exprest to be the Scripture and on this Expression he so strongly builds that p. 10 11. he concludes thence and Certainly too thus The Religion of our Church sayes he is therefore certainly Primitive and Apostolick because it teaches us to believe the whole Scriptures of the old and New Testament and nothing else as matter of Faith What mean the word Scriptures Any determinate sence of it or the dead Characters Alas their Church is far from teaching them the first or from having grounds to own such a pretence but puts the Book in their hands and bids them find the sence of it or their Faith for there is their Rule 'T is the bare Letter then unsenc't he means by the word Scriptures and so he must say 't is the outward Cuaracters his Church teaches us to believe and nothing else as matter of Faith that is their whole Faith has for its object Ink thus figur'd in a Book A worthy Argument to proove their Church is certainly Primitive and Apostolick whereas itis known Faith was before those Characters and besides if this be to be Apostolical we owe nothing to the other Apostles for our faith but onely to those six who writ But we mistake him he means neither sence of the word Scripture and hates these distinctionswith all his heart which would oblige him to either He meant to talk of Scripture indeterminately and confusedly which might make a fine show and yet expose him to no Inconvenience by giving any particular account of his meaning His Inference from this his First Principle being an Immediate one will utterly overthrow the Papists without doubt Therefore saith he p. 11. unless there can be New Scriptures we can have no New matter of Belief no new Articles of Faith No my Ld Yes as long as by Scriptures you mean no determinate sence of Scriptures but the bare Letter onely whose sence is fetch 't out by Interpretations and these as we experience depend on menes private Judgments and Fancies if menes Fancies may vary every hour you may have diverse Interpretations every hour and so new Articles of Faith every hour Is not this a mad kind of arguing to conclude as absolute an unerrableness in Faith as if they had not onely a determinate Principle but even as self-evident and unmistakable as the First Principle in Metaphysicks to guid themselves by whereas our daily eysight and their own sad experience every day teaches us by the practice of this Principle and yet their differing in the Sence of Scripture in most high and most concerning Points that the Speenlation is naught and the Principle it self a false and mis-guiding Light Nay I doubt my Ld. himself has no hearty value for this his First Principle though he sayes he wholly relies on it For I never saw Protestant Book in my Life thinner and sleighter in Scripture-Citations than is his Dissuasive so that if that be his First Principle he makes little use of it 35. Many other Propositions or Supposals are imply'd in his book to give it force As that It matters not how a Citation is qualify'd so it be but alledg'd 'T is no matter whether the question be rightly stated or no. The Tenets of our Church are not to be taken from the use of definitions found in approved Councils speaking abstractedly but from the particular Explications of some Divines Every Foppery is a proper Effect of the Churches Doctrin Points of Faith ought to be comprehensible to Reason and Spiritual things sutable to Fancy The Act of an Inquisition Sayings of a few Divines or Casuists are all Catholik Faith and the Doctrin of the Church That is rationally dissuasive which is confessedly Uncertain No Answer was ever given to the Citations or Reasons produc't in the Dissuasive Talking soberly and piously about a point is oftentimes as good as prooving it That t is Self-evident Scripture's Letter can bear but one Interpretation as wrought upon by Human Skills These and multitudes of such like though not exprest yet run imply'd in his carriage all along this book and suppos'd true to give it any force yet so evidently false and weak that to pull them out thence and make them show their heads is enough to confute them I conclude and charge the Dissuader that he not onely hath never a Principle for his Dissuasive to subsist by but farther that 't is Impossible but himself should know in his own Conseience that he has none nay more that the Protestant Cause and the same I say of all out of the Church can have none The first part of my charge I have manifoldly prooved in this present Appendix The other part of it which charges him with Consciousness of having no Grounds hath two branches and for the former of those I alledge that the wayes he takes all along to manage his Dissuasive are so evidently studious so industrious so designed and perfectly artificial that though one who is guided on in a natural way is oftentimes not aware of his thoughts or their method till he comes to reflect yet 't is Impossible he should not be aware of his which he postures with such exquisit craft and such multitudes of preternatural sleights to render his Discourse plausible For the later of those Branches namely that he cannot but know the Protestant Cause can have no Principles to make it Evident I discourse thus ad hominem what I have prov'd in Sure-Footing out of the nature of the Thing 'T is their most constant and avow'd Profession and his p. 9. that they do wholly rely upon Scripture as the foundation and final resort of all their Persuasions This being so Fathers and Councils are not held at all by them but as far as they are agreeable to Scriptures that is their Testimony has no basis of Certainty from themselves or of their own but what they participate from Scripture Wherefore either they are No Principles or else Subordinate ones to their First Principle Scripture Unless then It be Certain or deserve the name of a Principle They can never be held by Protestants such nor consequently can merit the name of Principles even Subordinate ones because then pretended First Principle from which onely they can derive Title to that dignity is in that case none it self To Scripture then le ts come By which word if they agreed to mean any determinate Sence of it certainly known to be the true one their Discourse were well-built But since their Church can own no determinate Sence of the Scripture deriv'd down from Christ and his Apostles in antecedency to the Scripture's Letter but having renounc't that Way or Tradition must say she has it meerly from that Letter as yet unsenc't She must mean that 't is the Scripture Letter She relies on as the foundation and final resort of all her Persuasions nay for her Persuasion that this is the Sence of it Since then Principles are determinate Sences not characters or Sounds neither is
p. 8. The clear saying of one or two of those Fathers truely alledg'd by us to the Contrary will certainly prove that what many of them suppose it do affirm and which but two or three as good Catholicks do deny was not then a matter of Faith or a Doctrin of the Church I wish my Ld. had been so Ingenuous as to have made use of this Principle when he charg'd our Church it self with the mistakes of a few Writers contradicted not by one or two but sometimes by a whole Nation But this Principle shows 't was not Reason in him but Will and Interest which made him so hot As for his Principle it self it subsists not at all For is it not known that more than one or two that is S. Cyprian and the African Fathers deny'd the Baptism of Hereticks Valid yet the Contrary was notwithstanding found and defin'd to be Faith and the Sence of the Church Let him consider how perfectly he engages himself in the very Sphere of Contingency and recedes from Universality the Sphere of Certainty when he comes to rely on one or two unless he can show those one or two strangely supported and upheld by Universal Nature or concurring Circumstances 'T is possible even one or two Lawyers may hap to be ignorant of two or three Acts of Parliament But my Ld is still the best confuter of himself as appears lately by this present Principle apply'd to his former carriage against our Church To himself then let him answer I conceive that if one or two's not denying it to be of Faith or affirming expresly 't is not-of-Faith he engages not so far but bare denying a point argues what many do affirm to be not-of-Faith à fortiori one or two's affirming positively that to be of Faith and the Doctrin of the Catholick Church which many others barely deny argues 't is of Faith 'T was of Faith then what Gennadius cited by himself p. 59. affirms that After Christs Ascension the Souls of all Saints go from the body to Christ This being so let him reflect what himself asserts p. 49. that Justin Mariyr Tertullian Victorinus Martyr Prudentius S. Chrysostom Arethas Euthimius and S. Bernard affirm none go to Heaven till the last day Either then Gennadius his Testimony delivering the doctrin of the Catholick Church is Inefficacious and yet 't is incomparably the best nay the onely Efficacious one in my Lds. whole book or else according to him many Fathers and not one or two onely denying a point is no argument but that point may be of Faith Whether all those Fathers held so or no is another Question and requires a longer discussion 32. Fathers then are useless to the Dissuader as having according to him no virtue at all of setling the Understanding Yet he must make a show of them else all 's lost and so he tells his Readers p. 8. as if all were well two things both very remarkable The one that notwithstanding In the prime and purest Antiquity the Protestants are indubitably more than Conquerours in the Fathers A high Expression but compar'd with what he sayes p. 7. that in those times our present differences were unheard-of it signifies that they miraculously more then conquer where if his words be true no mortals else could either conquer or even attacque For how should one fight against such points in difference from those Fathers who never heard of those points The other is that even in the Fathers of the succeeding Ages the Protestants have the advantage both numero pondere mensurà in number weight and measure which joyn'd to his words at the bottome of p. 7. that each side may eternally and inconfutably bring sayings for themselves out of those Fathers which signifies that 't is to no end or purpose to alledge them amounts very fairly to this that he brags Protestants have a far greater number of Citations which are to no purpose than Catholicks have that those Citations which have no possible force of concluding or no weight at all do weigh more strongly for them than for us and lastly that they have a greater measure than we of proofs not worth a rush with which they can bubble up their books to a voluminous bigness And we willingly yield them the honour of having a very great advantage in all three in case they be such as his own words qualifie them to wit that each side may Eternally and Inconfutably alledge them 33. We come now to his main and most Fundamental and in comparison his onely Principle p. 9. laid out thus We do wholly rely upon Scriptures as the Foundation and final resort of all our Persuasions but we also admit the Fathers c. To finish our Discourse about the Fathers will make way to the Scripture What means admitting as contradistinguisht to relying on Not relying on that 's certain for 't is contradistinguisht to it And yet to alledge any thing for a Proof as they do Fathers and not to rely on it is to confess plainly for Truth will out that they alledge them meerly for a show He sayes they admit them as admirable Helps for the Understanding the Scriptures and good Testimony of the Doctrin deliver'd from their Forefathers Have a care my Ld. This supposes the Certainty of Tradition For if there be no Certainty of delivery there is no doctrin delivered nor consequently any thing for them to testify and so the words good Testimony unless our Ground of Continual Tradition stands mean directly that they are good for nothing as your former Discourses or Principles made them But I ask is their Interpretation of Scripture or Testimony Certain If not why should they even be admitted Or how can Vncertain Interpreters and Witnessers be admirable Helps to interpret right and good Testimony I fear my Ld. can onely mean they are Admirable Helps as Dictionaries and Books of Criticisms are to assist his Human Skill about the outward Letter which is a rare Office for a Father and not to give him the inward Sence of it or the deliver'd Doctrin of the Catholick Church for unless All conspire to speak to the same point if any one be silent concerning it it argues not according to my Ld. p. 8. a Catholick Consent and so is far beneath an admirable help And this is what we reprehend exceedingly in the Protestants that they love to talk gaily in common of any Sacred or Grave Authority for an affected form or show but not at all value the Virtue or Power of such an Authority not judge interiorly they have any worth valuing They would credit themselves by pretending Fathers yet at the same time lay wayes to elude them at pleasure or which is their very temper springing from their renouncing Living and determinate Sence and adhering to dead unsenc't words they study to speak Indeterminately and confusedly not particularly and closely 34. Do I wrong them Let my Ld. clear me His First Principle is by him
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
right to alledge either Scriptures Fathers or Councils I add Reason History or Instances See Corol. 12. 15 16 18 19. And it is done thus All discourse supposes that Certain on which it builds But if Tradition or the way of conveying down matters of Fact by the former Ages testifying can fail none of these are Certain therefore a Protestant or Renouncer of Tradition cannot with Reason pretend to discourse out of any of these that is Reason being Man's Nature he has lost his natural right to alledge any of these in way of proof Now that none of these are Certain if Tradition be renounc't is shown thus Scripture's Letter as to its Incorruptedness nay its very Being is Uncertain alone or without Tradition as is confest by Protestants and proov'd Sure-Footing Disc. 3d and 4th So are Fathers and Councils too For Fathers being Eminent Witnessers to Immediate Posterity or Children of the Churches Doctrin received and Councils Representatives of the Church their strength as Proofs nay their very Existence is not known till the notion of Church be known which is part of their very Definition and to which they relate Nor is the Being or Nature of Church known till it be Certainly known who are truly Faithful or have true Faith who not which must be manifested by their having or not having the true Rule of Faith Wherefore since the Properties of the Rule of Faith do all agree to Tradition our Rule and none of them to theirs as was evidently and at large shown there in my five first Discourses it follows the Protestant or Renouncer of Tradition knows not what is either right Scripture Father or Council and so ought not to meddle with them nor alledge them Again since pretended Instances of Traditions Failing depend on History Historical Certainty cannot be built on dead Characters but on Living Sence in men's hearts deliver'd from age to age that those passages are true that is on Tradition it follows that if the way of Tradition can fail all History is Uncertain and consequently all Instances as being matters of Fact depending on History And lastly since Reasons are fetch 't from the nature of things and the best Nature in what it is abstracting from disease or madness Unalterable is the Ground of the human part of Christian Tradition and most incomparable strength is superadded to it as it is Christian by the supernatural Assistances of the Holy Ghost Disc. 9. 't is a wild conceit to think any piece of Nature or Discourse built on it can be held Certain if Tradition especially Christian Tradition may be held Uncertain Third Way 5. THe Third Way is to examin the Method he takes in dissuading For common sence telling us 't is not to be expected any should be able to perform any thing unless he takes the right way to perform it 't is Evidert he cannot be held in reason to have power to dissuade unless the Method he takes be proper to that Effect that is not common to that Effect and a contrary one Now to dissuade is to unfix the Understanding from what is held before which includes to make it hold or assent that what it held before Certain is False or at least Uncertain The Way then he takes must be evidently able to oblige to some kind of Assent nay as he handles it for I suppose he aims to make them hold as Protestants to Assent to the contrary which therefore must needs require the Evidentest Method imaginable obliging their Reason to conclude that a man who takes this way of Discourse cannot but make good what he sayes at least that it may be strongly hop't from his method he will do it This reflected on let us weigh the Method my Ld. takes in his Dissuasive and if it be Evident to every ordinary capacity that as to the Godly part of it the Quakers out-do him and as to its quoting part the Smectymnuans us'd the same against the Protestants to confute Episcopacy for They too quoted and gloss'd Scriptures and Fathers both and indeed every Sect that has not yet shaken of the shame to disrespect all Antiquity then it is also Evident that this Method is Common to those Discourses which have in them power to satisfy the Understanding and those who have no such power Now that being most evidently no Method or Way to such an Effect which many follow and take yet arrive not at that Effect 't is plain to Common Sence that my Ld. of Downs miscalls his Book a Dissuasive and that it can have in it no power of moving the Understanding one way or other unless he can first vouch some Particularity in the Method he takes above what 's in others in which we experience miscarriage and himself professes we though taking it miscarry in it Let us then search after this Particularity in his way of writing Is it that he brings some stronger or more unavoidable sort of Testimonies then were ever yet produc't by others No Every Scholler sees they are so common that they have been hundreds of times produc't and himself p. 1. 2. acknowledges their vulgarness But perhaps he invalidates all the Answers our Controvertists have given to those Testimonies and presses them farther against us beyond what any has done yet Quite contrary He barely and rawly puts them down as if this were the very first time they had seen light nor takes the least notice of any Answer at all given to them formerly But it may be he layes Grounds to distinguish and press home his Testimonies and so gives them their full weight which others have not done Alas no I fear he never thinks of that but judges if we may conclude from his carriage the deed done so he but quote nor can I see one Principle laid in his whole Book strengthening any one Testimony by bringing it to its Ground Experimental Knowledge in the Authour he cites that the Churches constant Voice and Practice manifested this her Sence but as they are put down carelesly so they are past over slubberingly without the least enforeing them by way of laying Principles Is he at least Particular in his Sincerity and Ingenuity I know not how they will be satisfied with it who read his late Adversary Impeaching him for the contrary Vices and some passages in this present Appendix Where lies then this Particularity in his Method without which his Dissuasive can never in reason be held Creditable I speak ingenuously and from my heart All the Particularity I can observe in it lies in these two things First that he huddles together multitudes of his own sayings without any pretence of proof for the most part and when he brings any they are such as we have spoken of Next that instead of enforcing his Proofs by way of Reason he overflowes strangely with godly language and Scripture-phrases with which plaufible manner of Expression most unreasonably and unnaturally he strives to combat the Wills of his
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
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 râ— 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 Groundâ— of their Faith Tradition or Universal delivery seâ—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
are of Incomparable value not onely for the Divine Doctrin contain'd in them but also for many particular passages whose Source or first Attestation not being universal nor their nature much Practical might possibly have been lost in their conveyance down by Tradition Next follows those of Councils and Fathers and supposing Christ a perfect Law-giver 't is clear all they have to do with Faith is to witness the Churches beleef and the former of them to declare or explain Faith or the Churches Sence against obstinate Hereticks As such then their Books are to be valu'd that is exceedingly Next follow such as Euclid's or Archimedes his which express Science and those are of very great worth in regard they acquaint us with and manifest to our hands the Knowledge of the former world which being Speculative little of it could have come down by Tradition except when that Speculation became Practical and exprest it self in Matter by many useful or rather needful Arts Trades or Manufactures After these succeed Opinionative Books of which this last Age has produc't multitudes and these also are very useful if the Reader go not too credulously to work but have right Principles laid already in his head for then the variety of mens Conceits and their Reasons for them will hint to a Considerer diverse Consequences which otherwise the slowness and distractedness of our Reason would not have light of nay even the miscairiages of such Reasoners avail a wise man as Aristotle out of the contrary Opinions of Philosophers whom he saw failing in their Grounds gathered very happily the middle Truth These Books therefore are worth preserving Human Histories come next and These second Tradition in her object matter of Fact after she hath authenticated them and the Circumstances of their Writers There are others fit for Explications or Rational Declarations of a point by Similitudes allusions Examples such like as Pliny's Natural History Emblems Fictions others of an Ornamental Nature which being useful for Sermons and Discourses sutable to the middle size of the world 't is plain they are preservable With this caution that these and chiefly Opinionative books be either kept from the weak and credulous vulgar or else in the Preface to them some learned Authority declare in common how far they are to be credited lest by imposing on the reasons of the Generality they hinder the world's improvement Prayer-books and Recreation-books 't is almost as Evident they are to be preserv'd as 't is that Prayers and Recreations are to be used Onely caution is to be had the former be examin'd well and approov'd by Ecclesiastical Authority and that the later be chast and unabusive You have here my sentiment concerning Books against which you shall find nothing in Schism Dispatch't or any of my Writings In a word I would have every thing distinguish't examin'd by Grounds allow'd as far as 't is reasonable Nor wonder I much at your mistake of me in this point for you are not the onely man that thinks all Books and even Authority to be absolutely deny'd when they are sorted and rank't in their just degree of merit that is indeed settled and establish't for we Metaphysicians think nothing to stand firm but by being or being held-to-be truly what it is You denounce Wo to Colledges and Libraries if these men should prevail Yet you see now I leave you Libraries enow and permit you your onely darlings Books and onely desire you would love them wisely Neither will Colledges forfeit their Libraries to my Discourse Onely whereas you would have Schollers educated there onely pore on books Note and when they come to write quote I would have them take Principles along with them by which to judge and consider of what they read Without which 't is to be fear'd their much reading will do them more harm then good and even pervert honest natural Reason in them by filling their heads with a multitude of unconnected and unconnectible Ends of Sayings impossible to be ever postur'd in the frame of Reason and themselves unfurnish't of means to know which rather to adhere to which may sit them to talk indeed of many things like Parrats yet all the while for want of Principles know nothing of what they say If you would have Colledges consist of such I conceive I am a far better Friend to Colledges than your self are and that no great cause of Woe will come to them by my means But as our way in your conceit brings Woe to Colledges and Libraries so you affirm that Atheism and Mahometism will get by it By which I understand what a Disputant you are I beleeve you would quote Scriptures and Books to confute an Atheist or Mahometan whereas I conceive since all Discourse supposes an Agreement between the Discoursers in some Common Principle and they denie or undervalue your written proofs you must begin to confute them by Maxims of common Reason antecedent to all Authority For these Human Nature obliges all men to hold to unless they have quite irrationaliz'd themselves into perfect Scepticism whereas they reject or sleight the other which to render Efficacious you must go to work first with Principles of plain reason Your last Injury which I account the worst of all the rest is deliver'd thus Others of approved worth and abilities have met with this man who I think have done him more credit than he deserved This argues you are so set to abuse me that no Testimony though never so valid and confest to be such can stave you of And the Judgment or Veracity of my Friends who speak by Experience shall be question'd rather than you will be brought to entertain any conceit of me that 's handsome You leap voluntarily into Falsifications and ill-languag'd misconceits without any motive but are so restif and backward to think or speak in the lest civilly of me that witnesses of approved worth and abilities cannot win you to favourable apprehensions nor keep you from pursuing your resolute Censoriousness Had you found half that Testimony for the Authentickness of an old Writer in some mouse-eaten rag of Antiquity it had gone down currently with your Genius and bin next to Gospel I value not your Judgment of me but highly and equally dislike your humour as void of all Ingenuity whether it had been us'd to my self or another When you review Schism Dispatcht and see your mistakes I hope you will have a good conceit of my Friends at least for whom in this passage I apologize But that I may re-acquaint my self with you I am to tell you that you also have met me formerly and knew me very well Nay that I am exceedingly bound to you for the best favour in the world which is that accidentally you contributed to make me a Catholick But because 't is long ago I am forc't to remind you of it by two Tokens One is that in Durham-house where you at that time lodg'd when you came to
restrains you from it For our discourse is about the Ground of that Authority which ascertains to us Faith which theresore is antecedent to the notions of Faith Faithful Church Councils Fathers nay and creditable history-History-books too since those rely on Tradition taken at large for their Certainty as is evident by plain reason Coroll 16 24. which devolves into this that Tradition is FIRST AUTHORITY and so not proovable or disproovable by any other secondary Authorities but ought to be impugn'd by pure Reason But if you think fit to grant this Certainty to Tradition taken at large yet deny it to Christian Tradition which hath besides its Human force most powerful Divine Motives also to strengthen it please to speak it out and the strange unreasonableness of the position will quickly be made appear Or if you grant Christian Tradition Certain in bringing down those common Points in which we agree yet Fallible nay actually erring in bringing down to us those other points which we were found holding upon Tradition when you left us and for which as grievous Errors you pretended to leave us please to declare in what you hold the virtue of Tradition consists ascertaining to us both those common points and how we come to know Tradition is engag'd for them which done it will quickly appear whether its ascertaining virtue has its Effect upon some and not others or on all Unless you do this your very admittance of Tradition's Certainty in some overthrows you without more ado for to acknowledge it argumentative for the Certainty of some grants it a virtue of Ascertaining which therefore you are oblig'd to grant in all unless you give the reason of your Exception otherwise to admit it when your Interest is not toucht and reject it when it opposes you is plainly to confess that Tradition is able to certify yet that you admit it when you list and reject it when you list 7. Being inform'd then by Evident Reason that no kind of Authority but only the way of Reason is a competent Weapon to fight against Tradition with I have three things to propose to your Thoughts on this occasion which I hope will sound reasonable to any intelligent man by the very mentioning First that you would not alledge such Arguments as strike as well at the Constancy of every Species in Nature especially Rational Nature that is such natural Mediums as tend to destroy all Natural Certainty Secondly that your objections be not forrain or fetch 't from afar of for these are multipliable without End and apt to be suggested by Fancy upon every not-seeing the coherence of some other remote whether real or conceited Truth with the Tenet we aim to impugn but that they be immediate and close that is taken out of the Intrinsecal Nature of the Thing For so they will be more forcible and by consequence be apt to do your Cause much service and unless they be such they will do it none For in regard my whole process is grounded on the nature of the Thing as appears by my Transition and every Logician knows that remote and common considerations are liable for any thing we know to be connected or not-connected with the point we would apply them to because we see no Connexion but what 's Immediate it follows that 't is a very incompetent and dissatisfactory way to impugn an Adversary who endeavours all along to frame his discourfe out of the Intrinsecal Nature of the Thing by remote or unimmediate that is indeed Unconnected Mediums The third thing I request is that you either grant that no Argument or Reason is Conclusive Obliging-to-Assent or Satisfactory but what is either Proper at least Necessary Cause or Effect or else show us out of Logick that other Mediums have this virtue and how they come to have it This way of procedure will give me a great respect for you as taking honestly the Way which is apt to clear Truth and you will have this Satisfaction to your Conscience that you have endeavour'd it to your power by following the best method you could imagin to give your Cause its due advantage in case it can bear that Test that is in case it be Truth And if it cannot bear it that is if it be no Truth 't is your own best Advantage by this strict procedure to have discover'd it Your Judicious Readers also that look seriously for satisfaction will rest much edify'd and thankfull for your pursuing that Method which is likely to save them a great deal of fruitless pains in reading multitudes of books writ in a loose way whence no Conclusion or Satisfaction is likely to result 8. My fifth request and I hope 't is just and reasonable is this that if you conceive your Discourse has made good the Certainty of Written Authorities or quoted Testimonies without Tradition which I see isimpossible and hence you make account you have title to produce them against Tradition's Certainty That being the matter in hand and therefore you resolve to pursue the way of Citing Authours you would then be please'd to vouch your Citations to have truly in them the nature of Testimonies that is to be built on Sensible Knowledge and not on Speculative or Opinion in the Authour alledg'd and that they fall under none of Dr. Pierce's faulty or Inconclusive Heads or else show they are Conclusive though thus Faulty which is done by confuting my Grounds laid in my First Appendix § 6 7 8. Or lastly to declare that though thus Faulty and Inconclusive they ought still to be alledgd and to give your reason for it which candidly spoken out I am sure will be this that you must either produce such or none I hope all our ingenuous Readers will think me very reasonable who am well contented with any thing which is spoke out expressly and declaratively of what method or way of Satisfying you take and onely desire you would not quote and speak confusedly and in common as if you meant to persuade your Readers that your discourse has in it some strange force taken in the bulk though you will vouch no one particular piece of it to be Certain or as if you suppos'd their reasons were to be amazd and stupify'd meerly at the venerable Names of Authors and the solemnity of a diverse-letter'd or diverse-languag'd quotation without clearing to their Judgements the virtue by which such Citations can pretend to have force able to subdue their understandings to Assent or which is all one satisfy them If you refuse to do me reason in this point and still resolve to pursue the huddling together Testimonies without warranting their Certainty by showing upon rational grounds they must be such I shall declare beforehand to my Readers that I must be fore't to do right to my self which is to rank all your Testimonies under Dr. Pierce's Faulty Heads and so let them go as they are 9. Particularly I beg the Justice of you not to think to
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