378 A VINDICATION OF THE ANIMADVERSIONS ON FIAT LUX
CHAPTER XVI.
The power assigned by Papists and Protestants unto kings in matters ecclesiastical — Their several principles discussed and compared.
Your discourse on this head is not reducible by logic itself unto any method or rules of argument. For it is in general, — 1. So loose, ambiguous, and metaphorically expressed; 2. So sophistical and inconclusive; 3. So inconsistent in sundry instances with the principles and practices of your church, if you speak intelligibly; 4. So false and untrue in many particulars, — that it is scarcely, for these excellent qualifications, to be paialleled with any thing either in yoiu' " Fiat " or your " Epistpla." First, It is loose and ambigu- ous:— (1.) Not stating what you intend by " the head of the church," which you discourse about. (2.) Not determining' whether the king- be such a head of execution in matters of religion as may use the liberty of his own judgment as to what he puts in execution, or whether he be not bound to execute your pope's determinations on the penalty of the forfeiture of his Christianity; which I doubt we shall find to be your opinion. (3.) Not declaring wherein the power which you assign unto him is founded (whether in God's immediate institution or the concession of the j^ope), whereon it should solely depend, unto whom it is in all things to be made subservient. Se- condly, Sophistical : — (1.) In playing with the ambiguity of that ex- pression, "Head of the church," and by the advantage thereof imposing on Protestants contradictions between their profession and practice, as though in the one they acknowledged the king to be head of the church, and not in the other (whereas there is a perfect consonancy between them in the sense wherein they understand that expression) ; shrouding your own sense and opinion in the meantime under the same ambiguity. (2.) In supposing an absolute universal head of the whole catholic church, and then giving reasons why no king can be that head ; when you know that the whole question is, whether there be any such head of the cathohc church on earth or no. (3.) In supposing the principles and practices of the primitive church to have been the same with those of the present Roman, and those of the present Roman to have been all known and allowed of old, — which begs all that is in controversy ])etween us ; and sundry other instances of the like nature may be observed in it. Thirdly, Inconsistent with the principles and practices of your own church, both — (1.) In what you ascribe unto kings; and, (2.) In your stating of the power and jurisdiction of your pope, — if the ambiguity of your words and expres- sions will allow us to conclude what you intend or aim at. Fourthly,
POWER OF KINGS IN MATTERS ECCLESIASTICAL. 379
Ji'alse: — (1.) In matter of fact, as to what you relate of tlie obedience of your clmrcli unto kings; (2.) In the principles and opinions which you impose on your adversaries; (3.) In the declaration that you make of your own; and, (4.) In many particular assertions, whose consideration will afterward occur.
This is a business I could have been glad you had not necessitated me to the consideration of; for it cannot be truly and distinctly handled without some such reflections upon your church and way as may, without extraordinary indulgence, redound unto your disadvan- tage. You have by your own voluntary choice called me to the dis- cussion of those principles which have created you much trouble in these nations, and put you oftentimes upon attempting their disquiet. Now, these are things which I deske not. I am but a private man, and am very well contented you should enjoy all that peace and liberty which you think not meet in other nations, where the power is at your disposal, to grant unto them that dissent from you. " Lex talionis " should be far from influencing the minds of Christians in this matter, however the equity of it may at any time be pleaded or urged to relieve others in other places under bondage and persecu- tion. But I am sure, if I judge your proceedings against other men dissenting from you in conscience to be unjustifiable by the Scripture, or light of nature, or suffrage of the ancient church, as I do, I have no reason to desire that they should be drawn into precedent against yourselves, in any place in the world. And therefore, sir, had you provided the best colour you could for your own principles, and palliated them to the utmost, so to hide them from the eyes of those who it may be are ready to seek their disturbance and trouble from an apprehension of the evil that may ensue upon them, and had not set thern up in comparison with the principles of Protestants of all sorts, and, for the setting off your own with the better grace and lustre, untruly and invidiously reported theirs, to expose them unto those thoughts and that severity from supreme powers which you seek yourselves to waive, I should have wholly passed by this dis- course, unto which no occasion was administered in the " Animad- versions." But now, as you have handled the matter, unless I would have it taken for granted that the principles of the Roman church are more suited unto the establishment and promotion of the interest and sovereignty of kings and other supreme magistrates, and in particular the kings of these nations, than those of Protestants, which in truth I do not believe, I must of necessity make a little farther inquiry into your discourse. And I desire your pardon if in my so doing any thing be spoken that suits not so well your interest and designs, neither expecting nor desiring any, if aught be delivered by me not according to truth.