my own express and avow'd Doctrine Is not this a strange mistake But Sir let me reflect on my Obligations First you write a Book against Tradition and yet discover plainly in this last mistake you understand not in what I put Tradition to consist that is you impugn I thank you you know not what Wee are like to find a wise confutation of it when wee come to examin it's rationall part which still misses in what 's most substantiall and fundamentall Next you revile mee all over as abusing Scripture for unsenc't or without Sence when wee speak of it as your Rule of Faith and yet you see now wee speak the same of our own as to that point which I am sure you think mee too highly venerate and your mistake springs hence that which is a shame for a Schollar especialy for one Mr. Stillingfleet so highly praises you understand not the nature of Abstraction and imagine and represent mee to say 't is devoid of sence senceles without sence c. Which I no where affirm of it absolutely butas ti 's abstractedly consider'd as a means to arrive at Sence and as so taken it must not bee conceiv'd as having that Sence which ti 's a way to arrive at Once more for all that I may clear your mistakes to you know that wee make account there is the same reason for our Rule 's being onely significative or a way to Sence that is as such not-yet senc't as for yours but wee put the difference here that wee make account Living voice and Constant Practice of the circumstant Faithfull of the Church Essentiall is by our perpetuall comnverse with them and other conveniencies so perfectly significative of their sence in deliver'd points or points belonging to naturall Christianity that they leave to the Generality no possible ambiguity or occasion of mistake the persons being alive to explain themselves in any such Difficulty if their carriage and Expressions could possibly leave any wheras the Letter of Scripture as left to be interpreted by private heads is given both by reason and Experience to bee diversly interpretable and cannot by way of living voice apply it self pertinently to explain its own meaning when it 's sence is perverted by any but lies at the mercy of the interpreters pretending to draw it into different faces by alluding one place to another Criticizing and other fallible knacks You make a great noise all over your Book as if wee would make God unable to write intelligibly but you beg the question all the while which is whether God intended the Scripture for a Rule of Faith or no for if not then why is it not as intelligible as it need bee Again the question is whether God intended it for every private man to interpret or rather that they should hear the Church in that as well as in all things else belonging to Christianity If he did then They not God lead themselves into errour though their Spirituall Pride which makes them usurp the Churches Prerogative But Tuetullian long ago has given you the best Answer de Praescrip Haer. c. 39. Nec periclitor dicere ipfas quoque Scripturas sic esse ex Dei voluntate compositas ut haereticis materias subministrarent cum legam oportere haereses esse quae sine Scripturis esse non possunt Nor am I affraid to say that the Scriptures themselves are so fram'd by the will of God that they should afford matter to Hereticks for I read that there must bee Heresies which without the Scriptures could not bee I hope now you are satisfi'd that Tertullian is as great a Reviler of the Letter of Scripture as is your Friend I. S. As for the point it self it needs no more to evince it to any except verball Cavillers but this That Sence is no where formally but in intelligent Things that is in our case onely in mens minds nor can it bee otherwise in words then as in Signes that is Significatively Since then I deny not but the protestants are to hold Scriptures Letter Apt to signify Gods Sence as is seen Sure-footing p. 13. the very passage you cavil at I wonder what you would have or upon what Grounds you can require more You proceed as if you meant to overwhelm mee with your Favours and tell the Reader p. 64. it is pleasant to observe with what cross and untoward Arguments hee goes about to proove dead Characters not to have the Properties of a Rule of Faith May not one without danger of infidelity fear Sir that as some vessels give every thing that comes into them a tincture of the ill sent with which they are imbu'd so every thing that passes into your Fancy grows cross and untoward by a predominancy of those Qualities there You will give the Reader a tast or two you say but the artificiall sawce you adde to it will bee found to alter quite the naturall one of the dish it self The first tast is that I say It cannot bee evident those Books were writ by men divinely inspir'd till all the seeming Contradictions bee solv'd Upon this your fluent wit works thus How can this bee an Argument against those who by Scriptures must mean unsenc't characters I had thought Contradictions had been in the sense of words not in the Letters and Characters but I perceive hee hath a peculiar Opinion that the four and twenty Letters contradict one another Sir I perceive you have been us'd formerly to bee humm'd at the University for breaking Iests when you should dispute and have taken such a liking to the Grande 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of those Applauses you cannot for your heart yet wean your self of that merry pin of Fancy But though you bee pleasant as you say and follow your sport yet I must bee sober and regard the profit of our Readers I discourse then thus Contradictions are formally in mens minds and significatively in words Since then in the very place you quarrell at I allow your Tenet to bee necessarily this that those Characters are Significative of God's Sense my discourse runs evidently thus Since God cannot tell a ly or which is all one signify a Contradiction if the Letter of Scripture cannot bee clear'd from being Significative of Contradictions it cannot bee held of God's enditing See you any occasion Sir in this plain discourse which can deserve such mirth and triumph You might have pleased then after my words that the Protestants must mean by Scripture unsenc't Characters have added what imediatly follows there p. 13 with their Aptnes to signify to them assuredly Gods mind which I repeat again in the same place and then where 's the difficulty It being very good reason in my mind to say that Gods Spirit cannot order words to bee written which signify a ly But this passage dear Sir showes plainly you value honesty and fair dealing much less then your Jest dismembring a Sentence which ought necessarily go all together to gain a sorry
never are more powerfull than when you use your wit to make Authours fall out with one another and unnaturall mee with my self But to the point In the first Citation I say That the common course of humane Conversation makes it a madness not to beleeve great multitudes of Knowers c. But I add Sure-footing p. 49. what you omit that in the way of Tradition all Deliverers or immediate Forefathers are Knowers all the Knowledge requisit being of what they were taught and practic 't accordingly all their lives I beseech you Sir are those great multitudes of immediate Forefathers Knowers when they deliver down a Book for a right one that is do they all know the Translation is right made the Copy right printed or written and all the Perquisits which are needfull that they may bee truly said to know this Book is rightly qualify'd You see then how far I am from contradicting my self unless you show that I hold all Recommenders or Accepters of a Book to bee Knowers as they are of the practicall Doctrine they were bred and brought up to which I neither do nor can with any Sence profess The Reader also will see that the stratagem by virtue of which you made mee contradict my self was your omitting those words of mine which made the contrary clear The next place you cite p. 104. from mee to the same purpose is this that none but madmen can suspect deceit where such multitudes agree unanimously in a matter of Fact Now the words such multitudes mean all their immediate Fore-fathers qualifi'd as Knowers as I exprest myself a little before which will veryill sute your purpose in regard the matters of Fact employ'd about the delivering a right Book as in translating transcribing pointing right c. of which their Sences onely can make them Knowers are so inumerable and minute yet such that very great miscarriages may ensue upon a very little over-sight that to think all Forefathers can know no Fault in any of these interven'd is such an extravagant conceit that onely a most obstinate passion could make a rationall soul entertain it The point is at present that you affect to represent mee to the half part and by that art you take mee up perpetually before I bee down For it is not an agreement in any matter of Fact but in such a one as may bee known by all in which I place the force of being able to oblige others to assent to their proposalls You treat mee far worse p. 105. making mee say that the Providence of God is no security against those Contingencies the Scripture is liable to because wee cannot bee certain of the divine Providence or Assistance to his Church but by the Letter of Scripture which is to put upon mee a ridiculous Argument making mee infer there is no such Assistance from this that wee cannot bee Certain of it but such a way Whereas Common sence tells every one that our Certainty being an Effect of the Thing 's Existence must depend indeed on their Existence in regard we cannot bee Certain of what is not But the things can exist whether wee bee Certain of them or no I affirm then and charge upon you that I have no where either such words or sence in my whole book as you with a strange precipitancy to say no worse affirm p. 104. that I tell you Sure-footing p. 18. where my discourse onely pretends to show that who will argue orderly must first bee Certain of that on which hee builds his Conclusion ere hee asserts the Conclusion it self This was the tenour of my discourse there which I conceive to bee evident beyond Cavill If I err'd any where 't was in supposing you onely took from Scripture that God assisted his Church in preserving a right Copy of Scripture and therefore argu'd preposterously if you inferr'd God has a Providence over his Church in preserving right Scripture therefore 't is preserv'd right But this I spoke onely with an If and besides had good grounds for it For I conceiv'd there being but two wayes to know this by Revelation which you profess to have onely by way of Scripture and by naturall Reason whence you could not have it For however meer nature might teach it's exact Followers there was a God and that hee had Providence over his Creatures as it taught Socrates Seneca and such like yet I remember not that wee have any Ground to say meer nature inform'd any God had a Church much less that there was no way to Provide for her continuance in Faith or deriving his Doctrine down in her but by way of Books Hence I concluded and conclude still it must bee either by Scripture or no way you can know God has such a kind of Providence over his Church You are pleased to tell your Reader p. 119. that this Principle That in matters of Religion a man cannot bee reasonably satisfy'd with any thing less than that Infallible Assurance which is wrought by Demonstration is the main Pillar of Mr. S' s. Book whereas I assure you Sir the last part of the kind slur you put upon mee which is wrought by Demonstration was never either my words nor sence neither Pillar nor the least part of Sure-footing wherefore as you put those words in a different Letter for mine so you had done well to have put down the place too where those words were found which you wisely omitted If I had affirm'd that that Assurance which grounds Faith must bee wrought by Demonstration how should I pretend the Vulgar can bee sav'd who are manifestly incapable of Demonstration as I also frequently acknowledge Understand then my Tenet at length which you ought to have done e're you begun to write against it but that to use your own words you thought it an absurd and ridiculous study to bend your brains to read my Book as you would do Euclid p. 292. which yet is no more but to consider attentively my Principles and my Consequences My Tenet is that all the Faithfull have and those who seek after Faith may have and those who seek after Faith may have Assurance of their Faith wrought in them by Practicall Self-evidence in the same naturall manner but with far better Reason than they beleeve there was a Henry the 8th and that 't is onely Schollars that go about to Demonstrate what the Faithfull know but for want of Study or Reflexion on their own thoughts and on the Causes and Manners with which they were so assur'd are ignorant how to make it out I beseech you Sir repress this overflowing of Kindness in giving mee so many Advantages against you and take a little pains to understand what I say nor to borrow your elegant expression p. 292. suffer your self to bee so demurely discharged of a Study so necessary and so honorable I had affirm'd in my Letter to my Answerer p. 5th that it was a civill piece of Atheistry to say Faith is possible
True and hee expresses himself to do it lest Adversaries from his being wholly silent should take occasion to bee more impudent That is the reason of the thing requir'd it not but the unresaonableness of the Carping humour of Adversaries You alledge his words That Faith which was profest by the Fathers in the Nicene Council according to the Scriptures 315. l. 3. 4. c. is to mee sufficient c. Whence your discourse makes his opinion to bee that Scripture is the sufficient Rule of Faith Lord Sir where are your thoughts wandring or what 's the Nominative Case in that clause is to mee sufficient to the word is Is it not that Faith to wit the Nicene which you mistake for the Rule of Faith and joyn the Epithet sufficient to Rule of Faith which in the Testimony is joyned to Faith Your conceit that it seems hence the Scripture was to him the Rule to judge the Creeds of Generall Councills is a very weak one hee told you before his Faith came to him by Tradition of Ancestours all that is here intimated is that hee judg'd the Nicene Creed to be according to the Scriptures and what Catholik judges not so of that and the Council of Trent too and yet holds not Scripture which is to bee interpreted by the Church the Rule and Standard to judge the Church by To use your own words p. 332. You use a wretched importunity to perswade Testimonies to bee pertinent yet all will not do and your too violent straining them makes them the more confess their naturall reluctancy But now comes the Testimony of Clemens Alexandrinus charg'd to be taken not by mee but by the Authour I borrowed it of out of the middle of a long Sentence and both before it and after it Scripture nam'd so as to make it quite opposit to our Tenet I have already given account of my action and my Adversary now become my Judge charges it not wholly upon mee Alas I am not able to read the Testimonies in the books and understand them there 't is such a peece of mastery and therefore am fain to take them upon trust from others that can read them there But my Seducer how hee will acquit himself of so foul an Imputation is left to any Ingenuous Papist to judge c Sir let mee tell you you should consider circumstances ere you come to lay on such heavy charges I beseech you was the book in which this Seducer forsooth us'd this Testimony writ against Protestants who hold Scripture the Rule of Faith or against some Catholik Divines holding the Opinion of Personall Infallibility Clearly against the later This being so what was hee concern'd to transcribe the whole large Testimony no wrong being done to them either position of Ecclesiasticall Tradition which hee cites or of Scripture which hee cites not equally making against that Tenet or rather that passage of Ecclesiasticall Tradition being far more efficacious upon them than that which concern'd Scripture which they account not obligatory unless interpreted by the Church By this time the Reader will discern there was a great deal of rashness in the Accuser but no Insincerity at all in the Alledger Nor is there the least danger of the Testimonies following upbraiding them who patch together abundance of false words and fictions that they may seem rationally not to admit the Scriptures For what is this to us whose endeavours are to lay 〈◊〉 beginning from First Principles why wee and every man may and ought rationally admit the Scriptures and neither make our Faith ridiculous by admitting into it what 's uncertain nor leaving any excuse to Atheisticall Impiety in not admitting what 's Certain This is the summe of my aim and endeavours though nothing will content you but that wee admit the Letter to bee plain to all and by consequence to you and then your Fancy is to bee accepted for God's Word and your pride of understanding will bee well at ease You pass over nine of my Testimonies two from St. Basil and three from St. Austin alledg'd by mee Sure-footing p. 135 136 137. one from Ireneus and two from Tertullian and another from St. Peter Chrysologus Sure-footing p. 138 139. sleighting them as but a few whereas speaking of Testimonies from the Fathers as you do here you had answer'd but eight in all which you seem by your words to judge such a great multitude in comparison of 9 and those 9 or those few which remain as you call them so inconsiderable for their number in respect of the other numerous or innumera le 8 that the paucity of their number made them less deserve speaking to Yet a careless generall kind of Answer you give such as it is p. 318. telling the Reader that there is nothing of Argument in those few which remain but from the ambiguity of this word Tradition which wee will needs take for unwritten Tradition You add p. 318. that you need not show this of every one of them in particular for whosoever shall read them with this Key will find that they are of no force to conclude what hee drives at I was going Sir to use your own words and to ask with what face you could pretend this Let 's bring the book I 'le undertake it shall not blush to tell you how careless you are of what you say I omit that the word Tradition doth by Ecclesiasticall use signifie in the first place unwritten Tradition Moreover that wee may let Mercy triumph over Justice wee will pardon the first Testimony found p. 135. though St. Basil by counterposing Tradition of Faith to the conceits of the Heretick Eunomius seems to mean by Tradition Sense receiv'd from Fathers attesting this being the most opposit to Conceits or new-invented Fancies that can bee for even an Interpretation of Scripture may bee a Conceit or Fancy newly invented whereas what 's barely deliver'd cannot bee such The 2d is the same St. Basil's p. 136. Let Tradition bridle thee Our Lord taught thus the Apostles preach't it the Fathers conserv'd it our Ancestours confirm'd it bee content to say as thou art taught Is not here enough to signifie unwritten Tradition Did Christ teach it by reading it in a written Book or the Apostles preach it by book or is the perpetuating it by Fathers and Ancestours the keeping it by way of writing The third is St. Austin's p. 136. I will rather beleeve those things which are Celebrated now by the Consent of Learned and unlearned and are confirm'd throughout all Nations by most grave Authority Is universall consent and most grave Authority of all nations the book of Scripture or written Tradition or rather is it not most Evidently unwritten universall Tradition or Sense in the hearts of all Beleevers learned and unlearned or the Church Essentiall The 4th is from the same St. Austin 'T is manifest that the Authority of the Catholik Church is of force to cause Faith and assurance Do these
Tradition is the Rule of Faith is as much as to say Orall Tradition is the Rule of Faith the whole business had been concluded without any more ado and I think no body would have gone about to confute him What a terrible thing it is to deal with your great Wits Let 's see how a little honest plain Logick will dissipate this vapour To Conclude is to show evidently that two notions wee call the Subject and Predicate are identify'd or connected in that Proposition we call the Conclusion To do this wee find a Third notion call'd a medium or Argument to bee identify'd with those two whence wee infer them to be the same but how shall wee know that third notion to bee identify'd with those two others that is how shall wee know the major and minor propositions to bee true By finding another medium connected with them And how far must this go on Endlesly or no If endlesly since every following Connexion is prov'd by some foregoing ones in case wee cannot come to see some First Connexion or Principle wee could conclude or deduce nothing And how must we evidence the Connexion of the Terms or of the Subject and Predicate in these First Principles By another antecedent connexion of those Terms with a Third No for these are suppos'd the First Connexions Wherefore since they cannot be evidenc't by any thing out of themselves and yet must be Evident else nothing could bee evidenc't by them it follows they must bee Evident of themselves or self-Evident And in what consists this Self Evidence meerly in this that no medium middle Term or Argument can come between the notions of their Subject and Predicate which devolves finally into this that the Subject and Predicate are perfectly the same notion So that all Science about any thing is finally resolv'd into the nature or Essence of that thing that is into that things being what it is or which is all one it 's being the same with its self which your great Learning laughs at Hence what is is or Every thing is what it is as plain and course as it looks is the last resort of all Evidence in the world and in particular Sciences that the Subject of that Science is what it is as that man is a Man Quantity is Quantity and so a Rule is a Rule Faith is Faith must principle all that can bee solidly concluded either about Man Quantity Rule or Faith 6. Had you reflected on any maxims of Art and not stood pursuing your affected buffonerie when it became you to discourse like a solid Scholler you would have seen how little ground you had for your taunting non-sence To say that a Rule is a Rule is a First Principle had not been held a just occasion of giggling much less had you been so indiscreet as to parallell my Conclusion Orall Tradition is the Rule of Faith with my Principle A Rule is a Rule or to put it upon mee that because I make my Terms in my Principle self-evidently Identicall therefore I ought to do so in my Conclusion too whereas your Conscience tells you and my whole Book informs the Reader I go about at least to prove it in so rigorous a method that as you fear to admit and so wave speaking to my Letter so you and your fellow Probable-Christians judge it your best play to laugh at it And 't is a cheap way if you had a Fool to deal with who would let such weak evasions serve your turn But let mee summ up my obligations to you at present You have manifestly falsify'd my Intention pretending I mean't to define whenas I expresly disown'd it Sure Footing p. 4. You omit to answer whether those Propositions or Predications of mine bee true or false and if true whether my Consequences bee right or no which was all your task at present you lay the gull you have rais'd for your Ground and thereupon cavill and flout all the way without sense reason or the least occasion You laugh at the nature of First Principles bewraying either your Ignorance of those things on which all solid Discourse can onely bee built or your Necessity of scorning such unfriendly Discoverers of your weakness which is the worst of all you make this unsavoury kind of Talk the first part of your Onset and the first tast you give your Reader of your Sincerity and depth of Reasoning And now Sir bee Judge your self whether the confessing your self thus amply to bee a disingenuous and weak Caviller bee not strangely obliging to your thankfull Servant Really Sir unless you will bee so good as to take the telling you candidly of your Faults to bee sufficient Payment I am exceedingly afraid I shall live and dy in your debt I could make good sport with the word measure in your definition for you will define to excell mee though none requires it of you but I dare not imitate you nor pretend to so great a degree of witty and pleasant Eloquence Onely I will beg leave to transcribe your words which introduce your definitions p. 4. Rejecting then his way of definition as inept and frivolous and no wayes tending to give a clearer notion of things I shall endeavour to explain a little better if I can the meaning of these Terms And certainly Sir a man may with a little Astrology prognosticate your victory for you combat nothing but a Chimera your own brain had coin'd In the mean time 't is another small Kindness to show your self so vain as to build your own triumphs on a voluntary misprision But right or wrong you are resolv'd to conquer and I must have patience 7. I hop't when I came to your second Section your Reason which as your Friend Mr. Stillingfleet who hummes your Book as loud as you can do his for your heart tells us runs throughout your Book would have given some respite to your Kindnesses and my Thanks for them but I discern in this and your following Section that your very Reason it self is compounded of Kindness and that your soberest impugnation of my discourse is made up of Groundless Cavills and which I am loath to say voluntary mistakes I am sorry to see it because I intended to throw aside the rubbish of your Book in this Letter that in my Answer I might better lay open the admirable Fabrick of your Discourse and have nothing there to do but to speak to solid points But in this disappointment I must behave my self as well as I can and your Goodness must help mee out by pardoning me if I omit to thank you for innumerable Kindnesses which are involv'd in your Rational performances till God gives me health and leasure 8. You are pleas'd to honour me with a very loud and heavy Calumny all over your Book as reviling Scripture vilifying disgracing it and what not Now Sr I use still to distinguish in Scripture the Sence of it from the Outward Letter which distinction if you
admit not I have no more to do but to alledge experience confest by all that many Sects who have the outward Letter inform it with different Sences which evidently argues a Divisibility or Distinction between that Letter and it's Sence Admitting then this Distinction and that the Sence of words is the Soul of them I cannot allow that Letter with any propriety to be called Gods word unless inform'd and enlivened with Gods Sence but onely dead Characters for sincerely Sr I never saw a Bible creep about and move it self that I should call it that is the paper and characters Living Now taking those Letters in complexion with Gods Sence and as inform'd by it I challenge your utmost spight which most of your book especially the end of this Section shows to be very bitter against me whether you ever read any man give a higher respect to those Oracles then my self See my words Sure-Footing p. 40. 146. which you might have had the Candour to acknowledge And as for the Author of Rushworths Dialogues whom you accuse of the same crimes I know not whether you will take my word or no but I assure those who will that when on occasion I was moving him to write a Comment on the Books of the New Testament he shook his head and reply'd Ah Sr do you know what you ask They are so full of profound heavenly sence that 't is beyond the wit of man to declare it without injuring it assuring me it was to sublime a task and required such perfection of Science especially Divinity that he durst not undertake it I challenge you therefore as you hope to bee held an honest man to show mee any one expression in all my writings where I speak of the Letter of Scripture in Complexion with it's Sence which onely is truly Gods word otherwise then with highest reverence nay of that very Letter as manag'd by any method of arriving at a Certain and determinate Sence of it but with respect For otherwise the meer Letter of Scripture quoted by the Devill and taken in his sence is the Devills Word not Gods and for the same reason the same Letter cited by you to signify your Sence is your Word though you tell your Auditors boldly that all is Gods Word you talk out of the Pulpit unless you first make Evident you adhere to a Certain method of interpreting it right which you shall never evince nay Certainer Solider then is the living Voice and Practice of the Church Essentiall which you so laugh at and would perswade your Readers to renounce and disbeleeve it to adhere to your Grammatical Quibbling Criticisms So that all your anger at us in reality springs hence that we will not let Your Word bee taken for Gods and honour'd forsooth and reverenc't with a sacred and Divine veneration Hence all this heat and foam of ill language And good reason for this one point of not permitting your private Interpretations of Scripture that is your Word to be held Gods so deeply concerns your Copy-hold that if this cheat bee once discover'd your self all the Books you write nay all your whole Profession signifies just nothing This short and plain Discourse once understood by our Readers as I hope it will your fierce Calumny against mee as a Blasphemous person devolves to this that you venerate your own Talent or Fancy in sencing the Letter of Scripture as a most Sacred thing nay place it in stead of the Holy Ghost who first dictated that Sence to the Divine Writers And can you do mee a greater Kindness than to discover this and bee so highly concern'd for it 9. You tell the Reader p. 13. that whatever I attribute to Scripture for fashion's sake or say you to avoid Calumny with the vulgar as hee sayes very ingeniously in this Explication of the 15th Corollary nevertheless 't is plain that according to his own Hypothesis hee cannot but look upon it as perfectly useless and pernicious By which words you would make mee acknowledge I attribute nothing to Scripture but to avoyd Calumny with the vulgar whereas in the place you cite there is no such matter but only that some of our Controvertists not I condescended to the Protestants sleight-way of quibbling out of Scripture lest they should calumniate them to desert Scripture it self But this is your usuall sincerity 10. You quoted after you have discours't as if there could bee no use of Scripture besides making it the Rule of Faith And that it is intolerably pernicious according to his Hypothesis is plain because every silly upstart heresy fathers it self upon it and then quote for these words Sure-footing p. 40. But look there and one may read I speak of Scripture only as ill-manag'd by you that is putting it without any distinction of the Persons in the peoples hands and leaving it to their Interpretation to make use of it for a Rule of Faith Now if Scripture as mis-manag'd bear the same notion with Scripture it self then you have dealt very honestly and done mee no Kindness in falsifying my intentions evident from my words in that very place and inveighing against mee accordingly As for your next citation that Scripture-words not senc't nor having any certain Interpreter under which notion I express my self to take them are waxen-natur'd that is appliable to diverse sences 't is so beat out by manifest experience that 't is beyond Cavill to confute it and the very Disputes between Iohn Biddle and the Protestants is sufficient to evince it But your Candour is pleased to confound Scripture's Letter taken as unsenc't with the same Letter as taken with it's true Sence that is taken as God's Word and that Letter as taken without any Certain Interpreter with the same Letter as certainly interpreted and then who so abhominable miscreants as the poor Papists who must bee forc't to say not what themselves in reality say but what their disingenuous though even therein kind Adversaries will needs have them say 11. Your third Section tells us that you are much puzled for Instances of Traditions Followers differing in Faith and you are so put to it that you cannot I mean you will not distinguish between the Head of our Church acting as a Definer of Faith or Proceeder upon Tradition and acting as a prudent Governour Please then to take notice how this Affair of Censuring Books is manag'd Diverse Books perhaps of twenty severall Authors are order'd to bee read over by some Divines and their Judgments concerning them to bee given in which they do The Chief Officers of the Church perhaps have twenty other things to handle that very day and Themselves have neither leasure to peruse the Books nor discuss the Propositions which coming clad in a Theologicall dress would in Prudence require a great deal of deliberation ere any of them were expresly and particularly to bee declar'd against with it's peculiar Censure All that the nature of their Circumstances permits
Predicate being the very same notion no other middle notion could come between them by connexion with which they might bee shown connected with one another You remember them I suppose it was they that made you and your Friends such sport in your Book Practicall Self-evidence is that which wee are not thus imbu'd with by nature through the common light of Understanding nor yet is it acquir'd by rationall Discourses for this is Evidence by-deduction not Self-evidence but that which is stoln into us as it were at unawares by a common converse with things in this world which all mankind in a manner even those who are very rude are acquainted with Examples of the former are if you have done laughing A Rule is a Rule Faith is Faith also A whole or a part and more is more than a part or is a part and more Examples of the later for your better satisfaction I propose three or four One shall bee that in a square space 't is a neerer way to go from one corner to that which is opposite by the Diameter than to go by the two sides Another shall bee that things look less afar off and bigger neerer-hand A third shall bee that abstracting from madness 't is impossible Mr. T. or any other such you see how kind I am to you should take for his Text The Fool hath said in his heart there is no God and at the same time and in the same circumstances things stand now in England should preach Atheism and endeavour to perswade them out of that very Text there is no God The last shall bee the Existence of Q. Elizabeth or K. Henry the 8th Now I affirm that all these are Practically-self-evident for it was not by virtue of Speculative discourses the vulgar arriv'd to the Knowledge of these and such like things as is evident by this that they know not how to prove these or give an account of their assent by way of evident discourse but by virtue of the common knowledges of things in the world they are acquainted with Now what is thus self-evident is so far from being impossible to bee evidenc't Speculatively that 't is the proper task of Learned men by which I mean not those tedious mighty men of Talk who think it an excellent confutation of Sence to cavill at words and Expressions to look into Nature and discover or if you bee not offended demonstrate what were the proper Causes which wrought thus after a naturall manner that Effect call'd Certainty in rationall Souls as to all the aforesaid particulars which found they will appear to bee the mediums fit to demonstrate that Effect That this is so in the two first Examples you are so well skilled in Euclid the mathematicks though one Prophet T. say's I have not read him as to know that notwithstanding this Practical-self-evidence all mankind has of them Mathematicians notwithstanding go about to demonstrate them speculatively without fearing to do a needless action out of the nature of Quantity as I make account I could demonstrate the 4th the 3d. too out of the nature of Man or out of this if you please that a man is a man or a rationall Creature that is a Thing that acts not if hee have the use of Reason without a motive To come nearer home I concieve that 't is to all unprejudic't and unpreoccupated Understandings as are all Catholikes who have not their Faith from skill but by the naturall way of Education Self-evident Practically that the Doctrine deliver'd now as taught by Christ and his Apostles by such as profess to have it by way of Tradition or uninterrupted Succession from them is truly their Doctrine or that the Certainty of Traditions conveying down matters of Fact is practically-self-evident and thence I proceed to look speculatively into the Causes of such an Assurance and so demonstrate it Which when I go about I discover that besides what ascertain'd Humane Tradition in witnessing the Existence of Henry the 8th or any other matter of Fact infinite Advantages were found in Christian Tradition enabling it to bring down the first-preach't Doctrine above what was found in them But I expatiate too far I hope by this Sir you see at length what my whole Book ayms at though good man you were so taken up with cavilling at little wordish Exceptions you spy'd it nor before that is to demonstrate by way of Speculation what I conceiv'd before to bee self-evident practically you see also at the same time how infinitely you oblige mee by professing your Ignorance of this point for in so doing you profess withall that you are utterly Ignorant of what my whole Book meant And are not you rarely qualify'd to bee an Impugner of my Book who are so perfectly to seek in knowing what 's the main end it drives at Is it not evident hence that your endeavours to confute mee can never go to the bottom of the difficulty but onely talk superficially that is wordishly and withall mistakingly to some passages in it Surely plain reason tells us in every ordinary affair that if one man understands not the main end the other ayms at however hee may talk prettily and express himself in good language yet hee can never speak home and to the purpose And as this is plain à priori from it's proper Cause your Ignorance of my main intent so you have abundantly demonstrated the same à posteriori in your whole Book which no where as I hope to show you hereafter begins at the bottom but is wholly made up of a great many aiery gay prettinesses such as best befits one who mocks at Evidence and Demonstration But 't is no matter your Friend Mr. Stillingfleet will extoll you for it the more and the Generality of your party who are accustom'd and educated by you to loose sermonary Discourses will like it the better whereas had you profest the way of Evidence you had been character'd by him as monstrously opinionated of your self and that kind of Readers your onely admirers would not have understood you 14. Your second Part treats about the Properties of the Rule of Faith and whether they agree solely to Orall Tradition I assign'd seven of which you are pleas'd to mistake quite no fewer than all But I must not here take notice too much of your Reason but of your Kindnesses contradistinguisht by your Friend Mr. Stillingfleet to your Reasons that is which are Irrationall You tell mee p. 57. that I might have learn'd something from the same Authour from whom I borrow'd my Chief Properties of the Rule of Faith if I had but had the patience to have consider'd his Explication of them Surely learned Sir you have great skill in Judiciary Astrology or else you deal with Lilly and Booker or perhaps have an inchanted Glass which discovers to you all I do in my study For you know exactly all I do there nay which is yet more wonderfull all I do
Faith being confessedly the means to arrive at the Points of Faith and the Sence or meaning of Scripture being the Points of Faith it follows unavoidably that the Protestants must say if they will speak sence that the Rule of Faith must bee the means to bring them to the Sence or meaning of Scripture for which according to them the Letter of Scripture as significative being sufficient 't is consequent they can onely mean by Rule of Faith the Letter of Scripture as significative of God's Sence or Points Faith I beseech you Sir what say you to this Discourse Do you answer it or show that if you take Scripture in any other Sence for Rule of Faith than as thus consider'd you do not confound the Rule of Faith with the Points of Faith Not a jot Nor is it your fashion to speak to my Reasons or Consequences Thus you answer'd my First Discourse the most solid and most Fundamentall part of my Book Deforming the plain sayings I built on for Definitions denying my conclusions in a following Section and saying something against them but not a word I can find any where against the Proofs which inferr'd them deduc't at large there for 14. § § together that is from § 2. to the end Your way of answering is generally when you are gravell'd with the Reason to bring some ridiculous Parallell then laugh heartily and mock at that and so discountenance the other But here to do you right you bring two very good ones but the comfort is you understood them not to bee such else wee should not have had them which you put a little oddly and then triumph and think your self victorious Pray Sir lend me your Parallells a while to manage The first of them is found p. 62. concerning which I thus discourse Taking the Statute-book for the means to convey to us the Sence of that Book or the Laws I must still say you cannot mean by Statute-book the Sence of that Book or the Laws that is that Book as conjoyn'd with it's Sence for so it would signify that the same Thing is a means to it self that is is before and after it self you must onely mean then by Statute-book thus consider'd the Letter of that book as yet unsenc't or contradistinguisht from the same book as conjoyn'd with its sence that is the Letter of that Book as Significative Thus I conceive it perfectly parallell to mine and withall very rationall But you make it amount to this p. 62. l. 13. That a Book cannot convey to a man the Knowledge of any matter because if it did it would convey to him the Thing to bee known The later part of which is true though I percieve you know it not for these words Knowledge of a matter involves in their signification the thing Known as if you reflect on your own words Matter and Thing you will quickly discover But the Sophistry lies in this that when you say a Book cannot convey c. you equivocate in the word Book which I contend must either be taken for the Letter of it in conjunction with the Sence which is the thing known and then it cannot thus accepted bee a means of arriving at the Knowledge of the Thing or the Thing as known for then it would signify as much as if one should say the Letter with the thing known is the means of arriving at the thing known or else it must bee taken for the Letter as Significative onely or without the Sence and so it may bee conceiv'd a way of arriving at that Sence 't is judg'd apt to signify But Sir your contending here against a thing so Evident has a great deal of reason for it you would have the outward Letter of Scripture confounded with the Sense of it that those who hear you quote the Letter may thee fool'd to imagine you have still the Sense aoo whereas should these bee known to bear distinction it would bee very obvious to question whether you speak any thing of God's Word or no how much soever you have the outward Letter in your mouth and pen Which reflexion alone if it were considerately weigh'd would spoil all your writing and preaching too For thus go your First Principles The outward Letter lying in a book must first bee call'd God's Word and held so plain that it cannot bee misunderstood and then the Sence you give it must needs bee held God's Sence which politick Principles lay'd I see not what you are inferiour to those whom the Holy Ghost inspir'd and your sayings are to have the same force if the plot take as the words of a Prophet or Evangelist And who would not bee angry fume and take on against a Discourse which is likely to devest you of so considerable and beneficiall a Prerogative Your second Parallell applies my Distinction concerning Scripture to Orall Tradition for you have a speciall Faculty of your own in making men contradict themselves thus you us'd a whole cluster of our Authours p. 119 120. and as for poor mee if you take mee underhand I can scarce speak a word consonantly Now Sir wee are thus far agreed and better Friends than you took us to bee that I allow your Parallell to a tittle and stick not at all to grant what you would force upon mee p. 63. that When I say Orall Tradition is the Rule of Faith I can onely mean by Orall Tradition the Living Voice and Practice of the Church as apt to signify the Sence of Forefathers and not the Sence or those Points of Faith which they are apt to signify Also that those Words and Practices taken formally as the means to know Points of Faith are contradistinguish't from that Sence or those Points and oppos'd to it relatively as a means is oppos'd to an End and therefore taken as consider'd in this abstraction and contradistinction as a Means to cause their actuall Sence in us I say those Words and Practises are without Sence in the same manner as a Means taken formally for such is without the End and excludes it from it's notion All this I voluntarily grant and least you should conceit your strong Reason has brought mee to it I let you know I ever took them so formerly See Sure-footing p. 41. 2d Edition which I still intend to quote By Orall or Practicall Tradition wee mean a delivery down from hand to hand by Words and a constant course of frequent and visible Actions conformable to those Words of the Sence and Faith of Forefathers Where you see I make Sence or Faith the thing deliver'd and Words and Actions the Way of delivering which therefore must needs exclude one another formally Yet you think you have gotten a notable advantage against mee by this Parallell Discourse telling your Reader p. 63. When hee hath answer'd this Argument hee will have answer'd his own A shrewd Opponent who confutes mee by putting mee to answer an Argument thinking it would puzzle me grievously which is
manner is compounded of putting tricks upon your Adversaries that is putting their sayings upon such accounts they never intended then impugning your own fictions 'T is not on the impossibility of any going out of us nor meerly because whenany one is out of our Church hee is not in it wee ground the Necessity of our Churches Unity but in this that her nature and Constitution is so fram'd that shee can admit no division in her Bowells but keeps her self distinguisht from Aliens If any one recede from Faith it must bee by not hearing the present Churches living voice teaching him points which the Knowledge Practice and Expressions of the Teachers determins and make Evident what they are whence his disbeleef if exprest is an Evident matter of Fact which is most apt to make a plain distinction between the disbeleever and the Beleevers and an Evidence beyond Cavill for the Church Governours to proceed upon This done as likewise in the case of high disobedience against Church-Laws or Governours shee Excommunicates that is solemnly separates the Schismaticall Offender from the Obedient Faithfull Hence those Faithfull look upon him as a Rebell or Outlaw or as our Saviour expresses as a Heathen or Publican no Church-officer admits him to Sacraments but upon his pennance and Satisfaction nor any Son of the Church will communicate with him in Sacred duties Pray you Sir is this the Temper of your Church of England Your Rule is the Letter of Scripture as conceiv'd significative of Gods word and this to private understandings Again you say all necessary points of Faith are plain in it nay that nothing is fundamentally necessary but what is plain there Hence all that hold the Letter to bee plainly Expressive of Gods Sence and intend to hold to what they conceive plain there whether Socinians Anabaptists Independents or whatever other faction all hold to your Rule of Faith and so are all Protestants For if you would ty any of these to any determinable points you force them from the Rule of Faith Scripture as seeming plain to them and would instead thereof bring them to a reliance on your Judgement And if you would punish them for not doing it you cannot evidence their Fault by way of matter of Fact that so you may proceed upon it for as long as they profess their intention to hold to what seems plain to them in Scripture and that your Text seems less plain to them there than their own you ought not to proceed against them Ecclesiastically without disannulling your avowed Rule of Faith And your carriage executes accordingly neither using Church-discipline against them for Tenets nor yet for denying or disobeying your Goverment Episcopacy though held by you divinely instituted When did you put any distinction by any solemn Ecclesiastical declaration between an Anabaptist Presbyterian Socinian c. and your selves When did you excommunicate them warn the purer Protestants by any Publick Ecclesiasticall Act not to joyn with them in Sacred Offices but to look upon them as Aliens Might not any of them come to receive the Communion if hee would or has any discipline past upon him to debar him from being admitted None that wee see Your Party then in indeed no Ecclesiasticall body cohering by Unity of Tenets or Government but a Medly rather consisting of men of any tenet almost and so bears division disunion and Schism that is the Formal cause of non-Entity of a Church in it's very Bowells These two flams of yours are Sir the Favours you have done my Friends and I can onely tell you in a country complement I thank you as much for them as if you had done them to my self Seeing your Reason begin to play it's part bravely in the following part of your Book I thought I had done my duty of Thanking but I percieve one main Engin your Reason made use of was to make mee perpetually contradict my self And this you perform'd by singling a few words out of my Book from their fellows introducing them in other circumstances and so almost in every Citation falsifying my Intentions and this purposely as will bee seen by this that you practis'd designe and Artifice in bringing it about This obliges mee in stead of making an End to return back and to show how sincerly you have us'd mee in almost all your Citations I omit your false pretence that I mean't to define contrary to my express words You tell your Reader p. 11. That if any presume to say this Book Scripture depends not on Tradition for it's Sence then the most scurrilous language is not bad enough then are those Sacred writings but Ink variously figur'd in a Book quoting for those words App. 4th p. 319. But if wee look there not a word is there found of it's depending or not depending on Tradition for it's Sence nor of making that the Cause why I us'd those words you object cite for it but onely that whereas my Lord of Downs sayes his Faith has for its object the Scriptures I tell him that since he means not by the word Scripture any determinate Sence which is the formall parts of words hee must mean the Characters or Ink thus figur'd in a Book as is evident there being nothing imaginable in them besides the matter and the form which every Schollar knows compound the thing This being then the plain tenour of my discourse there and not the least word of Tradition sencing Scripture Whatever the Truth of the Thing is 't is evident you have abus'd my words as found in the place you cite My Citation p. 12. which abstracts from what security wee can have of those parts of Scripture which concern not Faith you will needs restrain to signifie no security at all either of Letter or Sence which is neither found in my words nor meaning How you have abus'd my words to avoid Calumny with the Vulgar cited by you p. 13. as also the former of those cited p. 14. I have already shown § 9 and 10. P. 17. You quote my words 'T is certain the Apostles taught the same Doctrine they writ whence you infer they writ the same Doctrine they taught Which your introducing Discourse would make to signifie an Equality of Extent in Writing and Tradition by saying I grant this Doctrine which signifies there the First deliver'd Doctrine was afterwards by the Apostles committed to writing Whereas whoever reads my 29th Cor. will see I can onely mean by the word same Doctrine a not-different Doctrine Whatever the truth of the point is this shows you have an habituall imperfection not to let the words you cite signifie as the Authour evidently meant them but you must bee scruing them to serve your own turn You quote mee p. 36. to say that Primitive Antiquity learn'd their Faith by another method a long time before many of those Books were universally spread amongst the Vulgar The summe of your Answer is that when the Apostles who did miracles
were dead Writing then became needfull But that in those Circumstances Orall Tradition was a sufficient way of conveying a Doctrine What I note is that you ended your citation at the words before those Books were universally spread amongst the Vulgar but had you added what follow'd immediately to compleat that period much less the Catalogue collected and acknowledged you had been put to confess too that Tradition was a sufficient way for diverse Ages after the Apostles were dead which had been little favourable to your Tenet I complain then that by citing mee by halves as you do frequently you slip the answering better half of my Arguments and here particularly as appears by the words much less that part in which I put the most force P. 41. You put mee to say expresly that Tradition is the best way imaginable to convey down such Laws to us Now if by the word such you onely meant such as it concerns every man to bee skilfull in and had so exprest it you had done well for 't is my position but you had brought an ill-resembling Instance of Magna Charta and make mee seem to allow your Instance and to affirm Tradition is the best way to bring down Magna Charta as appears by your words Mr. S. saith expresly it is but how truly I appeal to the Experience and the wisedome of our Law-givers who seem to think otherwise making my word such mean such as Magna Charta which is far from my meaning in regard I judge not Magna Charta a thing in which 't is every man's particular concern to bee skilfull in but Lawyers onely whom others trust few in England but they being thoroughly acquainted with the Laws found there Take your own Liberty Sir in making Parallells 't is my Advantage you should you pick out such aukward ones but when you have made them do not disingenuously put them upon mee and quote mee to say them expresly Thus you use my words Why may not hee mistrust his own Eyes which p. 16 and 17. were apply'd by mee to the business of mistaking or not mistaking in transcribing perfectly a whole Book or correcting the Press in which we daily experience miscarriage but you apply these words to your own senceless Parallell of seeing the City of Rome p. 83 and then by such an application endeavour to make them seem ridiculous as they must needs for you had discourst ridiculously and by making them part of your Discourse and not taking them as any part of mine had made them so too I could instance in many others of this nature but I am too long already P. 61. being to state the point you alledge my words Sure-footing p. 13. That the Protestants cannot by Scriptures mean the Sence of them but the Book that is such or such Characters not yet senc't or interpreted And there you stop my immediately following words explaining my meaning are these that is such and such Characters in a Book with their Aptness to signifie to them assuredly God's mind or ascertain them of their Faith And this Explication you omit which had been nothing had you not made an ill use of that omission but your Cavills afterwards and the loud out-cries in your Book in many places of a senceless Book my Ignorance of your Tenet what not are all grounded upon your own fly omitting those words in which I exprest your Tenet to bee that those Characters were significative of your Faith I wonder what else you would have a Rule of Faith to bee but a Mean's to signifie to you God's Sence or the Faith Christ taught those inspir'd Writers It was one of my requests in my Letter that wee might agree to acknowledge what was Truth in one another's Books but you use all the Arts Insincerity can suggest to deprave wrest or diminish my words rather than I should appear to speak reason in any thing All must bee monstrous in your Adversary when your pregnant Fancy and dextrous pencil come to delineate it which shews indeed much crafty wit but I doubt the Reader will think it argues not too much Honesty I affirm'd Sure-footing p. 17. that the numerous Comments writ upon the Scripture and the infinite Disputes about the Sence of it even in most concerning points as in that of Christ's Divinity beat it out so plain to us that this to wit to find out a Certain Sence of Scripture by their Interpretation is not the task of the Vulgar that 't is perfect phrenzy to deny it which you quote p. 85. and diverse other places leaving out still my words and sence that this is not the task of the Vulgar upon which that whole § proceeds and impugning it accordingly See your own words p. 86. making mee say The Protestants cannot bee certain of the true Sence of it as if Protestants and Vulgar were the same notion Also p. 86. Hee tells us say you the numerous Comments upon Scripture are an Evidence that no man can bee Certain of the true Sence of it This improves it into a very ample Falsification for the word no man excludes all Catholikes too and indeed all the world however proceeding to interpret it whereas I onely engage in the place cited against the Vulgar And after you have ended you Confute all built on your own omission of those important words you single out after your old fashion two or three of my words 't is perfect phrenzy to deny it and call it a hot phrase whereas 't is very luke-warm taken in the occasion I spoke it namely that the Vulgar could not bee certain of the right Interpretation of Scripture since even Learned Commentators so strangely differ'd about it How you will clear your self of this kind Insincerity without casting a mist before men's eyes that they cannot read right I cannot in your behalf imagin P. 104 You quote mee twice as endeavouring to prove that men may safely rely on a generall and uncontroll'd Tradition Which though you pretend not my words yet I count it an injury to impose upon mee such a Sence Uncontroll'd joyn'd to Tradition is such another Epithet as Sufficient joyn'd by you to Certainty I who contend for the absolute Certainty of Faith would say Uncontrollable not Uncontroll'd for a thing may be Uncontroll'd meerly because it had the good Fortune that none had occasion to look into it and so controll it whereas nothing can bee Uncontrollable but by virtue of it's Grounds 't is built on preserving it from a Possibility of ever being controll'd Your intent in producing those two Citations from mee is as you declare it p. 105. is to show the Unhappiness of my Demonstrations that in order to demonstrate the uncertainty of Books and Writings must suppose all those Principles to bee uncertain which I take to bee self-evident and unquestionable when I am to demonstrate the Infallibility of Orall Tradition A hard case yet it will bee harder to come of for you
contend first that my Demonstration would conclude too much viz. as you tell us p. 164 that if it were true it would bee impossible any Christian should turne Apostate or Heretick or that any Christian should live wickedly I marry this were a rare Demonstration indeed But how comes my demonstration to bee thus guilty of a plot to make all the world Saints or rather of drawing after it a Conclusion so extravagant By virtue of a direct Falsification both of my words and Sence by cogging in a word little in show but very large in Sence namely the monosyllable All making my Principle run thus that the greatest hopes and fear are apply'd to the minds of all Christians which you put down here in the Italick letter the same you quoted my words in I beseech you Sir review my own words put down lately by your self p. 161. 162. at what time you made that good resolution and see if any such word bee there But what 's most materiall is this Let the Reader survey your following discourse which aims to confute mee and hee will see'tis wholly and solely built on this word All so that your own Falsification is still the First Principle which gives the Strength and Life to your Confutation What use you make of it may bee seen p. 164 l. 8. That any Christian c. Ib. l. 12. That any Christian should live wickedly l. 18. That any Christian should turn Apostate l. 26. But all Christians have those Arguments of Hopes and Fears strongly apply'd l. ult 'T is necessary all Christians Again p. 165. l. 3. which I desire the Reader to note that hee may see how bold you are in your imposing things upon mee If these causes bee put in all the Faithfull actually causing as say you Mr. S. saith expresly in his Grounds Whereas I assure the Reader Mr. S. sayes expresly no such thing But to proceed p. 165. l. 8. 9. T is impossible there should bee any defection c. l. 14. T is impossible any single Christian. P. 167. It concludes there can bee no Hereticks or Apostates c. This dear Sir you use mee First you put upon mee other words and meaning and then overthrow most powerfully not what I said or meant but what you had counterfeited mee to do which victorious way of confuting runs thorough the better half your Book You affirm p. 165. that I liberally acknowledge in other places this to wit that 't is impossible any single Christian should either totally Apostatize or fall into Heresie is a genuine Consequence from my Principles Surely Sir your great plot is to have mee thought a direct mad man or Frantick For never did any man moderately in his wits advance a Position and pretend to demonstrate it which is contrary to the Eye sight and frequent Experience of the whole world nay write a whole Chapter as I did Sure-footing p. 65. how Heresies come in and yet maintain in the same Book no man can turn Heretick that is that no Heresy could ever come in Well but what are those other places which must prove mee a liberal Acknowledger of such an unheard of Paradox You assign four places p. 165 166. The first you introduce mee thus Hee tells us and then you quote my words from Sure-footing p. 54. That it exceeds all the power of Nature abstracting from the Cases of madness and violent disease to blot the Knowledges of this Doctrine out of the Soul of one single Beleevor I assure you Sir I tell you no such thing and that I have neither those words nor sense in my whole Book which makes mee doubt you did not so much as make a resolution here to set down my own words as you did formerly and I wish for your own sake you did not resolve the contrary My Doctrine is that the Knowledges of this or Christ's Doctrin may be blotted not onely out of the Soul of one single Beleever but all Beleevers in case it bee laid there onely opinionatively or imprinted slightly by a fleeting Sermon or wordish discourse apt to go in at the one ear and out at the other My words in that place cited are these It exceeds all the power of nature abstracting from madness and violent disease to blot knowledges THUS FIXT out of the Soul of one single believer And what mean the words thus fixt 't is told you in the same p. 54. in Sure-footing that 't is by so oft repeated Sensations which in the foregoing page where that discourse begins is explained to bee by Impressions upon the Senses not made once but frequently and in most many times every day and that to make those more express and apt to bee taken notice of their lives are to bee fram'd by the Precepts they hear and conformable Examples they see All this is impli'd in the words thus fixt as found in that place which therefore being very prudent in your generation you demurely omitted else it had seem'd no great Paradox which 't is your constant endeavour to make mee still speak that no one man unlesse mad or much diseased can forget what hee daily experiences in others others and practices himself But grant all true you pretend to and that every man must needs have or retain the knowledge of Christs doctrin however imprinted yet do I any where say that no man can act against knowledge and so relinquish Tradition and by that means turn Apostate or Heretick when you find that Position in mee cite it and let us see it otherwise barely to alledge mee saying they cannot but know it argues not I say they must necessarily follow it The last of those four Citations which you bring for this point p. 166. immediately follows this first now discust in Sure footing p. 54. whence it concerns the same matter namely the Indelibleness of Knowledges thus fixt out of the Soul of one single man as is Evident to him that reads the passage in it's proper place though false dealing bee so naturall to you you assure the Reader p. 166. that in the full career of my bumbast Rhetorick I deliver it that is as you express it a little before the Impossibility that Tradition should fail in any one single person roundly without fear or wit whereas neither there nor in that whole Discourse is there one sylable concerning Traditions being adher'd to or not adher'd to this Subject beginning the next Discourse in these words All this is well may some say in case Tradition had been ever held to but onely of it's Certainty or Regulative virtue founded on naturall Knowledges imprinted by frequented Sensations in such a manner as is impossible to bee blotted out in one single Testifier or part of Tradition I am loath to think or say too hardly of you Sir onely I say 't is strange a meer Chance should produce so constant an Effect of perverting my Evident Sense oft times words too in each passage It may bee
of such things consists in a kind of Undulation So that now Corrupt Nature when shee finds her self a little more free follows her own tendency or propension and bears downwards and now again Supernatural and Gracious Assistances with which the Wisdome of the Eternal Father had furnish't his Church superabundantly being shock't and excited even by this contrary motion of Nature begin to put themselves forwards into an opposit motion and strive more vigorously to raise themselves upwards For example Disciplin which is to apply Christian motives by tract of time grows remiss in the Church hence decay of virtue dissoluteness of life addiction to material goods and consequently Ignorance creep in by insensible degrees into diverse parts so that it happens there are multitudes of corrupt Members in the Church and regardless of any duty who therefore want nothing but a fair occasion and one to lead them to break all ties of Virtue and Obedience and run into the utmost Extravagancies Nor can wee think but in the course of such a vast variety as is found in a World now and then there will bee found amongst those wicked men some notable fellow of a subtle wit a bold spirit and a plausible tongue so circumstanc't that hee can hope for Impunity by the friendship of some great person and so dares give way to his proud desire of having followers or his private spleen to renounce the Church's Faith and shake of the yoak of her disciplin Hereupon the rampires of Government and disciplin being forc't and violently broken down presently like a Torrent or Inundation all those whose hearts were corrupted with spiritual pride or other vices like brute beasts leap after one another out of the Fold of the Church and threaten to trample down all that 's Sacred Reviling the Church and laying to her charge all the faults found in particular persons as if they were Effects of her Doctrin though their own knowledge tells them otherwise and make use of failings in particular Governours to renounce and extirpate the Government it self On the contrary those good Catholikes who by this Trial are made manifest stir up their zeal both in behalf of their Faith and their Governours instituted by Christ and detest the vicious Lives and Pride of those Rebels the Parents of such a horrid Revolt The Governours alarm'd begin to look into the Cause of this distraction and to provide wholesome Remedies They call Councils Generall ones if need bee to straiten afresh Ecclesiasticall Disciplin enjoyning the Officers of the Church to stand every one to his Charge They take order to promote worthy Officers and to advance Ecclesiastical Learning they recommend afresh by their grave Authority the points of Faith to the Ecclesia Credens as the depositum preserv'd uninterruptedly in the Church from Christ and his Apostles and establish them in a particular beleef of them nay make these more intelligible and rational by Explicating them more at large or if the Heretical party involve and confound them in ambiguous words they define and declare them in language most properly suting to the sence writ in the hearts of the Faithfull and lastly anathematize the Revolters if they prudently judge their contumacy irreducible that so the remaining Body may concieve a just horror and aversion against that Rebellious party and bee preserv'd uninfected with their contagious Communion All which Advantages and much more are visibly found in the Change made in the Church by that neverenough-renowned Synod the Council of Trent occasion'd by Luthers fall Nor is this all for the Faithfull not onely grow more virtuous by the reformation of Church-disciplin but even by the Calumnies of their Adversaries Again the learned party in the Church are excited to far greater industry and consequently Knowledge by the insulting opposition of the Churches enemies whose disgracing points of Faith for absurd and contradictions stir up divines to show their conformity with acknowledg'd naturall Truths as does their calling into question the Ground and Certainty of Faith open the understandings of those who defend it to look into the Causes on which Gods sweet and strong Providence has founded it's infallible Perpetuity and so demonstrate it A task no Heretick durst ever attempt finding Principles failing him to begin with that is Causes laid by Gods Providence to build his Congregation on whence all they can do is to talk gaily and plausibly about the Conclusions themselves and laugh at Principles From which discourse is Evident that by occasion of a Heresy which purifies the Church of all her ill humors and rectifies and makes sound what remains Tradition renews as it were it's Youth and recovers it's vigor whence also it must needs Propagate and extend it self still unto more and more Subjects as is also daily Experienc't 'T is seen also that the abundance of corrupt Humors begets Heresy at First for multitudes fall away then wheras afterwards scarce two or three in any Age desert the Catholick Banner It appears also that Secular interest or desire of Liberty and Spirituall Pride not zeal of Truth begun and continu'd the breach I mean in the Leaders for afterwads they are content to remain where they are without troubling themselves to propagate the Truth to other Nations nay they have let the large region of Nubia run to wrack for as Mr. T. to make us smile tells us p. 174. Alvarez sayes it was for want of Ministers and never sent so much as one single Protestant Parson to assist them It shows also how unconcern'd the Catholik Churches Stability is in all the Heresies that have or shall fall since they onely tend to confirm and radicate more deeply in the hearts of the Faithfull the Points of Faith they renounc't to occasion reformation of disciplin and so to purify their virtue Lastly it shows how Tradition or the Delivery of Faith by the Living Voice and Practice of the Catholik Church is so immovably planted by the hand of the Almighty that it loses nothing by all the Actuall Deserters of it that ever have been but is by that means onely prun'd of it's saples branches to shoot out in due season livelier and farther But to return my Friend I hope Sir you will pardon mee if I have rather taken pains to open your understanding a little in acquainting it more fully with that part of my doctrin is totally mistook than to proceed with your Faults in lieu of which I here pardon you all the Injuries you have done my meaning or words in neer the other half your book that is from p. 176. to p. 300. though I see them many and some of them very gross ones The Testimony part I would not here neglect because as you shall see shortly they concern not my book as any proofs of the point and so are improper to bee allow'd room in my future Answer which designes nothing but against your reasons You are resolv'd to bee brief in them and I hope
words Authority of the Catholick Church mean the Book of Scriptures Or can I desire more then this Father offers mee in express terms or a greater Testimony that you are to seek for an Answer to it then the strange Evasion you substitute instead of a reply Especially if wee take the Testimony immediatly following which from the best establisht Seats of the Apostles even to this very day is strengthen'd by the Series of Bishops succeeding them and by the Assertion of so many nations Is here the word Tradition pretended Indifferent and apt to bee taken ambiguously and not rather Assertions of so many nations or Consent of nations and Authority of the Catholik Church of force to cause Faith and Assu rance which to demonstrate is the whole Endeavour of Sure-fooring The 5th is the same Fathers cited p. 137. The Faithfull do possess perseveringly a Rule of Faith common to little and great in the Church Is the word Church the same with the word Tradition or in danger of being ambiguous or as you say of the word Tradition p. 318. commonly us'd by the Fathers to signify to us the Scriptures The 6th is of St. Irenaeus All those who will hear Truth may at present perfectly discern in the Church the Tradition of the Apostles manifest in the whole world What means the world at present but that the Tradition of the Apostles is yet vigorous and fresh in the Church which remark had very unfitly suted with Scriptures The 7th and 8th are Tertullians Both say the same Sence that what is establisht as Sacred or profest at this present day in the Churches of the Apostles is manifestly deliver'd by the Apostles or a Tradition of the Apostles which is incompetent to Scripture it not being a Tradition or point delivered but the Delivery The last is of Chrysologus which has indeed the word Tradition but by the additionall words of the Fathers not left ambiguous but determin'd to unwritten Tradition For the Fathers according to you are not to give or diliver down the Sence of Scriptures it being plain of it self This Sir is the upshot of your skill in Notebook-learning the three first Testimonies from Scripture you answerd not mistaking quite what they were brought for the 4th you omitted You have given pittiful answers to eight from the Fathers and shufled off nine more without answer pleading you had given us a Key to open them which was never made for those locks By which I see you reserve your greatest Kindnesses like a right friendly man till the last You will not have the Councill of Trent make Tradition the onely Rule of Faith you had oblig'd mee had you answer'd my reason for it in my 4th note p. 145. 146. But this is not your way you still slip over my reasons all along as if none had been brought and then say some sleight thing or other to the Conclusion as if it had never been inferrd by mee but meerly gratis and rawly affirm'd I have explicated our Divines that seem to differ from mee herein Sure footing p. 187. 188. and the Council it self takes my part in it by defining and practising the taking the Sence of Scripture from that quod tenuit tenet Sanct a Mater Ecclesia which in this antecedency to Scriptures Sence can no where bee had but from Tradition You cavill at mee for not putting down the words in which that Councill declares it self to honour the Holy Scripture and Tradition with equall pious affection and reverence Why should I you see I was very short in all my allegations thence and rather touch't at them for Catholicks to read them more at large than transcrib'd them fully But how groundless your Cavill is may bee understood hence that I took notice of a far more dangerous point to wit it's putting the Holy Scriptures constantly before Tradition and show'd good reason why But you approve not even of any honour done to the Scriptures upon those Terms and your interest makes you wish that rather it's Letter and Sence both should remain uncertain than it should owe any thing to the Catholick Church You ask how an Apostle and Evangelist should bee more present by the Scripture ascertain'd as to words and Sence then by or all Tradition I answer because that Book is in that case Evident to bee peculiarly and adequately his whereas Orall Tradition was common to all and 't is doubtable what hand some of those Apostles or Evangelists might have had in the source of that which was lineally deriv'd to us Sir I wonder how you hit so right once as not to answer likewise the Testimony I brought p. 152. of the Catholick Clergy's adhering to Tradition in the â—ick of the breach you might as well have spoke to that as to the Council of Trent divers others But I perceive it had some peculiar difficulty as had divers of the neglected nine else your Genius leads you naturally to flie at any thing that has but the semblance or even name of a Testimony whereas unactive I stoop at no such game till I see certainly 't is worth my pains and I fear yours will scarce prove so THey come in play p. 320. And because they are huddled together here something confusedly it were not amiss to sort them under Dr. Pierce's Heads found Sure-footing p. 170. To the first Head which comprises those which are onely brought to vapour with belongs that of St. Hierom. p. 323. To the second Head which consists of those which are raw unapply'd and onely say something in common which never comes home to the point belong all those of Eusebius That of St. Chrysostome and St. Austin's p. 324. of Iustin and Theodoret p. 325. That of Hilary p. 327. of St. Basil. p. 328. of Chrysostom p. 328. and 329. and those of St. Austin in the same place Of Theoph. Alexandr p. 330. Theodoret p. 330. 331. The 2d and 3d. from Gerson p. 331. To the 4th that of St. Austin p. 325. To the 7th Head which comprises those which are false and signifie not the thing they are quoted for appertain that of Ireneus p. 326. of St. Austin St. Hierome and the 2d of Theoph. Alexandrinus p. 330. To the 8th consisting of those which labour of obscurity by an evidently ambiguous word that of Optatus p. 327. The first from Gerson p. 331. and that from Lyra p. 332. St. Cyprian's Testimony was writ by him to defend an Errour which both wee and the Protestants hold for such and therefore no wonder if as Bellarmin sayes more errantium ratiocinaretur hee discoursed after the rate of those that err that is assumes false Grounds to build his errour on Whence the inferring an acknowledg'd false Conclusion from it is an argument rather his Principle was not sound I know Sir you will fume at this usage of your Testimonies but with what reason For first you putting them down rawly without particularizing their force or import
not You know better than my self I never use to read the Fathers you can pronounce fearlesly that I never read Euclid and here you can tell to a hair where I borrow'd my Chief Properties of the Rule of Faith and that it was Dr. Holden ' s Analysis What Mephostophilus reveals these secrets to you But Sir I beg your pardon I will not put this gift of yours upon such a score you are a Divine and so no doubt know these things by the Spirit of Prophecy nor am I a little proud to know that so great a Prophet is so near related to mee by his Friendship and Kindnesses But Sir take heed even holy men and Prophets themselves have been deceiv'd sometimes I need not quote Scripture to you how a certain person offer'd to bee a lying Spirit in the mouth even of Prophets and as for your present Prophecy I do faithfully assure you that I never read a leaf in Dr. Holden's Analysis in my life nor knew till your Book told mee it hee treated at all of the Properties of the Rule of Faith The occasion of this neglect was that I was told hee went the way of Rushworth's Dialogues which I made account I comprehended sufficiently and so minded not to peruse it You see Sir what you gain by being persoually affrontive which you exceedingly affect in your Book to mee and others and so studiously endeavour it that to find occasions for it you stick not to say the most false and unjustifiable things rather than not humour that Infirmity of your Will Now your Kindness in this partinular carriage consists in this that you discover plainly a resolution to cavill though you engage your self by that means to assert things which may easily bee false and which 't is impossible for you to prove or justify were they true which signifies you are neither too civill over honest nor endow'd with any exceeding proportion of Prudence But Mr. Stillingfleet likes you never the less for it and perhaps will proclaim your praises the louder for your victory however atchiev'd by Stratagem Dolus an virtus 15. You are pleas'd p. 60. to Cavill that the words absolutely ascertainable to us are as you who are master of Language and so may say any thing deliver your self most contradictiously exprest And why because they import with respect to us without respect to us As if it were such an unheard of thing that the word absolutely should ofttimes signify perfectly as when wee say absolutely good an absolute Workman Scholar c. And then I beseech you inform mee what Contradiction there is in saying the Rule of Faith is perfectly ascertainable to us Besides you should as well have plac't the contradictiō in the words absolutely ascertainable For if it bee once sence that it is absolutely ascertainable it cannot bee ill to adde to us for the word ascertainable implies a respect to some or other On this occasion that I may not trouble my Reader often with such nitty Exceptions with which your Book abounds it were not amiss to reflect how industriously your friend Mr. Stillingfleet and you who as 't is most sit eccho mutuall praises to one another affect and pursue such empty cavills any misplac't word whether it happen through the Compositors letting it in in a wrong place or printing it whennot sufficiently blotted out in the originall any less propriety in an expression occasion'd by the hast I was in when I writ my Appendix against him which was sent to the press in loose Quarters of sheets any Metaphor which light unsutable to your Cavilling Genius as that of perching which makes your self verry jollyly merry any pretended degree of obscurity in a word as that of Regulate in stead of Rule any expression that sounds not roundly and tersely Rhetoricall in a book in which I meant no Rhetorick at all These and divers others such wordish Faults or no Faults 't is all one with you are judg'd mighty pieces of ignorance according to the genius of such aiery kind of Schollarship and great Triumphs made upon them Wheras I should rather wish to combat the inward meaning and sence of a discourse than it 's outward dress or manner of expression provided the manner of expressing wrong not that sence Hence I except mainly against the Titles of Mr. Stillingfleets and Mr. Tillotsons books It being both highly improper and abusive of the signification of words to call that a Rule which is Confessedly possible to be False that is which possibly has no power in it to rule at all and equally absurd to call that a Rationall Account of any thing which is built on no First that is Self-evident Principle without which no rationall discourse can subsist nor Conclusion bee deduc't as I showd lately § 5. Unless perhaps Mr. Stillingfleet takes Rationall as wee use the word reasonable when wee say a thing is reasonable strong that is wee hope it will hold but yet wee see not but it may break This is my way of excepting but were Mr. Tillotson to work upon the word Rationall 't is good luck hee is Mr. Stillingfleets dedicated and dedicating friend for otherwise t is forty to one he would have about with him And first he would have called the Title of his Book his Definition of it and then have fal'n foul with him for setting forth a Book to Englishmen and using the word Rationall which was neerer the Latin instead of the word Reasonable which was plain English and so more intelligible to his Readers But enough of these Fooleries 't is now high time I return to my Friend and his Kindnesses Your present one Sir which I acknowledge common to you and your Friend and you ought to applaud one another for it consists in this that by your magnifying and frequently insisting upon exceptions against my words not upon a Logical score because they are Equivocall or injure the Sence wee are discussing but upon a Grammaticall or Rhetoricall that is a Superficiall account in which the point under debate is no way concern'd is a very hearty acknowledgment to your Reader that you value the aiery gingling of words more than the solid substance of Sence which discovers you how much soever you have read noted and scribled to bee very Empty of true Learning or Science This is a reall Kindness Sir and I humbly thank you both for it Your second Section and some following ones for the main part of them speak nothing but pure Reason I mean in your way that is sophistically and knowingly deforming every passage you meet with Yet to do you right you speak a great Truth in the beginning of your § 4. p. 65. when you say And thus I might trace him through all the Properties of the Rule of Faith for nothing is more Certain than that Thus that is handling things as you do one may do any thing nay even write a Book against the First Principles themselves The Rule of