Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
book_n author_n great_a name_n 1,614 5 4.6579 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A59219 A discovery of the groundlesness and insincerity of my Ld. of Down's Dissuasive being The fourth appendix to Svre-footing : with a letter to Dr. Casaubon, and another to his answerer / by J.S. Sergeant, John, 1622-1707. 1665 (1665) Wing S2564; ESTC R18151 61,479 125

There are 7 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

London and in your chamber there upon occasion of reading a book writ by a certain Protestant Bishop against the Real presence I observ'd and acquainted you with my observation that to my Judgment the Fathers spoke more favourably for the Papists tenet than the Protestants Hereupon you took me by the hand and told me they were mad who read the Ancient Fathers and saw not they meant Christ was as really in the Sacrament as in Heaven The other was yet more remarkable and this that either your Grandfather or Father I know not which but I think your Grandfather was intimate with Mr. Calvin and when he had put out his Explication of Christ's presencein the Sacrament which dodg'd and shuffled between really and notreally that is between is and is-not he challeng'd Mr. Calvin with it and laid open to him the non-Sence and indefensibleness of it asking him why he put out so strange an Opinion which he was never able to make good at which Mr. Calvin took hold of his own finger and said See you this I would willingly cut it off on condition I had never put it out so To which your Grandfather reply'd You should then explain it some other way Mr. Calvin answer'd My Institutions are so spread all over France that 't is now too late Thus you letting me see by a Testimony very immediate that the late Authour of this Tenet which now so reigns all over England wish't his finger cut off when he writ it How you will reconcile this with the late new piece of the Rubrick in the common-prayer-Common-Prayer-book absolutely renouncing all real presence in which point the Church of of England formerly exprest her self abstractedly do you consider Sir I beseech you let this be a fair warning to you how you deal disingenuously for the future and pardon some of my expressions to my high provocation and exceeding great hast I am sure the worst of them is a Civility compar'd to the harsh carriage you have us'd towards your self in openly falsifying both my words and sence and causlesly wresting to an ill construction every passage you touch't yet not doing me the right to go about to answer any one in the least that so I might see by your Reasons you had Grounds to think as you writ Had you argu'd against me I know too well the right of a Writer to take it ill if you laid open and nam'd my conceived Faults though the names of them had been harsh Words but not even to attempt to confute them yet to flie into such Expressions is the very definition of railing I was extreme sorry to lay open the Fault of a Friend though my own Concern made it Fitting and your demerit Just and do assure you that onely the Injury to my Cause which went along in that action oblig'd me to this Vindication Setting aside the duty I owe to That I am still as ever Your true Friend and humble Servant J. S. A LETTER from The Authour of Sure-footing to his Answerer SIR I Am certainly inform'd there is an Answer to my Book intended and a Person chosen out for that Employment whose Name I am unconcern'd to know it being only his Quality as a Writer I have to do with I receive the Alarum with great chearfulness knowing that if my Adversary behaves himself well it will exceedingly conduce to the clearing and settling the main point there controverted But because there is difference between being call'd an Answer and being an Answer and that 't is extremely opposit to my Genius to be task't in laying open mens Faults even as Writers though it has been my unhappiness formerly to meet with Adversaries whose way of winning made that carriage my only duty wherefore to prevent as much as I am able all occasion of such unsavory oppositions and to make way to the clearing the point that so our Discourse may redound to the profit and satisfaction of our Readers I make bold to offer you these few Reflexions which in effect contain no more but a Request you would speak to the point and in such a way as is apt to bring the matter nearer a clearing This if you please to do you will very much credit your self and your endeavours in the opinion of all ingenuous persons If you refuse and rather chuse to run into Rhetorical Excursions and such Discourses as are apt to breed new Controversies not pertinent to the present one under hand you will extreamly disparage both your self your party and your Cause and give me an exceeding advantage against them all I shall also have the Satisfaction to have manifested before-hand by means of this Letter that I have contributed as much as in me lies to make you avoid those Faults which I must then be forc't to lay open and severely press upon you little to your Credit nor your Causes neither You being as I am informd and Reason gives it signally chosen out as held most able to maintain it 2. That there may be no more distance between us than what our Cause enforces I heartily assure you that though I highly dislike your Tenets negatively opposit to what we hold Faith and the Way of Writing I foresee you must take unless you resolve to love Candour better than your Cause as being Inconclusive and so apt to continue not finish debates yet I have not the least pique against yours or any mans Person Nor have I any particular aversion against the Protestant party rather I look upon it with a better eye than on any other Company whatever which has broke Communion with the Catholick Church It preserves still unrenounc't the form of Episcopacy the Church-Government instituted by Christ and many grave Solemnities and Ceremonies which make our Union less difficult Many of their soberest Writers acknowledge divers of the renounc't Tenets to be Truths some of them also profess to hold Tradition especially for Scripture's Letter and even for those Points or Faith-Tenets in which they and we agree that is where their Interest is not touch't I wish they would as heartily hold to it in all other Points which descended by it and look into the Virtue it has of ascertaining and declare in what that Virtue consists I am confident a little candour of confessing truly what they finde joyn'd with an endeavour of looking into Things rather than Words would easily make way to a fair Correspondence I esteem and even honour the Protestants from my heart for their firm Allegiance to his Sacred Majesty and his Royal Father This uniting them already with all sober Catholiks under that excellent notion of good Subjects and in the same point of Faith the Indispensableness of the duty of Allegiance we owe our Prince by Divine Law Lastly I declare that for this as well as for Charitable Considerations I have a very particular zeal for their reconcilement to their Mother-Church and that 't is out of this love of Union I endeavour so earnestly
I can justifie my self I complain then that your carriage in this one page discovers you at once an absolute stranger to Science and withal very uncivilly Injurious to me all along without any imaginable need Ground or the least occasion given You begin with a mistake of the reason why the Rational Way explained in Rushworth's Dialogues was follow'd by me in Schism Dispatcht or rather why that way was devised and conceive 't is because we despair of maintaining the Popes Personal Infallibility and think all your own if you disprove this So that you strongly apprehend this the basis of all our Faith By which I see Opinion and Faith is all one with you Deceive not your self nor your Readers Sir our D r● came and do dispute against personal Infallibilities far more strongly than you are even likely and if you please to look into our Councils you find no news of building Faith on any such ground but onely on Tradition The Way I take is the old-and-ever-Way of the Church the farther Explication of it is indeed new not occasion'd by our relinquishing Personal Infallibility of the Pope you shall never show the Church ever built her Faith on a disputable Ground but by this occasion Had you look't into Things and consider'd the progress of the Rational part of the world as well as you pore on Books you would have discern'd that the Wits of this last half Century have been strangely curious and Inquisitive and straining towards a Satisfaction apt to bring all into doubt which they conceiv'd to hinder their way to it Had you reflected on those Heroes of such Attempts the Noble and Learned Sr. Kenelm Digby des Caries Gassendus Harvey and now the Royal Society those living Libraries of Learning in their several wayes you would have found that parallel to them in the matter of Controversy were the Ld. Faukland and Mr. Chillingworth whose acute wits sinding no Establishment nor Satisfaction in the Resolution of our Faith as made by some particular Divines nor yet in the Grounds of the Protestant Beleef endeavour'd to shake the whole Fabrick of our Faith and allow but a handsome Probability to their own Whence Doubt and Inquisitiveness being the Parents of Satisfaction and Evidence Catholick Controvertists began to apply themselves more closely and regardfully to look into the Ground● of their Faith Tradition or Universal delivery se●tled from the beginning of the Church proceeded upon by Councils and all the Faithful insisted on and stuck to by the Fathers especially those who were most Controversial as Athanasius S. Augustin Tertullian S. Hierome c. and at large by Vincentius Lirinensis and to consider how Proper Causes lay'd in Things by the Course of God's Providence had the virtue to produce the Effect of deriving down with Infallible Certainty Christ's doctrin to us Hence sprung our farther Explication of this way which so much bewonders you This is your mistake now to your Injuries I quoted Rushworth's Dialogues and call'd it The rich Store-house of motives fortifying Tradition Upon this your Reason works thus This I do not understand I never heard of such an Authour and it is possible the better to cry himself up he might borrow another name What means This I do not understand I 'le acquaint the Reader It means you are so wedded to talk by the book that you are utterly at a loss if an Authour be quoted you have not heard of The reason of which is because as I see by your Discourses which look like so many dreams your Genius inclines you not much to trade in Books which pretend to the way of Reason and if Schism Dispatch't so amaz'd you 't is to be fear'd that Sure-Footing and its Corollaries may put you out of your wirts But with what Civility should you hint I so extoll'd my self under another name it being as you say but possible Should I put upon you all things that were possible what a Monster might I make you But it abundantly manifests your short reach of reason that 't is highly Improbable For either I must have discover'd my self to the world to be Authour of both books and then I had sham'd my self with so high self-praises or not have manifested it and then where 's the credit I had got by the other book I had so extoll'd Your next Injury is that I make nothing of and disclaim the Testimonies of Popes and Prelates calling them the words of a few particular men and cite for it Schism Dispatch't p. 98. where there is not one word of either Pope or Prelate nor of disclaiming any Testimony nor of calling those the bare words of a few particular men Now if this be so every word you charge against me is an injurious Calumny and your whole charge a direct Falsisication My words are these By this is shown in what we place the Infallbility of the CHURCH not in the bare words of few particular men but in the manifest and ample Attestation of such a Multitude c. Where though you cannot or will not yet the Reader if he understands plain English will see I meddle not with who is or is not Infallible besides the Church nor sean the validity of Testimonies of Popes or Prelates but treat in what the Infallibility of the CHURCH consists Now the word CHURCH denothing in its First Signification an Universality I place her Infallibility in Universal Attestation from Age to Age. Notwithstanding which my Corollaries in Sure-Footing if your Wonderment at my new Way or your own habituation to words will let you understand them will let you see I also place Infallibility in lesser Councils even in particular Sees but most in the Popes or the Roman not by way of an Afflatus of which I for my part an able to give no account but by a course of Things Natural and Supernatural laid by Gods sweetly-and-strongly ordering Providence in second Causes But what aggravates your Falsification is that whereas I there counterpose bare words and Attestation rejecting the first and making use of the later you make me affirm Testimonies to be bare words To which how much I attribute every such passage of mine will tell you for on them the way I follow entirely builds So that this whole Charge is either quite opposit or else disparate to what I say in the place whence you cite my words Your third Injury and 't is a strange one is that I sleight Scriptures Fathers and Councils as much in this business and call them in scorn Wordish Testimonies for which you cite Schism Dispatch't p. 42. But not such a word is found there nor I will undertake any where else in my Writings 'T is likely indeed that speaking of such things as you use to call Testimonies for you name every sleight Citation such whether it have the nature of Witnessing in it that is be built on Sensations or no I may say they are wordish in regard you have no
no. For to confess he brings nothing but common objections without undertaking to manifest they were never satisfactorily answered is to carry it as if meerly to transcribe were sufficient to convince especially since the being often urged is a very probable Argument they have been also often answer'd Seventh Way 11. THe Seventh way to confute him is to run over his whole Book bringing it into Heads and then by disabling those Heads overthrow the Book it self noting first that I guid my Quotations by its Third Edition in Octavo First then we will distinguish it into the Matter of His Dissuasive that is those things on which he builds his pretence of Dissuading and the Manner of it or the Way he takes to manage that matter The matter is divided into his Authorities and his Reasons Wee 'l begin with his Authorities And because we have found and shew'd Dr. Pierce's so fam'd Sermon to be the very Idea of inefficacious quoting 't is but reason we should manifest how the Dissuasive participates of its Nature by ranking the Citations produc't in it under those ten faulty Heads which comprehended the other's Authorities To the First Head belong that of Senensis p. 21 and 49. Those two p. 34. Those p. 46 and 52. Maldonat's p. 55. Those p. 68. Those noted with b c d e and f. p. 88. AEneas Sylvius p. 89. Those three so maliciously and wilfully misrepresenting the Catholick Tenet p. 94. To which add that of S. John p. 104. That cluster of Citations p. 111. and that which follows Elutherius and S. Ambrose p. 113. His Scripture p. 121. His general muster of such as wish't reformation of manners in the Church 125 126. Now to vindicate these Testimonies his Lp. should show to what purpose as a Controvertist he alledg'd these more than for show I note that all these fall also under the 2d and 3d. Head and perhaps diverse of the others To the 2d Head appertain Those of Tent. Bas. Theop. Alexandrinus in the Preface Tert. p. 28. S. Cypr. and Dionysius p. 57. Ambrose Hilary and Macarius p. 58. Olympiodorus and Leo p. 59. His Scripture p. 60. and 61. Justin and Origen p. 69. Eusebius and Macarius p. 70. Ephren and Nazianz. p. 71. Those p. 83 and 84. Origen p. 85. Lyra and those noted g h i k l m. p. 88 89. The Council of Eliberis and S. Austin p. 100. Cyprian p. 110 and 114. Those p. 115 and 116. Against all these it is charg'd that they are raw and unapply'd onely saying something in common which comes not home to the point Wherefore to validate them His Lp. must show the contrary To the third belong those p. 28. Those p. 42. Innocent p. 47 and p. 92. Clemens and Origen p. 98. Epiph. p. 100. Those p. 104 105 106 107. The Extravagants p. 113. Those p. 117. and 123. Chrysost. p. 119. Of these he is to show that he has levell'd them directly at a question rightly stated I charge him with the contrary and add that most of his other Citations fall under this Faulty Head Under the 4th are rank't those p. 29 30. Those p. 49. 50 51 56. Lombard p. 64. A castro p 67. S. Austin p. 73. S. Gregory p. 118. Canus p. 119. These either impugn a Word for a Thing or some Circumstance or Manner for the Substance Under the 5th the whole pag. 48. and all those p. 62. which are evidently Negative and so Inconclusive Under the sixth are comprehended his First p. 20. and his Second p. 21. Bellarmin and Gerson p. 24. Albertus p. 43. Roffensis and Polydor Virgil p. 45. His first Citation p. 64. Which we affirm to be the Saying of private Authours or Schoolmen which others do or may contradict To this Head also belong all those in a manner in his two last chapters that is in the better half of his Book To the 7th Head are related that of S. Ambrose in his Preface S. Austin p. 5 and 6. Of the Emperours p. 12. Leo the 10th p. 16. Pius the 4th p. 17. the Ephesin Council p. 23. The Council of Trent p. 25. Those three p. 37. Nazianz. p. 58. Tertull. p. 69. The two first p. 73. Those three p. 87. and that p. 90. Those first p. 98. S. Greg. p. 100. His descant on the 7th Synod p. 101. 102 103. Symmachus p. 114. And lastly my Ld. of Downs his Testimony of himself the page before the Title page so strangely misrepresenting the Minde of that Frontispiece These I affirm to be false and not to signify the thing they are expresly quoted for Diverse of them also are direct Disingenuities with a craft in the managing of them which argues design and are inexcusable by mistake To the Eighth belong those of Athanasius Lactantius and Origen in the Preface S. Chrysostom p. 72. Theodoret and Gelasius p. 74. In which 't is easy to be made appear the words are ambiguous Those of the 9th or Sayings of Writers on his own side are not worth mentioning nor yet the 10th or pieces of Scripture interpreted by himself unless he will show us he proceeds on Evident Principles in sencing them which so force the meaning he gives them that they can possibly bear no other Till he does this all his glosses are presumable to have no other foundation but meer strength of Fancy and since he professes p. 9. that his Dissuasive wholly relies on Scripture that is on the sence he conceives it to have the common mode of interpreting Scripture by Fancy which reigns so in the world will make any sober man doubt unless he show us the evident Principles which necessitated his Interpretation that his whole Dissuasive is perfectly built on his own Imagination The Dissuasive hath two or three other faulty Heads of Citations besides those mention'd as Vnauthentick ones such is Origens p. 98. and that against the 7th Synod p. 103. Those also which cite an Authour but no place where they are to be found as S. Cyril p. 99. And lastly brought to impugn Faith but speaking onely of Alterable practices as those p. 123. which he is to show Authentick well-cited and Pertinent And as well of those as the former he is to make good if he will go to work like a solid man that they have in them the true nature of Testimonies and such Certainty as may safely be rely'd on for Principles of those serious Discourses he makes upon them See Sure-Footing p. 172 173 174. 12. But that I may do right to the Dissuader I am to confess ingenuously that he has in him one Citation which hath in it the true nature of a Testimony or depending on the Authour's Knowledge had by Sence of the present Doctrin of the Church at that time Now though it be the Testimony only of one single Father and so I am not in severity bound by Catholick Grounds which vouch onely Consensus Patrum which I understand to mean a Consent of so many and
himself often alledges that very thing which should clear the Church and and makes use of it to her farther disgrace First making the School and Church Private Opinions or Explications and Faith all one and at next that the difference amongst such Opiners and Explicaters argues our difference in Faith How strange a malice is this Was there ever any time since the Apostles in which there were not in the Church diverse persons and even some Governours bad in their lives and also Erroneous in their Opinions when the Abstractedness of Christian Faith restrain'd not their Understandings from descending to particulars nor secur'd them in such discourses depending much upon human Sciences Do not the best Champions of Protestants object to the Ancient Fathers themselves such Errors in Opinions Yet no ancient Heretick was ever so weak as to make that an Argument against the Church of those times Did not many Protestant Writers holdmany Roman-Catholick Tenets as may be seen at large in the Protestants Apology Yet no Catholick in his Wits thought therefore the Church of England her self was Roman-Catholick I have heard that one of their Chief Ecclesiastical Officers namely Bishop Bilson writ a book purposely to justify the Hollanders Rebellion against the King of Spain maintaining that Subjects might in some Cases rise against their Soveraigns and turn them out of their Government And yet Catholicks are far from that peevishness to esteem the Protestants disloyal in their Principles but honour them highly for the contrary Virtue even though they are pleased to permit us their Fellow-sufferers for the same loyal Cause to be abused and branded publickly for Traytors by every disloyal Scribbler And to come neerer home did not my L. himself formerly write some strange Opinions I need not name them yet no Catholick was ever so absurd as to charge his Church with those Tenets But which is yet far worse he imputes to the Catholick Church such licentious Cases which not onely Private Authours may and do freely contradict but even Mulritudes of Church-Officers namely almost all the Bishops in France in Diocesan Synods nay the Head of the Church himself has disapproov'd in condemning the Apology writ for them Yet for all this all must be our Churches fault whether she will or no and our Doctrin though she condemns it Was ever such a disingenuous Writer heard of But what aggravates most the Case is neither the Church of England nor the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury nor any Officer or Bishop of hers that we heard of did ever in any solemn Act blemish those Authours cited in the Protestants Apology by condemning their Books nor yet those writ by the Dissuader though they judg'd them amiss but on the contrary his person is advanc't and chosen for their Champion and yet our Writers are soberer more candid than to impute to their Church any of these not-yet-disavow'd Faults whereas my Ld. for want of better Proofs will needs clap upon our Church any misreasonings of private men though our chief Church Governour and many Inferiour ones have discountenanc't and blemish't them Nor is it onely every defect human nature is liable to in reasoning or acting which must be made our Churches Crimes but every unfavorable Circumstance Man's Nature can light into and their defective Effects are all made by the Dissuader's Logick to spring from meer Popery nay the very National Rudeness of his wild Irish is in his Preface confounded by his carriage with our Churches Doctrin and the Inability of their Teachers with much Rhetorick complained of and charactered to be Popery when himself enjoyes the revenue which should educate them better and encourage them Against this kind of unreasonable procedure in the Dissuader I levelled those Corollaries from Corol. 31. to 40. which I intreat my Reader to review and him to consider particularly In the mean time I would ask him on this occasion a few short Questions May not any one remain a Catholick and never hold or practice these Cases and Opinions Do not Catholicks impugn them as much as Protestants Does he find any of those Opinions or Cases in our Catechisms or any Command of our Church to hold or act them nay even in that most common point of extending Indulgences to the next world but they who will use them may who will not need not How then does he hope to dissuade from Catholick Religion by impugning that which touches not that Religion nor concerns any ones being of it And why does not he rather fear all sober men will see his aym by this declamatory kind of Opposition to endeavour to gain credit as a great Anti-papist and not to convince solidly his Readers whose experience if they know any thing enables them to give a ready and satisfactory answer in their own thoughts to all those Questions I have now ask't and so to confute neer three parts of His Book He saw it himself and though he carries it on all along as if he were willing all should be thought the Doctrin of our Church or Faith yet fearing the Calumny is too manifest to be cloak't he provides excuses and Evasions before hand in his Title p. 127. saying The Church of Rome AS IT IS AT THIS DAY DISORDER'D teaches doctrines and uses practices which are in themselves or in their immediate CONSEQUENCES direct Impieties c. So that he speaks of our Church precisely as having some disorders in her and that they lead to ill onely by Consequences drawn from such disorderly Tenets and who 's the drawer of these Consequences Himself But grant his position that there are Disorders in the Church I mean not in Faith held Universally and obligatorily but in unobligatory Opinions and Practices I ask does he think there was ever any time in which there were not some Disorders in the Church or ever will be while Original corruption lasts Does he 〈◊〉 the very time of the Apostles was exempt from such frailty or that S. Paul complain'd for nothing of the Pastors in those primitive and purest times Phil. 2. v. 21. that Omnes quae sua sunt quaerunt non quae sunt Jesu Christi Again thinks he it any wonder that a disorder'd Tenet or a Falshood in a point belonging to manners is apt to lead by consequence to ill actions none doubting but that as Virtue is the connatural Effect of Truth so is Vice of Falshood What hath he got then by this kind of Proceeding taking up better half his book Onely this he hath proov'd there is Original Sin in the world and so it's Effects Ignorance and Interest Again let him consider how disputative an Age this last Century has been and what infinit multitudes of Writers concerning Opinionative Points of all sorts have been in our Church how voluminous how descending to particulars or Cases and this both in School-divinity Morals and Canon-Law and then let him speak seriously whether he can conceive it possible in human Nature there should not
proper Contrition It adds farther that Reconciliation to God is not to be ascrib'd ipsi Contritioni sine Sacramenti voto QUOD IN ILLA INCLUDITUR to Contrition without desire of the Sacrament WHICH IS INCLUDED IN IT that is in Contrition Thus the Council I note First the Dissuaders craft in not putting down the words of the Council A practice frequent with him as I show'd before and purposely omitted as appear'd evidently then and will do more now because not at all favourable to his insincere humour of deforming all he meddles with Next by this means he handling onely Perfect Contrition makes our Church require actual or votive Pennance to Its Sufficiency Whereas the Council expresly voids any necessity of actual Pennance to this or proper Contrition and onely requires it to Attrition 3ly He omits the words which is included in it which put down had disanull'd all his whole discourse and cleard our Church from all his Calumnies For this shows the Councils sence to be that Contrition alone if qualifyed as it ought to be reconciles to God but that to be qualify'd as it ought to be it includes a purpose or desire of doing other duties incumbent on the sinner by reason of his Sin and signalizes this particularly of his duty to the Church in resolving to come to the Sacrament of Pennance Let us parallel it Suppose the Council had said True sorrow for sin will save you but not unless you have a will to restore what you have stoln for otherwise your sorrow is not true in regard true sorrow for Sin includes a will to rectify what sin had disordered Where 's now the occasion of my Lds. ranting declamation of the Councils going against Scripture and the promises of the Gospel teaching for Doctrins the Commandments of men of evacuating the goodness of God by Traditions of weakening and discouraging the best Repentance and of preferring Repentance towards men before that which the Scripture calls Repentance towards God and Faith in our Ld. Jesus Christ. Yet supposing that sinners are commanded by Christs Law to give account of their Souls to the Church and receive their Absolution and Pennance from her as well as they are to restore what 's stoln the case is undeniably parallell But since many other duties are included in Contrition as an obligation to restore credit or goods unjustly taken away to repair temporal damages our Neighbours have incurr'd by us and the spiritual ones of Scandal asking pardon for affrontive Injuries curing our former Uncharitableness and wordliness by giving Almes and such like a purpose of all which if our Contrition be right ought to be included in it 't is worth Enquiry why the Council particularises this of coming to the Sacrament of Pennance And to Catholicks who understand the nature of that Sacrament the Answer is so easy that 't is needless For after the heart is contrite or substantially turn'd there remains no more to be done but to wash of the tainture of bad Inclinations Mortal Sin uses to leave behind it and to make Satisfaction to our Neighbour or the World Wherefore because the wholsome Sacrament of Pennance rightly us'd is ordain'd and apt of its own Nature both to wash away those remaining staines by sorrowful and penal actions enjoyn'd by Church disciplin and also to ty men to the Execution of all due Satisfaction to the injur'd World hence the heart being truly converted interiorly this Sacrament is the most Efficacious means to set all else right so to come to it is the onely remaining duty as including all else and for that reason 't is particularly exprest by the Council that true Contrition must include a purpose to come to it because if true it must needs include a desire to take the best means to rectify what 's amiss And lest a Sinner should be apt to conciet and say within himself thus I am truly sorry for my offending God there is then no more to be thought on the Council most prudently declares that That will not do unless they desire likewise to set right what they had disorder'd of which the Church is to be the Judge and careful Overseer and so 't is their duty to the Church to let her take Cognizance of it The Dissuader did ill then to phrase it Ritual Pennante as if onely a dry Ceremony had been enjoyn'd by the Council ere the Soul could be reeoncild to God whereas 't is a Sacrament of its own nature executively satisfactory of all the kinds of duties and efficaciously reparative of all the disorders which are the Arrears and Effects of a sinful Action But he did worse to omit the Councils words and so leave out totally Quod in illâ includitur which candidly put in had made all his Process to no purpose But worst of all when he could not but see all this to inveigh against so innocent so rational charitable and wise Proceedure of this Grave and Venerable Council with the harshest Expressions that ever were clad in Holy Language And it were good my Ld. who is so high against our Casuists would let us know by what Cases he guides himself in his whole Book where he sprinkles Scripture Holy-water all over as if every thing were a Devil he met with and here particularly in wilfully publickly and causlesly calumniating not a private person but an whole Council consisting of so great a multitude of the most Grave most Venerable and most Sacred Personages in the whole Christian World 21. A seventh kind of his Disingenuities is his Exaggerating and magnifying manner of Expression by virtue of which he can make any mote seem a Beam and though the Fault would ly in a very small room perhaps require none at all yet as men blow up Bladders with wind he can so swell and puff it up by plying it with his aiery Rhetorick that it looks as big as a mountain whereas come neer it examin and grasp it that will not now fill your hand which before took up the whole prospect of your Eye He can also by placing things in false lights make even the greatest Virtue seem a Vice and then make that new-created vice a monstrous one Both which were visibly discovered in our last Instance out of the Council of Trent 22. I pass by many other of his petty Disingenuities as his interposing Parenthesisses of his own speaking most confidently where he has least Ground so to make up the want of this with abundance of the other His confounding good Cases with bad Some private Bigotteries with acts of true Piety Books approved by the Church with those of private Authours understanding spiritual things grosly and materially as in his whole business of Exorcisms In which were I in as merry an humour as his Lp. is there I could make his discourse there far more ridiculous than he makes any thing found in the Churches Ritual which book we are onely to defend or he to object if
Certain means to arrive at their Sence and till then I beseech you what are they else but meer WORDS or rather meer Characters and Sounds What high deference I give to Scripture see § 18 19. beginning p. 146. in Sure-Footing To Councils see Corol. 27. To Fathers taking them properly you may be inform'd by the whole Body of my Discourse concerning Tradition of which they are a part and the Eminentest Members of it in Proportion to their number Your 4th Injury is that the onely thing I place Infallibility in is Oral Tradition and the Testimonies of Fathers of Families whereas I place Infallibilities also in other things though I make this the greatest But your discourse makes me disesteem and exclude all others both Popes Prelates Fathers and Councils by establishing this Whereas by settling this I establish all others nor find you any such Expressions in my Book on the contrary 't is evident by those words I include them unless you think Popes and Prelates are not Fathers of Families but take lodgings or hire rooms in other mens houses by the week Truth is being to express the obligatory descent of Faith from Age to Age I cast about for a common word fit to express such Deliverers and conceiv'd this of Fathers of Families the aptest because the Church consisting of Families this was most General and every Master of a Family by being such has an Obligation to see all under him taught their Catechism or Faith This in common which was enough for my purpose then But were I to distinguish the strength of those Testimonies I should show that a Priest hath an Incomparable advantage above a Layman a Bishop above him and the Head of the Church above a Bishop Your 5th Injury is lighter because it speaks but your own Apprehensions and I am to expect no better from you My many chimerical suppositions and my Impertinencies in which I so please my self must needs begets wonder say you in case the man as probably be of any account and reputation in the world Now my Suppositions in the way I take are chiefly these that men in all Ages had Eyes and Ears the wit and if they were good Christians the Grace not to tell an open and damnable ly to no purpose and for these I should much wonder my self if you did not wonder at such odd Grounds and esteem them Chimerical because you have read them in no ancient book for you use not to look into Things By this extravagant kind of dealing you say you cannot but suspect me to be one of the Fraternity of the new-pretended Lights I believe you heartily For to begin with Self-evident principles and thence to deduce Immediate Consequences is such a new Light to you as I dare undertake scarce one beam of it ever enter'd into the Eye of your Understanding I conceive 't is the difference between your way ours which breeds all this mis-intelligence Ours ayms to bring all Citations to Grounds by way of Cause and Effect yours to admit them confusedly especially if writ by some old Authors provided they speak not for the Interest of Papists for then they are questionable Ours is to be backwards in assenting to any thing writ long ago till our Reason be satisfy'd no Passion or mistake could invalidate its Authority yours to believe them hand over head if the book be but said to be Authentick which is to a degree the same Weakness as that of the rude Country people who think all true they see in Print and that their having a ballad of it is sufficient to authenticate it Our Principle is that no Authority deserves any Assent farther than Reason gives it to deserve and hence we lay Principles to assure us of Knowledge and Veracity in the Authour ere we yeeld over our Assent to his sayings Yours is kinder-hearted than to hold them to such strict terms and is well appay'd if some Authour you have a conceit of praise the other for a good Writer or his work for a good Book Ours is to lay Self-evident Principles and deduce immediate consequences and by this means to cultivate our Reason that noblest Faculty in us which constitutes us Men yours to lay up multitudes of Notes gleand from several Authours and if you better any Spiritual Faculty you have 't is your Memory not your Reason Hence we carry for the main of our Doctrin and as far as 't is antecedent to written Authority our Library in our Heads and can as well study in a Garden as sitting in a Library stufit with books whereas your way of Learning ties you to turn over leaves of Authours as children do their Dictionaries for every step of your discourse and as an ingenious man said of those Poets who spun not their Poems out of their own Invention but made them up of scraps of wit transcrib'd from other Authours Lord how they 'd look If they should chance to lose their paper Book So we may say of you that if your Notes you have with much pains collected hap to miscarry you are utterly at a loss so that little of your Learning is Spiritual and plac't in your Soul as true Learning should be but in material and perishable paper and characters In a word your whole performance ends here that you are able to declare what other men say whereas ours aims at enabling us to manifest what our selves KNOW No wonder then if our wayes being so different we cannot hit it but that as you think ours Chimerical so I assure my self yours and consequently all you write in that way is as far as you go about to conclude or cause Assent by it exceedingly ridiculous This I doubt not will confirm you in what you said before that I am no Friend to Ancient Books or Learning To Note-book Learning indeed not much to true Learning or Knowledge very much and even to the other as far as it conduces to This. To Books I am so much a Friend that I desire not a few should be selected of each sort by a General Council of Schollers and the rest burn'd as did an ingenious person but I would onely have the riff-raff burn'd 't is no great matter if that tedious Legend of Dr. Dee's Sprights accompany them and the Generality preserv'd but so that their Contents should be gather'd in Heads or Common-place books for Schollers to look in occasionally not for rational Creatures to spend their whole lives in poring on them and noting them with a foolish expectation to find true Knowledge by stuffing their Heads with such a gallimawfry and after 40. years thus spent never the wiser for indeed this is little better than for one to hope to frame himself a good sute of Apparel by picking thrums ends out of a multitude of old and overworn Garments But to the point I distinguish Books And as for the Scriptures ascertaining their Letter and Sence which is done by Tradition 't is clear they
over-bear me with the conceiv'd Authority of other Divines resolving Faith in their Speculative Thoughts after another manner than I do since this can onely tend to stir up Invidiousness against my person which yet their charity secures me from and not any wayes to invalidate mv discourse For every one knows t is no news Divines should differ in their way of explicating their Tenet which they both notwithstanding hold never the less firmly and every learned man understands that the word Divine importing a man of Skill or Knowledge in such a matter no Divine has any Authority but from the Goodness of the Proofs or Reasons he brings and on which he builds that Skill Please then to bring not the empty pretence of a Divines Authority or Name to oppose me with and I shall freely give you leave to make use of the Virtue of their Authorities that is their Reasons against me as much as you will I easily yeeld to those great discoursers whoever they be a precedency in other Speculations and Knowledges to which they have been more addicted and for which they have been better circumstanc't In this one of the Ground of Faith both my much Practice my particular Application my Discourses with our nations best Wits of all sorts my perusing our late acute Adversaries and the Answers to them with other Circumstances and lastly my serious and industrious studying the Point join'd with the clearing Method God's Providence has led me to have left me as far as I know in no disadvantage What would avail you against me and our Church too for my Interest as defending Tradition is indissolubly linkt with Hers is to show that our Church proceeds not on Tradition or that in Her Definitions She professes to resolve Faith another way rather than mine or which is equivalent to rely on somthing else more firmly and fundamentally than on Tradition But the most express and manifold Profession of the Council of Trent to rely constantly on Tradition has so put this beyond all possible Cavil on my side that I neither fear your Skill can show my Grounds in the least subcontrary to hers nor the Goodness of any Learned and considering Catholik however some may conceive the Infallibility of the Church plac't ad abundantiam in somthing else will or can ever dislike it I expect you may go about to disgrace my Way as new But I must ask whether you mean the substance of it is new or onely that 't is now deeper look't into and farther explicated than formerly If you say the former my Consent of Authorities p. 126 127 c. has clearly shown the contrary and common sense tells us no other way was or could be possibly taken for the Generality of the Church at least in Primitive times till Scripture was publisht universally and collected If the later please to reflect that every farther Explication or Declaration as far as 't is farther must needs be new and so instead of disgracing us you most highly commend our reasons for drawing consequences farther than others had done before us Again if it be onely a farther Explication it is for that very reason not-new since the Sence of the Explication is the same with the thing explicated As 't is onely an Explication then 't is not-new as farther 't is indeed new but withal innocent nay commendable But there are three things more to be said on occasion of this objecting Catholik Divines One is that taking Tradition for the living voice of the present Church as I constantly declare my self to do not one Catholick does or can deny it for he would eo ipso become no-Catholick but an Arch-heretick and this all acknowledge In the thing explicated then that is in the notion of Tradition all agree with me and consequently in the Substance of my Explication nor can any do otherwise except they be equivocated in the Word Tradition and mistake my meaning which I conceive none will do wilfully after they have read here my declaration of it so unmistakably laid down The second thing is that an Alledger of those Divines will onely quote their Words as Speculaters not those in which they deliver themselves naturally as Christians or Believers which Sayings were they collected we should finde them unanimously sounding to my advantage and not one of them oppositely And lastly speaking of our Explication as to its manner Divines contradict one another in other kinds of Explications but not one Author can be alledged that expresly contradicts this which I follow 10. My sixth request is that you would speak to the main of my Book and not catch at some odd words on the by as it were Otherwise understanding Readers will see this is not to answer but to cavil 11. And because we are I hope both of us endeavouring to clear Truth I am sure we ought to be so therefore to acquit your self to your Readers that you ingenuously aim at it I conceive you will do your self a great deal of right and me but reason nay which is yet weightier do the common Cause best service if you will joyn with me to retrench our Controversie as much as we can Let us then avoid all Rhetorical Digressions and Affectations of Witty and fine Language which I have declin'd in my whole Book and chosen a plain downright manner of Expression as most sutable and connatutural to express Truth Likewise all Repetitions of what particulars others have said or answer'd before us such as are the Objections made by that ingenious person the L. Faukland and the Answers given them in the Apology for Tradition unless it be conceiv'd those Solutions are insufficient and Reasons be offer'd why they are judg'd so For I conceive it an endless folly to transcribe and reprint any thing others have done before us except it be Grounds which ought to be oft inculcated and stuck to and those particulars which we show to be not yet invalidated but to preserve still their strength Much less do I suspect it can fall under the thought of one who aims to discourse rationally such my Answerer ought to be to rake together all the filth and froth of the unwarrantable Actions or Opinions of some in the Church or to run on endlesly with multitudes of invective invidious sayings on his own head without proof then apply them to the Church as does the Disswader It would also very much conduce to the bringing our differences to a narrower compass if you would candidly take my Book endwayes and declare what in it is evident and so to be allowed what not What Principles are well laid or Consequences right drawn and what are otherwise To requite which favours I promise the same Carriage in my Reply to you By this means it will be quickly discover'd whether or no you have overthrown my Discourse by showing it ill coherent and how far 't is faulty that if I cannot clear it to be connected I may confess