of prudent caution when he knew the Jews had designed to put him to death for it is said from thence forward he walked no more publickly among the Iews When the storm seemed to threaten the leaders of the Church in such a manner that by their withdrawing the People might probably enjoy more quiet and not want help enough to perform the necessary Offices even the Bishops were allowed to retire and upon this ground S. Cyprian and Athanasius justified themselves but when the case is common when the necessities of the Church require the presence of their Pastours then the good Shepherd must lay down his life for the Sheep as S. Augustin hath resolved this case in his Epistle to Honoratus So that this whole matter belongs to Christian prudence which is then most needful and fit to be used when the resolution of the case depends upon particular circumstances so as not to shun any necessary duty for fear of danger nor to run upon any unnecessary trouble to shew our courage 2. Since no wisdom is great enough to prevent all troubles of life that is the greatest which makes them most easie to be endured If the Wisdom of the Serpent could extend so far as to avoid all the calamities that mankind is subject to it would have a mighty advantage over the simplicity of the Dove but since the most subtle contrivers cannot escape the common accidents of life but do frequently meet with more vexations and crosses than innocent and undesigning men do we are then to consider since the burden must be born what will make it sit most easily upon our shoulders And that which abates of the weight or adds to our strength or supports us with the best hopes is the truest wisdom And who is he that will harm you saith S. Peter if ye be followers of that which is good i. e. innocency is the best security against trouble which one can have in this World but since the World is so bad as that the best may suffer in it and for being such yet that ought not to trouble or affright them But and if ye suffer for righteousness sake happy are ye and be not afraid of their terrour neither be troubled But should it not trouble a man to suffer innocently yes with a respect to others but as to himself he may more justly be troubled if he suffered justly For nothing makes sufferings so heavy to be born as a guilty Conscience that is a burden more insupportable to an awakened mind than any outward affliction whatsoever Iudas thought himself to be wise as a Serpent not only in escaping the danger which he saw Christ and his Disciples falling into by the combination of the Priests and Scribes and Pharisees against them but in ingratiating himself with them and making a good bargain for his own advantage but the want of a Dove-like innocency marred his whole design and filled his conscience with such horrour as to make him own his guilt and put an end to his miserable life Whereas the other Apostles whose chief care was to preserve their innocency as to any wilful sins though they had too much of the fearfulness as well as the simplicity of Doves till the descent of the Holy Ghost upon them yet they held out in the midst of fears and dangers and came at last to rejoyce in their sufferings And S. Paul tells us what the cause of it was For our rejoycing is this the testimony of our conscience that in simplicity and godly sincerity not with fleshly wisdom but by the grace of God we have had our conversation in the world See here not only what peace and serenity but what rejoycing follows an innocent mind and the Testimony of a good conscience when all the arts of fleshly Wisdom will be found vain and useless affording no satisfaction to a mans mind when he looks back upon all of them then sincerity and integrity of heart will give a man the most comfortable reflections and fill him with the most joyful expectations This enables a man to look back without horrour to look about him without shame to look within without confusion and to look forward without despondency So that as the streight line is the shortest of any so upon greatest consideration it will be found that the upright and sincere man takes the nearest way to his own happiness II. Prudent Simplicity implies the practice of Ingenuity which is such a natural freedom in our words and actions that men may thereby understand the sincerity of our mind and intention Not that men are bound to declare all they know to every impertinent enquirer which is simplicity without prudence but in all cases wherein men ought to declare their minds to do it without fraud and dissimulation and in no case to design to overreach and deceive others This is that simplicity of Conversation which our Saviour requires when he saith let your communication be yea yea nay nay i. e. you ought to converse with so much sincerity that your bare affirmation or denial may be sufficient this being the proper use of speech that men may understand each others minds by their words for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil i. e. the wickedness of mankind and that distrust and suspicion which is occasioned by it is the reason they are ever put to make use of oaths to make their Testimony appear more credible And therefore nothing but such necessity can justifie the use of them Oaths and Wars being never lawful but when they are necessary Some understand the reduplication of those words yea yea nay nay after a more emphatical manner viz. that our words must not only agree with the truth of the thing but with the conception and sense of our minds and so the greatest candour and sincerity is commanded by them Truth was described of old sitting upon an Adamant with garments white as snow and a light in her hand to intimate that clearness and simplicity and firmness that doth accompany it such as was most remarkable in the primitive Christians who abhorred any thing that looked like dissimulation and hypocrisie especially in what concerned their Religion In this they were plain and open hearty and sincere neither exasperating their enemies by needless provocations nor using any artificial ways of compliance for their own security When the casting some few grains of incense on the altar and pouring out wine before the Emperors statue might have saved their lives they chose rather to dye than to defile their consciences with that impure and Idolatrous Worship To be dismissed after summons to the tribunal without compliance was a scandal and raised suspicions of some secret assurances given to be proclaimed to have sacrificed though they had not and not to contradict it was great infamy To procure a certificate of sacrificing though they did not or to pay fees to the
to deceive If then the reputation of integrity be so necessary the main point to be considered as to wisdom is this whether such reputation can be sooner gained and longer held by meer pretending to simplicity or by the practice of it He that only pretends to it must act otherwise than he designs and yet is concerned to make others believe he doth not but in this he puts a force and constraint upon himself which is uneasie to any man and he lets the vizard fall off sometimes when it is more observed than he thinks and then his countenance is taken at the greatest disadvantage and this is given out for the only true Copy And while he keeps it on it is a hard matter to deceive all eyes for it may be some by-standers have practised the same arts themselves and they know the make and the fashion and all the several strings which help to keep it from falling off and when the suspicion grows strong the laying aside the disguise will not be able to give satisfaction But he that walketh uprigh 〈…〉 and worketh righteousness and speaketh the truth in hi 〈…〉 t as the Psalmist describeth the practice of integrity may possibly meet with such as will be ready to condemn him for hypocrisie at first but when they find he keeps to a certain rule and pursues honest designs without any great regard to the opinion which others entertain concerning him then all that know him cannot but esteem and value him his friends love him and his enemies stand in awe of him The path of the just saith the Wise man is as the shining light which shineth more and more unto the perfect day As the day begins with obscurity and a great mixture of darkness till by quick and silent motions the light overcomes the mists and vapours of the night and not only spreads its beams upon the tops of the Mountains but darts them into the deepest and most shady Valleys thus simplicity and integrity may at first appearing look dark and suspicious till by degrees it breaks through the clouds of envy and detraction and then shines with a greater glory Thus the Christian Simplicity was despised and reproached as folly and obstinacy and many hard censures and sharp persecutions did men undergo for the sake of it for a long time as the most durable Kingdoms have had the sharpest pangs and been the longest in the birth but at last persecuted and despised innocency prevailed over all the craft and power of the World It was then the great glory of Christians that their enemies could reproach them for nothing but their Religion that they were in all other things honest and good men only they were Christians and then true Religion is most like to prevail in the world when mens other vertues commend their Religion and not when zeal for their Religion is their only vertue When righteousness and peace and humility and charity and temperance and patience and a constant integrity make men enquire after a Religion which produces such fruits as these are then it will appear that Apostles and preachers of Religion are then wise as Serpents as to the promoting the honour of their Doctrine when by the innocency and simplicity of their lives they are harmless as Dove◠3. But suppose that troubles and persecutions do arise what becomes of the harmless Doves then they are soon taken and easily destroyed when those who are only wise as Serpents may see many wayes to escape danger which the innocent Doves dare not follow them in what wisdom then can there be in so much simplicity as makes suffering unavoidable This is the hardest part of the case but that which our Saviour doth here suppose when he saith Behold I send you forth as sheep in the midst of Wolves be ye therefore wise as Serpents c. So that if we cannot make out this to hold in respect of sufferings we must yield this counsel or advice of Christ to his Disciples to be defective as to the main occasion of it To this therefore I answer in these particulars 1. Our Saviour doth allow the wisdom of prevention as to all unnecessary dangers for otherwise he would never have bid his Disciples be wise as Serpents but only be as quiet as Sheep and as harmless as Doves God forbid that Christian simplicity should be taken in so ill a sense as to hinder us from a just and necessary care of our own safety and not only for the preservation of our selves but of our Religion too When we have liberty and opportunity to do it it is being stupid as Sheep and careless as the Ravens of their young ones and not being only harmless as Doves to neglect the doing it In such a case it is a violation of the duty we owe to God and to Posterity if we do not use all lawful endeavours for the preservation of our selves and our Religion from all the attempts of wicked and unreasonable men But in case storms do arise after all our care Christ doth not seem to forbid his Disciples making use of a present shelter till the storm be blown over But when they persecute you in this City flee to another And some say the likeness to Doves is recommended in regard that its safety lyes chiefly in the quickness of its flight But our Saviour neither imposes a necessity of suffering in all cases nor allows a liberty of flying upon every apprehension of danger but leaves this matter to be determined according to circumstances as makes most for Gods honour and his Churches good i e. herein to be wise as Serpents and harmless as Doves by not exposing themselves to needless dangers when they may be avoided with a good conscience nor declining any necessary duty for the sake of any trouble which may follow upon it There were some in the Primitive Church who thought it unlawful in any case to avoid persecution and Tertullian pleads their cause with many plausible reasons saying that persecution is designed on purpose for tryal by God himself that the allowance for flying was peculiar to the Apostles case not to avoid persecution but for the more speedy propagation of the Gospel and some of the Christians were so far from flying that they ran upon persecution and seemed ambitious of Martyrdom S. Chrysostom saith it was one of the reasons Julian gave why he would not openly persecute Christianity because he knew the Christians gloried in being Martyrs and he would not humour them so much as to spread his Nets to catch such silly Doves that never minded the danger they fell into But the Christian Church never approved rash and indiscreet suffering as much as it encouraged all Christians to patience and courage and perseverance for they required not only a just cause but a necessary occasion of suffering and blamed those who hastned their own destruction for they observe that Christ himself made use
Officers to be excused from doing it made them a sort of libellati although their names were never entred in the Heathen Rolls and they were forced to undergo severe penance before they were restored to the communion of the Church So much simplicity and singleness of heart was then supposed necessary to the Christian profession No directing the intention no secret reservation no absolution either before committing the fact or immediately upon confession of it were ever heard of or allowed in those days of Christian innocency and simplicity If the Heathen Officers sought after Christians they neither lied to them nor betrayed their Brethren but would rather endure torments themselves than expose others to them for which reason S. Augustin highly commends the resolution of Firmus an African Bishop who rather chose to be tortured himself than discover a Christian committed to his care who was sought after for no other reason but because he was a Christian and the Heathen Emperour himself was so pleased with it that for his sake he forgave the other person and suffered him to enjoy his liberty When the Christians were summoned before the Heathen Tribunals they used no shifting tricks or evasions they concealed no part in their minds of what was necessary to make what they spake to be true they did not first peremptorily deny what they knew to be true and then back such a denial with horrid oaths and dreadful imprecations upon themselves and after all think to justifie the doing so by vertue of some secret reservation in their own minds Is this becoming the simplicity and ingenuity of Christians Such may possibly think themselves Wise as Serpents in so doing but I am sure they are far from being innocent as Doves But are there any who go under the name of Christians who own and defend such practices I think indeed scarce any who went under the name of honest Heathens ever did it For they did not only require constancy and fidelity in oaths and promises but simplicity anâ— sincerity both in the making and keeping 〈◊〉 them They condemned the Romans wh 〈…〉 t to avoid their oath by a trick and 〈…〉 ck to the Carthaginians they mig 〈…〉 e constancy of Regulus in observing the words of his oath as to his return although very capable of a mental reservation and if he did not promise the Carthaginians to perswade the Roman Senate to the Peace he behaved himself with great sincerity as well as constancy When the King of Persia thought by a trick to avoid the oath he had made to one of his Neighbour Princes viz. That he would not pass such a stone which was set up as a Boundary between them and he took up the stone and caused it to be carried before his Army his Counsellours told him they feared such deceit would never prosper with him because as the Prince sent him word Covenants are to be understood according to the plain meaning of the words and not according to any secret reservation Since then the very Heathens disallowed such artifices and frauds are there any worse than Heathens that justifie and maintain them Is not this rather an artifice and fraud of their Adversaries to render them odious But even in this respect we ought to be harmless as Doves and therein lies a necessary part of Christian Ingenuity in not charging on others more than they are guilty of I shall therefore fairly represent the doctrine held in the Church of Rome about these matters and leave you to judge how far it is consistent with Christian Simplicity There are some things wherein the Divines of the Roman Church are agreed and some things wherein they differ The things wherein they are agreed are these 1. That an Officious lie is but a venial sin This they do not stick to declare to be the common opinion of all their Divines Ex communi-omnium sententiâ saith Azorius A lie that hurts no-body but is intended for the good of others is no mortal sin and herein all are agreed saith Reginaldus because say they where there is no other fault but the meer falsity it is not of its own nature and kind any mortal sin for a lye of it self is a harmless thing or at least saith Lessius the hurt is not great that it doth and it is no great matter whether men be deceived or not if they do not suffer much by it and from hence he concludes it to be venial in its own nature It is true they say an officious lie may become a mortal sin by accident when it is confirmed by an oath when it is too publick and scandalous and used by those from whom the people expects Truth as Bishops and Preachers and Religious men saith Sayr Not even in them saith Navarr unless the scandal be great or their consciences tell them they are mortal sins or some other circumstances make it so If it be in matter of judicature although the thing be small yet I think a lie a mortal sin saith Cajetan because men are then bound to speak truth That reason is of no force at all say Soto and Navarr for that circumstance alone doth not alter the nature of the sin So that if a man tells never so many lyes provided he intend to hurt no body by them they do not make one mortal sin For that is a fixed Rule among the Casicists that an infinite number of venial sins do not amount to one mortal and consequently though they have obliquity in them yet they do not put a man out of the Favour of God But upon these principles what security have men to invent and spread abroad lyes provided they are intended for a good end in their own opinion What sincerity is to be expected when the confessing a truth may do them injury and the telling a lye may do them good For even Cajetan himself makes that only a pernicious lye when a man designs to do mischief by it They cry out upon it as a great scandal for any of us to say they think it lawful to lye for the Catholick cause and in truth they do not say so in words for they still say a lye is unlawful for any end whatsoever but here lyes the subtilty of it They grant it in general to be a fault but such a venial such an inconsiderable fault if it be for a good end and they have so many wayes to expiate the guilt of venial sins that the difference is very little as to the practice of it from making it no sin at all And some think they had better own downright lying than make use of such absurd wayes of evading it by mental reservations by which men may be truly said to affirm that which they do deny and to deny that which they do affirm But notwithstanding this 2. They are agreed that in some cases thâ—… which otherwise would be a lye is none by
〈◊〉 help of a mental reservation Let us not therefore do the Iesuites so much injury to charge that upon them as their peculiar doctrine which is common to all their Divines and Casuists And herein F. Parsons was in the right when he asserted that the doctrine of Equivocation and mental reservation hath been received in the Roman Church for four hundred years only some have extended the practice of it farther than others have done But in the Case of Confession they all agree without exception saith the same Author that if a man hath confessed a thing to a Priest he may deny and swear that he never confessed it without being guilty either of a lye or perjury reserving this in his mind that he hath not confessed it so as to utter it to another And I find the greatest enemies to the Use of Mental reservation in other cases do allow it in this and do not barely allow it but think a man bound in conscience to use it under grievous sin saith Parsons when by no other means of silence diversion or evasion the said secresie can be concealed I do not now meddle with the inviolableness of the Seal of Confession which I do not deny a great regard ought to be had to where an obligation greater than that of keeping a secret doth not take it off as where the Life of my Prince or the publick Safety are concerned not from any Divine Institution but from the baseness of betraying a Trust but I wonder how they came to think it to be no lye or perjury in this Case and yet to be so in any other It is to no purpose to alledge other Reasons peculiar to this ase for the single question is whether what a man keeps in his mind can keep him from being guilty of a lye or of perjury in his words If it cannot then not in the case of Confession if it may then a mental reservation will equally do it in any other Case And consequently no man who doth allow it in this case can on that account disallow it in any other This Navarr very well saw and therefore from the allowance of it in this Case of Confession he de duces the lawfulness of the use of it in all cases wherein a man is not bound to speak all he knows The common answer in this case is that in confession the Priest doth not know as man but as God and therefore when he is asked any thing as a man he may deny what he knows as God But Navarr at large shews the folly and absurdity of this Answer because this doth not salve the contradiction for to say he doth not know is as much as to say he doth not any way know it which is false if he doth know it in any capacity and it is false that he doth not know it as man because he knows it as a Priest and as such he is not God but man And the very Seal of Confession discovers that it is made known to him as a Man and with the consent of the penitent a Priest may reveal what he heard in confession and in other cases he may make use of that knowledge as a man without particular discoverie I do not therefore wonder to see the stout and plain-hearted Defenders of the lawfulness of this practice in other cases to express so much astonishment at the nicety and scrupulosity of those who dispute against it as so dangerous and pernicious a thing upon other occasions when they think it so pious and innocent in this For say they If it be a lie to deny what a man knows it is not in the power of the Church or of God himself for any end whatsoever to make it lawful for a Priest to deny what he knows And if it be not a lie in that Case neither is it in any other But although none in the Roman Church are able to answer that argument yet I must do some of them that Justice as to clear them from the owning the allowance of this practice in other common cases upon the same ground Yet I fear upon strict enquiry we shall find that those do equivocate more who seem to deny it than those who openly assert it For although two persons of the Roman Church seem wholly to reject it except in the case of Confession yet the one of them is charged with singularity and suspicion of Here sie and the other with little less than Heresie and Apostasie and their proceedings with him shew what esteem they had of him But most of their other Divines and Casuists do approve it in case of Testimony and accusation Soto doth allow a Witness being examined about a secret crime to say he doth not know any thing of it although he were privy to it and for this he quotes some Divines of great Authority before him as he might have done many others but he will not allow him to say he did not see the fact committed nor that he heard nothing of it because saith he words of knowledge seem to be restrained by judicial proceedings to that which a man is bound to declare But this â—ubtilty the latter Casuists will by no means admit of and allow denying the fact in any words and say of him that he was afraid where no fear was They therefore say It is enough that a witness answers to what ought to have been the intention of the Iudge whatever his actual intention was and therefore if a man supposes the Judge not to proceed legally against him he may not only deny the fact he knows but swear to that denial provided he keeps this in his mind that he denied any such fact which belonged to the Iudges conusance or that he did not do it publickly and in this case say they there is neither lie nor per jury Others say no more is necessary to avoid a lie or perjury in such cases but only to understand the word of denial with this restriction so as to be bound to tell you And this is the common case which Parsons and others speak of If a man be examined upon oath whether he be a Priest or not they say he may with a safe conscience deny it with that poor reservation in his mind and that is a known rule in this case among them that what a man may truly say he may truly swear So that a Priest may not only say but swear he is none and yet by this admirable art neither tell a lie nor forswear himself Some of later times being made sensible of the pernicious consequences of the imputation of such doctrines and practices to their Church have endeavoured to qualifie and restrain the Abuse of them But upon due examination we shall find this to be only a greater art to avoid the odium of these things and a design to deceive us with the greater
fineness For they allow the same words to be said either in oaths or Testimonies i. e. a plain denial of what they know to be true but only differ from the other as to the way of excusing such a denial from being a lie which say they depends on the circumstances of denying and not upon the reservation of the mind So Malderus himself grants that a guilty person being examined upon a capital Offence may deny the fact with this reservation so as to be bound to tell it but then he saith the circumstances give that sense and not the reservation in his mind But saith Emonerius or rather a famous Iesuite under that name these circumstances only limit the words to such a sense which they cannot otherwise bear because in such circumstances a man is not bound to declare what he knows therefore saith he whereever there is a reasonable cause of concealing what a man knows such mental reservations are to be understood and so there is the same liberty allowed in practice Among the late Casuists none hath seemed to have written with more pomp and vanity against mental Restrictions than Caramuel yet he not only allows a Confessour to deny upon oath what he heard in Confession but in case of secret Murder that a man may with a good conscience deny the Fact though the Judge be competent and proceed according to due form of Law What way can this be excused from a lye since he saith a mental reservation will not do it He hath a fetch beyond this A Iudge is only to proceed upon evidence if there be no sufficient evidence against him he may persist in denying it because it cannot be fully proved and therefore his denyal saith he is of such a fact which he can proceed upon and what cannot be proved is none in Law These are the shifts of those who seem most to oppose the Iesuitical art of Equivocation and inveigh bitterly against it as a thing wholly repugnant to the Truth of our words and the sincerity of our minds and that Candour and Simplicity which ought to be in Christians But in my apprehension they had altogether as good take up with the dull way of lying or with the common artifice of equivocation and mental reservation as make use of such refinings as these But however we gain this considerable advantage by them that they do assure us that mental reservations are so far from excusing the words spoken from being a lye that they contain a premeditated lye and so the sin is the more aggravated by them that all such propositions are in themselves false and designed only to deceive others and so all the effect and consequence of lying follow them that there is nothing so false but may be made true nothing so true but may be made false by this means Caramuel gives a remarkable instance of this kind in some of the Articles of the Creed for by this way of mental reservation a man might truly say Christ was not born understanding it secretly at Constantinople He did not suffer viz. at Paris He was not buried viz. in Persia. He did not rise again viz. in Japan Nor ascended into Heaven viz. from America so that by this blessed Art the most abominable Heresies may be true doctrine and the most cursed lyes prove precious Truths Besides they confess that it takes away all confidence in mens words and destroys all sincerity of conversation and the very inclination to speak Truth For as Malderus well observes there is no reason men should not have the same liberty in private conversation which is allowed them before an incompetent Iudge and some Iesuites themselves grant that if the common use of it be allowed there can be no security as to mens words there being nothing so false but it may be made true in this way And no man can be charged with a lye till they know his heart nor the Devil himself in all his lying Oracles who surely had wit enough to make some secret reservation and a very little will serve for that according to Suarez who saith it is enough in the general that a man intend to affirm or deny in some true sense although he know not what Since from their own Authors we thus far understand the mischievous consequence of these practices it will not be amiss to set down briefly the cases wherein they are commonly allowed 1. In general Whereever there is a just and reasonable Cause for concealing of Truth For that is the most general rule they give in this case where a man is not bound to speak his whole mind he may utter one half and reserve the other half of one entire proposition Now a just and reasonable Cause with them is declining of danger or obtaining any advantage to themselves either as to body honour or estate In all such cases they allow that a man may speak what is simply false and swear to it too provided that he hold something in his mind which makes it true But if a man happen to do it without just cause what then doth he lye doth he forswear himself by no means But he is guilty of Indiscretion and is that all then they tell him for his comfort that an oath that wants only discretion is no mortal sin 2. If a man be barred the use of Equivocation or mental reservation that doth not hinder the using it even in renouncing equivocation Even Soto himself saith that if a Magistrate requires from a person to speak simply all he knows of such a matter i. e. without any reservation a man may still answer he knows nothing of it i. e. with this reservation to tell him But what if in particular saith he he asks about a secret Murder whether Peter killed John which he alone saw doth it not seem to be a lye for him to say he knows nothing of it No saith he for still the meaning is so as he is bound to tell F. Parson speaks home to this point Suppose saith he a Iudge asks a man whether he doth equivocate or not He may answer Not but with another equivocation But if he still suspects he equivocates what then is to be done he may deny it with another equivocation and so toties quoties as often as he asks the other may deny and still with a farther equivocation Suppose a Priest saith Iacob à Graffiis be asked a thing he heard in confession may he deny that he knew it Yes saith he and swear it too because he knew it not as man But suppose he be asked whether he knew it not as man but as God He may deny it still with another equivocation i. e. not as God himself but as his Minister What if a Iudge saith Bonacina be so unreasonable to bar all equivocation yet the respondent may equivocate still And he cites several others of theirs who defended this