The Disarmers Dexterities Examined, Chapter 3 · Section 1
SECT. 1.
No cause can justifie Schisme. The reasons of my setting down the sin of Schisme so largely. The state of he question, which the Schismaticks, the Romanists, or we. The case of the Romish Recusant. Of the Pope excommunicating us, against Canons Ephesine, and Apostolick, &c. A difference between the Court of Rome with their abettors, and the charitable subjects of the Papacy. The fundamental question, the right of the Popes power. My modifying the Fathers words.
IN the first Section of his first part, two things S. W. is much to seek in, and to those it will be act of charity to afford some satisfaction. First, why I took pains to set so ill a character upon schisme (as is done in the 6, 7. and 8. Sect. of Chap. 1.) to gather as he saith, such a bundle of severe rods out of the sacred Scriptures and best Fathers, to whip Schismaticks:) 2. Why I thinke the cause or occasion of any mans schisme not worth the producing or heeding in this Controversie.
Of the later of these I have already spoken in the Reply, Chap. 1. Sect. 1. and shall now only adde another very ancient testimony from Dionysius Alexandrinus, in his Epistle to Novatus, foreign.Ap: Euseb: foreign. A Christian ought to endure any thing in that (humble Charitative) cause of not dividing the Church of Christ, rather then really to divide upon what ever cause. And because it is now suggested that this is but a fetch, the prettiest that ever S. W. met with, to wave the whole question, or whatsoever is materiall in it, I shall in answering of his first wonderment, give a clear account of this second misunderstanding also.
The evident reason of my premising so largely, and so early that bloody pourtraicture of the danger, and sin of schisme, as far as it respects the Romanist and us (for it had a more comprehensive influence than so, as hath been already said) was no other but the intire desire to speak the full truth of God, and to lay all guilt, where I was fully perswaded the All-just searcher of hearts, and Judge of actions had laid it, i. e. on those, whosoever they were, that were truly guilty of it, who had either divided from the Catholicke Church of Christ, truly so called, or in special from any particular National Church, such as the Church of Rome is on one side, and the Church of England on the other. And this was so pertinent in both these respects, to the Romanists present case (as many especially, as have forsaken that Communion of ours, in which they sometimes lived obediently) that if ever I had been really willing to alleviate the Fathers censures of the crime of schism, (as twice, or thrice my Disarmer pretends me inclinable to do, he shall see anon with how little reason) I might most justly say, that it had been from a tenderness to our enemies (and not from any jealousie of our selves) an effect of which it really was, that I chose not to proceed to fasten this crime on any,Tr. of Sch…sm, p. 11. to assume the office either of an accuser, or a Judge, but contain my self within the meekest bounds, that humility and charity could advise, of vindicating our own integrity, without recriminating or retorting the charge on our adversaries. Of this I shall now speak a little more expresly, upon this occasion.
That it is in this debate, concerning Schisme, a matter of question betwixt the Romanists and us, whether the Bishop of Rome had before, and at the time of the Reformation, any supreme legall power, and authority over the Church of England, I willingly acknowledg (and by the way, it is strange that S. W. can think fit to affirm, that*That our Church had authority to do it (to cast you out and deny you Communion) if you be found to deserve it, being then her subjects and children, none doubts, p. 4. none doubts it) and till that question be decided on one side, it cannot with any reason be defined, on which side the schisme doth truly lye. And therefore I deemed it absolutely necessary to examine all the Romanists pleas imaginable, their weightier, or lightest colours of pretensions to that authority. And I think no man can, or doth say that I have omitted any head of them; but on the other side, that I was over carefull to prevent some which they now choose not to plead. From hence it is inevitably consequent, that as on the tryal of this question of the papal supremacy, the Crisis of this other of Schisme so depends, that when the one is determined, the other must follow it, it being evident that actually there is a schisme or partition betwixt us, and by both of us granted, that no cause can excuse them who shall be found guilty of it: So whilst the former, that of the papal authority, is under contest; the question is not barely this, Whether the Church of England be schismatical, or no, (for a Romanist may cheaply debate that, an… keep himself safe, whatsoever becomes of the umpirage) but indifferently, and equally, whether we, or the Romanist be thus guilty, or which is the Schismatick, that lies under all those severe censures of the Scriptures and Fathers, Those of the English Reformation on the one side, or the English Revolters on the other side, not excluding (but involving also under the same condemnation, in case they have no due authority over us, which now is the question, and must not be begg'd on either side) the Governours in the Romish See, that have against all Christian methods of charity, and duty of Communion, cast us out of their societies, as without authority (in case they are not our lawfull superiors) so without all cause, and continue their severity without all remorse or relenting for the space of many years, and this not only toward us, but toward many other Churches, East and West, North and South, in all parts of the habitable world.
For if the Church of England be really foreign, duly subject to no forein jurisdiction, which I must yet suppose to be made good in that tract of schisme, then the laie Papist, baptized a member, and sonne of this Nationall Church under the authority of our Ecclesiastical Superiors, as he was born a subject under the civill Governors of this Realm, hath revolted, and separated from his immediate Superiors, and for his sake, among others, it was, that the Discourse was so punctual, and so large c. 3. concerning the unity of subjection of all inferiours to all their lawfull Superiours, and the schisme that arose from the breach of that unity, the casting off that Obedience; It were to be wished the English Revolters, that are so neerly concern'd, and the unsetled doubters, that are in most danger to be seduced by the confidence of a supposed safety, which is promised them in their departure from us, and affirmed to be granted on all hands, would timely be admonished to take notice of it.
So again if the Bishop of Rome had really no more power and authority over this Church, then the Bishop of Antioch in the time of the Ephesine Councel was found to have over Cyprus, then his pretending this supereminent authority, and proceeding with us, as with his legall subjects, sending out his Bulls of Excommunication against us, what is it but a schisme formally on his part, which makes the rupture between the sister Churches, and a most express violation of the antient Canons, which so distinctly, and precisely command the contrary. I shall best give you their sense in the very words of the great Councel of Ephesus, Can: ult. foreign, that no Bishop (be he ne never so dignified) shall invade another Province, which hath not been from the beginning under his, i. e. his Predecessors hand or power. But in case any have thus invaded and by violence brought it under him, he shall then make restitution that the Canons of the Fathers be not transgressed, and under pretence of sacred office, the pride of secular power secretly steal in, and so we by degrees lose indiscernibly the liberty which our Lord Jesus Christ the Redeemer of all men hath given us by his own blood. This is yet more distinctly set down in the genuine Apostolike Canons, where as the due observance of the Primate in every nation is prescribed Can: 34. and his power thus limited in the exercise of it, that he shall do nothing in the Inferior Bishops Dioceses, foreign, without the good liking of them all (and if he do otherwise, he abuses his dignity, saith the Scholiast, and*foreign Zon. p. 17. D. converts it into foreign and foreign, which is no better then tyrannie) so Can: 35. they proceed to define foreign — that no Bishop shall dare to ordain any without his own bounds, in cities or regions not subject to him; or if he be convinced to have done so, without the good liking of those that have the rule of those cities or regions, he is to be deposed for that default.
And what they thus define about Ordination, the Councel of Constantinople extend to all other Ecclesiastical affairs, Can: foreign (as before foreign, that no Bishops must, unless they be called or intreated, meddle beyond their Diocess, or with Churches without their bounds, either for ordination, Zon. p. 70. A.or any other Ecclesiastical oeconomies; and the Scholiast tells us, that the word foreign signifie, it to be foreign, a robbery, and a tumultuous disorderly invasion in them that are guilty of it. The same doth the 13th Canon of Antioch define of any Bishop, in reference both to*foreign. ordination and to constituting of what ever Ecclesiastical affairs that belong not to him, decreeing a plain nullity of all that he shall thus constitute, and so again Can: foreign. of that Councel.
And this being the Bishop of Rome his condition in respect of us, in case he have no legall authority over us, and be not intreated by the Governours of our Church to exercise any; or in case he were our Primate, yet still if he act without the Councel, and against the consent of our Bishops, as he must be supposed to do, when he excommunicates them, and their Flocks together, 'tis all this while, as was shewed, usurpation and invasion, and by force of these Canons foreign and foreign, irregular, invalid, and null, and in the consequence of it, most evidently destructive of that foreign that concord and unity, as of brethren, which is to be preserved between severall Churches, and so a most culpable act of schisme in the Bishop of Rome, and in all them that are guilty of it in so high a way, as to anathematize and disclaim all Communion with others: and this is all this while visibly antecedent to, and abstracted from the cause of his doing it, which alone S. W. will allow to be considered, accusing me for waving the question, when he swallows it down at one haust, pretending that none doubt of their Churches authority to do it, which I profess to be the one fundamental question of all, to which this other, who they are that are guilty of the schisme, or whether the charge of schisme be sufficiently proved against us of the Church of England, is but appendent, and consequent, the usurping of an undue power over those that are not his Ecclesiastical subjects, being no Judicial act, but a most visible Tyrannie in him that exercises it so bloodily, on whatsoever pretended misbehaviours, and that which alone, without any other branch of plea, justifies us from the guilt of schisme, in vindicating our just liberties, by casting him out of that power, who was so unduely possest of it, and so divolves (unless he can clear his title to the power) the whole guilt of the crime on the accuser.
How highly the Court of Rome, and all that abet her grandeur and contemt of their brethren, are to be judged criminous herein, this is no place to define: I willingly acknowledg a wide difference between them, and the humble charitable members of the Roman Communion, who living quietly under their Superiors, endeavor and pray for the peace of the Catholike Church, and contribute not actively or willingly to the ruptures of it: Of which number because our charity bids us hope there are great multitudes, we are still free from any necessity of prejudging the Church of Rome from being a true Church, and so still retain that favourable opinion of salvation being attainable amongst them, which we always allow'd, yet cannot absolve from the guilt of the most culpable schisme those that have set up, and maintained that more than foreign or foreign or foreign, that impregnable fortress, rather than wall of partition betwixt us, nor yet those that against all rules of subjection and subordination have renounced their lot in the Church of England, wherein they were planted, and given themselves up to a forein obedience.
My Disarmer will, I suppose, by this discern the satisfaction which he is likely to receive to his two scruples, I have that confidence of his capacity, as to leave him to pick it out of the premisses, and apply it to his best advantage, as I do also this open acknowledgment, that if by the process of this debate it shall appear, that the Bishop of Rome is, or was by the Institution of Christ, from whom he pretends, our legal superior, possessor bonae fidei of the supreme power over us, we are then unquestionably the Schismatickes; and if not, then are they such, which have revolted from us. And this, as it will shorten the method, and make it still reasonable to wave the consideration of the occasion and causes of the schisme (of which they that are guilty are not excusable by any motive or cause of their action) so it is most distant from declining the very point of the difficulty, as S. W. without all colour of truth, or argument, pretends, the right of the power being the one great requisite to the validity of any exercise of it.
Wherein as we have no reason to dread the Romanists, or to misdoubt our plea, so I assure S. W. no fear, or jealous apprehension of any possible danger inclined me to modifie any sharp expression of the Fathers against schisme, as he twice or thrice without any justice suggests me to do. The clearing whereof is all that I have any obligation to adde to this Section.
His first whisper of suggestion is, that in rendring S. Augustines words, Non esse quicquam gravius schismate, I say there is scarce any crime so great as schisme. [There saith he, I mince it with scarce, when the place cited is absolute, that there is not any] But certainly S. W. sees amiss, The place in that Father is not absolute, that there is not any so great, but only that there is not any gravius heavier or greater; now there may possibly be many crimes as great, though no one were supposed greater, and so my rendring it [there is scarce any so great] i. e. scarce any equall to schisme, is fully as much, as the originall conteined: and if it differ at all from it, 'tis that 'tis more comprehensive, than that which 'twas set to interpret. And yet also the other expressions of the Fathers, produced in that place, gave me authority to set it in that amplitude, not idolatry, not sacriledge, not parricide (say they) is so great, and therefore I conclude, scarce any crime can come in competition with it, not knowing any that was qualified for it by being greater than these, and yet not assuming to affirme more than my authorities did induce, that there was none greater. Herein tis visible my Disarmers hast was too great, and that I could not have rendred either the words more fully, or the sense of the testimonies more punctually, than I did render them: 'Twere, I doubt, his dearest interest, that some softer expression did truly belong to that sin, than that which I was forced to allot to it.
The other rendring which he blames is on occasion of these words of Irenaeus, Nulla ab eis tanta fieri potest correptio quanta est schismatis pernicies, whence, not as translating to a word, but as deducing a conclusion, I infer, that it is in the opinion of the Fathers very hard, if not impossible to receive such an injury or provocation from the Governors of the Church as may make a separation excusable [here, saith he, the Doctor mitigates the dangerous expression with, very hard if not impossible.] But why did he not say, I did not exactly render schismatis pernicies? For it is evident, I varied that more, than the nulla fieri potest correptio. The short is, I set down the latine punctually, and so left it not possible for me to impose on any that understood that: Thence I inferred what I supposed the testimonies would be sure to beare, and was carefull not to go beyond those limits, and knowing that both in Scripture oft, and not seldome in other Authors foreign which is literally impossible, was in sense to be rendred hard or difficult, I took that cautious expression to be best, that in their opinion 'twas very hard, if not impossible.
A third whisper there is still behind in this §. that in stead of the words of S. Augustine, separate from the Catholike Church, the Dr. full of jealousies and feares, puts the Church truely Catholike, as if, saith he, there were much danger lest any perhaps should imagine Christs Church (of which he conceives S. Austin meant it) to be untruely Catholike] But this will be soon dispatcht. S. Austines words are, Communionem separent à communione Orbis terrarum, I exprest this [and by separating from the universall or truely Catholike Church of Christ] the reason is visible, because the Church of Rome is by her Advocates styled the Catholike Church, being certainly not such in the notion, wherein S. Austin speaks, that of the Communion of the whole world, or as Catholike, if truly so, must signifie Vniversal.
These are the acts of charyness, whereof I am accused as of dexterities, that I found necessary, lest I might too directly prejudice my future work; with what truth suggested, the reader will now judg, yea & S W. also (if 'twere possible he should believe himself in this part of his accusation) whom I have now made my Confessor of my secretest and deepest reservations, I wish he would not oft put me to such necessities, till he be better qualified for that office.