with which if they happen to play they have great luck if they do not burn their wings You are at your ease and may freely talk at pleasure secur'd by the Laws and at defiance with the Pope The case is otherwise with us who believing of the Pope as we do and subject to the Laws as we are can neither be without respect for him nor apprehension of them and though we could speak even clearness it self 't is all to nothing but we fall foul on one of the Rocks Notwithstanding since I ow much to your friendship I would gladly preserve if I can your good opinion both to my self and Religion of which you speak so charitably and nothing like an enemy and besides would not be guilty of her shame by confessing she has nothing to answer nor of my own by continuing in an unjustifiable communion I obey you with this request that you will take care to preserve me from the hazard I run by serving you and let this Paper be seen by none but such as mean as well as you and I. First then I am so far from thinking our friendship shockt by your free proceeding that I take my self and Religion both obliged to your candor and wish from my heart I may as well justifie her as you have your friendship And for my Church there are so few who look upon her with equal eyes that this pity of yours as just and charitable as it is is yet more rare and I cannot see it without as much acknowledgment as satisfaction And yet as strongly as you discourse every where I think you have reason no where more than in this particular For so it is if we say nothing and when we are often and loudly provoked to speak still hold our tongues we have a bad cause and such for which nothing can be said if we speak we are insolent and cannot keep our selves quiet when we are well And after all 't is the Combat betwixt the Knight and the Giant still as you have rightly observed But the world is the world where Reason as much our nature as it is cannot hinder but Chance and Interest and Passion and several humours to which men are subject will have their share in the conduct of things Wherefore without complaining farther of what complaints are not likely to remedy I think it best to address my self to my defence And the first point of it shall be to declare I mean not to defend any of those opinions which you have alledged with so much sharpness for in truth I think them not defensible and that there is not more sharpness than justice in what you say Not but that to own who would take the pains to peruse the Authors you have cited some of those Sayings possibly might not appear so ugly as they do in your Paper For there is a great difference betwixt words taken as they lie in the whole Context and singled out from their fellows who might peradventure to some of them afford some tolerable explication But besides that I conceive that labour not necessary for my purpose I have no kindness at all for the Doctrines and not enough for the Authors to prevail with me to undertake it I have heard from those who meddle with Controversie that their greatest difficulty often is to preserve the credit of private men whom because they are of the same Communion they are so unwilling to affront that they have much ado to preserve the Church from the contagion of their Errors As my nature is a little more blunt I have no such difference for them and think it but just that Qui pergit quae volt dicere ea quae non volt audiat Let them shift for themselves on Gods name or let those defend them who approve their Maximes For my part I hate them heartily and think it but a preposterous Charity to be so tender for the credit of those who betray the credit of the Church Allowing then for reason all you say against those opinions of which I think as ill as you can do I yet conceive your reason fails in the inference you draw from them That true Religion cannot teach Doctrines inconsistent with Government That a Commonwealth is not safe in which such Doctrines are either tolerated or conniv'd at that is when they come to be instilled and get credit with the People otherwise while they remain in the Schools I should think the danger not very great for Kingdoms are not overturn'd by Syllogisms Farther if you please that the Doctrines you have produced are such Doctrines I freely grant you But that our Church does teach such Doctrines I deny and notwithstanding all you have said if you still preserve your unbyass'd candor hope to make the contrary very evident And first because with you I think my authority may signifie something for you know I will not tell you a lye you shall permit me to say something of my own knowledge I was born you know of Catholic Parents bred up in Catholic Religion and have lived some part of my time in Catholic Countries I have been at their Schools heard their Catechisms their Sermons their Discourses and by the care of my Friends and some pains of my own think few of my condition more fully instructed in that Religion I assure you faithfully I was never taught any such Doctrine nor ever heard the Church taught it On the contrary I have been bred up in this belief that obedience to my King is not only truly a duty but a duty truly required by Religion and this perswasion was so well setled in my heart that I yet remember how great and surprizing a horror the late Rebellion caused in me when I was too young to judge otherwise of it or any thing else but as I found it contrary to the sentiments which had been instilled into me I have heard indeed of the opinions you cite but as of extravagancies of bold men and when I came to the age of judging of things my self found that though they were held by men living in Communion with the Church they had yet no warrant from the Church to hold them nor any better ground than their own mistaking reasonings and so continued to detest them by judgment as I did before by Education Now this answer which it seems you foresaw you have endeavoured to prevent making use your self of an Artifice of Rhetoric to bar me the assistance of Logic for you would perswade me that to distinguish the material Church from the formal or the man from the Churchman is an idle airy nicety which is of no use in the World But truly one of us is much mistaken for I think on the contrary that nothing is more obvious nothing more familiar let me add nor more necessary and that even to your material world as you call it which without such distinctions would quickly run into confusion The World is made up of men
as against any other I could alledge that of those Popes who have gone farthest none has defined any thing concerning these matters in those circumstances which even those Divines who attribute most to them require as necessary to make it believed or ex Cathedra as they call it But I conceive it needless it seeming to me sufficiently evident by what has been alledged already that our Faith and Church are not to suffer by these exorbitancies and commonwealths can secure themselves by their own power But Friend the case is otherwise with you Your men alledge Scripture for these errors and engage your Rule of Faith and how the honest Protestant who in this case undoubtedly has the true sense of Scripture on his side can handsomely disengage his Church from a scandal to which is pretended the authority of her Rule is difficult to apprehend If people come not to their journies end who refuse to take the right road it is no wonder to any nor blame to the Guide whose office it is to shew men the right way but cannot make them follow it But your men pretend they keep the way your Church shews them to Truth and yet arrive at Error And when Error and Truth pretend both to the same Rule and that the Rule of your Church I should think your Church deeply concerned to consider by what means it may be decided which is Heresie and which Faith In short our erring men since they pretend not our Churches Rule can never fix their errors upon the Church nor advance them to Faith nor beyond the degree of opinions Yours since they pretend to the very Rule owned by you must needs till a certain way of proceeding upon that Rule or interpreting Scripture be setled render it doubtful to those who truly desire to be guided by your Rule which of the two is the doctrine of Christ and are therefore wonderfully more dangerous to the Church than ours Farther abstracting from Passion or Interest which may be equal in both ours because they have no firmer ground than their own deductions are more reclaimeable and may at any time relinquish their errors without offering violence to their Faith and Religion Yours because they pretend to your Rule of Faith are apt to mistake their misguided Fancies for Religion as we have seen in the late confusions the title of Saints appropriated to wicked men and so become fixt and unalterable in them for which reason they are also much more dangerous to the State as they were before to the Church In this inequality of cases I do not know the Church of England has proceeded so far as ours in the Council of Constance or condemned these Errors by any Authentic Censure though in my opinion it were proper for her to consider how much her Rule upon which depends her own stability is concerned in them Mean time instead of reproaching our several Churches with the errors of their several Members It were I think more to purpose I am sure more charitable to endeavour that all Errors might be taken away on both sides that by one Faith and one Baptism we may all serve our one Lord and God and reunite into one Holy and Immaculate and Glorious Church free from those spots and wrinkles which our unhappy Divisions have too too much and too long brought upon her This is what the desire to obey your commands has suggested to me in answer to your Letter You will pardon the length of it which as it is beyond my expectation so 't is beyond my power to remedy and give me leave to hope it may prevail with you not to abate either your Charity to my Religion or kindness to Your very humble Servant THE THIRD and FOURTH OF THE CONTROVERSIAL LETTERS OR THE GRAND Controversie Concerning The pretended Temporal Authority of POPES over the whole Earth and the true Sovereign of KINGS within their own respective Kingdoms Between two English Gentlemen The one of the Church of ENGLAND The other of the Church of ROME LONDON Printed for Henry Brome and Benjamin Tooke at the Gun and Ship in St. Pauls Church-Yard MDCLXXIII FRIEND FOR all the thanks I owe you and all the Complements 't were fit I made you take this acknowledgment that you have answered beyond my expectation and this assurance that I will consider very seriously what you say and make such use of it that you shall have cause to think your labour not unprofitably spent But yet I cannot but complain of the secresie which you enjoyn me I for my part am so well satisfied of your way of writing that I cannot but think others will be so too and that this shiness of yours is injurious both to your self and the World and because unjust commands are not to be obey'd let me tell you frankly I mean not to confine your Papers to my closet They shall be seen if it please God by more Eyes then mine but yet not to fall absolutely out with you I will divide stakes and so communicate what you write that there shall be no suspition of the Writer This I promise you very faithfully and to do it with more exactness lest your name should be discovered I engage my self to conceal my own Then if John a nokes get all the praise from you the fault be upon your own Head For the rest to deal plainly with you I find my self I know not how Things will not settle with me and though out of the mouth of a good Protestant I believe what you say would have past good reason yet when I reflect you are a Papist that is if you will pardon my Freedom of a crafty insinuating Generation I have still a kind of grumbling This Papist marrs all and though I think my self as free from prejudice as other men I find t' wil not do I can not but fear being trapan'd You have I must confess said many things very well and more then I thought you had been allow'd to say but you are reserv'd still 'T is true you give Reasons for your reservedness which I can not answer but whether it be that my plain nature would have every thing as plain as my self or that curiosity be like Love where too much reason is thought blameable I could wish in this occasion you had us'd less Reason and more Freedom Speak out the whole truth man and be a good Protestant otherwise own the whole Falshood and be a Papist of the first magnitude I fear your half Catholicks are in as bad a Case as Montaltos half Sinners who shall be damn'd for not sinning enough For my part if I would be a Papist I would be a Papist to purpose Hang this motly Religion this half Rome half Geneva Faith which gets a man neither credit nor security I would be as good a Catholick as Bellarmin for his heart if I would be one and if I thought your Catholick Faith would save me I would take order mine
said for them but since they do not their part is to do their Duty in what concerns them to do and rely upon God for the rest Then for the Contradiction between the two Laws The Divine Law saies Bellarmin obliges us to preserve the True Religion Human only to have this or that Man for King Where is the Contradiction say they Cannot I keep this Man for my King and keep my Religion too A body would â—kink that this is very possible to be done The contrary to that Divine Law is You shall not preserve the True Religion and if any Human Law command this Disobey freely in God's name for Aequum est obedire Deo magis quam Hominibus But while you disobey this Law which you cannot without offending God obey do not refuse to acknowledge your Prince and obey him there where you offend God if you do not obey Again the contrary to vvhat he calls the Human Law is You shall not have this or that Man for Prince or which is all one You shall not obey him in just Commands Bellarmin has not yet produc'd any Command of the Divine Law which saies this nor vvill till Rebellion become a part of Gods Law In fine Whoever persists to put a contradiction betwixt Fearing God and Honouring the King will be Confuted by all the Bells in the Parish Lastly Whereas he makes it only by Human Law that this or that Man is King they Reply vvhat you have more at large in a former Letter That He becomes King as the Pope becomes Pope by Human means but when he once is so Obedience to him is by Divine Right and so if there be any contradiction betwixt Preserving our Religion and Obeying our Prince the Divine Law contradicts it self For as Preservation of Religion is Divine Law so Obedience to Princes is Divine Law too If Bellarmin be not pleas'd vvith these Answers they leave him to make better himself retorting as they are very good at Reparty his Argument against a scandalous Pope for he say they exposes Vertue to evident danger For such as the Ruler such will be the Inhabitants And Gods Law is to be observ'd when 't is contrary to Human Law and Gods Law obliges us to preserve Vertue and 't is by Human Law only that this or that Man is Pope c. And so we come to another Argument from the parity betwixt an Infidel Prince and an Infidel Husband whom the Apostle allows the Faithful Wife to leave and therefore Why are not the Faithful People as free in respect of an Infidel Prince In Answer to this they Dispute several things with exactness enough and examining the particular Cases where and how far and why Divorce is lawful find several Disparities and several Reasons why the Argument concludes not But to leave those Considerations which are not without their perplexity this Reply of theirs seems very plain Bring say they a Permission from the Apostle for a Subject to desert his Prince as plain as this is for a Woman to leave her Husband and we vvill acknowledge the case is equal The Apostle plainly derogates from the general Rule and brings an Exception wherein the Law of Marriage binds not He that was so careful of Private concerns cannot be imagined unmindful of Public and greater Had he known any Exception from the general Rule of Obeying Princes it is not to be suspected he would conceal it and testifie more care for Private Families than Commonwealths So that the Argument amounts to this We are free from the Law in cases where the Law is dispenst with therefore we are free likewise where 't is not dispenst with Again say they the Woman is only then free when the Man refuses to live vvith her for if he stay S. Paul wishes her to stay vvith him Now if any Prince refuses to Govern his People unless they vvill become Infidels like himself I think they will allow the People are not obliged to turn Infidels for his sake but may get them another in case he leave them But if the King will stay with his People since the Woman is to stay with her Husband who vvill be with her they think the very parity concludes the People oblig'd to stay vvith their Prince Otherwise the parity stands in this manner Even as the Faithful Woman is not to leave her Unbelieving Husband who vvill continue vvith her even so the Believing People are to leave their Unbelieving King who vvill stay vvith them Or even as the Believing Woman is free from an Unbelieving Husband who casts her off even so the Beleiving People are free from an Unbelieving King vvho does not cast them off Which methinks are something unlike for Parities The next Argument is of great esteem with Bellarmin He made it in his Book De Rom. Pont. and repeats it in Tortus and urges it largely against Barklay This it is Princes are receiv'd into the Church with this either express or tacit bargain to submit their Scepters to Christ and preserve and defend their Religion and this under penalty of forfeiting their Kingdoms if they fail Wherefore if they become Heretics or an obstacle to Religion they may without injury be Judged and Deposed by the Church For he is not fit to receive the Sacrament of Baptism who is not disposed to serve Christ and lose all he has for his sake according to S. Luke 14. If any one comes to me and hates not Father and Mother c. he cannot be my Disciple And the Church would err too grievously if She admitted a King who without Controul would cherish Heresie and overthrow Religion C. 24. Thus Argues Bellarmin in Rom. Pont. But against Barklay more largely Let us imagine saies he an Infidel Prince desirous to be receiv'd into the Church should speak in this manner I desire to become a fellow Citizen with the Saints by Baptism and promiss to submit my Scepter to Christ and defend his Church to my power and never to break my holy purpose Nevertheless If I happen to break my Word and become an Heretic or Apostate or Pagan I will not be punisht with Temporal Punishments either by the Church or its President or any but Christ and if the Chief Governour of the Church separate me from the Communion of the Faithful I will nevertheless that the Faithful Sons of the Church continue Faithful Subjects to me and may not be absolved from the bond of their Obedience by any Such a King saies he if Barklay think fit for Baptism wise men would laugh at him For if a man should desire to be incorporated into any City and should protest that if he had a mind to betray that City he would not be judged by the Magistrates of it but by the King who dwells far off every body would laugh at him And truly He that according to the Gospel ought be prepar'd to lose his life for the Faith of Christ ought more to be
especially since many Doctors thought so as well as he For 't is one thing saies he in Tortus to bring Examples of Kings saies he of Popes say they and another to prove their Power and Authority Secondly They Answer that if it be a good Proof that a thing may lawfully be done which has been done before the Wickedest things in the world may be prov'd Lawful People may lawfully Rebel Public and Private Faith may be broken Commonwealths may be overturn'd c. for all these things have been done And without more adoe Popes may be Depos'd by Emperours as well as they by Popes for that has been done too Lastly and with a little more smartness They say this way of Proof plainly begs the Question and assumes the very Point in Dispute Bellarmin affirms and his Adversaries deny the Pope may justly Depose Princes now to Argue He has Depos'd them therefore He justly may assumes That what he has done is Just which is the very Point they Contest with him and therefore think it had been something shorter and altogether as much to purpose to have said 'T is Just because 't is Just. Every body knows Popes have both challenged and used a Deposing Power but every body is not satisfied that this Power is justly due to him Bellarmin undertakes to prove it is and brings for an Argument That he has us'd it which no body denies and would have that conclude That therefore he justly may which if his Adversaries had thought a good consequence they had not put him to the trouble of making it For they knew and acknowledged the Antecedent enough before But they think the Popes did amiss who did so and if barely saying that they did the thing be proving they had right to do it they confess they are in the wrong but if it be not Bellarmin is so and should have considered that barely to say his Tenet over is a kind of Proof which takes with none but very good natur'd People and as far as I see his Adversaries are a little more stubborn I am so weary with long Writing that I must intreat your permission to refer what remains to another opportunity I will hope I have said enough to quiet your suspicions and am sure I have said so much that I need some quiet my self and must take leave after so long a Journey to rest a while Your c. The Ninth and Tenth OF THE Controversial LETTERS OR Grand Controversie Concerning The pretended Temporal Authority of POPES over the whole Earth And the True Sovereign of KINGS within their own respective Kingdoms Between two English Gentlemen The one of the Church of England The other of the Church of Rome LONDON Printed for Henry Brome and Benjamin Tooke at the Gun at the Ship in St. Pauls Church-yard 1674. FRIEND I Expect that which you say remains with much impatience and t is only to tell you so that I now write for I do not intend to give you my thoughts of your last till I receive your next Only let me tell you it wambles in my stomack I know not how and works not kindly but because your next possibly may fully settle me I will not yet complain But methinks this next opportunity of yours is long a coming Have you been sick or diverted with business of greater consequence then clearing your self and your Church from an aspersion of which I take no joy to tell you the suspicions are more pregnant than I wish they were For 't is undeniable that Tenets inconsistent with Government are maintained among you You say they belong not to Religion and that indeed is something but not enough This may serve in some measure to justify your Religion but nothing at all to clear your selves For what matter is it whether your Religion be innocent if all that profess it are guilty though upon another account If you think these Tenets true you will be apt to practise them at one time or other although they do not belong to Religion Religion indeed is the strongest Principle of action but not the only one It is no part of Religion that two and three make five but yet if you do think to pay a debt of five pounds with twice forty shillings no body will deal with you And if all the Papists in England adhere to these Doctrines whether this adhesion of theirs proceed from Religion or any other motion the men will be unsafe and irreconcileable to the security of their Country let the Religion be what it will But if there be any who think them false it were convenient both for the satisfaction of their Prince and Fellow subjects and the interest of the thinkers People should know who those any are We cannot know your thoughts unless you acquaint us with them And because we have reason to believe that some do hold them and no reason to believe of any particular man but he is of the number till he disclaim them what can we do but involve you all guilty and innocent if there be any such in the same condemnation of diffidence You tell me the French plainly and openly condemn them The honester men they and the more shame for some body that there should be more honesty found in France then England You should do as they do though t' were but to be in the mode In all their airy toys their Feathers their Perukes their Pantaloons you can follow them fast enough But when they play the men and set you examples of prais-worthy actions there you are content to be out of fashion as if it were an honor to be as light as they and a shame to be as wise But pray what security is it to England that they are good subjects in France If they were knaves all over the rest of the world and we all honest at home it were a great deal better for us than that they should be honest abroad and we knaves at home I perceive indeed by what they do that you tell me true when you say these Tenets are no points of your Faith But then methinks you should have the less difficulty to disclaim them Unless perhaps you think them true which if you do either make them out to be consistent with goverment or you will not be consistent your self I tell you plainly I shall think ill of you if you think well of these Doctrâ—nes unless you can shew them innocent and safe which as far as I perceive you do not go about to do and when you offer at it may I believe with as much hope of success offer at the Philosophers stone In other Countrys you tell me They are more reserved and will not say you can not but you shall not And I believe you have liv'd in those other Countrys and suck't their Polities with their Air. But for my part I must confess I am for the mode once in my life and would be of the French fashion in this
Scholars for they are sure enough that for his own sake He will not use his power against those who maintain his interest It may be too with Princes as with other men who to compass some end upon which they are passionately set at present value not a mischief much more considerable than the loss of their present pretences which is farther of If the Pope can assist either French or Spaniard the Divines of that King whose part he takes may say any thing freely and Stasemen who have little esteem of Shoolmen will think the Pope sufficiently over-reacht when for a few pleasing words they have got peradventure a Town or Province So that your Princes seem to be alwayes playing with the Pope at Vy Politics in which game they think their steel to his quils advantage enough though I should think the advantage is cleerly on the Pope's side for as he cannot make stakes he hazards nothing but if Trump ever turn of his suit he bids fair for all Defende me gladio ego te defendam calamo peradventure was no such unequal offer Besides they may possibly have the art to turn his credit to their advantage and make use of it to keep their Subjects more obedient and more in aw It may be they have some of them no better original Title to all or part of their dominions than his Authority and then a blind man may see what reason they have to uphold it It may be these it may be other reasons sway with them but whatever they are or may be I think 't is plainly hatching a serpent in their bosoms For let us suppose the Pope and a Catholic Prince at ods a thing so far from impossible that 't is not unusual 'T is in his power you 'l say to continue Catholic whether the Pope will or no and then He 's safe for he gives the Pope no hold it being only Heresie upon which he can fasten But is this true that nothing will do it but plain Heresie Has not Zecchius taught us that the Pope may deprive Princes of their Kingdoms as oft as they do any great hurt in the Church And will not the bad example of contrasting stubbornly with the supreme Pastor be interpreted a great hurt in the Church Has not Fransciscus Bozius informed us that by reason of the supreme Monarchy in all things temporal Laws may be made by the Church and Kingdoms taken away for just causes If we ask what these just causes are Santarellus answers That Princes may be punisht and depos'd not only for Heresie but for other causes for their faults if it be expedient Ant. Sant in Her Schis Apostas c. c. 30. 31. if Princes be negligent if their persons be insufficient if unuseful How few Princes are there who fall not under some of these qualifications or at least may not be judged to do so when the Pope and He their Enemy is to be Judge As certainly it were a crime greater than the greatest of these to seek the determination of these things from any else This negligence though stumbles me a little for it seems a general and something a captious word and I think it would be to the satisfaction of those who are concern'd if it were defined as soon as might be how many hours a day a King is to give audience that he may not pass for negligent But the man for my money is Thomas Bozius who tells us plainly That the Church the Spouse of Christ De Jure Stat. l. 1. c. 6. p. 6. and Queen of the world may as often as the order of the whole doth require c. transfer the proper rights of one to another as a secular Prince may cast down private mens houses for the beautifying the City or impose tribute for the weal public That he may thus justly do although he hath not erred from whom such rights are transferred to another so the Pope gave the Indians to the Spaniards 'T is an honest fellow this Bozius and cares not for mincing matters Give me the man that speaks out But what think you is Heresie the only unkinging crime when you see any great harm negligence insufficiency unusefulness will do it When innocence it self is no security and the best King of the world may be turn'd out of his Kingdom and that justly if another be thought able to govern more handsomely What handsome work will these Maxims one day make in the world if they be suffered to take deep root For my part I cannot see but Catholic Princes as secure as you make them are no less concern'd then Protestants to beware of them and weed them up quickly and effectually But is it so easie to scape the crime even of Heresie I doubt not and am filthily mistaken if this word Heresie have not as comprehensive a sense and be not of a nature as plyable as Popery amongst us and if managed with equal dexterity may not prove equally serviceable The late King was the honour of Protestant Religion and certainly had never a Subject more unmoveably fixt in it than himself And yet malice made him pass for a Papist at least inclin'd to Popery do what he could and by that imputation principally undid both him and the Kingdom Henry the third of France was possibly as hearty a Catholic yet all his industriously affected bigotteries his great beads and Friers weeds could never clear him from the stain of Heresie maliciously fixt upon him till he fell with a fate different from that of our glorious King in this that his Kingdom suffer'd more no longer his own end was more private being execrably murthered by a private Paricide whereas the barbarous injustice done to our King was heightned by the formalities of public justice So that as far I see Heresie is as dangerous as Popery with us and as hard to be avoided But let us consider a little Sancius has told us that it is to be held with a right Faith that the Principality of the Bishop of Rome is the true and only immediate Principality of the whole World c. If this be right L. 4. c. 1. p 319. the contrary sure is wrong Faith and wrong Faith I think is Heresie Thomas Bozius who never fails will tell us that Christ committed to St. Peter the Carrier of the keys of eternal life the right both of the Terrene and Celestial Empire as Pope Nicholas saith from whom we have it that he is without doubt an Heretic who taketh away the rights of the Terrene and Celestial Empire committed by Christ to the Church of Rome and saith it is lawful so to do and for that he shall be an Heretic in such his assertions P. 152. And Carrerius that the Bishop of Rome is the highest Father and Man of the world and the universal Vicar and Lord of the world and that all others depend upon him as their builder and that otherwise if one
and men of several qualities The same person is both a man and a Rich and Proud man a Powerful and an Angry man and we see Wit and Ambition Goodness and Ignorance Learning and Fantasticalness often coupled together and a hundred several mixtures of several qualities united all in one material Man Now consider what fine work there would quickly be if every one of these useless formalities as you call them must be chargeable with all actions if Riches must be taken away because the Rich Proud man has scorn'd and Power because the Powerful Angry man has wronged his Neighbour if Wit must bear the blame of Ambition and Goodnesâ— the miscarriages of Ignorance and Learning the Errors of Fantasticalness Reason is our very Nature and yet I think there are few to whom Nature has not given Logick enough to see that we do not always act as reasonable and who are not learned enough to separate the Animal from the Man To speak yet plainer a severe Father a harsh Master do they not sometimes use their Children and Scholars unreasonably and so as utterly to spoil them A corrupt Judge does he not pervert Justice and render those Tribunals from whence men expect the relief of Injuries the seats of Oppression What then Must the Father and the Master and the Judge be condemned for the faults of the Man and none of these powers left in the world because they have been and daily are abused I think you and every body will confess that this were unreasonable and yet your Argument spares none of them For 't is all one to Children and Pleaders if they be materially opprest and misus'd whether this be done by the fault of the Office or the Officer and small comfort it is to tell them that their Judges and Masters acted in their case as passionate men not as Judges and Masters for they remain opprest still and the formality relieves them not Kings themselves are men too and not exempt from the failings of Mortality Our Country indeed has this amongst other things to thank God for that she has been extraordinarily blest with good Kings but History affords examples of such elsewhere as have been unjust and cruel and tyrannical And if you will not allow the King and his sacred Function to be free from the aspersions to which the Man is sometimes liable let me tell you Friend your Doctrine will be more dangerous and more inconsistent with Government than the Papal pretensions Now as in all these cases and a hundred more which happen every day and every where Nature teaches us to examine the formality from whence the mischief proceeds and endeavour to provide against that and let the rest alone so I think it ought to be in the case of the Church We condemn not Learning because some learned men are fantastical nor Riches for the pride of rich men why must the Church be condemned for the fault of Church-men Authority and Goodness and Wit are not blemisht by the errors of those who have them the Power of Fathers and Masters and Judges is and must be preserved in the world however Severity and Covetise daily abuse it and if this be so in all the rest of the world can you think it reasonable the Church alone should be exempted from the general rule and be more answerable for the faults of those who live in her communion than Authority for the faults of bad men in Authority The faults indeed should be taken away but the Church let alone And truly had your Reformation as you call it gone no farther than to retrench abuses such as these you mention and who knows but there may be other I might peradventure have call'd it so too But instead of abuses to take away Office and all and defie the supreme Pastor of the Church and alter the whole face of Religion there by your favour you reformed a little too far For the same Logic which makes the Church responsible for the errors of Church-men makes the Office responsible for the faults of the Officer and that is to take all Offices out of the world where men will be men and liable to be reduced from the path of vertue in spight of all preventions possible in such a nature as ours I hope by this time that distinction does not appear so airy and useless as you imagined you shall permit me to add that possibly you are no less concern'd in it than We. For we are not the only men amongst whom Principles inconsistent with Government may be found Remember who they were that ruin'd England by the late War and were guilty of things which to dilate were as unsavoury as needless They were so far from Popery these men that fear of Popery was a chief Engine employed in the mischief Sad fate by the way and preposterous wisdom to destroy our selves for fear of being destroyed and run into Fire and the Sword for fear of Ink and Paper Neither is England the only example Scotland and the Netherlands and Germany and France have felt lamentable effects from the Doctrines of men who would take it for an imputation to have learnt any thing of the Pope So that it is very plain that the Papal is neither the only nor the only dangerous King-deposing power in the world 'T is as plain that these men are neither Infidels nor of our Church so that you must even exercise your Pity too and take them into yours Or if pity will not prevail I hope at least you will take care so to defend your Allegiance a not to overthrow your Church And unless you make your Creed consist but of Eleven Articles I see not how you can disown the Communion of these men for 't will be a strange Catholic Church which communicates neither with the Church of Rome nor her Adversaries Wherefore if your Argument be good and Religion must answer for the faults of those who profess it there is no remedy but Princes to be secure must banish all Religion and People turn Atheists to be honest men and good Subjects Now whatever answer you would give to one who should charge such wicked principles upon your Church because they are maintained by numerous and learned and famous men amongst you the same I give for mine I believe for all your Pique to formalities you would go near to distinguish your Church or Believing men from the Erring men and say you communicate with the Men but not with the Errors So you shall permit me to say for mine and this farther that whatever you say you must of necessity either condemn your selves or absolve us 'T is not that the force of your Argument drives me to that way of answer which I have chosen it being easie to shew the Churches innocence even in your own way and without the help of your disliked formalities Your Argument in short is this Learned men in the Church hold wicked Doctrines therefore the Church
I believe those who are of a contrary judgment will be convinc'd by what I have said neither did I go about to convince them My business was to satisfie you not to dogmatize And I hope you will perceive your Argument so answer'd that if those unquiet Spirits of fear and diffidence continue still to hant you the blame is not to be imputed to me Of two propositions which you assum'd to fix a power Paramount in the Pope upon our Faith I have shew'd a Catholick may safely deny either of both 'T is at his choice to take either way and any one does his business If he will deny a temporal Regality in Christ the difficulty is cut up by the root since a Vicar can not with any shadow of pretence challenge more then was in the Principal himself If not willing to meddle with that question he will take the other way and affirm that whatever power Chrit had he left only Spiritual to Peter and his Successors the difficulty is as fully cleared A Catholick take my word may unreprovably hold either or both and that you may have better security against your fears then my word can give you I have shewed you both maintain'd by those whom Catholicks are not permitted to reprove If all this be not enough to quiet your suspicious let me add that if you consider well you will find that of all men the Principles of Catholciks can least endure the contrary Doctrine Ask of your Fore-fathers walk in the antient Paths avoid novelties and the like are Maximes so known and universally receieved amongst them that who is known to contradict them is known so far to swerve from the acknowledged grounds of Catholick Religion Now when the authority of unquestionable antiquity is of the one side and on the other that of Authors both late and few and of no extraordinary credit a Catholick who knows what he does can so little doubt which part to take that I think he is not excusable if he so much as doubt or at least not otherwise then as zeal is excused by blindness None have that veneration for antiquity and Fathers which Catholicks pretend for they look upon them as the men who have begot them in the Gospel from whence they give them the name of Fathers as the most considerable Pillars of the Church as the principal Persons on whose attestation the Rule of Faith and Stability of Religion depends After the sacred Books of Scripture written by Divine Inspiration to which no writing of Man can be equall'd nor so much as compar'd we Reverence in the next place the Writings of the Fathers which we think useful too and the most useful of any to the understanding of the Scripture of which we hold them the best Interpreters We universally blame those of other Communions for preferring the obscurity of private interpretations before the clear light of Tradition And all these things are known and acknowledg'd by every body Wherefore since the great Lights of the Church St. Agustin and St. Hierom and St. Cyril and St John Chrysostom and St. Bernard and the rest shine clearly out and with a joint consent unanimously conspire into the same Doctrine none are so blamable as Catholicks if they oppose it And such men as Comitolus and Sermarinus and the like put into the contrary ballance weigh so little that t is shameful even that they should enter in The truth is the world goes otherwise then sharp-sighted men would think it should or could else t is not easie to conceive how it should be possible there should be found amongst those of our principles who should stand in opposition to the Fathers All that can be said is that worldly policy sometimes makes a little too bold with Christian simplicity and that preposterous zeal is very blind and therefore a very dangerous Guide And I shall take the liberty to tell you that understanding Catholicks who consider the way they take see if it were followed in other things it would mine Catholick Religion and that the men indeed perhaps by the priviledge of well meaning ignorance are Catholicks but the way is not a Catholick way Thanks be to God there are not many who walk in it and those who do I believe consider not what they do For sure I am that knowingly to sleight the Reverence due to Sacred Antiquity and set up new Masters in opposition to the Fathers of Christianity and Doctors of the Church agrees very ill with a Catholiek Spirit In fine as men will be men and God must make the World another thing then it is if we expect that all should do as they ought you will find among Catholicks some who hold the contrary Opinion but none who hold this reprovable And this I say the more confidently because I mistake very much if it be reprovable even amongst the Jesuits themselves who yet are thought the greatest Favourers of the Papal power At least I know they cannot reprove it without reproving their own best and most famous Authors Read Bellarmin de Rom. Pontif. the fourth Chapter of the fifth Book and Maldonat upon 27 Mat. and see if they do not both expresly hold and strongly prove the Doctrine of the Fathers and so far that the latter says people would make Christ a temporal King whether he will or no c. against his express declaration and that before a Court of Justice They are too long to be transcribed But if you take the pains to read them since that is safe enough from being reproved which there is no body to reprove I hope your suspicions will be at quiet However I think it but seasonable that I should and be permitted after so long a journey to rest Yours c. FINIS ERRATA PAge 3. line 13. read particular l. 36. r. were p. 7. l. 5. r. you cite p. 8. l. 1. for he r. his l. 5. r. enterfere l. 32. may r. my p. 10. l. 37. r. no extraordinary p. 17. l. 29. r. the Servants ear p. 18. l. 26. r. because he defiled l. 33. r. yet he gave l. 35. r. Rabanus p. 21. l. 6. r. dogmatically l. 9. r. any principle l. 11. r. his side p. 22. l. 8. r. suppose l. 28. r. branches p. 23. l. 22. r. Kings p. 24. l. 16. r. penetrat p. 27. l. 22. dele to l. 28. r. were disposed p. 30. l. 18. r. his answer signify'd l. ult r. resolvedness p. 31. l. 28. r. Creation By. The Fifth and Sixth OF THE Controversial LETTERS OR THE Grand Controversie Concerning The pretended Temporal Authority of POPES over the whole Earth And the True Sovereign of KINGS within their own respective Kingdoms Between two English Gentlemen The one of the Church of England The other of the Church of Rome LONDON Printed for Henry Brome and Benjamin Tooke at the Gun and at the Ship in St. Pauls Church-yard 1673. FRIEND I Must confess I am something better at ease at least I
thought necessary Learned Men should be constrain'd by Oaths and fear of Penalties terribilibus comminationibus to declare their thoughts of this matter Possibly Interest may have had some share in this backwardness Men of this sort of Learning belong most to the Church and may peradventure consider that If they displease him who carries the Keys he may perhaps make use of them to shut the Gates of Ecclesiastical preferment Besides they have been diligent to discountenance and suppress all Books written against the Popes Power so that a Private man cannot write without the hazard of a Censure on his Book and possibly on his Person These I think are the true Reasons I am sure they are good ones of the backwardness which you phansie proceeds from a prohibition of the Church and with a great deal of injustice and no truth heighten into malice and the execrable hypocrisie of teaching two Religions one to be published the other conceal'd and I know not what when all this while I assure you there is no such thing as a Prohibition of the Church at least that I know of for any man to speak what he thinks what Fisher mentions was a private Order made amongst the Jesuites and concerns only themselves but wise men are not forward to speak what may turn to their prejudice nor quiet men to interpose in the concerns of higher and the Highest Powers as I conceive they are not therefore blameable However it be He who from the Sence of those who have vvrit would infer the Sence of all Learned Men concludes in my opinion very fallaciously Those who Write not and whose Sence we know not being much more Numerous and every jot as Learned as those who Write But to let that pass this Doctrine has found a different reception in the world The French as their natures are frank and open without more adoe plainly deny it and besides a great many reiterated Arrest of Parliament have solemnly condemn'd it in all their Universities In other Countries they are more reserv'd and rather oppose the Execution of the Power than the Power it self They let the Pope and any for him talk as they please but when it comes to Practice it alwaies proves unjust in that particular and I believe alwaies shall do In Brabant the Custom is That all Bulls are understood of course to be Subreptitious till they be approv'd by the Prince In other places they have other expedients but as far as I see by several means they all compass the same end and admit no more than they think stands with their Profit Only the French bluntly tell the Pope You cannot others use softer words but their Actions say You shall not farther than we think fit Now for the Opinion of the Canonists since Divines universally reject it I may without more adoe reject it with them Of the other it may be enquir'd Whether it be of Faith and Whether it be True which are very different Questions And for Faith I positively and freely disclaim it both because the Maintainers of it themselves confess it is not and though some are unwary enough to heighten it to that degree yet they are but few and their rashness is generally condemn'd as ill grounded and carried too far And besides I see the contrary is openly maintain'd by as numerous and considerable a Member as any belongs to the Catholic Church and while at Rome they condemn Withrington and Barklay at Paris they condemn Bellarmin and Suarez The Pope and the rest of the vvorld knows and sees this and yet Communicate freely with them and account them all the while good Catholics Which is plainly to acknowledge it is no point of Faith in which they differ for if it were they could no more Communicate with them than with Arrius or Pelagius neither is any consideration of their Power or concern of Policy able to justifie or dispense with acknowledging him a Catholic who persists to maintain an Heresie All the difficulty is Whether it be true or no. And who am I that I should undertake to dogmatize in an Age so Antidogmatical and where no vanity is thought greater than that of Dogmatizing and this in a Question which has exercised the Wit and Learning of Men esteem'd so great that to oppose them may chance be counted Arrogance The most I can do is to tell you what I think and what I think is even in my own judgment so inconsiderable that I think it a great deal better to play the Historian than the Disputer and hope you will be satisfied if I inform you as much as I know of this Question and relate the Arguments hitherto produc'd on both sides at least as far as I am acquainted with them and leave you to judge as you see cause By this means as you will have all the Information I can give you so none can rationally blame me for barely relating what every body either knows already or may know that will take the pains to look upon what is publickly and every where extant But before I begin the Arguments it will not be amiss to look a little into the Origin of this Dispute and consider when and how it came into the vvorld Gregory the VIIth was the first that brought it on the Stage Till his time the Independent Power of Princes was never questioned They not only quietly dispos'd of Civil matters without controll except where any notorious Injustice happened and then both Popes and other zealous Prelates took the liberty to reprehend and sometimes Excommunicate them but had no small share in Ecclesiastical matters so far as to make Laws concerning them to invest the Persons duly chosen to Benefices and confirm the Election even of Popes themselves which was not held valid without their approbation Take it in the words of Onuphrius no enemy to this Pope Onuph de var. Creat Rom. Pont. L. 4. Though formerly the Bishops of Rome were respected as the Heads of Christian Religion the Vicars of Christ and Successors of Peter yet their Authority extended no farther than either to assert or maintain the Doctrines of Faith For the rest they were subject to the Emperours all things were done by Their appointment Themselves were Created by them neither did the Pope dare to judge or determine any thing concerning them Gregory the VIIth was the First of all the Bishops of Rome who relying on the Arms of the Normans and Wealth of the Countess Mathildis a Woman of great Power in Italy and inflam'd by the discord of the Princes of Germany opprest with Civil Wars contemning contrary to the Custom of his Predecessours the Imperial Power and Authority after he had obtain'd the Pontificate durst not only Excommunicate but deprive the Emperour by whom he had been if not Elected at least Confirm'd of his Kingdom and Empire A thing to that Age unheard of for as for the Fables which go about of Arcadius and Anastius and Leo the
advantage to the Church as they who favour it suppose it would be the ruin of it One of our Principles is respect to the Ancient Fathers which he that would take away would do the Church very bad service Every body knows what reverence we profess to those great lights and what veneration we pay to their learning and vertues What shall we say that they were ignorant of a doctrine which is pretended was taught by Christ they who understood what Christ taught so well and defended it so zealously Can it be imagined our new Schoolmen know more then these great men who in defence of Christianity against opposers as subtle as any that have since appear'd discovered a learning which for ought I perceive After-ages have more reason to admire than think they can equal But if they knew as much as they do now it can be less suspected from their Vertue that they would conceal their knowledge and suppress a truth of this importance I cannot readily fancy any thing more incredible not to say a harsher word than that a point of no less concern than the performance of our duty to God and his Vicegerents Kings should lye dormant in breasts inspired with so much zeal and enlightned with so much knowledge for Ten whole ages and at last break out and surprize the world with a new-light Nor do I see how it can be thought possible without imputing either Ignorance or Dishonesty to those who of all men in the world are farthest from the suspicion of either I should be sorry to be or see the Catholic who should in good earnest think either imputable And yet if they knew this doctrine and did not conceal it we must of necessity have heard of it long before we did Gregory the 7th is the first unquestionable Author of it For though a little more Antiquity be sometimes pretended yet those pretences are in truth but weak and little better then meer conjecture All that I can imagin possible to be said in the case is that they had no occasion to declare their knowledge but being busied with other controversies said not all they knew in this But I fear this cannot be maintained For they do often treat of both Powers explain their natures and settle their bounds They tell us the one consists in constraint the other in freedom That one has to do with Sacrifice and Sacraments and Divine things the other with Human That one inflicts Corporal the other Spiritual punishment and the like Was there no occasion all this while to have given one touch of this Direct and Indirect Power one little hint at the distinction if they had known it Let them think so that please For my part I conclude they knew it not those who think otherwise may conclude if they please that they would not teach what they knew but conceal'd a point of Christian duty and which they knew to be so and so by seeking to justifie they knew more than we can possibly tell they did since they express it not themselves call in question their vertue which we all know But yet bare silence is not the case They teach the direct contrary They teach there are none who can punish Kings but only God that we for our parts are to obey even unjust and wicked Princes and this because God has so commanded whose secret but yet just Providence places over us as well Nero's as Constantins That the Church has no sword but the Spiritual which to extend to Temporals is Arrogance He that can reconcile these and twenty other of their express doctrines with the deposing Power may never stick at any thing or fear that Impossibility will ever stand in his way In fine They allow us no other disobedience then in case of commands contrary to what God has commanded before and no other resistance even in this case but of prayers and tears Put them to have known the efficacy of our distinction and that it was lawful while directly we are oblig'd to pray like Christians indirectly to fight like Turks and they have direly cheated the vvorld and trapan'd the Church into many a severe Persecution from which let them say what they will she had force enough to have freed her self if she had thought it lawful to use it Primitive Christians themselves had the confidence to tell their Persecutors to their faces they wanted not strength to revenge themselves if they had thought the defence of their lives a just excuse for resisting their Prince or the Sword a lawful instrument to introduce the Gospel But they knew Religion was not to be establisht by fighting but preaching and that Conquest is not the way to set up the Kingdom of Christ If their Prince bad them fight against his Enemies they did so but if he himself became their Enemy they chose as was their duty to die rather then fight against him The truth is people may say and think as their fancy guides them but Force is not the way to preserve or introduce true Religion Falshood may need it but it weâ—kens Truth Consider which way the wisdom of God went to work As rain into a fleece of wool as drops of dew distilling on the earth He who had an unresistable power would not use so much on this occasion as to break even a bruised reed 'T is evident by the choice of unerring wisdom that this is the proper way of Truth and that 't is a deceitful wisdom and takes wrong measures which goes otherwise And indeed what can be more wild then to think to force men into Heaven and make Saints of them whether they will or no We see what Christ what his followers did we know how we were taught by the great and best succeeding Masters of Christianity I shall never be perswaded that those who taught in this manner were acquainted with these indirect subtleties at least we should have been acquainted with them much sooner if they had In fine I cannot but think there is very little of a Catholick spirit in introducing a Doctrine not only unknown to the ancient Fathers but so opposite to their Maxims that it cannot well be imagined how they should contradict it more plainly then they do unless we fancy them Prophets too and that they foresaw all the subtleties which should be brought in the world after they left it Otherwise we cannot expect they should talk of Direct and Indirect who never thought of either But they plainly say There is no Power in the Church but spiritual and that this spiritual Power does not extend to Temporals Again That Princes have none to call them to account but only God and that just or unjust they must be obey'd saving only in unjust commands And if any disguise of words can hinder this from being a plain determination of the Thing I must needs profess I know not how it can be determined by them But forgetfulness of the Fathers I fear is
a condemnation without more ado Neither did they well know at first on what bottom to fix This Indirect came in afterwards As far as can be guest they thought because the Pope was Superiour over all Christians he might therefore come and all Christians any thine Since the business coming to be debated they cast about for waies to maintain it and the Indirect way pleases most though it be not yet well setled some thinking it as much too little for the Pope as others too much But whatever they think I fear both the one and the other is ruinous to the Church For neither can pretend to be believed but for some reason and this reason since it cannot be the same for which we believe other points of Faith there being manifestly no such thing as uninterrupted delivery in the case must be something else which as well as It must pretend a vertue of inducing belief And that being a Rule of Faith which has power to settle Faith here is a new Rule of Faith brought into the Church and with it all the Incertainâ—y and all the confusion blamed in the most extravagant Sect and this even by her own confession who thinks her Rule is the only means to avoid that incâ—rtainly and that confusion This Rule is manifestly discarded by a new one For she cannot with any face pretend all she teaches was delivered to her if it be pin'd upon her that she teaches what was not dâ—livered and if She lose the pretence to all she will keep it to none since it cannot appear but if she have once deserted her Rule she has don 't oftner And then farewel Church Once take away the Rule and the Church must of necessity go after She has no solid ground of Authority but the stediness of her Faith no stediness of Faith but the stediness of her Rule break that once and there is neither Authority nor Faith nor will within a while be Church left So that in good earnest I do not think the malice of all her profest enemies could â—ver do the Church so much harm as the zeal of her unwary Friends At least for my part break but the Chain once and I know no more any certain way to Heaven than the veryest Enthusiast among all those Sectaries who rove blindly for want of a sure Guide and should find my self as much at a loss That any thing must be believ'd but what was taught by Christ or that any thing can be known to be taught by him but by the constant belief and practise of intermediate ages is what a Catholic should neither say nor endure to hear for it manifestly takes away Divine from Faith and all the advantage we profess in our method above others to come to Faith leaving us as much benighted and as much to seek and as small hopes of success as we object to those whom we think stray most and are most in the dark Wherefore salvo meliori as far as my short prospect reaches To bring Deposing Faith into the Church is a ready way to depose the Church I cannot tell whether I should more wonder or grieve but I am sure I do both to see men so intent upon the maintenance of an Opinion which they have espoused that they forget the honour and safety of the Church and to observe a certain supercilious gravity with which they labour to discourse these things into Faith and Religion should so far impose upon the world that they do not discover thâ—y are quite contrary and destructive to both But no doubt there are enough who see all that is to be seen but if they be no more forward then I to say all they think they are in my conceit the wiser By the favour of your earnestness it is no commendable disposition in private men to turn Reformers on every occasion and when they see any thing amiss step presently in and make a bustle in what concerns them not Let those who Govern the world and shall severely answer for those miscarriages of which They are the cause look to their duty Ours is to live quietly and unoffensively and trust God 's Providence Your importunity has carryed me farther than I intended But you have now your will of me and know I for my part think the not-deposing doctrine is the truly Catholic doctrinâ— Did I think otherwise all your importunities and all considerations in the world besides should not perswade me to it I hope you now find I said true when I told you my thoughts of this matter were such as bâ—came a good Christian and a good Subject and afford you no occasion to change yours if you had any good of Your c. FINIS The Thirteenth and Fourteenth OF THE Controversial LETTERS OR Grand Controversie Concerning The pretended Temporal Authority of POPES over the whole Earth And the True Sovereign of KINGS within their own respective Kingdoms Between two English Gentlemen The one of the Church of England The other of the Church of Rome LONDON Printed for Henry Brome and Benjamin tooke at the Gun and at the Ship in St. Pauls Church-yard 1675. FRIEND YOU had sav'd your self and me some trouble if your last had been your first I almost despair'd of doing any good upon you and perceive that exsculpere verum out of one of your humour is one of the hardest tasks in the world But since 't is come at last I regret not my own pains and for yours it was in your power to have spar'd them But yet I have not done with you The Pope is a crafty Gentleman and has more strings to his Bow then one Shut the door never so fast it is hard to keep him out If St. Peters Keys will not open the lock He has St. Pauls sword to cut it off Not that I apprehend any great danger from downright fighting 'T is a Trick he shews as seldom as he can And he has reason for Kings overmatch him at that weapon But Justice has a sword too and that so sharp that I should be very sorry to see it in his hands Now that there may be justice without deriving it from Pasce Oves or Dabo Claves and that it may belong to him as well as others and by the same means And that he actually has heretofore and may when he please again set on foot pretensions upon this Title to part perhaps all his Majesties Dominions is something too evident to be deny'd and of too great importance to be neglected It is a thing which has long disquieted me with uneasy thoughts but I must freely avow to you I was never so sensible of the danger as since I read the Considerations of present Concernment You are so much concerned in that Book that I must needs suppose you have seen it and observ'd how much may be replyed to what you have said to me But I am for the present so intent upon what 's before that I cannot reflect