical differences they are not comprized in them] Is not a man according to his specifical difference comprised in a living creature which contains in it both rational and irrational living creatures? And so is not sacriledge comprised in theft, which contains purloining of any thing whether common or sacred? and is not Parricide contained under Murther, when murther contains all killing whether of superiors or aequals? And what if killing superiors be a greater sin, than killing of aequals, is not the greater comprised in the general word, as well as the lesser? Are not these fine nets, and Lawes, and generical words, that catch hold only of the lesser, and let go the greater? Such extracts of sublimed sense S. W. hath communicated to us, in his attempt to prove that a man may be guilty of the highest, when he is perfectly free from any even the lowest degree of sin? Might not another mans Disciple, as well as Mr. Whites, have retained, without boasting of it, as much Logick, as this Magistery hath appeared to arrive to?
5. Such stuffe as this the whole Section is made up of, and must not with ordinary charity be minutely insisted on, only I cannot omit to reflect on one most scandalous suggestion most causelessely whispered against me, that I seem to doubt whether Councels have any authority, and durum telum necessitas] applyed to it; When he cannot be ignorant of the authority we allow Councels, and when all that I was in that place guilty of, was the framing a Dilemma, which part soever of which he took, it was manifest his cause was overthrown, thus, Either the Councels, that are supposed to be left out of my Scheme, have some authority over him that is accused to divide from them, or they have none; If they have any, that (said I, and must still affirm) must be reducible to paternal power (as made up of those under whose authority he is placed, be it a Diaecesane, Provincial, National, or General Councel) If they have none, (as a Councel of Spaniards have none over an English man) any farther than by way of counsel and advise, that will directly fall under the head of fraternal charity.
6. Meanwhile it is evident, that as I acknowledge the just authority of Councels of all sorts from Diaecesane to General, and that as paternal to all that are subject to each, so I*Repl. p. 29. then affirmed expressely that the power which belongs to the Bishops in each Province (and the proportion holds in a Nation, and the whole world) is united in that of a Provincial Councel, where all the Diaecesane Bishops are assembled (which again he strangely disguises; and misrepresents, making me to say no more, but that the offence against the whole was consequently an offence against any one there residing, (he should have said against every one, and consequently against all that have authority over him) and the despising of that is an offence under the first sort of Schisme, that of dividing from, or disobeying our superiors.
8. In defense of his great subtlety he proceeds to ask an abstruse quaestion, What paternal power hath a company of Bishops over a single Bishop? I answer, the same that any Aristocratick Government hath over every single member of it, and this, I take it, is as Paternal, as in a Monarchy, Monarchick power could be.
9. But because having mentioned this of Councels of all sorts, I did not, for some reasons particularly mentioned, proceed to handle the authority of Councells, or any other quaestion on that so large head of various discourse, farther than to say, that the Emperor when those last remedies were seasonable, had power of convoking Ʋniversal Councels (as every Prince in his own Dominions National) hence he is qualified by his gifts, to conclude that I confesse I treated not specially against Schisme against general Councels, and presently interprets that my confessing my division of Schisme insufficient, which was only objected. But I pray how can my omitting to handle one part more largely, or contenting my self (for reasons to me convincing) to have named it, inferre my not naming it at all, or excluding it quite out of my Scheme? Which if I visibly and confess'dly did not, 'tis then as visible and confess'd, that my division was not insufficient, or maimed in that respect.
10. What he addes p. 241. of my divination that towards the end of the world I think it probable there may be a General Councel, and his reason which his best auguries can give of it, that Antichrist who is to be then the Ʋniversal secular Governour, and by consequence according to D. H's grounds the head of Gods Church, or Supreme in Ecclesiastical affairs, will doe Christianity that favour as to gather a General Councel, adding that this if any must be my meaning, is, all of it put together, as unparallel'd an unsincerity, as Antichrist himself, of whom he speaks, with his foreign, was likely to be guilty of.
11. I (that believe Diogenes spake very reasonably, when beholding the Southsayers he cryed out foreign man was the most ridiculous of creatures) could not but behold with some amazement such words cited from me, that toward the end of the world I think it probable there may be a General Councel] Could I write in so deep a sleep, as to transcribe what I never remember to have been the matter of my dream? Yet these are S. W's plain words [towards the end of the world he thinks it probable there may be one] But looking neerer, it was observable that [towards the end] and [probable] being put, as citations, in Italick letters, the [of the world] and [he thinks there may be one] were not so noted, and then 'twas obvious to smell one of S. W's arts, and therefore looking on my words,*P 30. Repl. Ch. III. Sect. 1. n. 13. I found to my astonishment (what I could not be so uncharitable to have suspected) none other than these words of mine [the congregating of the like (when possible, and probable toward the end) is recommended p. 158. as a supply, when there should be need of extraordinary remedies.]
12. Can there be any quaestion of the sense of these words, that when the congregating of Councels is 1. possible to be had, 2. probable to conduce toward the end, to which Councels have been or should be alway designed, then I recommended the assembling of them, as supplies, &c. And behold a metamorphosis by one slight of hand, inserting [of the world] and then I that have written an intire dissertation, to prove that Antichrist was already come in St. Johns times, (not, as†Christ. Doctr. c. 3. p 65. Bellarmine teaches his Catechumeni, that toward the end of the world he will endeavour to deceive us, but I say, that he was long since come) in the Infancy of Christianity, must now turn an extemporary Augur, and Southsay of Antichrist, an Ʋniversal secular Monarch, towards the end of the world, and what not, when S. W. hath decreed to have it so.
13. To all the fourty and four false dealings in his Index amass'd together, I shall oppose this one Peccadillo of S. W. and if it do not outweigh them all (in pressing toward the Abysse) as much as the grossest falshood can truth, I shall be content to lye under as great a load, as his arts can provide for me. And so I take my leave of this Section (and of his captious suggestions, which constantly partake of some degree of this craft, though it do not alwayes arrive to this perfection of visible unhappinesse) having to his grand quaestion [why I treated not of Schisme against the King] given competent satisfaction in the Answ. to Sch. Disar. Ch. VII. Sect. 5. n. 4. if he had been at leisure to read so farre, instead of*P. 144. saying, that, as it appears, we decline to own the Supremacy of Kings in sacred matters. How truely, he may judge by what is there largely said in defense of it.