Disputations Concerning Matters of Religion, Discourse · Chapter 5
CHAP. V. Of the various Iſſues and Succeſſes of Conferences, Colloquies and Diſputations about matters of Religion.
IT is the obſervation ofyAug. Thuan. apud Melch. Adam in vita Pet…i Boquini, p. 146. Lorinus in Act. Apoſt. cap. 9. v. 29. at. p. 422. Poſſev. Bibliot. ſelect. tom. 1. c. 13. p. 365. divers learned man, that conflicts in matters of Religion have for the moſt part been fruitleſs of good effects, and ſometimes that they have brought forth much evil fruit. For example: The Collation, Conference or Diſputation of Catholicks with the Donatiſts, though it were fairly carried againſt them, and that by the Teſtimony of the Judge, who was conſtituted as Moderator in the cauſe, yet they would not acknowledge themſelves convinced; and when the ſentence of the Judge was produced againſt them, they raiſed a ſlanderous report againſt him and their Antagoniſts,zDicunt judicē fuiſſe proemio corruptū. Aug. Collat. cum Donatiſt. tom. 7. part. 1. p. 726. as if they had corrupted him with bribes to paſs an honourable ſentence on their ſide: which occaſioned Auguſtine to write a Confutation of them after the publick Collation with them.
And in his particular Diſputation with Poſcentius a Nobleman, and an Arian Heretick; when he was ſhamefully foiled, he vain-gloriouſly gave out,aAug. ab ipſo ſuperatū Aug. Epiſt. Poſcent. Ep. 174. tom. 2. p. 898. that he had gotten the victory of Auguſtine. But the Examples of our own State and later times may be more for our inſtruction and caution: And we have but too good proof of very bad effects of Conferences or Diſputations with Papiſts;bSo in the Dean of Pauls and Dean of Windſors Epiſtle before the Report of the Conference with Campian, printed ann. 1583. as in the year 1581. when Campian that Thraſonical Champion of the Romiſh Church, of whom we have made mention before, when diſcovered by his Antagoniſts to be a man of confident undertakings, and impotent performances, yet Reports and Pamphlets were ſpread abroad every where by his party, as though Campian, like ſome great Bear or Lion, had ſhaken his Adverſaries off, like cowardly Curs one after another.
What followed upon the diſputes with the Jeſuite Fiſher, and a third with Dr. Laud, the Biſhop of Saint Davids, with the ſamecOf Doctor Whites reply to the Jeſuite Fiſher, p. 8, 9. Fiſher, Dr. White ſheweth in his Epiſtle to the Reader, in theſe words, His Majeſty had experience of the unfaithful dealing of Pontificians, when they make relation of ſuch things as paſs by word of mouth onelyonly in private Diſputations; and he well underſtood how the Cretizing Jeſuite had dealt with a reverend Biſhop, and with my ſelf; for had we been School-boys of thirteen years old, he could not have made us ſeem more childiſh and unskilful then he did; diſperſing hundreds of papers to his own praiſe, and to our diſgrace.
But ſuch lying reports will, at long running, turn to the diſgrace of thoſe that divulge them: and that the more, by how much they are the more notoriouſly untrue; as that fiction of theirs of D. Featly his diſpute with the ſame Fiſher, who was ſuch a buſie & pragmatical Jeſuite, as to be found fiſhing for ſilly ſouls in many places: With him the Doctor being drawn to diſpute (by one Mr. Buggs, who in his ſickneſs was ſollicited to ſet up his reſt for ſalvation in the Romiſh Religion) and the diſpute ended:(d)The Romiſh Fiſher caught and held in his own net by Doctor Featly, in the Preface to the Relation of the conference, June 27. An. 1623. p. 3. About a week after the Earl of Warwick, who was preſent at it, having occaſion to paſs over the Seas, and coming to Saint Omers, had the company of Doctor Weſton at his Inne, to whom this Doctor, taking the Earl for a Roman Catholick, told for freſh and moſt hapyy news out of England, That at a conference betwixt Father Fiſher and Weſton, ſweet Jeſuites, and two Proteſtant Miniſters, the Jeſuites had quitted themſelves ſo well, and the Catholicks Faith prevailed ſo far, that two Earls, and one hundred others of the auditory were joyned to the Church of Rome with this encounter of thoſe two Earls. The party to whom he ſpake, was one who could not but ſmile at this relation; for there *Ibid. p. 6.were not near an hundred of both parties in all at the conference, whereof twenty were profeſſed Papiſts, and known Recuſants; and for the reſt, which were Noble men, Gentlemen, and Gentlewomen of quality, with ſome few Divines, there was not any one of them any way ſtaggered in Religion by this meeting: but on the contrary, they have openly profeſt that they were much eſtabliſhed and confirmed in the Proteſtant Religion by it; and Mr. Doctor Featlys Refutation of an Anſwer to the Book intituled the Fiſher, &c. p. 130.Buggs himſelfe, whoſe ſatisfaction by this conference was principally intended, who before had doubted of our Church, gave thanks after the Disputation to Sir Humph. Lynde for the meeting, and aſſured him that he was well reſolved now of his Religion, that he ſaw plainly it was but the Jeſuites bragging without proofs; and whereas formerly by their Sophiſtical perſwaſions, be was in ſome doubt of the Church, he is now ſo fully ſatisfied of the truth of our Religion, that he doth utterly diſclaim the Popiſh Prieſts company, and their Doctrine alſo.
Though it be a wicked thing to lye (albeit it were for a good intent, yea, for the glory of God, Iob 13.7. Rom. 3.7, 8. and no wickedneſs as ſuch, is matter of laughter, but rather of ſorrow) yet they mingle ſuch folly and abſurdity with their lying, as the Prieſts of Baal did with worſhipping of their Idol, that they deſerve to be derided for it, as they were by the Prophet Elijah, 1 King. 18.26, 27. and the more, becauſe it is frequent with them, and by ſome of the approved as a pious fraud: but ſometimes their malignity produceth ſad effects, eſpecially of publick diſputes; as is obſervable concerning the Diſpute of that Illuſtrious and Incomparable man, the Lord Morney, as DoctoreIlluſtri & incomparabili viro Domino Philippo Mornayo, &c. Epiſt. dedicat. praefix. Critic. Sacr. Rivet calls him, and the Biſhop of Eureux at Fountainbleau forementioned; the Noble and Learned Lord confiding in the truth of his Allegations, which were excepted againſt, as hath been ſaid, wanting the uſe of his own Library, and forced to make uſe of his Adverſaries Books: they brought him one Book over night of one Edition, another in the morning of another; and withal, as fDoctor Sutlives Anſwer to Parſons, l. 3. c. 12. and out of him Mr. Birkbeck in his Anſwer to the Antidotiſt, added to the ſecond Edition of the Proteſtants Evid. p. 474.ſome have written, put a powder into the places quoted, the ſmell whereof was like to have coſt him his life: that hegSerres French Hiſt. Anno 1600. p. 1053. fell very ſick upon the firſt days conference, ſo as they could proceed no farther, is teſtified in the report of their Diſpute in the French Hiſtory; and ſome of his Adverſaries ſpake ſuſpiciouſly of his ſickneſs, as if it were more in his mind then in his Body, being aſtoniſſhed with the ſucceſs of the praludium of that dayes Velitation, whichhPleſſaeus attonitus ſucceſſu praecedentis velitationis apud Gisbertum Voetium de deſperata cauſa papatus, l. 3. ſect. 2. p 681. col. 2. Gisbertus Voetius diſproves: and concerning the cauſe of his diſeaſe, he ſaith nothing of poyſon, becauſe he takes it from ſuch Authors of the Popiſh party, as if they knew it to be true, would rather conceal it if they could, then let it come abroad into the world. But the matter is probable enough;
Firſt, becauſe there are ſuch poyſons, as will not onelyonly make one ſick, but kill him too, though he neither eat them nor drink them; as by anointing the leaves of a book with poyſon, wherebyiBerkbeck ex Binfield ubi ante. Averroes is ſaid to have killed Avicen; by poyſoning of clothes, arms, ſeats, ſaddles, whereofkJoh. Mariana de Rege, &c. l. 1. c. 7. p. 67. Mariana the Jeſuite ſhewes many examples in his book De Rege, and Regis Inſtitutiones; yea, a man may be killed by carrying a poyſoned Torch:lAnno 1574. Carolus Cardinalis Lotharingiae diem obiit non ſine ſuſpicione veneni, facis per noctent praelatae peſtifero odore cerebro corrupto. Bucolz. Index. chronol. p. 638. ex Thuano. ſo was the Cardinal of Loraine, a great and buſie man in the Councel of Trent, poyſoned with the ſmoke of a Torch carried before him in the night.
Secondly, it is not improbable, that ſome of the Lord Morney or Pleſſes enemies might both know that there were ſuch poyſons, and where to procure them, and how to apply them;Haereticis obſtinatis beneficium eſt quod de hac vita tollantur; nam quò diutiùs vivunt cò plures errores excogitāt, plures pervertunt, & ma jorem ſibi damnationem acquirunt. Bellarm. Tom. 2. l. 3. dc Laicis c. 21. verbis ultimis. for it ſeems by that we now noted of the Cardinal of Loraine (which fell out An. 47.15.) that deſtructive arts were neither unknown, nor unpracticed at that time; and the diſpute betwixt the L. M. and the Biſhop of Eureux was 26. years after. Any ſuch wickedneſs is the more probable of a Papiſt againſt a Proteſtant, becauſe of the Popiſh Doctrine, which is this, it is a benefit for obſtinate Hereticks to be taken out of this life, for the longer they l…ve, the more errors they invent, and the more they pervert, and procure to themſelves the greater damnation. It was not to be expected, but the diſputation being broken off by the L. M. his occaſion, the Papiſts would inſult and report whatſoever might make for their own glory, and his diſparagement, as indeed they did; but how poorly the Popiſh Biſhop began to make good his charge and challenge againſt the L. M. the learned Reader may ſee by that whichmGisbert. Voetius de deſperata cauſa papatus l. 3. Sect. 2. c. 10. à p. 680, ad 692. Giſbert Voetius hath written of it in his Book Of the deſperate cauſe of the Papacy, and by the excellentnA refutation of calumnious relation of the conference of Monſieur Pleſſis, and Monſieur of Eureux by one againſt N. D. I. P. 3. part printed by Arn. Hatfield, An. 1600. Refutation of the Tract ſet out by the L. M. after the Diſpute for his own juſt defence, to which the Biſhop his AdverſaryoPerronus ad illum librum nunquam reſpondit. Ibid. And this was 35. years after, for Voetius his book was printed An. 1655. and the diſpute was An. 1600. and this Apologet. Treat. ſoon after. never made any anſwer.
But the moſt certain and remarkable iſſue or effect of this Diſpute was, that pSerres French Hiſtory ad Ann. 1600. p. 1053.Canoy one of the Commiſſioners for the Diſpute, Preſident in the Chamber of the Edict at Charters, left his profeſſion of the Reformed Religion, and became a Romiſh Catholick; many thought that Caſaubon the other Proteſtant Commiſſioner, and Greek Reader to King H. the Fourth, would have followed the ſame courſe; but he left not the world long in this opinion, having written to the Synod of Miniſters aſſembled at Gargean, that he was not ſo wretchedly inſtructed in piety, as that for want of knowledge of the truth, he ſhould ſuffer himſelf to be carried away with every humour of Doctrine.
The cauſes of ſo little good ſucceſs of Debates, Diſputes, Conferences, or Controverſies of Religion, betwixt parties of oppoſite opinions are divers; in ſome the prevalent power of fanſie or imagination above judgement, is the cauſe, that Arguments, whether artfiicial of reaſon, or inartificial of teſtimony, will work little upon prejudicated fancy: of the various working whereof we may read many obſervable particulars in the learned diſcourſe of Picus Earl of Mirandula, ofrJo. Picus Mirandula lib. de imaginatione, vol. 2. operum p. 91. praecip. c. 7, 8, 9. that Title.
Secondly, With ſome, cuſtome is a great obſtacle againſt the receiving of truth: and thence it is that thoſe who have been trained up in untruth from their Child-hood, are with greateſt difficulty convinced of it, or converted from it. We may ſee the refractorineſs of this reſiſtance in Peter, Acts 10. who, when v. 12,13. a viſion was preſented unto him, ſhewing him ſeveral kinds of creatures, clean and unclean, and he had a command to kill and eat, v. 13. Not ſo v. 14. Lord (ſaid he) why ſo Peter? he gives this reaſon of his refuſal, though the command came from Heaven; becauſe of his cuſtomary forbearance of forbidden meats, I have never eaten any thing that is common and unclean.
Thirdly, With otherssPrava vel honoris, vel pecuniae cupiditas animos diſputantium invaſit, ut tanquam in pugna ſola ſpectaretur victoria… Ludov… Vives de cauſis corrupt. artium, l. …. p. 38. a corrupt cupidity of glory or gaint is a great cauſe of their ſtanding out againſt clear diſcoveries; ſuch will not yield to verity, ſo long as they can with confidence and impudence make any ſhew or appearance of victory, or outface the foil they have taken in diſpute.
Fourthly, Some withſtand the truth in unrighteouſneſs, principally out of hatred and diſdain of their Adverſaries, leſt it ſhould be thought, that by them they were brought to yield unto it: this was the humour of the Arch-Biſhop and Cardinal of Capua, who would yield to reform nothing, though many corruptions were diſcovered,tNicol. Archiepiſ, Capuanus, Magna contentione clamabat ne quid omnino reformaretur, ne Lutherani jactent quaſi ab ipſis propemodum adacti illud fecerint. Job. Sl…idan Comment. l. 12. p. 242. An. 1538. left the Lutherans ſhould brag that they had been brought to reformation by them.
Fifthly, Some account it their credit to be no changelings, eſpecially in Religion; not knowing the difference betwixt conſtancy and obſtinacy.
Sixthly, And oft times it falls out, that by the ſubtilty or eloquence of Diſputants, when they are ſomewhat evenly matched, the Auditory is kept pendulous, or irreſolute; even he, perhaps, for whoſe ſake the Diſpute or Conference was undertaken, asuIlle cujus cauſa in congreſſum deſcendis Scripturarum, ut cum dubitantem confirmes ad veritatem an nagis ad haereſim deverget, hoc ipſo motus, quod te videat nihil promoviſſe aequo gradu negandi & defendendi, certe de pari & altercatione incertior diſcedit, neſciens quem Haereticum judicet. Ter…ul. praeſcript. adverſ. haereticos Tom. 1. c. 18. p. 170. Tertull. ſheweth; He, ſaith Tertullian, for whoſe cauſe thou deſcendeſt into a Controverſie of Scripture, that thou maiſt confirm him againſt doubting, it is hard to ſay whether he tend more to Verity or to Hereſie, becauſe he ſees thou prevaileſt nothing, the diſpute going on in an equal degree of denying and defending: certainly by ſuch a parity in altercation he will depart more uncertain, not knowing what he ſhould judge to be Hereſie.
Seventhly, When Conferences and Diſputations in Religion ſucceed not ſo well as good men would have them, is, becauſe they are not ordered or managed in ſuch a manner as they ſhould be; whereof I ſhall ſpeak in the next Chapter, as in its p…oper place. In the mean time this good order will require, that I now obſerve, what good ſucceſs hath been the iſſue of ſome diſputations betwixt Michael and the Devil in Iude, Chriſt and the Devil, Matth. 4. By the way, ſome take Michael the Arch-Angel for Chriſts Son, for a created Angel to me it is, which I will now neither determine nor diſcuſs: and for the diſputes of Stephen and Paul, they muſt needs have the better of their adverſaries, becauſe they were not able to reſiſt the Wiſdome and the Spirit by which they ſpake, Act. 6.10. not with any evidence of truth, or appearance of reaſon: yet when the truth was moſt illuſtriouſly ſet forth, ſome were ſo blinded and hardned with their own malice and envy, that they could not ſee it, or would not confeſs themſelves to be convinced by it; is, as when our Saviour had mightily and miraculouſly proved himſelf to be the Son of God by caſting out Devils, the Devil would not ſuffer his Adverſaries to acknowledge it, but ſtirred them up to impute the power of the holy Spirit to Beelzebub the Prince of Devils, Matth. 12.24. And when Athanaſius had a Diſputation with Arius, he would not yield that the power of Truth had prevailed, butwArius in quit nulli dubium eſt quin magicis artibus Athanaſius non deſinat judicum pervertere ſenſus, &c. Athanaſ. diſp. contra Arium Laodiceae, tom. 2. col. 393. moſt abſurdly ſuggeſted, that he managed his cauſe by Magical Arts.
Notwithſtanding the iſſues and effects of ſome Diſputations have been more ſucceſsful (beſides thoſe which were carried on by a Divine Power againſt Humane or Devilliſh malignity) as that of Octavius a Chriſtian, with Cecilius an Heathen, ſet forth by Minutius Felix; whereof we have obſerved before, that ſome take that for a real ſtory, ſome for a pious diſcourſe compoſed by Minutius himſelf Dialogue-wiſe, under the borrowed names ofxCaecilium ſuperſtitioſis vanitatibus etiamnum inhaerentem diſputatione graviſſima ad veram religionem reformavit Octavius: ſic Minutius Felix Concluſ. Dialog. Tom. 9. Bibliothec. Patrum, col. 22. Octavius a Chriſtian, and Cecilius an Heathen: the effect whereof, whether it were hiſtoricall, or poeticall, or moral, was ſuch as was anſwerable to ſuch convincing premiſes, viz. that Cecilius converted by Octavius from ſuperſtitious vanities, they parted with mutual congratulation, and Minutius thereby accounted himſelf Felix,yPoſt haec laeti hilareſ que diſceſſimus; Caecilius quod crediderit, Octavius quod vicerit, ego quod ille crediderit, hic vicerit, Ibid. rejoycing with and for them both.
zEuſeb. Eccleſ. Hiſt. l. 6. p. 32.Euſebius andaHierom. Catal. Script. Eccleſ. tom. 1. p. 292. Hierome make report of Beryllus Biſhop of Boſtra in Arabia, that he fell from the faith to ſtrange doctrine of the Divinity and Humanity of Chriſt; but conferring with Origen, was convicted by manifeſt proof, and recovered to his former ſound opinion. The effect of the Diſpute betwixtbBaron. Annal. tom. 2. ad ann. 277. parag. 16. Archelaus and Manes was rather the confuſion of the Heretick then his converſion; for he run away from his Antagoniſt when he had convinced him, and would not appear in his ſight any more. And though Auguſtine ſometimes wholly loſt his labour in conflict with Hereticks, who continued contumacious and clamorous againſt the Truth and him: yet ſometimes he was very ſucceſsful in his Diſputations with them; ſometimes as Origen was with Beryllus, cAug. fin. l. 2. de Artis cum foelice Manich. tom 6. p. 657.as when he brought Felix the Manichean Heretick to a Recantation of his Errour, and ſubſcription againſt it: ſometimes as Archelaus, when he diſputed with Manes, whoſe foil and flight I have noted in another Chapter: As when having diſputed with Fortunatus a Manichean, anddPoſſid. in vit… Aug. c. 6. put him to ſilence, he put him alſo to ſo much ſhame, that he went out of the City of Hippo, and returned thither no more. More might be obſerved of his good ſucceſs, either for converſion or victory, but that I muſt leave a little room for ſome other memorable Examples of like ſort; not to mention that which I had occaſion to bring ineIbid. c. 4. ad ann. 325. before, of a ſubtile Philoſopher and Logician convinced and converted by a plain old man. We may note next the iſſue of that famous Diſputation betwixt Maximus the Monk, and Pyrrhus the Archbiſhop of Conſtantinople, about thefSee cap. 4. ann. 645. Will of Chriſt; which was, that the Archbiſhop gave way to the Truth propoſed and proved by Maximus. The iſſue of the Diſpute (betwixt Gregentius a Greek Biſhop with Herbanus a Jew) continued about 40 days together,gTom. 1. Bibli. Patrum Graec, Lat. p. 277. concluded with the converſion of many from the Jews. I will conclude this point of the good ſucceſs of Diſputation with one or two domeſtick…; the one is of Dr. Reynolds conferring or diſputing with Hart in the Tower, who it ſeems in one point of moment was brought to acknowledge a Proteſtant Truth, viz. hHart in his Epiſt. to the indifferent Reader, p. 2. before the Conference.That the opinion which makes the Pope a Temporal Lord over Kings and Princes, is unreaſonable and unprofitable altogether; for he hath not to meddle with them or their civility, much leſs to depoſe them, or give away their Kingdoms: that's no part of his Commiſſion. But the Doctrine ofiNon licet Chriſtianis tolerare regem infidelem aut haereticum, ſi ille conetur ſubditos ad ſuam haereſim vel infidelitatem pertrahere: ad judicare an rex pertrahat ad haereſim necne, pertinet ad Pontificem cui eſt commiſſa cura Religionis, ergo Pontificis eſt judicare regem eſſe deponendum vel non deponendum. Bellar. de Rom. Pontif. lib. 5. c. 7. tom. 1. p. 351. col. 1. Bellarmine is, (wherein not onelyonly the Jeſuites, but other Zelots for the Papacy follow him) That Chriſtians ought not to tolerate an Infidel or Heretical King, if he endevour to draw his Subjects to Hereſie or Infidelity: but to judge whether the King draw his Subjects to Hereſie or no, belongeth to the Pope, to whom is committed the care of Religion.
So that it belongeth to the Pope to try whether he be to be depoſed or not.
But had the learned and religious Doctor prevailed nothing at all with his Adverſary, but that Hart had been ſo hardened in all Popiſh Errors, as to renounce none of them, as he did what he could by Sophiſms and Lies, by Fraud and Falſhood to out-face the Truth, askConfer. c. 7. diviſ. 7. p. 377. Dr. Reynolds juſtly chargeth him; yet we cannot but account it an happy effect of their Diſpute, that it produced in print ſo excellent a Book as the Report of that Conference is, ſo full of all kinde of Learning pertinently applied, and meeting with the ſhuffling ſhifting Papiſts at every turn.
Though in this reſpect this Conference proved in the iſſue and effect of it better than was expected, yet it is more ſtrange, and ſuch as the like hath ſeldome hapned, which fell out upon the Diſpute of him and his Brother William: “Mr. Fullers Church-Hiſt. of Great Brit. l. 10 p. 47. 48.John Reynolds, Mr. Harts Antagoniſt, at the firſt was a zealous Papiſt, whilſt William his Brother was as earneſt a Proteſtant; and afterwards providence ſo ordered it, that by their mutual Diſputation John Reynolds turned an eminent Proteſtant, and William an inveterate Papiſt, in which perſwaſion he died. This gave the occaſion to an excellent Copy of Verſes, concluding with this Diſtich:
Quod genus hoc pugnae est ubi victus gaudet uterque,
Et ſimul alteruter ſe ſuperaſſe dolet?
What war is this, when conquered both are glad,
And either to have conquered other, ſad?
The ſucceſs of the Diſpute betwixt Dr. Featly and Fiſher both good and bad, I have obſerved already in this Chapter. And ſo much may ſuffice for the iſſues and effects of Colloquies, Conferences and Diſputes in matters of Religion.