a different question to ask Whether an opinion be Heresy and Whether the Maintainer be an Heretick the opinion becomes heretical by being against Tradition without circumstances but the Person is not an Heretick unless he knows there is such a Tradition Now St. Cyprians case was about a doctrin included in a practice which he saw well was the custome of the African but knew not to be so of the universal Church till some congregation of the whole Christian World had made it evident And herein consists the excuse St. Austin alledges for St. Cyprian 't is true I have no assurance this Apology can be alledged for John 22. but another perhaps may that the multitude of Fathers which he conceiv'd to be on his side might perswade him the opposite opinion could not be a constant Tradition There remains only Bellarmins excuse to be justify'd which is not of so great moment Divines helping themselvs by the way that occurrs best to them and missing in such reasons without any scandal to their neighbours One of these two solutions will generally satisfie all such objections as are drawn from some fathers mistakes against the common Faith For nothing can be more certain then if any Father had known the doctrin contrary to his errour to have been universally taught in the Catholik Church by a derivation from their ancestors beyond the memory of any beginning he would readily without dispute have submitted to such an Authority and so much the sooner as he being neerer the Fountain could less doubt that the stream of which he saw no other rise reach'd home to the Spring-head This therfore is evident that whoever erred knew nothing of such a Tradition whencesoe're that ignorance took its root the severall causes of which depend upon the several cases of their mistakes here not pressed and therfore not examin'd THE SIXTH ENCOUNTER Disabling three other Arguments brought against Tradition THe seventh objection pretends not only different but opposite Traditions might be deriv'd from the Apostles And this they support with these two crutches one consists in a demurrer that the contrary is not proved the other in an Instance that it plainly hapned so in the case of the Quartadecimani who inherited from St. John a certain custom which was condemned by a practice deriv'd from some other Apostles But the weaknesse of this objection appears by its very proposal For since all Catholicks when they speak of Tradition deliberately and exactly define it to be a Doctrine universally taught by the Apostles we may safely conclude where two Apostles teach differently neither is Tradition And that this word universally may not seem by slight of hand cog'd into the definition on purpose to take away this objection the necessity of it is evident because all that weare the name of Christian unanimously agreeing that in point of truth one Apostle could not contradict another wherever two such Traditions are possible to be found it absolutely follows no point of truth is engaged An inference expresly verified in the example of the Quartadecimans their contention being meerly about a Ceremony not an Article of Faith Wherfore only indifferent and unnecessary practises are subjects of such a double Tradition and by consequence such Traditions are not of Christian beliefe or concerning matters here in controversy this very definition rather directly excluding them The eighth Argument seems to take its rise from our own confessions telling us We acknowledge some points of Faith to have come in later then others and give the cause of it that the Tradition whereon such points rely was at the beginning a particular one but so that yet at the time when it became universal it had a testimony even beyond exception by which it gain'd such a general acknowledgment The example of this is in certain Books of Scripture as the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Apocalyps whereof in St. Jerom's time the Greek Churches refus'd the one and the Latin the other yet now both have prevaild into an universal reception To which I return this clear answer 't is the nature of things acted that depend on Physical and mutable causes to have divers degrees in divers parts according to the unequall working of the Causes and so Christ having deliver'd by the hands of his Apostles two things to his Church his Doctrin as the necessary and substantial aliment thereof and his Scriptures ad abundantiam it was convenient the strength of Tradition for one should far exceed its strength for the other yet so that even the weaker should not fail to be assured and certain Upon this reason the Doctrin was deliver'd to all the Apostles and by them to the whol community of Christians the Scriptures to some particular person or Church yet such whose credit was untainted and from them by degrees to be spread through the whol Church and communicated to the Pastors in the Books themselvs to the people by their Pastors reading and explications For who does not know before Printing was invented the Bible was not every mans money Whence it appears Scriptures are derived to us by a lower degree of Tradition then that of Catholik doctrin and consequently our Faith and acceptance due to them is not of so high a nature as what we are bound to in respect of doctrin For the sense of Scripture is to be judged by the doctrin as the Church and custom of Antiquity teaches us alwaies commanding and practising that no man exercise his wits in interpreting the holy Scripture against the receiv'd Faith of the Church as in all matters of science they who are Masters in the Art judge the text of Books written upon such subjects by their unwritten skil and practical experience And here I would willingly ask what such Protestants as object this to us can answer for themselvs since they directly professe not to know Scripture by the Spirit and therfore must necessarily rely on Tradition especially those who take for their rule to accept only such Books for Canonical as were never doubted of for they cannot deny but the Scriptures were receiv'd in one Church before another as the Epistles of St. Paul St. John or St. Marks Gospel c. and how do they admit the Apocalyps so long refused by the Greek Churches whom they use to prefer before the Latin But they presse us farther that if a particular Tradition became universal this depended on the Logick of those Ages to discern what testimony was beyond exception I demand what signifies Logick do they mean common sense sufficient to know three and four make seven or wit enough to comprehend and manage with a just degree of discretion the ordinary occurrences in humane actions If they do I must confess it depends on Logick For I cannot think God Almighty deliver'd the Scriptures to Apes or Elephants who have a meer imitation of reason in their outward carriage but to Men that have truly understanding and a capacity of evidence within
conceiting themselvs able by them utterly to destroy all Traditions These are such as forbid to add or detract from the holy Scriptures which though commonly so explicated by Protestants yet certainly cannot but appear to every child altogether impertinent to our controversy For t is a far different question Whether we were bound to put no new or Apocryphal Books into the Canon which our adversaries charge us to have done or to take none out which we charge them to do from that now in debate Whether there be any other means of assuring matters of Faith beside the Bible or rather Whether Scripture in an eristical and contentious way be a Rule sufficient to decide all controversies in Religion Nevertheless let us see the Texts they alledge for their opinion Deut. 4. 2. Iosh. 1. and others to the same effect My first answer is suppose these places imported all the force our adversaries pretend we are not in the least degree concern'd since all that 's said is clearly spoken of a certain Book or Law properly and specially belonging to the Jews and no more obliging Christians then the Book of Leviticus or the Law of Circumcision Secondly since it is held as a main distinction and opposition betwixt the Laws of the Jew and of the Christian that those of the Iew were to be written in Stone and Paper and those of the Christian in the hearts of men by Tradition it would rather follow if such Analogy were to be made that because nothing but Scripture is to be given to the Jew only Tradition is to be pressed on the Christian. Thirdly to the end this place may have the effect endeavoured by the arguer all the rest of the Bible except Deuteronomy or such other Book to which the Texts cited particularly relate may be burnt or at least cast out of the Canon and not have any power to decide controversies even in the Jews law I know 't is answer'd that Protestants deny not such Books Neither do we accuse them of it only we conceive we may safely say they contradict themselvs in pressing these places to that effect of one side and admitting the Books on the other My fourth Answer is that the Law it self enjoyns in certain cases other precepts to be added remitting the people upon any doubt first to Iudges and afterwards to the High Priest and commanding their declarations to be obey'd and under greatest penalties punctually observ'd So that the consequence drawn out of these places is both weak in it self and prejudicial to them that use it Nor is the inference our adversaries wrest out of the last Chapter of the Apocalyps less unreasonable then the former where he that adds or detracts any thing from that Prophecy is accursed whence pleasant discoursers will needs conclude that Christian doctrin is no otherwise to be proved but by Scripture Questionless to speak more pertinently to the Text they should have said it was to be prov'd out of nothing but the Apocalyps but because that would appear too palpable and absurd they included the rest of the Scripture violently against the express letter and meaning of the Text. This Argument seems to me as if the fam'd Astrologer Mr. Lilly had obtain'd a Protection from the State that none should presume to abuse his Prognostications by foysting in counterfeit ones or blotting out any part of his and thence one should boldly infer that all our Courts of Justice were commanded to judg such cases as came before them only out of Lilly's Almanack with this sole difference that the arguer here unjustly cogs in the whole Scripture instead of the single Book of the Apocalyps which makes his consequence far weaker and more unexcusable then the other as I confess the similitude I use agreeable rather to the impertinency of the objection then to the dignity of the subject To these two may be parallel'd that Preface of St. Luke so strongly urg'd by some The words as I understand them are these Seeing many have endeavâ—ured to compile ae history of the things in great abundance acted among us according as they who were from the beginning eye-witnesses and instruments of the Gospel have delivered to us I also have thought fit excellent Theophilus since I was present at all things almost from the beginning to set them down to thee in order that thou mayest know the certainty of the Reports which thou hast been taught This is the Text though others interpret it otherwise who if they will urge any thing out of their own explication must first justify it against this But out of this First St. Luke pretends no more then to tell our Saviours life like a good Historian however some of his excellent sayings cannot be deny'd their place in his life as is testifyed by the same St. Luke in the first of the Acts and therfore we ought not expect to know more from him then was fit for an Historian to report that is the eminent deeds and sayings of our Saviour Now the end express'd in the Text for the writing of this History may be understood two ways One that Theophilus might know which reports were true which fals The other that Theophilus out of the recital of Christs miracles and heroical actions might understand the greatness of his person and by consequence the certainty of his holy doctrin which depends from them But whether one or the other however there is not a word that this Book should serve for a Catechism to teach him and all the world the entire body of Christian doctrin which must be our Adversaries meaning There are yet two passages I must not omit because our Adversaries make great account of them one is the fourth Chapter of the first to the Corinthians That you may learn in us not to be wise beyond what is written To understand this place you must know there grew some emulations betwixt the disciples of the Apostles if I may guess betwixt those of St. Peter and St. Paul This St. Paul reprehends at large but for fear of making the breach wider instead of closing it would not name St. Peter chusing rather to put the case as if it had pass'd betwixt himself and Apollo and first uses this argument that Paul and Apollo are but Ministers of Christ therupon after some diversion he comes to tel them how all that any man has is from God and for the people and concludes to have all esteem'd as the Ministers of Christ and dispensators of his Mysteries And after he has express'd how little he concerns himself whether he be wel or ill reputed by them concludes telling them he had taken those two names of Paul and Apollo to teach them this point and then brings in the words alleadg'd which I may venture to paraphrase thus I have disguis'd my discours concerning the esteem you ought to have of your Preachers under the names of Apollo and my self that by what I teach you to be due to our
charity grant among Jews it might have been done as not a few think the very Law was lost in the times of their wicked Kings or other oppressions what inference can they make against Christian Tradition Of Books of Scripture peradventure there was a time when some one or rather any one might have been lost because it was in few hands shall we therfore conclude the same possibility of suppression when we treat of Doctrins universally profest by so many Millions when we dispute of Practices every day frequented by the whole Church Stil ther 's one jarring string that grates my ears with its loud discord though the stroak come not from the hand of these objectors yet I wil endeavour to put it in tune Some sick heads roving up and down in their extravagant phansies wil needs entertain a wild conjecture that at first our Saviour was indeed stil'd God and though the learned who had the knack of distinguishing knew wel enough the inward meaning then signify'd only a most eminent aud god-like person yet the common People understanding their Preacher simply as the letter sounded came by degrees universally to believe his true and real divinity But with what ingenuity can such rambling wits think the chief Principle of Christianity should be so negligently taught or accuse so many holy Saints of those purest times to be such deceitful Teachers Besides did not their rashness blind them they would easily see the raising the Person of Christ from humane to divine would necessarily infer a notorious change in the solemn Prayers of the Church and daily devotion of the People which certainly would give so great a stroak to both it could not possibly be attempted either undiscern'd or unresisted Lastly the Christian Faith being delivered not in a set form of words but in sense a thousand ways explicated enforc'd according to the variety of occasions and capacity of the learners how can any ambiguity of phrase endanger them into a mistake who attend not so much to the dead letter as the quickning sense so variously exprest so often incultated to them by their masters THE FIFTEENTH ENCOUNTER Declaring the state of this Question Whether the Scripture can decide controversies THere remains yet a second part of our Apology for as this is the Catholicks principle to adhere to the authority of the Church that is to the living word written in their Breasts which governs all their actions relating to religion so on the other side whoever have at any time under the pretence of reformation oppos'd her Authority such have constantly rais'd up their Altar against Tradition upon the dead letter of the Scriptures Which as the Catholick Church highly reverences when they are animated by the interpretation of Tradition so by too much experience she knows they become a killing letter when abus'd against the Catholick sense in the mouths of the Devil and his Ministers But before we set our feet within the lists I am bound to take notice of an opposition no less common then slight and absurd and this it is When we retire to Tradition after both parties have lost their breath in beating the aerial outside of Scripture they presently cry out Cannot Aristotle cannot Plato make themselves be understood why then should not the Bible as wel determine Controversies If this were not after sixteen hundred years of experience after so much pains of our own since Luthers time idly cast away in tossing the windy balls of empty words without coming to resolution of any one point peradventure it were pardonable but now alas what can it be but an obstinate desire of darkness and a contempt of Gods Law and truth by a bold and irrational assertion and loud clamours to beat down the Catholick Church like Dametas in the Poem striking with both hands and his whole strength but winking all the while Let us therfore open our Eys and look thorow this objection Cannot Plato and Aristotle make themselvs be understood Yes but what then Ergo the Scripture can determine controversies The supposition wherin all venom ly's is conceal'd which thus I display As Aristotle wrote of Physicks and Metaphysicks so the Scripture was written of those controversies which since are risen among Christians But Plato and Aristotle can make themselvs be understood concerning those Sciences therfore the Scripture can do as much concerning these Controversies This ought to be the discourse But had it been cloth'd in so thin and transparent a dress the Authors would have blusht to thrust it into light For t is a most shameless Proposition to say the Scriptures were written of the Controversies long after their date sprung up in the Christian world Beginning from Genesis to the Apocalyps let them name one Book whose theme is any now-controverted Point betwixt Protestants and Catholiks T is true the intent and extrinfical end of writing St. Johns Gospel was to shew the Godhead of Christ which the Arians afterward deny'd but that is not so directly his theme as the miraculous life of our Saviour from whence the Divinity of his Person was to be deduc'd and yet the design so unsuccessful that never any Heresy was more powerful then that which oppos'd the truth intended by His Book But I suppose their reply wil be they purpose not to say the Scripture was written of our present controversies but of the precepts of good life and Articles of Faith necessary to them about which our controversies arise If this be their meaning their Assumption is as ridiculous as in the other their Major or chief Proposition For their argument must be framed thus As Scripture was written of the necessaries to good life so Aristotle and Plato of Physicks and Metaphysicks But Aristotle and Plato writ so plainly that all questions rising about their doctrin can be declared out of their words therfore all questions relating to good life may also be clear'd out of Scriptures Wherin the Minor is so ridiculous to any that have but open'd a Book of Philosophy that 't is enough not only to disanul the proof but discredit the Author And yet were it true the consequence would not hold For whoever considers what belongs to the explication of Authors knows there is a great advantage to discern the sense of those who proceed scientifically above the means to understand one that writes loose Sentences An Archimedes an Euclid a Vitruvius wil be of far easier interpretation where the Subject is of equal facility then a Theognis Phocyllides or Antoninus because the antecedents and consequents do for the most part force a sense on the middle propositions of themselvs ambiguous Now the works of Plato and Aristotle are generally penn'd though not always so rigorously yet stil with an approach to the Mathematical way The Scripture uses a quite different method delivering its precepts without connexion betwixt one another And though I deny not but peradventure the Articles of our belief have in themselvs as much
to thy salvation so that thou understand them according to the Faith of Iesus Christ which I have orally deliver'd to thee and this is in direct terms the Catholick Rule that the interpretation of Scripture is to be govern'd by Tradition or by the faith and doctrin so receiv'd and formally depends from the first words Remain constant to my doctrin Or by another explication which is more material and flat and most incredible That the old Scripture for of that only the Apostle speaks no other being written while Timothy was a child should be able without relation to the knowledg of Christ by other means to make a man understanding enough to be saved by the Faith of Him as may be seen by Sr. Peters being sent to Cornelius So that of these three senses the first is nothing to our adversaries purpose and nevertheless is the best The second positively and highly against him the third incoherent to the words precedent and following and in it self an incredible proposition But give it the greatest force the words can by any art be heightned to they come nothing neer the state of the question proposed which concerns the decision of all quarrels carried on by litigious parties Whereas this Text is content with any sufficiency at large to bring men to salvation a point not precisely now controverted betwixt us Besides Timothy being already a Christian 't is a pure folly to think the Apostle sent him to the Scriptures to chuse his Religion The words immediatly following the place explicated are urged for a new Argument They are these All Scripture is inspired from God and profitable to teach to reprove to correct to instruct in justice that is good life that the man of God become perfect being furnisht to every good work The paraphrase according to my skil is thus The holy Writ I spake of is any Book inspir'd from God and profitable to teach things unknown reprehend what is amiss to set straight what is crooked to instruct in good life that the Church of God or any member therof may become perfect being by instructions and reprehensions applyed out of Scripture by such preachers as Timothy fitted to any good work or all kinds of good works This I conceive the natural meaning and most conformable to the Text were we to seek the interpretation of it indifferently without any eye to our present controversy And in this sense 't is a cleer case the Apostle speaks of the benefit of Scripture when explicated and apply'd by a Preacher in order to the perfecting of those that hear him But if by importunity the adversary will needs have it that the Scripture should give the quality of being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the person himself that reads it to content him I shall not hinder him of his mind but only prove it nothing to his purpose For still this must be the sense that it produces in the reader the excellencies requir'd in a Preacher namely to make him do all those good works which are expected of him as teaching reprehending c. so that one way or other still the Scripture is apply'd to furnish him with Precepts Arguments Examples and such like instruments of perswasion but of giving the first Catechism or binding ones self Apprentice to the Bible to learn the first rudiments of Christian profession ther 's not the least word or syllable that colours for such a conceit nor can it indeed consist with the direct meaning of the place since the being already a Christian is plainly suppos'd in Timothy by St. Pauls institutions viva voce before any exhortation to this use of Scripture So that here is no question concerning the first choyce of Faith but of perfection after Faith much less any mention of convincing in foro contentioso about which is all our controversy Another place is Acts 26. where St. Paul defending himself before Agrippa and Festus against the Jews accusation who calumniated him that he spake in derogation of the Law and brought in a new doctrin to the disturbance of the people made only this answer that he preach'd nothing but what the Prophets had foretold His words are these The Iews for this teaching Christs doctrin finding me in the Temple would have kill'd me But I having obtain'd succonr from God until this very day have persisted testifying or protesting to great and little that I spoke nothing but what the Prophets and Moses had foretold should come to pass as that Christ was to suffer that he was to be the first should rise from death to life and preach light both to Iews and Gentils This is the true interpretation of the Greek Text as far as ly's in my power to explicate it according to the intention of St. Paul I deny not but the words singly taken may be interpreted I have persisted testifying to great and little and in my Sermons saying nothing but what c. But this explication is neither so proper to his defence nor at all advances the Adversaries cause For since St. Paul tells us directly what the points are of which he spake whatever can be gathered out of them only this is said that these three points were foretold by Moses and the Prophets and on the other side the discours is imperfect running thus I preach'd indeed many other things yet nothing but what was in Moses and the Prophets to wit that Christ was to suffer c. His meaning therfore is that since he was in hold his perpetual endeavours had been to shew that these things he was accused to have preach'd against the law were the very marrow of the Law and foretold by Moses and the Prophets and that wheras the Jews expected Christ to be a temporal King who by force of Arms should restore the house of Israel to a great and flourishing estate the truth was quite contrary for according to the doctrin of Moses and the Prophets He was to be a passible man to suffer death afterwards to rise again triumphantly as the first fruits of the Resurrection and to send his Disciples both to Jews and Gentiles to spread the light of the Gospel throughout the world What advantage against the necessity of Tradition can be drawn out of this place of Scripture which doth not so much as talk of the extent of Catholick doctrin much less come within kenning of our Controversy is beyond my reach This I know that to say all points of Catholick doctrin can be sufficiently prov'd out of Moses and the Prophets is an assertion I believe our Adversaries themselvs will deny as being both ridiculous in it self and absolutely discrediting the necessity of the new Testament and yet clearly without maintaining so gross absurdities they can make no advantage of this Text. THE SEVENTEENTH ENCOUNTER Examining such places as are brought against the admittance of any but Scriptural proof in Religion WE are at last come to those places in which they most glory
began in a slight familiar conference betwixt two intimate friends and kinsmen as it were only for exercise to train themselvs and practice their postures but since by the entrance of new Allies is become of so high concernment that what at first was a private voluntary skirmish seems now to spread it selfe into a publique and solemn War Nor need I strain much to make good the phrase since the eminent Names on the one side and the great advantage of ground on the other may justly be admitted to supply the number of an Army in both And because I desire to prepare my self with the fittest proportion I could for the assaults of my Adversaries I have declin'd the Sword and Buckler and taken up a single Rapier chang'd the antique weapons of Dialogue though in my opinion they want neither ornament nor particular efficacy into the modern mode of direct discourse Wherein as I confesse Their guilded Armour shines more and dazles the ey so I fear not when we come to charge our courser steel wil prove substantial and impenetrable However I shall not spend much time in parley but after a short relation how I come to be drawn into the quarrel and by what method I intend to carry it on I shall immediately advance to a close encounter Before those Dialogues wherein that original private conference is at larg delivered were brought to light or as I think fully conceiv'd in the Authors brain an honoured friend and Patron of mine had couch'd some smal but quintessential part of their doctrin in a little pithy Present to a new-converted Lady and having cited it afterward for brevity sake in a controversial Epistle to an eminent Friend engag'd it therby into an almost fatal combat nothing but truth being able to rescue it from so potent an enemy Besides a deceased friend of mine having oblig'd me to declare my opinion concerning a witty discourse made by one of his acquaintance extorted from me an unlick'd Mola representing suddenly and imperfectly my judgement in reference to that Authors work This again stirring the same humours drew the doctrin into an eminent danger of encountring opposition Neverthelesse God so ordering it many years past in calm and happy daies of peace the two Adversaries whom these occasions had provoked not publishing their Labours as things below their persons till all-discovering time as I believe against the Authors intentions brought them both to light and by consequence an imputation on those Dialogues and a necessity on me to dis-engage the honour of their Composer In order to which my intention is not to reply minutely to either of the Opponents works muchles to handle any by-questions but only to chuse out of them or any others what I conceive may possibly be thought as yet unanswer'd and consequently capable of prejudicing those Dialogues By this reserv'd and moderate temper I hope to free my self from all such incivilities as necessarily attend on the undertaking to convince a particular person of weakness or inconsequence in his discours from which kind of captious proceedings besides my Reason I am beholding to my Nature for its extream aversnes Besides in answering a writing many impertinent quarrels are pick'd the substantial controversie lost or confounded and the Truth it self by multiplicity left more obscure then when the disputant began for where many questions are started and none deeply searched into the Reader goes away without any resolution more then what himself brought along with him I intend therefore with all candor and fidelity to select such objections as I think really interest the Controversie and handle them without relation to Books or distinction of Authors or citations of places as one who seeks Truth not the glory of confuting or vanity of answering But some may be unsatisfied with my proceedings and demand if this be my intention why do I cite those Authors in particular and as it were make a shew of answering without any effect I desire those to consider that the names of Author's carry weight among two sorts of Readers One such as diligently peruse the books written on both sides to whom I offer this satisfaction that they may find the solution to any difficulty which occurs concerning this subject in their writings The other such who look no farther then the Title page or whether a book be answer'd or no are insolent upon the writers name and importunely clamorous that 't is a Piece beyond all possibility of reply be it never so weak and trivial to whom the simple profession that 't is answered is a wedg fit for their knot I must confesse next to the assurednesse of my Cause 't is my chiefest comfort to deal with Persons of such quality such as the Protestant party never produced before it seems to have chosen them to live by or die with Two whose Merits found the way of honouring their Descents by their generosity whose eloquence none were found to exceed whose wits none wil be found to equal What erudition in Languages or acutenes in Logick could furnish was treasur'd in their breasts But above all a comprehensive judgement in managing the numerous and weighty affairs of a Kingdom to the very heightning that sublime and subtlest Office Secretary of State which they both successively exalted to such a pitch that it must expect a fall in whoever shall succeed them One is the right honourable George Lord Digby now Earl of Bristol ever mounting the scale of Honour to a degree so far above the reach of others that 't is even beyond their sight The other Lucius Lord Falkland who crown'd his deserved Lawrell with a wreath of Oaken Scyons dying in such a posture as if mischief could not have ravag'd England had it not made its passage through the brest of that Martyr of Peace I can accuse him of nothing but that he left this Book behind him it being too plain what unhappy impression it maks in his Friends since my self almost a stranger cannot read those quaint and gentile expressions those rarities of wit those coruscations of Greek and Latine remarques and which most of all surprizes my admiration those Noble sweetnesses and civilities so unexpected in a quarrelling Treatise but I feel in my heart an unusual sorrow and regret that our thoughts cannot stay on him without the sad check of a fuit But since we are out of hope to resuscitate him that 's gon like the day he died on let us by Davids example leave these flattering weaknesses of nature and seek severe reason in the controversy we pretend to manage THE FIRST ENCOUNTER Explicating the Argument by which RUSHWORTH proves the Infallibility of Tradition THe Dialogues in whose defence we now appear as Second govern their discourse by this fair method First they treat and settle these definitions Tradition we call the delivery of Christs doctrin from hand to hand in that part of the world which with propriety is call'd Christian By
their Souls But if they take Logick for an ability to discourse beyond the reach of ordinary prudence and that human evidence which governs our lives I see no occasion of expecting any such Logick in our present question The ninth attempt consists in a diligent survey of our Fortifications to spy out some breach or weaker place by which errour may creep into the Church This I cannot call an Argument for none are so unwise as to make such a consequence It may be therfore 't is unlesse they bring strong proof of this necessity in some particular instance that may shew it to be an exception from the common maxim à posse ad esse non valet consequentia And yet in this discourse I find not so much as the very posse which I thus declare If any should deny that George could leap over Pauls-steeple and a quaint Oratour to maintain the affirmative should largely discourse how the rise of the last footing the help of a good staffe the cast of his body and many such circumstances give advantage to the leap but never think of comparing these with the height of the Steeple no sensible person would say he had proved the possibility of performing such a wild and extravagant enterprize So he that discourses at large how errours use to slide into mans life without comparing the power of the causes of errour to the strength of resisting which consists in this principle Nothing is to be admitted but what descends by Tradition as also without considering the heat and zeal stil preserv'd alive in the Churches bowels from the great fire of Pentecost says no more towards proving an errour 's overrunning the Church then the Oratour we exemplified for Georges leaping over the Steeple Wherfore this attempt is so far from the business it deservs not the honour of being accounted an Argument Yet because we compar'd the propagation of the Catholique Faith to the perpetuation of Human kind let us propose the like discours against it and say that in Affrick or the Land of Senega there are under earth great mines of Arsnick Whereof one may at some time or other vapour a contagious smoak which encountring with a strong wind from the South may breed so great a Plague in all the North Countries that none can escape it and hereupon presently conclude that all on this side the Line are quite dead and those who seem to live and discourse are but phantasms and have nothing of real in them though I believe the instances brought in for declaration of so groundless a conceit may seem better to deserve that name THE SEVENTH ENCOUNTER Answering the Greeks and some Divines who object new Beliefs to the Catholick Church THe first is of the Greeks Hieremie Nilus and Barlaam who profess to stand to Tradition and the first seaven General Councils and can be no way disprov'd say's the objector unless by what shall be as forcible against the Catholick cause But truly this instance is so lame it needs a new making before it be answered For the Author expresses not in what points of difference betwixt us and them he intends to urge it If about shavings or fastings and the like we shal have no quarrel against him if about the Procession of the holy Ghost I doubt he will find himself entangled in an equivocation betwixt the matter and manner of that mystery However that all arguments against them will serve against us is but the Authors liberal addition without any proof or means to guess at it That they accuse us to corrupt Tradition by sowing tares among it has two parts one justify's my plea that we rely on Tradition since they charge us with endeavouring to corrupt not disclaim it the other that we do indeed corrupt it is only said not proved and farther shews that the plea of the Greeks is non-Tradition alleadging only this that their Fathers do not deliver the doctrin of the procession of the Holy Ghost not that they say the contrary which clearly demonstrates there are no opposite Traditions between them and us As little force has the Note cited out of Tertullian to prove that he thought more was to be believ'd then what was drawn from antiquity because he was content private men might begin good customs in their own houses For sure he could not believe that omnis fidelis could constituere for the whole Church or even for his neighbours house So that we need a great deal of Logick to draw from this remark the creeping of an errour into the Church not a word being so much as intimated that this good custom should be against what was already receiv'd which had been enough to make it rejected and not comprehended in Tertullians known judgment There is another instance strongly urg'd and largly dilated but if I guess right of so much less credit the more 't is opened It is out of a history by one Wadding an Irish man concerning two Treaties of two Kings of Spain with two Popes to tear from them a definition for the Immaculateness of our Ladies Conception I follow an Authors words who has read the book and it seems found a great violence in the carriage of the business which made him express it by the word tearing Who this Wadding is I know not for I have heard of more then one but whether this be any of them I am totally ignorant having never seen the Book nor any other signs by which to discover the Author Out of this Book they collect three arguments One from Waddings testimony another from the State of the question he handles a third from his practice joyntly with the practice of divers others of the same degree For the first I am desirous notice should be taken of the Authors condition When he wrote this book he was Secretary to the Bishop of Carthagena and He his Kings Ambassador to move the Pope to define our Ladies Conception without original sin and in solliciting this to use an extraordinary importunity Wherin I see two circumstances that concern the qualification of his Book One that he was to act a business of great heat and if his zeal were not conformable to the eagerness of his senders he was like to have little thanks for his pains The second that he was Secretary to an Ambassador by which he had priviledg to say and publish Dicenda Tacenda whether they were his own opinions or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so they any way advanc'd his cause Now this encouraged Secretary undertakes to affirm that many things have been defined against the opinions of some Fathers and in the present case he says peradventure it has been defin'd that our Lady was free from all actual sin He adds the validity of Hereticks Baptism the beatifical vision before the day of Judgment the spirituality of Angels the souls being immediatly created and not ex traduce the Assumption of our Lady and her delivery without pain To Wadding
reality of the business there was no doubt among the Fathers about the truth or falsity of the main matter being fully satisfied concerning that by Tradition even from their childhood but the question was about the answer to their enemies proofs and to consult what arguments and reasons should be alledged against them for the satisfaction of the Church and the world without the Church and for the expression of the Catholik doctrin in such words as the Arians could not equivocally interpret to their own perverse meaning especially finding they had fo puzled the world with the dust they had rais'd in mens eyes that even some good Catholiks could scarce see their way but were in danger of stumbling against the blocks those Hereticks maliciously cast before their feet Eusebius Caesariensis testifies of himself that He thought Alexander's party had held the Son of God to be divided from the Father as one part is cut from another in Bodies which would have made God a body and truly two Gods For these reasons was their magna conquisitio their turning of Scriptures and their meeting in Council as St. Athanasius witnesses speaking in the name of the very Council it self in his Epistle de Synodis We met here says he not because we wanted a Faith that is because we were uncertain what to hold but to confound those who contradict the truth and goe about novelties Neither can any argument be made out of Eusebius's Epistle to some Arians in which he says The Bishops of the Council approved the word homoousion because they found it in some illustrious Fathers for though the inward sense of that term was perfectly traditional yet was it not til then precisely fixt to that particular expression But the same Bishpos consented to the Excommunication of the Contradictors to hinder men from using unwritten words and was not that a proper and prudent remedy to prevent the inconveniences that easily arise from confusion and incertainty of language when every one phrases the mystery according to his private fancy and governs not his terms by some constant and steady rule as the writings of the Apostles or ancient Fathers which interpretation exactly agrees with the Greek of Eusebius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that literally and truly signifie Words written neither in Scripture nor any where else as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was in the Fathers And so I need not alledge He was a secret Arian though if he were his testimony as far as it reaches would be so much the more efficacious against them as Theodoret imploys it Now by all this may be seen why in Councils there are engag'd so many disputations for no calumny can be so impudent as to deny the Fathers know their Faith before they meet there which is plainly imply'd by the Hereticks ordinary protesting against them as unfit Judges because they are parties and therfore refusing to come to the Council besides the possession of the old Religion being as publik and notorious at such times as the Sun it self at noon wherfore to say they come to seek out or dispute their Religion by those long conferences is a pure folly They then hold their Religion upon Tradition or possession but dispute things either for regulating the Churches language that all Catholiks may keep a set form of explication of their Faith or else to convince their Adversaries out of such grounds as themselvs admit To dispute whether a Council not confirm'd by the Pope makes an Article de fide or no concerns not the difficulty now before us and engages Catholick against Catholick which is not our present work In the mean while out of all which has been said we may gather that there is no apparence the Catholick Doctrin concerning the Trinity was diversly taught before the Council of Nice and then first establish'd out of the Scriptures but that it was the known and confessed faith of all the Ages before as St. Athanasius expresly teaches avowing confidently he had demonstrated it supplicating the Emperour to permit the Catholicks to live in the belief of their Forefathers and upbraiding his adversaries that they could not shew their progenitors And to say the truth unless a man be so perverse as to affirm Christians did not use the form of Baptism prescrib'd by Christ there can be no doubt of the Tradition of the blessed Trinity the very words of Baptism carrying the Tradition in themselvs Lastly 't is objected there was no reason for the Council of Nice in this quarrel to look into Tradition since they had such abundance of Scripture But we must put out our eys if we do not see that even at this day the Arians are so cunning as to avoid the strongest Texts of Scripture and explicate them by other places and that 't is impossible to convince in this manner any Heretick as long as one place can explicate a hundred opposed The Council therfore at last though favour'd with as much advantage as Scripture could give over its adversaries was forc'd to conclude out of Tradition as Theodoretus St. John Damascen and chiefly St. Athanasius himself confesses a necessity which the Rules of St. Irenaeus Tertullian St. Basil and Vincentius Lyrinensis who teach it is to no purpose to dispute with Hereticks out of Scripture and our own experience of above a hundred years plainly convince and fully justify to any rational man whose humour or interest is not to have all Religion obscure and doubtful THE TWELFTH ENCOUNTER That the necessity of Communicating Infants is no Tradition But Prayer to Saints is THere are yet two instances urged against Tradition One that for six hundred years 't was believ'd necessary to give the holy Eucharist to children which custom has now been a long time disused The proof as far as I know of the necessity is drawn only out of St. Austin and St. Innocentius and some words of St. Cyprian The former of which Fathers are cited to make this argument against the Pelagians The Eucharist cannot be given unless to those who are baptized But the Eucharist is necessary for Children Therfore Baptism is necessary for them To which I answer with a formal denyal that any such argument is made by those holy Fathers For their discours runs thus It is necessary for Children to be incorporated into Christs mystical body but this cannot be done without Baptism therfore Baptism is necessary for Children Whether of us take the right sense of these Fathers let the Books judg I will only add 't is a great shallowness to think the Pelagians who deny'd the necessity of Baptism should admit the necessity of the Eucharist or that it was easier for those Fathers to prove the necessity of the Eucharist then of Baptism So that their argument must be suppos'd by the objector to be drawn ex magis obscuro ad minus obscurum Yet because especially St. Austins words seem equivocal I will briefly set down the state of the
the non-precept and the reason thereof out of the first part nothing can be deduced out of the second this consequence is inferred Pagans would be equally scandaliz'd by the Permission as by the Precept Wherfore if it be commanded neither certainly ought it be permitted Although no law obliges one Divine to maintain the reasons of another yet I see no such evidence in this consequence as for it to renounce the reason for me thinks if those we call Saints were meant to be Gods we should of necessity be bound to worship them whence it follows if it be not necessary to worship them neither are they Gods nor the worship exhibited to them such as is due to God but only of that degree which we give excellent creatures a position so conformable to Nature that it can scandalize none but the enemies of Perfection who under pretence of avoiding Idolatry take away the due honour and excitation to Vertue But which way out of a non-Precept can be infer'd the non-Teaching of the Doctrin I cannot imagine since what those Doctors hold continues true at this day when it cannot be denied that Praying to Saints is both taught and practiced For though in our prayers there be some directions to Saints yet generally Christians are not bound to such dâ—votions and they that are 't is but their own voluntary acceptance of the obligation to which such prayers are annexed THE THIRTEENTH ENCOUNTER Reflecting on certain considerations and shewing that there is nothing able to disprove the Church of Rome's Communion to be the signe of the true Church ALthough out of the whole preceding discourse it be evident that this way I defend makes the Churches Definition depend upon the Tradition of the point defined and not Tradition upon them as if because by Tradition we know the Churches Definitions to be true therfore we know the truth deliver'd by Tradition Nevertheless since there may be some truth in this reflexion That Tradition is known sometimes by Definition let us see what can be said against it T is first therfore put into consideration whether since four Disciples of Christ have written Gospels or the Gospel that is as much as they preach'd for they preach'd nothing but the Gospel if God would have us trust the Church he was not both to specifie so much very plainly in them and farther deliver such signs as were necessary ever to know Her by For answer I ask a cross question Whether if God Almighty would have all men see by the Sun he was first to tell them which It is and paint ' Its picture on every wall that so we might know which is the Sun And because any question may seem rather offensive then deserving any answer I proceed to the application and ask Whether any of those Christians of whom Saint John says exierunt ex nobis could doubt which was the Church wherof he had been a part and left it And since you cannot answer otherwise then affirmatively I think I need not repeat the same question of Arius and Pelagius and Luther If then God has provided for all these that they were taught to yeild obedience to the definitions of this Church so clearly that they could neither doubt which Church was their teacher nor of what Church he spake how dare they presume to accuse him of deficiency in his providence The same Authority that gave you the Scripture and told you it was the Word of God said likewise that what she taught was no lesse the Word of God If you believe her report for the Book why refuse you it for the Doctrin If her recommends be not security enough for the one they will certainly prove far less for the other since unlesse I am strangely mistaken the doctrin of the Catholik Church is not so hard to believe as the story of the Bible let any Atheist or discreet Moore or Pagan be judge Oh but since the Evangelists wrote Gospels they wrote all they preach'd for they preach'd nothing but the Gospel The Gospel is known to be the same with the Greek Evangelium that is the Good-spel or happy tidings of Christs comming so that the Book or Preaching which tels us Christ is come is a Gospel be there never so much more or lesse in the Book or Sermon how then it can be infer'd out of the name Gospel that the Apostles writ as much as they preach'd for it is not credible they preach'd all they wrote I am not able to comprehend The second consideration is how we know when the Church has defined To which I answer In the practice of sixteen ages it has no more been doubted when the Church had defined then when a Parliament had enacted Why then is there required more information But some Divines say more some less to be enough Let them be doing in the Schools as long as the practice goes on sufficiently for the Churches government Thirdly we are to consider Whether sufficient notes be left to know the Church by But who shall use these notes Catholicks They are in the Church Hereticks They know what Church they forsook Pagans They look not into the Scriptures to finde the Churches mark Peradventure those Hereticks whose separation is so long since that they remember not out of what Church they went But none are grown so aged yet However the marks of the Church are apparent enough in Scripture if there want not wil in the seeker to acknowledg them The fourth consideration is Whether points of Faith or to be of Faith be infinite new ones continually springing or finite if finite why are they not all delivered at once to make an end of incertitude and defining The answer is they are both finite and infinite finite in gross and wholy deliver'd by the Apostles wholy believed and practis'd by this present Church but infinite in the detail by which mans wit can parcel out this general stock of Faith For as soon as any sharp and crafty Heretik has varied some proposition necessary to the explication of a fore-believed Doctrin there may be occasion of setling some new proposition which shal be no other then a part of what was formerly believ'd in Substance though not so explicitly deciphred As he that professes Christ is a Man implies he has a mans Nature a mans Understanding and Will and Action though this word Man distinguishes not precisely these faculties nor does he that repeats all these qualities in particular say any more then he that said in general he was a Man Now then I answer the objection as Aesops Master did those who would have bound him to drink up the Sea stop the Rivers said he and I will performe my bargain So say I hinder impertinent curiosities from importuning the Church and her Truths wil be undoubtedly seen in her belief and practice without making new Definitions The last objection that it will appear a shift to say the Churches definitions are certain and yet
height of those Mysteries the Fathers saw just cause to conceal then in cavilling at their compendious expressions which suted best with their circumstances And certainly 't is most agreeable to reason that the mind of such as wrote before the Controversy began should be judged by those Fathers who for the easier defence of truth and fuller confutation of the Innovators were forc'd to break the Seal of secrecy and who being their immediate Disciples without doubt must necessarily best know their minds and consequently were most able to repeat the lessons they had so lately learnt of their Masters He afterwards reckons up certain Grammar weaknesses of some Fathers and the excellencies of others and out of both draws venom to his comb So that whether a Father write down right natural construction or by abilities of explicating himself polish his stile all breeds darkness to this great Illuminator or Calumniator rather of the Fathers Nay the very vices they cry out against in evil Preachers must be the faults of the Princes of antiquity by this Interpreters benevolence But he knocks all on the head by the example of St. Hierom who having related what had passed in him during his sleep in another place defends it was but a dream And can you believe the Objector was awake when he fumbled out this piece of impertinency Yet he urges it for a convincing evidence and bearing a special good wil to St. Hierom he very kindly perswades himself that the Stories of Malchus St. Paul the Eremit and St. Hillarion were Romances the first because his maligners calumniated it the other two though never question'd because he shew'd wit in them It seems too he would beget in his Reader this dutiful conceit of the Fathers that they were wont to deliver Romances for Articles of Faith concluding with this desperate and ungracious demand Who shall assure us that they have not made use of these same Arts in their discourses concerning the Eucharist and afterwards renews again the like impudent quaere discovering too openly the prophaness of his heart as if he suspected the Fathers might perhaps have cozen'd the people with some fals glasses to magnifie the power of Prelates Next he objects the Fathers often affirm or deny obsolutely what they mean only comparatively and if you wil not believe him he produces examples out of St. Hierom St. Chrysostom Amphilochius and Asterius But St. Hierom is plainly in the very words comparative The rest are both explicated to the same sense by the bordering Ages who might easily know the practice of their lives in that controversie and in his very citation have nothing capable of being urg'd against that explication besides the phrase it self is favourable What great difficulty is there to pick out the English of this sentence Praemia pudicitiae nuptiae possidere non possunt c. with the rest too trivial to be repeated He makes a second review of the Fathers speeches concerning some Heresy not yet debated upon another design to shew that while they speak against one Heresie they seem to fall into the contrary But there is no new difficulty brought unlesse it be of those terms 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both which this Author abuses by a wrong interpretation the first he renders let fall in heat of disputation instead of giving it the true sense which Englishes it thus suppos'd for disputation sake for so 't is contradistinguish'd to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to which St. Basil opposes it the later he explicates done or said by dispensation whereas the proper signification is by discretion St. Athanasius's meaning being that he deliverd what was fittest in that occasion and for the person to whom or in whose name he spake for his words give us some hints inclining to either of those senses that He intended only to personate an objection against himself or else to draw some answer out of another without engaging to declare his own judgment But 't is worthy our pains to look into the sweet interpretation he makes and compare it with the Greek which himself puts in the margin he reads therfore thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is men ought not maliciously to take or understand and draw it to be his proper meaning what one writes or does as now it s cal'd ad hominem for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies according to the art and understanding to apply every thing to the particular circumstances which offer themselvs Lastly he tels us the use of words is chang'd since Antiquity but specifies so simply that without question he hoped none but blind men would look into his book as if the World now thought that Papa signifies not a spiritual Authority but a temporal Garbo that Confessio signifies some outward ceremony Missa all the prayers now used c. THE FIFTH SURVEY Of the six Chapters following wherin he objects wilful deceit to the Fathers HItherto our Oratour has opened those Pleas which in a manner of necessity follow'd that multitude of books the Fathers have written and would if we could believe him perswade us Nothing is to be learn'd or understood out of Books but every three words wil never fail to have some reason or other to make them so obscure that no light or satisfaction can be derived out of them Nor is all this enough unless he gives them a touch of wilfulness which he does upon three Heads First from their writing Commentaries where he notes that many times they recite others opinions without naming the parties whence he would infer that out of their Commentaries nothing can be gather'd concerning their own judgment in the point they handle I cannot deny but such kind of commenting is sometimes used nor do I understand why it should be reprehensible to propose to the Reader choice judgments of divers eminent learned Persons even of Hereticks somtimes at least in St. Hieroms days when there were not so many Catholick writers that all good explications might be found in them though this honest man who otherwise is no enemy of liberty in Authors and opinions be at present for his interest offended with it But we can come to no assurance of the Authors mind what then If we do not see directly what he inclines to though ordinarily some liking is shew'd more to one opinion then another yet we may know he proposes all interpretations for the reader to chuse as he pleases which implys that he saw no apparent inconvenience in any But why is this manner of commenting made a calumny against all the rest being a particular kind and not much used why brought for a prejudice against such places where only one opinion is mentioned why is St. Hieroms indefinite doctrin which imports no more then that such is the nature of some Commentaries turn'd to an Universal as if none should do otherwise Let him reflect upon Beza's or other of his own parties glosses and see whether