OF the three Arguments , which make up the substance of these three Treatises , the first in some respects , seems far the best ; the other two are more proper to amuse , then convince , and look more like products of wit and fancy , such as a fertile invention may multiply without end on any subject , then of a setled judgment . They rather skirmish then sight , and so as still to preserve their Reserves intire . But the first fairly engages the Triarii , and gives us the comfort of Alexander , to meet with all the enemies force at once . In truth it is the only proper Topick . For obedience to Princes being evidently taught by Faith , less then Faith will hardly serve to justify disobedience in case of Deposition . Notwithstanding in other respects I cannot but think it an ill chosen , and worse managed Topick .

For first , it is at most but an Argument ad Hominem , such a one as may stop a mans mouth , but contributes nothing to clear the difficulty . It is good only against a Catholick , and He , if he be satisfied with the proof this Author alledges , that the Church truly held , what he says she did , is put to silence , and must allow the conclusion true in vertue of his obligation , to believe as the Church believes . But yet sees nothing of that Truth himself , nor can tell how to make it out , or defend his Church , if it be objected against her , that she holds an untruth . To an Adversary it signifies nothing , unless perhaps to confirm him in his prejudice against the Church , when she is made to require the belief of things , which he may see inconsistent with Truth . However all is carried in the dark , the Catholick run down as with a boysterous shock at Blind-mans-buff , but neither satisfied himself , nor able to satisfy any body else , the rest left without the least glimps of light . In short , it is a Topick proper to fright a timerous conscience into a blinde obedience , but leaves the understanding altogether at a loss .

Again , it will not do at last , as he assumes , The Church has held it , and thence infers , it must be true . Another may assume , It is not true : and thence a Catholick infer , the Church has not held it ; and an Adversary , that the Church has erred . In either case , it must of necessity come to be examined , whether the point be true or no , and this by Arguments independent of the Authority of the Church . For if the Catholick by any Arguments can prove it is not true : — the Church never held it , is to another Catholick as undenyable , as his consequence , the Church hath held it , therefore it is true . At least there is no avoiding it with an Adversary : For who acknowledges the Church has held it , and cannot shew it is not an error , and by other mediums then the Churches holding it , cannot acquit the Church from having held an error . Wherefore since of necessity it must come to this at last , it had been a great deal better to have begun there at first , and never troubled us with a Topick , which even if it hold , makes us not a jot the wiser , and which when we have taken a great deal of pains to examine , leaves us exposed to as much in examining another .

Besides , considering the circumstances in which we live , I know not what worse office he could have done his fellow Catholicks , and indeed the Church it self . She is daily traduced with holding doctrines inconsistent with civil government . There is no way to clear her , that I know , but by denying that she holds those doctrines , or that those doctrines are inconsistent . This Gentleman assists the objection with his learned Syllogisms , and fixes the doctrines on the Church , and then leaves her to shift for her self , with the aspersion of holding doctrines inconsistent with Government , unless he would shew them otherwise . To leave her thus with the matter of fact confest , her Adversaries at liberty to conclude her guilty , and her friends uninstructed how to make out her innocence , in my opinion shews that inconsiderate love is sometimes more prejudicial then profest hate ; and I think more fore-sight would have become his learning , and more concern for her honour his zeal .

To draw a little nearer , I observe , it is nothing but the old dish newly , and not much differently , cookt , the same oversod bean still . Only whereas usually the inconvenience urged is , that unless the doctrine in question be true ; the Church has erred , he chooses to word it , The Church has been in a damnable error of belief , and sin of practice , a wicked and blinde Church , a Synagogue of Satan , &c. This sounds a little more big and frightful , but signifies much what the same . For the rest , 't is but what is met with every where . When the proof comes , on which he lays the stress , there is the fact of Greg. 7. the Councils of Lateran and Lions , with the rest of the Common-places , objected and answered by every body , who meddle with the question , according as they are for the affirmative or negative . These things , if they had been satisfactory , would have been so in other mens Writings , the dispute long since ended , and the pains of transcribing them afresh spared . But since he knows they were not , methinks he should have bethought himself of something more , to make them satisfactory , then barely to transcribe them .

However to make a formal business of it , this proof is divided into 6. Heads . All which if he can shew , he hopes it will be granted a sufficient proof . Sure he has been used to deal with very froward people , such who will not be content unless it be syllogistically proved to them , that the sun shines at noon : or else he is as unlucky at difficulties as some at musick , who praise and dispraise still in the wrong place . Was there ever such a pleasant If ? or did any man , besides himself , ever doubt , whether those things might be shewn , which every body , who knows any thing of the question , knows were never in dispute , but openly acknowledged on all hands ? For so it is with the main of what he brings , though in some particulars he has the ill fortune to be out . I am fully perswaded that neither the Sorbon Doctors , nor the rest of the Gentlemen , who it seems are out of his favour , would , to do him a pleasure , stick to yeild him freely , perhaps more then he asks , without staying to be for●'t to a confession by the rack of his severe Quotations .

Alas the difficulty lies not in the matter of fact-which is beyond Ifs and Ands , sufficiently agreed , but in this , whether that matter of fact sufficiently prove what is pretended from it . When he comes to this , all he does is to hope it over , and leave it to take its fortune . That a Scholler should treat a question of this concern in this manner ! Keep a pother about the premises , which no body denies , and expect the conclusion , which no body grants , should be yeilded to his confidence without any , so much as offer at proof that it follows , or is a good conclusion , which yet is the only thing in question ! He knows that all , who dissent from him , refuse to grant what he hopes to Bellarmin and the rest , who have produced the same things , with as much and as likely hope as he . He knows that what he tells us is no news ; that all has been examined and sifted over and over again , and that after all , there are who remain firm against him . Can it be possible a man of learning should think to hope these people out of their Judgments ? That they should for his sake relent , and profess that to be true which they think to be false ? Change all on a sudden , and that without any motive ? For the motives he proposes , he knows move them not . When a scholler tur●s from proving to hoping , and expects from the good nature of the Readers what he should force from them , whether they will or no , by the unresistable evidence of his discourse , I for my part think he has a great deal more reason to fear then hope , at least were it my case , I am sure I should not be altogether so confident .

However it be , the Argument in short is this : Do but grant me that what you and every body knows has been done , proves the Church engaged for my doctrine , and then I will prove the Church is engaged for my doctrine , and that 't is heretical ▪ and what you will , to oppose it . This is the long and the short of the learned Syllogisms , and elaborat● Quotations . Which if any one will take for a good Argument , he may fo● me . But I must needs profess I never saw worse Topick worse managed ; and am heartily afflicted to see a question so strangely handled , in which , to say nothing of some temporal considerations not altogether to be slighted , our very duty to God and Caesar is concerned .

But not to affront his pains and zeal with an answer so general , let us cast a view on particulars . He undertakes to prove , that the opinion , against which he writes , is Erroneous in Faith , Temerarious , and Impious . Never were ill names worse coupled . This is as much to say , you Sir , with whom I am very angry , are a Rascal and a Villain , and besides cannot put of your hat with a grace , or make a handsome leg , or some such diminishing aggravation ; which none , but a very merry enemy would use . Haeretical , and Impious are sins of the first magnitude . Temerarious , which for all its great sound is no more but plain Rash , is a moderate blundring fault , of which many an honest man , especially in our nation , is guilty , even he sometimes who speaks against rashness . Neither do I mention this for any great matter there is in it , but to observe by the way , that he was so intent upon heaping harsh names on the Tenet , against which he disputes , that he minded not much what they signified .

There follow the learned Syllogisms concerning which I shall only say , He has not weaved his web so fast but that it might perhaps be unravel'd at every stitch . There is play enough for a Gamester who would take all advantages . Who would examin what made an Error or Practice damnable ? whether what is damnable in its own nature , be so in all circumstances , and particularly in those in which the things he alledges were practised , whether the Church act always as a Church , or be responsible for all that is done by her , whether Fathers , or Children ; and whether in the cases insisted on by him ; with the rest of the many points of which he gives occasion to discourse , might peradventure stop the career before it came to the convincing Quotations , and put him to the charge of more proofs , then those he has provided .

But since I am at liberty , I conceive it best to gratify his expectation , and deny just where he would have me . For indeed to deny in the wrong place without necessity , may I fear shew something disobliging . 'T is as if a man should rudely call for mutton to him who had provided Capon and Pheasant . I joyn issue with him therefore where he desires and expects I should , upon the first part of his second Minor , and deny that the Church at any time has believed and practised , as he pretends . And this because I believe it will be found , the Church , or rather men of the Church , were in those times , as now , divided in their sentiments of this business . Some were for such a power , as he would have in the Pope , some were against it , both acted according to their several perswasions . And I conceive that what is done by one part of the Church , and contradicted by another , proves not the Act , and much less the Faith of the Church .

Again , although there had been no difference of sentiments and practices , I do not understand how the Church can be engaged , unless she proceeded on those grounds , on which alone the Church , as a Church , or Congregation of faithful can proceed . To this I apprehend two things necessary : First , that the point have been originally revealed by Christ : and 2dly , that this revelation have been preserved by an uninterrupted and uniform practice of the Faithful . If any , or all , of those who make the Church believe or act on other grounds then these , I conceive they believe and act , not as a Church , or as faithful , but as men , or schollars , or in some other capacity . And because , for any thing appears in his Argument , these conditions may be wanting , I deny any engagement of the Church in his concerns , and for the same reason , his last Consequence too , conceiving , whatever he may hope , that though he do shew all he undertakes , it will not follow that the Church has believed , taught , and practised , as he contends .

And now in truth we are at an end of our Argument ; at least what remains belongs to him , not me . His consequence since it is denied , must be proved , if he will have it pass , and till then there is no more for me to do . It is neither needful , nor indeed much to purpose to examine farther what he says , if what he says will not prove his intent . However since in likelihood something may occur , which though unnecessary , may yet be grateful to the Reader , let us hear at least what his witnesses say . Kings and Emperors and Popes carry with them too much respect to be deny'd audience .

We are told then , that Gregory the 7th . threatned the French King , and his subjects , and deposed Henry 4th . King of the Germans : Besides that he formerly taught this doctrine to the Church , and called the contrary wicked folly and madness , as bad as Idolatry . Farther that Paul the 5th . forbad the Oath of Allegiance ; Innocent the 10th . censured the negative subscribers ; and Alexander the 7th . the Irish Remonstrance . And all this dilated with several circumstances , not forgetting the very year in which each thing hapned , and Vouchers brought , and exactly quoted for every particular .

I verily believe this exactness might have been spared . These things are too well known to need more ado about them then bare naming . I wish they were not , for the honour of Popes and reverence we allow to their sacred and supreme dignity . And could they be concealed , I for my part would rather lose an opportunity of shewing Erudition , then publish them . But since this Gentleman has thought fit to bring them once again upon the stage , what will he make of them ? All this is in two words , Popes have appeared for the deposing doctrine all the ways they can . And what then ? Is all that Popes think true ; all that Popes do , well done ? Had he first shewn the Actions good , and opinion true , he had deserved well of Popes , by shewing them to have abetted goodness and Truth : But that remaining in question , to expose their actions to the same question , is , I fear , no very good piece of service to them . And 't is a worse to Christianity to assume their proceedings in proof of a point of Faith . The Authority of Popes , he knows well , stirs not the ballance , unless their Infallibility be cast into the scales . And for that point , I refer it to himself , if it be any more then a probable opinion , and that even according to his own value , if he hold it . For he is not to learn that every body sets not the same rate upon it , many holding it very improbable and very false to boot . Now if it become a schollar to suppose that point , ( for he offers not any where to prove it ) a point upon which all the stress lies , and which he knows is strongly contested ; I cannot think it becomes a Catholick to make a probable opinion a premise to infer a point of Faith . For this is plainly to make his Faith , a probable , and uncertain , and for ought he can tell , false Faith . I would entreat him the next time he writes , to have more concern for Christianity , and less for his espoused opinion , and in the mean time , change his hopes of having his Inference pass , into a desire that it may not . For I must hope , with a confidence something better grounded , that God will have more care of his Church ; then to suffer her Faith depend on Probabilities , if they be so much , and the Rock on which he has built her , crumble away into slippery sand .

But now to see how he sets off his ware ; how like an Artist he covers the weakness of what he says , by the strong expressions in which he cloaths it , and strives by his big words to fright us into an apprehension there is something in it , if we could finde it ! If I shew , says he , That Popes have taught it as sound doctrine ; As if they , or any body in their wits , can be imagined to have taught any , as unsound doctrine . No body yet ever cry'd stinking Fish . Proving it from Scripture and Tradition : That Scripture should have been pretended is no such wonder , or praise . No Heresy , that I know , but has attempted as much . But for Tradition he must pardon me , if I suspend my judgement till I hear what his witnesses say . For to me it seems a riddle , that Tradition should be so much as pretended . And condemned the contrary , as ●rr●n●ous in Faith , pernicious folly , and madness , and inflicted censures on them that held it : As if people did not use to give hard names to their Adversaries , and do all they can against them . Many an honest man has been called knave . The question is whether those opinions , and those men , deserved those censures , and that harsh language ; if they did not , they had the worse fortune ; to be wrongfully aspersed heretofore , and for no other reason but because they were so , concluded guilty now .

Again , we are told , that Gregory the 7th deposed Henry the 4th in a Patriarchal Council . I am very sorry he did so , and wish with all my heart , truth would give me leave to deny that fact . But for the Patriarchal Council , I must again suspend till better information . For I suspect few of the Nations belonging to the Patriarchate were represented in that Council , save the Italians , and know a good part of the German Nation by Counter-Councils among themselves directly opposed it . Yet though it were true , I believe it does not , even in his own judgement come home to his purpose . That he did it ex Cathedra , as Vicar of Christ , and successor of S. Peter , &c. I wonder in virtue of what other Authority he could pretend to proceed ; or how he could act at all without pretending some : And for the mystery of doing it ex Cathedra , he may , if he please dispute it out with Launoy , for I must confess I do not well understand it . That this sentence he publisht to the Empire in a Breve , and his Legats in several Nations of Christendom . Since it cannot be imagined he intended to make a secret of it , which way should he publish it , but by Letters , and Messengers ? Lastly ( for I will mention no more ) that he did not only believe , but formally teach this doctrine to the Church by Canons publisht in a Patriarchal Council at Rome ; for which he cites the famous Dictatus Papae . This of all the rest , might in my opinion have best been spared , both for his own and the Popes credit . For my part I conceive it becomes me to use a little more respect then he has done , and not say all to which this objection tempts me . Had he imitated the prudence of those , who though they balkt nothing which they thought material , yet forbore to meddle with these Dictatus , I believe he had deserved better of some body . If he have entertained a fondness for them , and will uphold them whatever come on t , let him if he please , maintain them against Withrington , who flatly denys they were defined by the Council . As for me I will have no more to do with them , only I would gladly know whether he do in earnest believe all they contain . If he do not , methinks it is not fair play to obtrude on others , what he believes not himself : If he do , it is the less wonder he makes the Churches Faith but probable , since he can be content with one , to make the best on 't , very improbable , and very singular . For I dare say there is not one man in the Church besides , who believes as he does .

Now all this seems to me , but much ado about nothing ▪ The sum total of all these , and if there were as many more , particulars , amounts to no more then this , Popes did it . And for this I think he needed not have brought in his Bill ; it would have past well enough in the gross . But when he urges payment , people desire first to be satisfyd whether they are obliged to discharge ▪ the Popes debts . He had done something , if he had shewed we stood bound for them , obliged to justify all they have done in this particular , and to believe , and that with divine Faith , all was well done , and may and ought be imitated . But barely to shew they have done what before he set pen to paper , every body knew they have , and this with so much circumstance and aggravation , is to take much pains where none needs , and none where they do . For all that , I cannot but acknowledge he is a great man in his way : Of all the places , which Art has invented for amplification , I think there is none wanting . There is the Who , and the What , the How , the Where , the Why , and all the rest , not so much as the When forgotten ▪ which though a body would think not much material ; it importing little , whether these things happen in 1074 , or 1084 , yet I know not how , his formal In Anno has its Energy . And though I believe the discourse would have shewn better spoken , then writ , because this way it looses much of the advantage , which a solemn gravity , a pleasing and emphatical delivery would give it , yet even this is tempting . For there are few who will not be apt to think there must needs be some sence , where they see so much exactness , Authors so accurately quoted for every particular , and care taken of every Minute , circumstance , even the very Year of our Lord .

Before I pass to the next Head , it will not be amiss to stop at a quotation or two by the way . Out of a letter of the deposed Emperor Henry the 4th . he cites these words ; M● quoqu● quem S. S. Patrum traditio soli Deo judicandum docuit , n●● pro aliquo crimine ) nisi a fide , quod absit , ●●orbitaverim , 〈◊〉 ●ensuit . The words as they ly in the letter , are these : M● q●●q●● ( licet indign●● inter Christian●s sum ad Regnum vocatus ) Te teste , quem S. S. Patrum , &c. as he cites , save that he puts Censuit at the last for Asseruit , which is not much material . I would English the period , if I knew how , but I cannot make out the gramatical construction , to which there seems something wanting . However , besides the Parenthesis , of no great import , he leaves out two words , which as short as they are , quite alter the sence , viz. Te Teste , or , according to your own verdict . To say absolutely , the Fathers allow me not to be judged , or , if you will , deposed , but only for Heresy , is much a different thing from saying , even according to your self the Fathers allow me not , &c. This is what the Emperor says ; to make him say otherwise is an evident salsification : Though I do not suspect this Gentleman guilty of it . For I believe he has not seen the letter himself , but taken the quotation on trust from some body , who has not dealt faithfully .

But yet there is no great force in it , though it pass in his own terms . As for the first half of the period , the Emperor is undoubtedly in the right . For the Fathers do indeed teach , that soveraign Princes are to be left to the Tribunal of God . But for the exception of Heresy , which is in the second part , I would gladly be directed to those Fathers who made it . I have neither met with it my self , nor heard of any who has found it so much as in any one of them . Nor do I know how to reconcile the second part of the period with the first , this exception to the Fathers either doctrine or practice . For since they refer the judgement of a Prince to God alone , I see not how they can allow him to be judged by any body else , even for Heresy . Again Heretick Princes there were in their days , but Deposition was never thought of . They have been excommunicated , but still obeyed . The practice then of the Fathers was against this exception , it appears not , nay , the contrary does appear in their words : what necessity is there to believe the Emperor in this point ? will he have Emperors make Articles of Faith too ? deposed , and if he credit his own quotations , Heretick , and Arch-Heretick Emperors ? For his Henricians had their name from him .

Again , he says , in a Dyet of the Empire there was no plea against the Popes Jurisdiction , no not by the Kings own Advocates . A wise observation , and much to purpose ; as if people were obliged to say all they thin● for their ●●rn at all times , and did not insist now on one plea , now on another , as circumstances direct their choice . In the contest between Paul the 5th . and the Venetians , it was debated , whether they should appeal from the Pope to a General Council , and 't was carried they should not , because they thought it needless so to do . Otherwise they thought it lawful enough , and told their subjects they did therefore refuse to make use of that remedy , to which their Ancestors and other Princes had had recourse in such cases , because the apparent injustice of the sentence against them required it not , Such was the case in hand : The Princes of Germany met to examine and dicide the controversy betwixt the Pope and Emperor according to the Canons , as he himself ; out of Vrspergensis observes : And he can finde fault the Popes jurisdiction was not questioned , when by agreement they were to proceed in another method . The Emperors friends thought him unjustly dealt withal , even according to the ordinary proceedings of Law , and because they undertook to make this good in an assembly of the wisest men of their Nation , does it therefore follow they had nothing else to say ?

But now come his witnesses , who are to give in their evidence that the Pope proved this Doctrine by Tradition . This I have longed for a good while , it seeming very strange , that wise men , as Popes are , should attempt a matter so unlikely to succeed . The evidence runs thus : Eos qui dicunt Regem non oportet excommunicari , &c. ad S ▪ S. Patrum dicta vel facta mitti●●● . Why but the matter in tryal is deposition ; pop us not off I beseech you with Excommunication . Speak if you please to Deposition . Consider●nt cur Zach●rias Papar●g●m Francorum deposucrit , & omn●s ●ran●ig●●●s ▪ a vinculo Juram●●ti , quod sibi f●●●rant absolverit . Why but this is not Tradition ; 't is a single fact , and that not true neither . For 't was not Zachary , but an assembly of the Estates of France , who d●●osed Chilp●ri● . The Pope concurred no farther then by privity and consent , and perhaps dispensing with their Oath , but they d●posed . I think it not fit to enter into th●se questions which may ●●e r●ised concerning that dispensation , it 〈◊〉 that ●●●●posed not ▪ and if he had , that one Deposition is ●o proof of Tradition . And so the proof of Deposition by Tradition is mad● up of two instance● , whereof one has no Deposition , the other no Tradition , which is what I suspected before hand it would come ●● ▪

There is not a word more of thi● business i● all this Treatise ▪ unless the quotation following ● littl● after , about Gregory the great , be referred to it , which because he cites for another Head , I conceive he intended not . But if he do think it worth insisting on , let him first try to make out against Launoy , that there ever was any such thing . For he contends , that this so much canvast priviledge , is a meer forgery , and I apprehend he would not be very wise , who should labour much in expounding a decree , which perhaps was never made . And yet they seem to be less wise who forged it ; sure they understood little either of St. Gregory , or of the world , who make that wise and holy Pope , one who by his words and actions owned himself a subject to his Emperor , decree Deposition , and not content with that , Damnation . For my part I never heard of any power left with St. Peter , or his successors to damn men , And have been taught all is in Aedificationem . So that even admitting the matter of fact , all that can be made of it , is at most a Commination , to fright people from wickedness by the apprehension of the mischiefs which may attend it .

Popes have hitherto furnisht matter for his discourse , now he passes to Councils , and produces first the Council of Lateran , an undoubted general Council , and the greatest , for number of Prelates that ever were . Who had a minde to raise doubts , might peradventure finde somewhat to say to this confident Gentleman , and be countenanc't by the Authority even of a General Council too . For if this Council be so undoubtedly general , how hapned it that the Council of Florence cal●d themselves but the 8th . General Council ? How came Cardinal Pool , no ignorant man in the History of the Church , to be of that opinion ? To the 8. General Councils held in the East , add the two he cites , of Lateran and Lyons , and leave out those of Basil , Constance , and Vienna , The Council of Florence comes to be the eleventh , not the 8th . So that as undoubted a business as he makes it , there have it seems , been those in the world who have doubted of it , or at least not acknowledged it , which I think is as bad .

But we will not fall out about this point . I am well content the Council be as general as he pleases . If he will think fit to be a little more wary another time , 't is as much as I desire . I cannot tell whether he foresaw what I would have , but , as far as I see , he is resolved to gratify me , being so wary in the rest , that he makes no play at all . For he barely relates the matter of fact , but offers not to apply it to his conclusion , nor gives any hint whereby it may be guest what service he would draw from it ; So that I am something at a loss what to speak to . I know indeed his journys end , but which way he means to get to it , am quite to seek ; Because he undertook to prove the not-deposing doctrine Erroneous in Faith , &c. This Council ( I suppose ) was intended for a Medium by which to make good that undertaking . Now how he will couple both ends to the middle , and out of this that a Canon was made , in which the deposing doctrine is suppos'd , infer the contrary Erroneous in Faith , is the difficulty .

For my part , I conceive , that Councils use to define those things , which they intend we should be obliged to believe , and have been told , that when they do not we are at liberty . I think he will not deny , that to make a Canon is one thing , to define another . I think he will not deny , that 't is at least current doctrine , that in Definitions , there is no necessity of believing more then the bare Definitions themselves . Antecedents and Consequents , the very Reasons themselves alledged for the Definition , are expresly excluded . I presume too he will acknowledge , that Canons may be made on suppositions short of the certainty of Faith , and known to be so . And if he will deny none of this , I cannot see how he can hope it will not be denyed to him , that because this Canon supposes his doctrine , it follows that the Council did suppose it to be a point of Faith : and much less , if it did , that the supposition was true .

I cannot tell , as I said before , whether he would make his Argument in this manner ; but I think he should in this or the like . And then Bellarmins doctrine followed generally by Divines , and I verily think by himself , to my apprehension hinders it from concluding . However , as it has been observed before me , this is a plain case , and which cannot be denyed , that the Act in question is a decree of something to be done , not a Definition of any thing to be believed , and that we who are not to believe more then barely the Definition should be obliged to believe what is not defined , is a morsel of too hard digestion till he have chewed it better . It is but little short of believing it is defined , because it is not defined . For he would have it believed , because it has been decreed , or supposed ; and Decreeing , and Supposing are plainly not-Defining . If he will have it at least obliging as to practice , he must first make out that obligation from our National Laws ; otherwise I must tell him , that is a pretence which would have exposed a man to punishment , even in Catholick times .