exprest to be the Scripture and on this Expression he so strongly builds that p. 10 11. he concludes thence and Certainly too thus The Religion of our Church sayes he is therefore certainly Primitive and Apostolick because it teaches us to believe the whole Scriptures of the old and New Testament and nothing else as matter of Faith What mean the word Scriptures Any determinate sence of it or the dead Characters Alas their Church is far from teaching them the first or from having grounds to own such a pretence but puts the Book in their hands and bids them find the sence of it or their Faith for there is their Rule 'T is the bare Letter then unsenc't he means by the word Scriptures and so he must say 't is the outward Cuaracters his Church teaches us to believe and nothing else as matter of Faith that is their whole Faith has for its object Ink thus figur'd in a Book A worthy Argument to proove their Church is certainly Primitive and Apostolick whereas itis known Faith was before those Characters and besides if this be to be Apostolical we owe nothing to the other Apostles for our faith but onely to those six who writ But we mistake him he means neither sence of the word Scripture and hates these distinctionswith all his heart which would oblige him to either He meant to talk of Scripture indeterminately and confusedly which might make a fine show and yet expose him to no Inconvenience by giving any particular account of his meaning His Inference from this his First Principle being an Immediate one will utterly overthrow the Papists without doubt Therefore saith he p. 11. unless there can be New Scriptures we can have no New matter of Belief no new Articles of Faith No my Ld Yes as long as by Scriptures you mean no determinate sence of Scriptures but the bare Letter onely whose sence is fetch 't out by Interpretations and these as we experience depend on menes private Judgments and Fancies if menes Fancies may vary every hour you may have diverse Interpretations every hour and so new Articles of Faith every hour Is not this a mad kind of arguing to conclude as absolute an unerrableness in Faith as if they had not onely a determinate Principle but even as self-evident and unmistakable as the First Principle in Metaphysicks to guid themselves by whereas our daily eysight and their own sad experience every day teaches us by the practice of this Principle and yet their differing in the Sence of Scripture in most high and most concerning Points that the Speenlation is naught and the Principle it self a false and mis-guiding Light Nay I doubt my Ld. himself has no hearty value for this his First Principle though he sayes he wholly relies on it For I never saw Protestant Book in my Life thinner and sleighter in Scripture-Citations than is his Dissuasive so that if that be his First Principle he makes little use of it 35. Many other Propositions or Supposals are imply'd in his book to give it force As that It matters not how a Citation is qualify'd so it be but alledg'd 'T is no matter whether the question be rightly stated or no. The Tenets of our Church are not to be taken from the use of definitions found in approved Councils speaking abstractedly but from the particular Explications of some Divines Every Foppery is a proper Effect of the Churches Doctrin Points of Faith ought to be comprehensible to Reason and Spiritual things sutable to Fancy The Act of an Inquisition Sayings of a few Divines or Casuists are all Catholik Faith and the Doctrin of the Church That is rationally dissuasive which is confessedly Uncertain No Answer was ever given to the Citations or Reasons produc't in the Dissuasive Talking soberly and piously about a point is oftentimes as good as prooving it That t is Self-evident Scripture's Letter can bear but one Interpretation as wrought upon by Human Skills These and multitudes of such like though not exprest yet run imply'd in his carriage all along this book and suppos'd true to give it any force yet so evidently false and weak that to pull them out thence and make them show their heads is enough to confute them I conclude and charge the Dissuader that he not onely hath never a Principle for his Dissuasive to subsist by but farther that 't is Impossible but himself should know in his own Conseience that he has none nay more that the Protestant Cause and the same I say of all out of the Church can have none The first part of my charge I have manifoldly prooved in this present Appendix The other part of it which charges him with Consciousness of having no Grounds hath two branches and for the former of those I alledge that the wayes he takes all along to manage his Dissuasive are so evidently studious so industrious so designed and perfectly artificial that though one who is guided on in a natural way is oftentimes not aware of his thoughts or their method till he comes to reflect yet 't is Impossible he should not be aware of his which he postures with such exquisit craft and such multitudes of preternatural sleights to render his Discourse plausible For the later of those Branches namely that he cannot but know the Protestant Cause can have no Principles to make it Evident I discourse thus ad hominem what I have prov'd in Sure-Footing out of the nature of the Thing 'T is their most constant and avow'd Profession and his p. 9. that they do wholly rely upon Scripture as the foundation and final resort of all their Persuasions This being so Fathers and Councils are not held at all by them but as far as they are agreeable to Scriptures that is their Testimony has no basis of Certainty from themselves or of their own but what they participate from Scripture Wherefore either they are No Principles or else Subordinate ones to their First Principle Scripture Unless then It be Certain or deserve the name of a Principle They can never be held by Protestants such nor consequently can merit the name of Principles even Subordinate ones because then pretended First Principle from which onely they can derive Title to that dignity is in that case none it self To Scripture then le ts come By which word if they agreed to mean any determinate Sence of it certainly known to be the true one their Discourse were well-built But since their Church can own no determinate Sence of the Scripture deriv'd down from Christ and his Apostles in antecedency to the Scripture's Letter but having renounc't that Way or Tradition must say she has it meerly from that Letter as yet unsenc't She must mean that 't is the Scripture Letter She relies on as the foundation and final resort of all her Persuasions nay for her Persuasion that this is the Sence of it Since then Principles are determinate Sences not characters or Sounds neither is
Readers before he hath brought any thing able to satisfy their Understandings 6. Yet though his Method have no particularity in it as to its quoting part who knows but it may be very particular as to its Rational part that is full of Proofs which conclude evidently or Demonstrations But I am so far from feeling the force of any one such Proof in his whole Book that I cannot discern its very Existence or even any Attempt of that kind and I dare affirm my Ld. of Downs never meant it or dream't of it If he have any such I request his Lp. would in his Reply single them out from all the Pious and Inconclusive Talk which swell his Book and I promise them very heartily to lend them a due and respectful Confideration But I am sure he will neither pretend he has any nor attempt the having any if he but reflect that a Demonstration is a Proof which has in it a virtue of obliging the Understanding to Assent and that it obtains this virtue by building on Intrinsecal Mediums that is on Proper Causes or Effects of which 't is impossible the one should be without the other This clearing Method onely the Champions of Truth dare take and the Defenders of Errour must avoid under penalty of having their Cause quite ruin'd and crush't to pieces And this severe Method of finding Truth relying on the Goodness of my Cause I fear not to take and stick to in Sure-Footing as appears there by my Transition which sufficiently shows the Particularity of my Method I expect now my Ld. of Downs would show me the particularity of his or renounce all right and Title to Dissuade 7. I have been something longer about laying open the Necessity of a Proper Method to dissuade ere one can in reason hope to perform that Effect because I see plainly that in the pursuit of Truth Method is in a manner ALL and that 't is impossible any Controversy should hover long in debate if a right Method of concluding evidently were carefully taken and faithfully held to I have told my Ld. of Downs where he may see mine and I desire him earnestly as he loves Truth either to admit it as Conclusive and follow it or show it Inconclusive and propose us a better to begin and proceed with Evidently And that I may more efficaciously endeavour to bring him nay provoke him as far as I may with Civility to a Method particular and proper to dissuade I declare here before all the world that I know his Cause to be so unable to bear it and hope himself is so prudent that he will never either venture to allow our Method competent to conclude evidently nor yet go about to establish a better of his own Fourth Way 8. THe fourth Way of disanulling my Lp's whole Endeavours is to speak ad hominem and challenge him thus Your Grounds allow neither Fathers to be Infallible in any Testimony you produce from them to dissuade with nor yet your self in interpreting Scripture nor I conceive will you say that you see with Infallible Certainty any Proposition you go about to deduce by Reason if there be any such in your Dissuasive to be necessarily consequent from any First or Self-evident Principle therefore You are Certain of nothing you alledge in your whole Book If then His Lordship would please to speak out candidly he ought to say I know not Certainly that any thing I say against your Religion is true yet notwithstanding I would fain dissuade you from holding the Faith of your Forefathers and to relinquish a Religion you judge unalterable and hope to be sav'd by holding it Which were it profest and deliver'd ingenuously as it lies at the very bottome of his heart his Lp's Dissuasive would be a pleasant piece and lose all power to move any Child of common Sence nay the vulgar Reason of the wild Irish would be too hard for it Now that this ought in due candour to be profest in case neither the Fathers nor Himself be Infallible in any saying or Proof of theirs is thus Evidene't For since to be Infallible in None hîc nunc taking in the whole Complexion of assisting Circumstances is the same as to be hîc nunc Fallible in All or Each and if they be Fallible or may be deceived in Each they can be Sure of None it follows that who professes the Fathers Himself though using all the means he can to secure him from Errour Fallible in Each must if he will speak out like an honest man confess he is Sure of None Let then my Ld. of Downs either vouch Infallible Certainty in himself reasoning or Interpreting or in the Authorities he cites I mean Infallible considering their endeavours in complexion with all the means on foot in the world to preserve them so or else confess that notwithstanding all means us'd by them they are in each Saying and Proof Fallible and so himself sure of never a Motive he brings to dissuade with Now to see so Eminent a Writer and chosen out on purpose as he professes by the whole Church of Ireland go about to combat a settled Persuasion held sacred unalterable descending from Christ by Attestation of Forefathers the Way to Bliss c. and bring no better Arguments to do it but such as are were he put to declare it and would speak out confessedly Uncertain is so far from being a competent Dissuasive from Catholick Faith that 't is when laid open which is here perform'd as good a Persuasive for the Generality of Catholicks to hold stedfastly to it as man's Wit can invent and far better to the weaker sort of Speculaters than to demonstrate the Infallibility of the Ground of Faith Such advantage Catholick Faith gains by the Opposition from her Adversaries if they be rightly handled and their Discourses brought to Grounds Fifth Way 9. THe Fifth Way is built on the fourth or indeed on the Protestants voluntary Concession For they granting they have no Demonstration for the Ground of their Faith must say they have onely Probability and consequently that Faith quoad nos is Uncertain or to use their own Expression that Faith in us is an Assent cui non subest dubium of which we have no doubt yet cui potest subesse falsum or possible to be false which amounts to this that Faith at large is but highly probable much lesse their Faith as contradistinguisht from ours Probabilities then being of such a Nature that they do not absolutely weigh down the scale of our Judgment I mean while they are seen to be but Probabilities as is my Ld's case it follows that if there be Probabilities for the other side the way to dissuade from It is to put all those probable reasons in the opposit ballance and then by comparing them show they have no considerable weight counterpos'd to those he brings for his Tenet Now that there is no Probability for our side is very hard
p. 8. The clear saying of one or two of those Fathers truely alledg'd by us to the Contrary will certainly prove that what many of them suppose it do affirm and which but two or three as good Catholicks do deny was not then a matter of Faith or a Doctrin of the Church I wish my Ld. had been so Ingenuous as to have made use of this Principle when he charg'd our Church it self with the mistakes of a few Writers contradicted not by one or two but sometimes by a whole Nation But this Principle shows 't was not Reason in him but Will and Interest which made him so hot As for his Principle it self it subsists not at all For is it not known that more than one or two that is S. Cyprian and the African Fathers deny'd the Baptism of Hereticks Valid yet the Contrary was notwithstanding found and defin'd to be Faith and the Sence of the Church Let him consider how perfectly he engages himself in the very Sphere of Contingency and recedes from Universality the Sphere of Certainty when he comes to rely on one or two unless he can show those one or two strangely supported and upheld by Universal Nature or concurring Circumstances 'T is possible even one or two Lawyers may hap to be ignorant of two or three Acts of Parliament But my Ld is still the best confuter of himself as appears lately by this present Principle apply'd to his former carriage against our Church To himself then let him answer I conceive that if one or two's not denying it to be of Faith or affirming expresly 't is not-of-Faith he engages not so far but bare denying a point argues what many do affirm to be not-of-Faith à fortiori one or two's affirming positively that to be of Faith and the Doctrin of the Catholick Church which many others barely deny argues 't is of Faith 'T was of Faith then what Gennadius cited by himself p. 59. affirms that After Christs Ascension the Souls of all Saints go from the body to Christ This being so let him reflect what himself asserts p. 49. that Justin Mariyr Tertullian Victorinus Martyr Prudentius S. Chrysostom Arethas Euthimius and S. Bernard affirm none go to Heaven till the last day Either then Gennadius his Testimony delivering the doctrin of the Catholick Church is Inefficacious and yet 't is incomparably the best nay the onely Efficacious one in my Lds. whole book or else according to him many Fathers and not one or two onely denying a point is no argument but that point may be of Faith Whether all those Fathers held so or no is another Question and requires a longer discussion 32. Fathers then are useless to the Dissuader as having according to him no virtue at all of setling the Understanding Yet he must make a show of them else all 's lost and so he tells his Readers p. 8. as if all were well two things both very remarkable The one that notwithstanding In the prime and purest Antiquity the Protestants are indubitably more than Conquerours in the Fathers A high Expression but compar'd with what he sayes p. 7. that in those times our present differences were unheard-of it signifies that they miraculously more then conquer where if his words be true no mortals else could either conquer or even attacque For how should one fight against such points in difference from those Fathers who never heard of those points The other is that even in the Fathers of the succeeding Ages the Protestants have the advantage both numero pondere mensurà in number weight and measure which joyn'd to his words at the bottome of p. 7. that each side may eternally and inconfutably bring sayings for themselves out of those Fathers which signifies that 't is to no end or purpose to alledge them amounts very fairly to this that he brags Protestants have a far greater number of Citations which are to no purpose than Catholicks have that those Citations which have no possible force of concluding or no weight at all do weigh more strongly for them than for us and lastly that they have a greater measure than we of proofs not worth a rush with which they can bubble up their books to a voluminous bigness And we willingly yield them the honour of having a very great advantage in all three in case they be such as his own words qualifie them to wit that each side may Eternally and Inconfutably alledge them 33. We come now to his main and most Fundamental and in comparison his onely Principle p. 9. laid out thus We do wholly rely upon Scriptures as the Foundation and final resort of all our Persuasions but we also admit the Fathers c. To finish our Discourse about the Fathers will make way to the Scripture What means admitting as contradistinguisht to relying on Not relying on that 's certain for 't is contradistinguisht to it And yet to alledge any thing for a Proof as they do Fathers and not to rely on it is to confess plainly for Truth will out that they alledge them meerly for a show He sayes they admit them as admirable Helps for the Understanding the Scriptures and good Testimony of the Doctrin deliver'd from their Forefathers Have a care my Ld. This supposes the Certainty of Tradition For if there be no Certainty of delivery there is no doctrin delivered nor consequently any thing for them to testify and so the words good Testimony unless our Ground of Continual Tradition stands mean directly that they are good for nothing as your former Discourses or Principles made them But I ask is their Interpretation of Scripture or Testimony Certain If not why should they even be admitted Or how can Vncertain Interpreters and Witnessers be admirable Helps to interpret right and good Testimony I fear my Ld. can onely mean they are Admirable Helps as Dictionaries and Books of Criticisms are to assist his Human Skill about the outward Letter which is a rare Office for a Father and not to give him the inward Sence of it or the deliver'd Doctrin of the Catholick Church for unless All conspire to speak to the same point if any one be silent concerning it it argues not according to my Ld. p. 8. a Catholick Consent and so is far beneath an admirable help And this is what we reprehend exceedingly in the Protestants that they love to talk gaily in common of any Sacred or Grave Authority for an affected form or show but not at all value the Virtue or Power of such an Authority not judge interiorly they have any worth valuing They would credit themselves by pretending Fathers yet at the same time lay wayes to elude them at pleasure or which is their very temper springing from their renouncing Living and determinate Sence and adhering to dead unsenc't words they study to speak Indeterminately and confusedly not particularly and closely 34. Do I wrong them Let my Ld. clear me His First Principle is by him
are of Incomparable value not onely for the Divine Doctrin contain'd in them but also for many particular passages whose Source or first Attestation not being universal nor their nature much Practical might possibly have been lost in their conveyance down by Tradition Next follows those of Councils and Fathers and supposing Christ a perfect Law-giver 't is clear all they have to do with Faith is to witness the Churches beleef and the former of them to declare or explain Faith or the Churches Sence against obstinate Hereticks As such then their Books are to be valu'd that is exceedingly Next follow such as Euclid's or Archimedes his which express Science and those are of very great worth in regard they acquaint us with and manifest to our hands the Knowledge of the former world which being Speculative little of it could have come down by Tradition except when that Speculation became Practical and exprest it self in Matter by many useful or rather needful Arts Trades or Manufactures After these succeed Opinionative Books of which this last Age has produc't multitudes and these also are very useful if the Reader go not too credulously to work but have right Principles laid already in his head for then the variety of mens Conceits and their Reasons for them will hint to a Considerer diverse Consequences which otherwise the slowness and distractedness of our Reason would not have light of nay even the miscairiages of such Reasoners avail a wise man as Aristotle out of the contrary Opinions of Philosophers whom he saw failing in their Grounds gathered very happily the middle Truth These Books therefore are worth preserving Human Histories come next and These second Tradition in her object matter of Fact after she hath authenticated them and the Circumstances of their Writers There are others fit for Explications or Rational Declarations of a point by Similitudes allusions Examples such like as Pliny's Natural History Emblems Fictions others of an Ornamental Nature which being useful for Sermons and Discourses sutable to the middle size of the world 't is plain they are preservable With this caution that these and chiefly Opinionative books be either kept from the weak and credulous vulgar or else in the Preface to them some learned Authority declare in common how far they are to be credited lest by imposing on the reasons of the Generality they hinder the world's improvement Prayer-books and Recreation-books 't is almost as Evident they are to be preserv'd as 't is that Prayers and Recreations are to be used Onely caution is to be had the former be examin'd well and approov'd by Ecclesiastical Authority and that the later be chast and unabusive You have here my sentiment concerning Books against which you shall find nothing in Schism Dispatch't or any of my Writings In a word I would have every thing distinguish't examin'd by Grounds allow'd as far as 't is reasonable Nor wonder I much at your mistake of me in this point for you are not the onely man that thinks all Books and even Authority to be absolutely deny'd when they are sorted and rank't in their just degree of merit that is indeed settled and establish't for we Metaphysicians think nothing to stand firm but by being or being held-to-be truly what it is You denounce Wo to Colledges and Libraries if these men should prevail Yet you see now I leave you Libraries enow and permit you your onely darlings Books and onely desire you would love them wisely Neither will Colledges forfeit their Libraries to my Discourse Onely whereas you would have Schollers educated there onely pore on books Note and when they come to write quote I would have them take Principles along with them by which to judge and consider of what they read Without which 't is to be fear'd their much reading will do them more harm then good and even pervert honest natural Reason in them by filling their heads with a multitude of unconnected and unconnectible Ends of Sayings impossible to be ever postur'd in the frame of Reason and themselves unfurnish't of means to know which rather to adhere to which may sit them to talk indeed of many things like Parrats yet all the while for want of Principles know nothing of what they say If you would have Colledges consist of such I conceive I am a far better Friend to Colledges than your self are and that no great cause of Woe will come to them by my means But as our way in your conceit brings Woe to Colledges and Libraries so you affirm that Atheism and Mahometism will get by it By which I understand what a Disputant you are I beleeve you would quote Scriptures and Books to confute an Atheist or Mahometan whereas I conceive since all Discourse supposes an Agreement between the Discoursers in some Common Principle and they denie or undervalue your written proofs you must begin to confute them by Maxims of common Reason antecedent to all Authority For these Human Nature obliges all men to hold to unless they have quite irrationaliz'd themselves into perfect Scepticism whereas they reject or sleight the other which to render Efficacious you must go to work first with Principles of plain reason Your last Injury which I account the worst of all the rest is deliver'd thus Others of approved worth and abilities have met with this man who I think have done him more credit than he deserved This argues you are so set to abuse me that no Testimony though never so valid and confest to be such can stave you of And the Judgment or Veracity of my Friends who speak by Experience shall be question'd rather than you will be brought to entertain any conceit of me that 's handsome You leap voluntarily into Falsifications and ill-languag'd misconceits without any motive but are so restif and backward to think or speak in the lest civilly of me that witnesses of approved worth and abilities cannot win you to favourable apprehensions nor keep you from pursuing your resolute Censoriousness Had you found half that Testimony for the Authentickness of an old Writer in some mouse-eaten rag of Antiquity it had gone down currently with your Genius and bin next to Gospel I value not your Judgment of me but highly and equally dislike your humour as void of all Ingenuity whether it had been us'd to my self or another When you review Schism Dispatcht and see your mistakes I hope you will have a good conceit of my Friends at least for whom in this passage I apologize But that I may re-acquaint my self with you I am to tell you that you also have met me formerly and knew me very well Nay that I am exceedingly bound to you for the best favour in the world which is that accidentally you contributed to make me a Catholick But because 't is long ago I am forc't to remind you of it by two Tokens One is that in Durham-house where you at that time lodg'd when you came to
so qualify'd as is apt to convince to answer it and not at all by Protestant Grounds which yield them all Fallible yet I have that regard for any thing that tends though remotely to Solidity that I will even remit something of my own advantage to give it a respectful Consideration The Testimony is of Gennadius cited by my L. p. 58 59. thus For after Christ's Ascension into Heaven the Souls of all Saints are with Christ and going from the body they go to Christ expecting the resurrection of their body with it to pass into the perfection of perpetual bliss To which my Ld. subjoyns and this he delivers as the Doctrin of the Catholick Church I take this excellent Testimony as put down by himself to do which the usage of St. Greg. Nazianzen's immediately foregoing gives me small encouragement In answer then I affirm that this Testimony so insisted and rely'd on as against us is as plain a declaration of the Faith of our Church at present as any now-adayes Catholick could pronounce For since no Catholick holds that any goes to Purgatory but they who die Sinners to some degree and that all who are Saints are with Christ in Heaven as is evident by the Churches common language affirming constantly the Saints are in Heaven and never that the Saints are in Purgatory but the Souls onely it is manifest that the words are as expresly for us as we our selves could invent or wish I hope it will not wrogMethod if on this occasion I show how Protestant Writers speed when they bring against us any Testimony of a Father speaking as a Father that is declaring that he delivers the sence of the Catholick Church however in other Testimonies which speak not narratively or matter of Fact the very nature of words joyn'd with the variety of their Circumstances must needs afford room for ambiguity and several Glosses I affirm then that this Testimony not onely is not in the least opposit to us but is directly opposit to the Protestants in another point of Faith in which we differ To discover this let us reflect on the words After Christes Ascension into Heaven the Souls of all Saints are with Christ and ask what mean these words After Christs Ascension And first 't is Evident it puts a distinction between the Souls of Saints before Christs Ascension and After it in some Respect and what is this Respect most expresly this that the Souls of the Saints After Christes Ascension go from the body to Christ that is that before the Ascension none did The avowed Doctrin of the Catholick Church prosessing that those who die Saints in the Law of Grace go straight to Heaven but that the best Saints before our Saviours dying for them and Ascending with them did not Whence also we hold that Christes descending into Hell was to free them from that State of Suspence and Want of their strongly desired and hopet for Bliss According to that Hymn of S. Ambrose and S. Augustin in the Common-prayer-book so oft said over by rote but never reflected on When thou hadst overcome the Sharpness of death thou didst open the Kingdome of Heaven to all Believers Signifying plainly that no Believers sound Heaven open for them till after Christ's death By the Success of this one Testimony is seen how utterly the Protestant Cause would be overthrown by way of Testimony as well as Reason were Citations distinguish't brought to Grounds and those onely admitted from the Fathers in which 't is manifest they speak as Fathers or Witnessers of what is the present Churches doctrin To close up this Discourse about the Dissuader's Citations He is to show us first that they fall not under the Faulty Heads to which they are respectively assign'd or under diverse others of those Heads Next that they have in them the nature of Testimonies And lastly which is yet harder that though they have in them the nature of Testimonies their Authority is Certain and their language unambiguous so that they may be safely rely'd on for Principles or Grounds of a solid Discourse This if he shows of any one citation which strikes at our Faith I promise him very heartily to subscribe to the validity of all the rest 13. Thus much for his Authorities Next should follow a Refutation of his Reasons produc't against our Faith for as for those against our School-Divines or Casuists they concern not me as a Controvertist Let him and them fight it out Now Reasons that strike at our Faith must either be against the Ground of Faith and those shall be consider'd in my Answer to his First Section or against points of Faith And these may proceed two wayes First by showing those points Incomprehensible to our Natural Reason or unsutable to our Faney and this way he frequently takes making a great deal of game upon such subjects as any Atheist may do by the same way in points common to him and us But this hurts us not in the least in regard we hold not Mysteries of Faith Objects of Human Reason nor Spiritual Things the Objects of Fancy and so these Reasons need no farther Answer The other way Reasons against Points of Faith may proceed is to show those Points contradictory to some Evident Principles at least to some other known or else acknowledg'd Truth And these were worth answering But such as these I find none in his whole Book rather that he builds his sleight Descants or Discourses on some controvertible Text or Citation relying on them as firmly as if they were First Principles Indeed p. 65. the Dissuader tells us of a Demonstration of his for the Novelty of Transubstantion and that a plain one too But I shal manifest shortly from the very words of the Author Peter Lombard on which his Plain Demonstration relies that 't is either a plain mistake or plain Abuse of him nay argues the direct contrary to what the Dissuader product it for Some Consequences also he deduces ad hominem against diverse points of our Faith built on our own Concessions or Allow'd Truths taken from the Fathers by which he attempts to overthrow it But these Consequences are so strangely Inconsequent and those tenets he would counterpose so far from Contradictory that 't is hard to imagin whence his Reason took its rise to leap into such remote conclusions I 'le instance in two found p. 49 and 50. That the Conflagration of the last day and the Opinion of some Fathers that the Souls were detain'd in secret receptacles till the day of Judgment do both destroy intermediate Purgatory Which Consequences if he will make good I will vield his whole Book to be Demonstrative and Unanswerable In a word all the good Reasons he brings are taken from some of our Divines writing against others and he hath done himself the right to chuse the best which levelled against the opinion of a less able Divine in stead of a point of Faith must needs bear a
Opinions which pretend a Subordination to and Coherence with Faith Divines should first clear their Incoherence with it ere They engage their Authority against them and then to do it efficaciously being back't with the Majesty of the Council's Orders My Lds words that the Fathers of the Council set their Doctors as well as they can to defend all the new curious and scandalous Questions and to uphold the gainful trade is indeed to the purpose but withal by his leave an unhandsome and most false Calumny against so many Persons of Honour and Quality and so Invidious a Charge that could he have proov'd it he had not slubber'd it over so carelesly without offering any proof for it but his bare word nor with a sleight proper to himself immediately after he had directly charged it have half recanted it with However it be with them that is whether they did any such thing or no as he had so lately and so pressingly challeng'd them to have done And this I note as a Third Head of his disingenuity frequent in his Book that he brings very good proofs for diverse particulars which concern not our Church but when it comes to the very point and which directly strikes at her his own bare word We know or it is Certain p. 54. l. 22. p. 62. p. 63. p. 67. c. is the best Argument he produces 16. A fourth disingenuity is his Perverting wilfully the Intention of Catholick Authours How he hath dealt with the Council of Trent in the two late mention'd points of Indulgences and Purgatory is already shown In like manner has he treated the Expurgatory Indies For whereas by the word Purgari emaculari in a Citation of his own p. 21 it is manisest they meant but to amend Corruptions of the late by the Antient Copies he makes as though out of gripes of Conscience forsooth that the Fathers were not right on our side they had therefore purposely gone about to corrupt the Fathers themselves p. 18. and 19. so to make them on our side because we could not find them so An Attempt impossible to fall into head of any man not stark mad For this altering the Fathers could not have serv'd our turn unless we had made it known and publish't it and if made Publick could not be imagin'd to do the deed neither for the Fraud must needs be made as Publick as the Book So that an Action thus intended must be a Human Action without a Motive or Reason which is a Contradiction Worse is what follows p. 21 22. but withal the malice of it is more easily discoverable For 't is evident by the particulars he mentions in those Indexes or Tables that the Printer or Correcter who made them was an Heretick and put in those Tables what his perversness imagin'd was found in the Fathers Whence it was but fit his whole Index should be expung'd Not that we fear the Fathers but that we disallow the wicked intentions of the Index-maker who abuses the Fathers to injure us So p. 62. he would make Catholikes themselves dissatisfy'd of the Ground of Transubstantiation because they say 't is not express'd in Scripture as if Catholiks held that nothing could be of Faith but what 's expresly found there whereas he well knows they universally teach and hold the contrary But his abuse of Peter Lombard p. 64. 65. is very remarkable though perhaps it might spring out of his little Experience in School-divinity To make Transubstantiation seem a Novelty he would persuade his Reader Lombard sayes he could not tell whether there was any Substantial change or no Whereas that Authour Dist. 10. brings Testimonies of the Fathers to prove it and concludes thence that 'T is evident that the Substance of Bread is converted into Christ's Body and the Substance of Wine into his Blood which is what the Council of Trent calls Transubstantiation And there ends that Distinction After which immediately succeeds the 11th De modis Conversionis of the Manners of this Conversion and of these he sayes he cannot sufficiently define whether this Conversion be Formal or Substantial or of another kind So that Substantial here supposes the Conversion of the Substance of Bread into Christes Body and is put by him onely to signify one of the manners of this Conversion which he explicates to be Sic Substantiam converti in Substantiam ut haec essentialiter fiat illa that one Substance is so converted into another Substance that the one is made essentially the other Whereas others who also hold Transubstantiation do yet explicate that Conversion by putting the body of Christ to succeed under the same Accidents in place of the Substance of Bread annihilated Now this Manner of Conversion calld by him a Substantial Manner in opposition to Formal which he makes to be a Conversion both of Substance and Accidents and not in Opposition to the change of one Substance into another he leaves Undefin'd but the Conversion it self of the Substance of Bread into the body of Christ which is our point he both defines hold proves out of Fathers Disc. 10. and calls them Hereticks that deny it How unfortunate is my L. to quote an Authour as not holding Transubstantiation then to call that Citation a plain Demonstration that it was not known in his dayes whereas he both professes to hold it and by alledging Fathers for it evidences he holds it was held anciently and lastly gives my L. such hard language for not holding it himself Whether it be likely my L. should light by some accident in reading Peter Lombard onely on the 11th Dist. and never read or light on the end of the 10th let Indifferent men judge I onely desire the Reader to observe how ill my L. comes of with his plain Demonstration and to remark that he ever succeeds worst when he most ayms at a good and solid proof the reason of which is because Truth being Invincible the neerer one closes to grapple with her the worse still he is foil'd Those few Instances may suffice for the 4th Kind of the Dissuaders disingenuities which is to pervert the Intentions of his Authours of which sort were it worth the pains I would undertake to show neer an hundred in my Lds. Dissuasive This piece of Art being now so customary to him that 't is even grown into a second Nature 17. His fifth kind of disingenuity is a most wilful one and most frequent too for it takes up far the better half his book 'T is this that he rakes up together all the less solid or ill Opinions and Cases and sometimes deforms the good ones of some private Writers in the Church which he will needs lay upon the Church her self as Mistress of our Faith Nay so strangely unjust he is in this Particular that whereas it evidently clears our Faith disengages the Church and shows it but Opinion when other Catholick Doctors uncontrolledly write against such an Opinion or Explication
I can justifie my self I complain then that your carriage in this one page discovers you at once an absolute stranger to Science and withal very uncivilly Injurious to me all along without any imaginable need Ground or the least occasion given You begin with a mistake of the reason why the Rational Way explained in Rushworth's Dialogues was follow'd by me in Schism Dispatcht or rather why that way was devised and conceive 't is because we despair of maintaining the Popes Personal Infallibility and think all your own if you disprove this So that you strongly apprehend this the basis of all our Faith By which I see Opinion and Faith is all one with you Deceive not your self nor your Readers Sir our D râ— came and do dispute against personal Infallibilities far more strongly than you are even likely and if you please to look into our Councils you find no news of building Faith on any such ground but onely on Tradition The Way I take is the old-and-ever-Way of the Church the farther Explication of it is indeed new not occasion'd by our relinquishing Personal Infallibility of the Pope you shall never show the Church ever built her Faith on a disputable Ground but by this occasion Had you look't into Things and consider'd the progress of the Rational part of the world as well as you pore on Books you would have discern'd that the Wits of this last half Century have been strangely curious and Inquisitive and straining towards a Satisfaction apt to bring all into doubt which they conceiv'd to hinder their way to it Had you reflected on those Heroes of such Attempts the Noble and Learned Sr. Kenelm Digby des Caries Gassendus Harvey and now the Royal Society those living Libraries of Learning in their several wayes you would have found that parallel to them in the matter of Controversy were the Ld. Faukland and Mr. Chillingworth whose acute wits sinding no Establishment nor Satisfaction in the Resolution of our Faith as made by some particular Divines nor yet in the Grounds of the Protestant Beleef endeavour'd to shake the whole Fabrick of our Faith and allow but a handsome Probability to their own Whence Doubt and Inquisitiveness being the Parents of Satisfaction and Evidence Catholick Controvertists began to apply themselves more closely and regardfully to look into the Groundâ— of their Faith Tradition or Universal delivery seâ—tled from the beginning of the Church proceeded upon by Councils and all the Faithful insisted on and stuck to by the Fathers especially those who were most Controversial as Athanasius S. Augustin Tertullian S. Hierome c. and at large by Vincentius Lirinensis and to consider how Proper Causes lay'd in Things by the Course of God's Providence had the virtue to produce the Effect of deriving down with Infallible Certainty Christ's doctrin to us Hence sprung our farther Explication of this way which so much bewonders you This is your mistake now to your Injuries I quoted Rushworth's Dialogues and call'd it The rich Store-house of motives fortifying Tradition Upon this your Reason works thus This I do not understand I never heard of such an Authour and it is possible the better to cry himself up he might borrow another name What means This I do not understand I 'le acquaint the Reader It means you are so wedded to talk by the book that you are utterly at a loss if an Authour be quoted you have not heard of The reason of which is because as I see by your Discourses which look like so many dreams your Genius inclines you not much to trade in Books which pretend to the way of Reason and if Schism Dispatch't so amaz'd you 't is to be fear'd that Sure-Footing and its Corollaries may put you out of your wirts But with what Civility should you hint I so extoll'd my self under another name it being as you say but possible Should I put upon you all things that were possible what a Monster might I make you But it abundantly manifests your short reach of reason that 't is highly Improbable For either I must have discover'd my self to the world to be Authour of both books and then I had sham'd my self with so high self-praises or not have manifested it and then where 's the credit I had got by the other book I had so extoll'd Your next Injury is that I make nothing of and disclaim the Testimonies of Popes and Prelates calling them the words of a few particular men and cite for it Schism Dispatch't p. 98. where there is not one word of either Pope or Prelate nor of disclaiming any Testimony nor of calling those the bare words of a few particular men Now if this be so every word you charge against me is an injurious Calumny and your whole charge a direct Falsisication My words are these By this is shown in what we place the Infallbility of the CHURCH not in the bare words of few particular men but in the manifest and ample Attestation of such a Multitude c. Where though you cannot or will not yet the Reader if he understands plain English will see I meddle not with who is or is not Infallible besides the Church nor sean the validity of Testimonies of Popes or Prelates but treat in what the Infallibility of the CHURCH consists Now the word CHURCH denothing in its First Signification an Universality I place her Infallibility in Universal Attestation from Age to Age. Notwithstanding which my Corollaries in Sure-Footing if your Wonderment at my new Way or your own habituation to words will let you understand them will let you see I also place Infallibility in lesser Councils even in particular Sees but most in the Popes or the Roman not by way of an Afflatus of which I for my part an able to give no account but by a course of Things Natural and Supernatural laid by Gods sweetly-and-strongly ordering Providence in second Causes But what aggravates your Falsification is that whereas I there counterpose bare words and Attestation rejecting the first and making use of the later you make me affirm Testimonies to be bare words To which how much I attribute every such passage of mine will tell you for on them the way I follow entirely builds So that this whole Charge is either quite opposit or else disparate to what I say in the place whence you cite my words Your third Injury and 't is a strange one is that I sleight Scriptures Fathers and Councils as much in this business and call them in scorn Wordish Testimonies for which you cite Schism Dispatch't p. 42. But not such a word is found there nor I will undertake any where else in my Writings 'T is likely indeed that speaking of such things as you use to call Testimonies for you name every sleight Citation such whether it have the nature of Witnessing in it that is be built on Sensations or no I may say they are wordish in regard you have no
Certain means to arrive at their Sence and till then I beseech you what are they else but meer WORDS or rather meer Characters and Sounds What high deference I give to Scripture see § 18 19. beginning p. 146. in Sure-Footing To Councils see Corol. 27. To Fathers taking them properly you may be inform'd by the whole Body of my Discourse concerning Tradition of which they are a part and the Eminentest Members of it in Proportion to their number Your 4th Injury is that the onely thing I place Infallibility in is Oral Tradition and the Testimonies of Fathers of Families whereas I place Infallibilities also in other things though I make this the greatest But your discourse makes me disesteem and exclude all others both Popes Prelates Fathers and Councils by establishing this Whereas by settling this I establish all others nor find you any such Expressions in my Book on the contrary 't is evident by those words I include them unless you think Popes and Prelates are not Fathers of Families but take lodgings or hire rooms in other mens houses by the week Truth is being to express the obligatory descent of Faith from Age to Age I cast about for a common word fit to express such Deliverers and conceiv'd this of Fathers of Families the aptest because the Church consisting of Families this was most General and every Master of a Family by being such has an Obligation to see all under him taught their Catechism or Faith This in common which was enough for my purpose then But were I to distinguish the strength of those Testimonies I should show that a Priest hath an Incomparable advantage above a Layman a Bishop above him and the Head of the Church above a Bishop Your 5th Injury is lighter because it speaks but your own Apprehensions and I am to expect no better from you My many chimerical suppositions and my Impertinencies in which I so please my self must needs begets wonder say you in case the man as probably be of any account and reputation in the world Now my Suppositions in the way I take are chiefly these that men in all Ages had Eyes and Ears the wit and if they were good Christians the Grace not to tell an open and damnable ly to no purpose and for these I should much wonder my self if you did not wonder at such odd Grounds and esteem them Chimerical because you have read them in no ancient book for you use not to look into Things By this extravagant kind of dealing you say you cannot but suspect me to be one of the Fraternity of the new-pretended Lights I believe you heartily For to begin with Self-evident principles and thence to deduce Immediate Consequences is such a new Light to you as I dare undertake scarce one beam of it ever enter'd into the Eye of your Understanding I conceive 't is the difference between your way ours which breeds all this mis-intelligence Ours ayms to bring all Citations to Grounds by way of Cause and Effect yours to admit them confusedly especially if writ by some old Authors provided they speak not for the Interest of Papists for then they are questionable Ours is to be backwards in assenting to any thing writ long ago till our Reason be satisfy'd no Passion or mistake could invalidate its Authority yours to believe them hand over head if the book be but said to be Authentick which is to a degree the same Weakness as that of the rude Country people who think all true they see in Print and that their having a ballad of it is sufficient to authenticate it Our Principle is that no Authority deserves any Assent farther than Reason gives it to deserve and hence we lay Principles to assure us of Knowledge and Veracity in the Authour ere we yeeld over our Assent to his sayings Yours is kinder-hearted than to hold them to such strict terms and is well appay'd if some Authour you have a conceit of praise the other for a good Writer or his work for a good Book Ours is to lay Self-evident Principles and deduce immediate consequences and by this means to cultivate our Reason that noblest Faculty in us which constitutes us Men yours to lay up multitudes of Notes gleand from several Authours and if you better any Spiritual Faculty you have 't is your Memory not your Reason Hence we carry for the main of our Doctrin and as far as 't is antecedent to written Authority our Library in our Heads and can as well study in a Garden as sitting in a Library stufit with books whereas your way of Learning ties you to turn over leaves of Authours as children do their Dictionaries for every step of your discourse and as an ingenious man said of those Poets who spun not their Poems out of their own Invention but made them up of scraps of wit transcrib'd from other Authours Lord how they 'd look If they should chance to lose their paper Book So we may say of you that if your Notes you have with much pains collected hap to miscarry you are utterly at a loss so that little of your Learning is Spiritual and plac't in your Soul as true Learning should be but in material and perishable paper and characters In a word your whole performance ends here that you are able to declare what other men say whereas ours aims at enabling us to manifest what our selves KNOW No wonder then if our wayes being so different we cannot hit it but that as you think ours Chimerical so I assure my self yours and consequently all you write in that way is as far as you go about to conclude or cause Assent by it exceedingly ridiculous This I doubt not will confirm you in what you said before that I am no Friend to Ancient Books or Learning To Note-book Learning indeed not much to true Learning or Knowledge very much and even to the other as far as it conduces to This. To Books I am so much a Friend that I desire not a few should be selected of each sort by a General Council of Schollers and the rest burn'd as did an ingenious person but I would onely have the riff-raff burn'd 't is no great matter if that tedious Legend of Dr. Dee's Sprights accompany them and the Generality preserv'd but so that their Contents should be gather'd in Heads or Common-place books for Schollers to look in occasionally not for rational Creatures to spend their whole lives in poring on them and noting them with a foolish expectation to find true Knowledge by stuffing their Heads with such a gallimawfry and after 40. years thus spent never the wiser for indeed this is little better than for one to hope to frame himself a good sute of Apparel by picking thrums ends out of a multitude of old and overworn Garments But to the point I distinguish Books And as for the Scriptures ascertaining their Letter and Sence which is done by Tradition 't is clear they
over-bear me with the conceiv'd Authority of other Divines resolving Faith in their Speculative Thoughts after another manner than I do since this can onely tend to stir up Invidiousness against my person which yet their charity secures me from and not any wayes to invalidate mv discourse For every one knows t is no news Divines should differ in their way of explicating their Tenet which they both notwithstanding hold never the less firmly and every learned man understands that the word Divine importing a man of Skill or Knowledge in such a matter no Divine has any Authority but from the Goodness of the Proofs or Reasons he brings and on which he builds that Skill Please then to bring not the empty pretence of a Divines Authority or Name to oppose me with and I shall freely give you leave to make use of the Virtue of their Authorities that is their Reasons against me as much as you will I easily yeeld to those great discoursers whoever they be a precedency in other Speculations and Knowledges to which they have been more addicted and for which they have been better circumstanc't In this one of the Ground of Faith both my much Practice my particular Application my Discourses with our nations best Wits of all sorts my perusing our late acute Adversaries and the Answers to them with other Circumstances and lastly my serious and industrious studying the Point join'd with the clearing Method God's Providence has led me to have left me as far as I know in no disadvantage What would avail you against me and our Church too for my Interest as defending Tradition is indissolubly linkt with Hers is to show that our Church proceeds not on Tradition or that in Her Definitions She professes to resolve Faith another way rather than mine or which is equivalent to rely on somthing else more firmly and fundamentally than on Tradition But the most express and manifold Profession of the Council of Trent to rely constantly on Tradition has so put this beyond all possible Cavil on my side that I neither fear your Skill can show my Grounds in the least subcontrary to hers nor the Goodness of any Learned and considering Catholik however some may conceive the Infallibility of the Church plac't ad abundantiam in somthing else will or can ever dislike it I expect you may go about to disgrace my Way as new But I must ask whether you mean the substance of it is new or onely that 't is now deeper look't into and farther explicated than formerly If you say the former my Consent of Authorities p. 126 127 c. has clearly shown the contrary and common sense tells us no other way was or could be possibly taken for the Generality of the Church at least in Primitive times till Scripture was publisht universally and collected If the later please to reflect that every farther Explication or Declaration as far as 't is farther must needs be new and so instead of disgracing us you most highly commend our reasons for drawing consequences farther than others had done before us Again if it be onely a farther Explication it is for that very reason not-new since the Sence of the Explication is the same with the thing explicated As 't is onely an Explication then 't is not-new as farther 't is indeed new but withal innocent nay commendable But there are three things more to be said on occasion of this objecting Catholik Divines One is that taking Tradition for the living voice of the present Church as I constantly declare my self to do not one Catholick does or can deny it for he would eo ipso become no-Catholick but an Arch-heretick and this all acknowledge In the thing explicated then that is in the notion of Tradition all agree with me and consequently in the Substance of my Explication nor can any do otherwise except they be equivocated in the Word Tradition and mistake my meaning which I conceive none will do wilfully after they have read here my declaration of it so unmistakably laid down The second thing is that an Alledger of those Divines will onely quote their Words as Speculaters not those in which they deliver themselves naturally as Christians or Believers which Sayings were they collected we should finde them unanimously sounding to my advantage and not one of them oppositely And lastly speaking of our Explication as to its manner Divines contradict one another in other kinds of Explications but not one Author can be alledged that expresly contradicts this which I follow 10. My sixth request is that you would speak to the main of my Book and not catch at some odd words on the by as it were Otherwise understanding Readers will see this is not to answer but to cavil 11. And because we are I hope both of us endeavouring to clear Truth I am sure we ought to be so therefore to acquit your self to your Readers that you ingenuously aim at it I conceive you will do your self a great deal of right and me but reason nay which is yet weightier do the common Cause best service if you will joyn with me to retrench our Controversie as much as we can Let us then avoid all Rhetorical Digressions and Affectations of Witty and fine Language which I have declin'd in my whole Book and chosen a plain downright manner of Expression as most sutable and connatutural to express Truth Likewise all Repetitions of what particulars others have said or answer'd before us such as are the Objections made by that ingenious person the L. Faukland and the Answers given them in the Apology for Tradition unless it be conceiv'd those Solutions are insufficient and Reasons be offer'd why they are judg'd so For I conceive it an endless folly to transcribe and reprint any thing others have done before us except it be Grounds which ought to be oft inculcated and stuck to and those particulars which we show to be not yet invalidated but to preserve still their strength Much less do I suspect it can fall under the thought of one who aims to discourse rationally such my Answerer ought to be to rake together all the filth and froth of the unwarrantable Actions or Opinions of some in the Church or to run on endlesly with multitudes of invective invidious sayings on his own head without proof then apply them to the Church as does the Disswader It would also very much conduce to the bringing our differences to a narrower compass if you would candidly take my Book endwayes and declare what in it is evident and so to be allowed what not What Principles are well laid or Consequences right drawn and what are otherwise To requite which favours I promise the same Carriage in my Reply to you By this means it will be quickly discover'd whether or no you have overthrown my Discourse by showing it ill coherent and how far 't is faulty that if I cannot clear it to be connected I may confess