(g) P. 209. — Bishop Patrick and the ' Soul's Conflict.' The paragraph commenc- ing ' The laws under which we live,' as stated in the foot-note (page 209), forms the basis of an extraordinary charge against the Puritans by Bishop Patrick, only less extraordinary than his mode of putting it. It occurs in his, it must be allowed us to say, miscalled 'Friendly Debate betwixt two Neighbours, the one a Conformist, the other a Nonconformist,' described below.*
Perhaps the better way to deal with the charge will be to give it in full, and then Bee what can be said about it. Be it observed, that C. stands for Conformist, and iV. C. for Nonconformist. The passage is as follows (part ii., 1669, pp. 219-222 ; in Taylor's scholarly edition of Patrick's "Works, vol. v., pp. 655-57) : —
O. I must add, that you are all guilty of too much confidence, and talk as if you were infallible in your conclusions. When you see, therefore, the folly of it in another, mend it in yourselves ; and do not talk hereafter as if all godly men had
*The 'Friendly Debate.' Part Ist, 1668; part 2<1, 1669 ; part 3d, 1669-70; appendix to part 3d, 10i;9-70, with u postscript. Curiously enouKh, the 6th edition, 'onlarRed and corrected,' does not in- cludo part 3d, or any ot the additions, though publislied long subsequently, viz., in 1083-4.
1
THE soul's conflict. '291
ever been of your mind ; no man of a tender conscience but held it unlawful to pre- scribe anything in God's worship. Everybody knows Cartwrif^ht, Eeynolds, Green- ham were of this opinion, as the prefacer boldly told you ; and it is a wonder he did not add Dr Sibbes. For so some of your party took care the world should believe, and chose rather to corrupt his writings, than have it thought he was of another persuasion
N. C. I shall never believe it.
C. You may choose ; but I shall prove that this good man's writings were abused presently after his death in this very point. For in his book called the Soul's Conflict he gave this direction, among others, to guide a soul in doubtful cases — ' The laws under which we live are particular determinations of the law of God, and therefore ought to be a rule to us, so far as they reach. Though it be too narrow a rule to be good only so far as man's law guides unto, yet law, being the joint reason and con- sent of many men for public good, hath an use for the guiding of our actions that are under the same. Where it dashes not against God's law, what is agreeable to law is agreeable to conscience.' Thus the rule stood when the book first came out.* But in a very short time after, when he was newly laid in his grave, the first words were changed into these — ' The laws under which we live are particular determination? of the law of God in some duties of the second talde.'f In which they made two restric- tions of that which he had said in general words ; first, they restrained the rule to tha second table, and not to all things neither, but only some duties ; and then they add a whole sentence, by way of example, which was not in the first edition, which I make no doubt was done on purpose, lest any man who read the book should think it was the Doctor's opinion, that we should conform to the orders of our governors about the worship of God, where the law of God hath determined nothing in particular, and their laws do not cross his. But what is there done by the Jesuits worse than this ? What greater injury to the dead than thus to play tricks with their books, and change their words at your pleasure.
N. 0. It is very strange.
C. I have something more to tell you. As they have added here, so they have taken away in another place just before it. He is answering, I told you, this question, What course must we take for guidance of our lives in particidar actions wherein doubts may arise, what is most agreeable to God's will ? And one advice is this — ' We must look to our place wherein God hath set us. If we be in subjection to others, their authority in doubtful things ought to sway with us.' A dangerous rule, some men thought ; and therefore in the next edition they left out those words, ' in doubtful things ;' and also blotted out this whole sentence which follows — ' It is certain we ought to obey (viz., in doubtful thiTigs of which he is speaking), and if the things wherein we are to obey be certain to us, we ought to leave that which is uncertain, and stick to that which is certain. In this case, we must obey those that are under God.'
N. C. Are you sure of this ?
C. As sure as that I see you ; though I must tell you there was a neat device to hide this fraud : for they reprinted the book speedily with the very same title-page that was before, without giving notice that it was a second edition ; and by leaving out those lines, and adding an example, as I told you, to illustrate the ntle as they had restrained it, they made the pages exactly even as they were at the first.X Afterward the book was divided into chapters ; and in all editions since, you will find these rules (chap. 17) with these alterations.