to cheat their posterity into everlasting damnation And is this to say the Conclusion over in the Antecedent and then infer it in the Consequent Beseech you Sir restrain those sallies of wit to things lesse dangerous to be plaid upon then salvation Lastly you object Mr Whites saying that several condemn'd Tenets are maintain'd in other terms by some Divines and assume that these Divines holding nothing as of Faith but what was delivered by the former age would have no Error And that is true meaning Errors in Faith but Divines proceed upon other Rules when they err and their Errors concern no Faith but Divinity It may indeed so happen that these Errors in Divinity do also contradict some point of Faith but that the equivocation of terms hinders them from seeing in which case the Position is erroneous and against Faith the beleef of the maintainer who sees not so much very good and unblameable Now if I understand the Position right 't is no more then this that some Divines understand not the force of terms used by themselves which rigorously scanned may happen to contain an error unperceived by him who uses them but dives not so far into them Remember then if you please the case is of Divines that is of persons working according to the rules of science not of faithful proceeding upon grounds of Faith after which I hope you will not infer an Error in the rule of Faith because there be errors in things concluded by other Principles ¶ 5. And truly if I have eyes Mr Rushworth does not more then shew a kinde of possibilitie that all points of faith could have been handed down the first delivered them to the second Age the third heard them of the second the fourth of the third c. But is this a proving of it that it was so or that no material corruptions could have crept in why else does he object against himself what is most obvious to be seen A posse ad esse non valet consequentia That cuts the throat of his Arguments so that yet there 's no certainty proved that which he answers is indeed reasonable you should think they were because they might be so handed but go no further yet till you prove more and seeing you conceive a possibilitie of such descent Remember the contrary possibilitie much more probable that there may be errors crept in but till you see you will not beleeve they are I shall not entreat you out of your Religion only I beg and wish you hold no more then your Arguments prove only a possibilitie but it is easier to deviate from the streight rule of truth then alwayes to keep to it ¶ 5. When you writ this Paragraph your thoughts certainly were so fixed upon the place in which your objection is brought in that the next leaves almost the next lines escape their observance The least advance would have suggested to them that not only a possibility of preserving truth but a plain actual indefectibility is aim'd at Not but that a possibility is enough such a possibility I mean or power as we speak of that is such as has the nature of a proper cause to its effect that is which should have done the effect Since if our Rule be proper to convey the truth to us no body can rationally affirm it has not done what 't is granted 't was of its own nature apt to do without evidencing what he says Let those therefore who upon pretence of errors refuse communion with us take it to heart and either plainly evince him or tremble at the horrour of living in a continued and obstinate schisme As for the edge of that maxime A posse ad esse non valet consequentia The Dialogues shew 't is taken off by this other frustra est potentia quae nunquam reducitur in actum the power in this case being but to one effect and to repeat what they say which is all I have to do seems unnecessary To guess at what the following discourse aims which puts a possibility of truth and a possibility of error this indeed the more probable but no more then probable I am quite at a losse Would you have no certaintie in Religion that is no Religion at all in the world For with what steadiness can I act in order towards Heaven if my thoughts be perpetually checkt with this doubt for example that perhaps there is no Heaven at all and if I be uncertain of it is it possible to shake off the doubt Till I comprehend your design therfore I shall only desire you to reflect that if the possibility of error be only the more probable then 't is but probable then the contrary though less is yet probable too then it may be there are no errors in the Church you refuse communion with Therefore since to divide is as much as lies in the divider to destroy the Church and to destroy the Church is to take away all hopes of salvation for since we cannot know the way to Heaven of our selves if we lose our mistress that should teach it us there can remain no ground of hope and this from all mankind consider if you please what 't is to continue a separation and at the same time acknowledge that perhaps there are no errors that is no ground why you should do so But we will beleeve no errors till we see them no indeed we will not contradict nature so much which supposes every man innocent till he be proved guilty In return to your civility of not intreating me out of my Religion I will intreat you not to be out of it neither and to remember that your soul being equally concern'd with mine 't is your obligation as well as mine not to beleeve any errors where you see there may be none till you see they are there and that not probably but with undeniable evidence when as you will be able to shew them I promise you I will be ready to desert them ¶ 6. But Mr. White would fain prove more from the natural inclination of truth and happiness this I think if it prove any thing proves man will needs be a groping after some Religion or other but that it should be after the true or make him preserve the true Religion I shall give Account why I will not assent unto without corruption I see not or why it should not prove as well that every particular man in whom there is such an inclination should preserve the truth My Reason why that inclination spoken of doth no way prove the Point is from the fall of Adam if there were no such thing as the corruption of mans nature Mr Whites Reason would have more likelihood in it and hereby appears the weakness of your cause in that you are fain the acutest of you to have recourse to such Bulrushes to make weapons of as the corrupt nature of man ready to uphold what the pure Oracles of God No the
receive all decisions from you for certainties and these shall be derived to following Ages and so Traditions of later date go for Apostolike God forbids not the Doctors out of two truths delivered to gather a third nor those that are no Doctors to do the same if they can but who gives the Doctors of your Church power to command their people to beleeve all their decisions certainly true without any more adoe Whether they be true or no it matters not as long as they are uncertain to any one he is not bound to beleeve them certainly true p. 31. Mr White demands whether the refuser have a demonstration against those truths he refuseth to give absolute assent unto no what then must he therefore assent Is it not a sufficient ground not to assent because he has no sufficient to assent I think it is and I pray do you shew the contrary if I mistake ¶ 10. A hundred Mathematicians only tell me there is another world besides this just such another they are satisfied but give me no ground to know the same must I needs swear it is so and assent to that I know not as a certain truth thus you suffer your selves to be led by the noses into a thousand absurdities though the man by his probabilities is not to conclude rashly all the Doctors determinations to be false yet though he had no probability against their decision he must deny assent only upon this ground that he has not sufficient evidence to conclude their determinations certain I ask of you when a Council of yours meet and from two truths received arrive at the discovery of a third Tenet can the Council erre in this Deduction or no I see no reason to say they cannot there 's no promise for it they are all every one of them singly taken one by one fallible men as well as others Nay Mr White p. 227. says they may when he denies any Fathers saying a sufficient proof of a point no says he not the chiefest of them no not 300 of them together for so many Bishops in a Council have erred well then it is possible they should err though I will suppose it less probable then that one man should erre well but still it is possible they should err and with what candor can Mr White call it an obstinate and malepert pride not to subscribe to a fallible judgement as infallible or certain I call it blind folly to do it must I beleeve that true which I have no sufficient ground for I have it not because their bare Assertions or judgement who may be mistaken are fallible so then I should beleeve a lie morally if not logically to me though not in it self because it is uncertain ¶ 11. Now consider is this a trifle uno absurdo concesso mille sequuntur though the first uncertainty which they concluded a certain truth be but a smal falshood as it is possible afterwards more must needs follow being built upon the former and so what wonder that Church swarms with Errors where such a principle is admitted Yet this way must be taken the certain word of the eternal God shall be thrown aside and fallible men that are parties too in the cause shall ascend the throne and make their word a Law ther 's difference between keeping quiet and not contradicting and between being forced to subscribe to what a man knows not certainly this is wickedness in them that force it it is forcing often to sin what is not of faith is sin But besides though Mr White say one single man cannot have a demonstration against that which is determined true though we suppose it rare it is possible for one man to find out what all the world besides is ignorant of as many have Mr Whites own instance of Des Cartes is sufficient who found out more then many learned Clerks with twice the poring and will you force all to subscribe notwithstanding ¶ 9 10 11. The Discourse in your following Paragraphs is strong and worthy your self and though by mistake of our Tenets not concluding against us yet full of excellently deduced truth And first to defend Mr White who only maintains the addition of Truths why do you so confidently call that an evident way how Error might enter and spread it self in the Church Is Truth and Error all one or does it follow that because men are content to admit of what they see to be true they will not check at what they either see is false or do not see is true Will it ever follow out of Mr Whites Position that there is no harm in adding of truths that the mischeif of adding errors cannot be avoided Now because I conceive the mistake your whole Discourse runs upon is occasioned by a wrong apprehension of the infallibility of Councils I find it necessary to observe that though some of our Doctors speak of Councils so indistinctly that they beget such an opinion of their infallibility and authority as I perceive you fancie yet the best Divines with whom Mr White agrees do not allow any power in the Church of making new Articles of Faith that is of making that to be faith to day which was not faith yesterday and the day before and always which it could not be without being taught by Christ and his Apostles whence 't is evidently consequent that if they cannot make any new thing to be faith neither can they oblige any to receive and beleeve it as faith Their power therefore of imposing Faith upon us whatever fancies the confusion of some Discourses hath raised extends no farther then to such things as both were and were known to be faith before their Imposition And sure no danger can be suspected from an Authority of commanding that which the whole world sees whether they have authority to do or no. And so much for faith As for truths collected from Premises First it appears they have no power to introduce them into the Catalogue of faith I except such as appear plainly at first sight and need no skill at all to their deduction which though in rigour they be not properly faith are yet in a moral estimation accounted the same and so by the world which in such plain things cannot be deceived are indifferently beleeved Secondly A Council being an Assembly of the learnedst men in the Church cannot be denied to see into consequences far enough to know whether they be truly deduced or no so that if they ingage for the truth of any one as it cannot be exalted into faith so neither can it be imagined falls without some prejudice crossing the disposition of nature which moves us to beleeve every one in his trade Neither do I think whatever you say of your hundred Mathematicians in which science being your self a Master to trust is improper but that if half a hundred Carpenters should agree such a peice of timber would fit such a house or as many Surveyers that
suo antevertit arcano sacrificii genere quod ab hominibus cerni non poterat seipsum pro nobis hostiam offert victimam immolat sacerdos simul existens agnus Dei ille qui mundi peccatum tollit Quando id praestitit cum corpus suum discipulis congregatis edendum sanguinem bibendum praebuit tunc aperte declaravit agni sacrificium jam esse perfectum For he who by his power disposes all things doth not expect the necessity now neerly approaching from his betraying expects not to be set upon by the Jews like Theeves expects not I say the sentence of Pilate that their malice may be the beginning and cause of the common safetie of mankind but by his providence prevents them and by a hidden kinde of sacrifice which could not be discerned by men offers himself an Host for us and immolates a Victim being himself both Priest and Lamb of God that Lamb which takes away the sin of the world When did he perform this when he gave his bodie to be eaten and blood to be drunk to his Disciples gathered together then he openly declared the Sacrifice of the Lamb to be now accomplished S. Hierom. ep ad Hedib q. 2. Nec Moyses dedit nobis panem verum sed Dominus Jesus ipse conviva convivium ipse comedens qui comeditur Neither did Moses give us the true bread but our Lord Jesus himself both guest and banquet himself both eating and eaten Cyril Al. l. 10. in Joan. c. 13. Non tamen negamus recta nos fide charitateque syncera Christo spiritualiter conjungi sed nullam nobis conjunctionis rationem secundum carnem ejus illo esse id profecto pernegamus idque à divinis scripturis omnino alienum dicimus An fortassis putat ignotam nobis mysticae benedictionis virtutem esse quae quum in nobis fiat nonne corporaliter quoque facit communicatione carnis Christi Christum in nobis hahitare Vnde considerandum est non babitudine solum quae per charitatem intelligitur Christum in nobis esse verum etiam participatione naturali Non credis mihi haec dicenti Christo te obsecro fidem praebe Nevertheless we do not deny that we are joyned spiritually to Christ by a righs faith and sincere charity but that we are not at all joyned to him according to the flesh that we utterly deny and affirm it to be altogether against the Divine Scriptures Does he think we are ignorant of the efficacie of the mystical blessing which when it is performed in us doth it not make Christ dwell in us even corporally too by communication of the flesh of Christ Whence is to be considered that Christ is in us not habitually onely that is by charity but also by a natural participation too You beleeve not me in these matters I beseech you beleeve Christ Cyril Hier cat myst 4. Cum igitur Christus ipse sic affirmet atque dicat de pane hoc est corpus meum Quis deinceps audeat dubitare ac eodem quoque confirmante dicente hic est sanguis meus Quis inquam dubitet dicat non esse illius sanguinem aquam aliquando mutavit in vinum quod est sanguini propinquum in Cana Galileae sola voluntaâ—e non erit dignus cui credamus quod vinum in sanguinem transmutasset Ne ergo consideres tanquam panem nudum vinum nudum Corpus enim est sanguis Christi secundum ipsius Domini verba quamvis enim sensus hoc tibi suggerit tamen fides te confirmet ne ex gustu rem judices quin potius habeas ex fide pro certissimo ita ut nulla subeat dubitatio esse tibi donata corpus sanguinem Hoc sciens pro certissimo habens panem hunc qui videtur non esse panem etiamsi gustus panem esse sentiat sed esse corpus Christi vinum quod à nobis conspicitur tametsi senâ—ui gustus vinum esse videatur non tamen vinum sed sanguinem esse Christi Since therefore Christ himself affirms it says of Bread This is my body who dares from thenceforth doubt it himself also confirming and saying This is my bloud who I say is there can doubt and say it is not his bloud In Cana of Galilee he did heretofore by his onely will change water into wine which approaches to bloud and will he become not worthy to be beleeved that he has changed wine into bloud Do not therefore consider it as bare bread and bare wine for according to the words of our Lord himself it is the body and bloud of Christ for although sense do suggest this unto thee yet let faith confirm thee that thou do do not judge of the thing by thy taste but rather hold by faith for most certain so that there be no place for doubt that what is given thee is body and bloud Knowing this and holding for most certrin that this Bread which is seen is not Bread although the taste judge it to be so but the Body of Christ and the Wine which is seen by us although to the sense of taste it seem Wine yet is not Wine but the bloud of Christ S. Aug. Ep. 162. Tolerat ipse Dominus Judam Diabolum sunem venditorem suum sinit accipere inter innocentes discipulos quod fideles noverunt pretium nostrum And in Psal 33. con 1. Ferebatur in manibus suis Hoc vero fratres quomodo posset fieri in homine quis intelligat Quis enim portatur manibus suis manibus aliorum potest portari homo manibus suis nemo portatur Quomodo intelligatur in ipso David secundum literam non invenimus in Christo autem invenimus ferebatur enim Christus in manibus suis quando commendamus ipsum corpus suum ait hoc est corpus meum Our Lord himself endures Judas a Devil a Thief who sold him he suffers him to receive amongst his innocent Disciples that which the faithful know to be our price Again upon these words of Psal 33. And he was carried in his own hands But this brethren how it may be verified in man who can understand for who is carried in his own hands in the hands of another a man may be carried no man is carried in his own How this may literally be understood of David we do not find of Christ we do for Christ was carried in his own handâ— when recommending his own very body he said This is my body S. Chrys in Matth. 26. Hom. 83. Credamus itaque ubique Deo nec repugnemus ei etiamsi sensui cogitationi nostrae absurdum esse videatur quod dicit superet sensum rationem nostram sermo ipsius quod in omnibus praecipue in mysteriis faciaâ—us non illa quae ante nos jacent solummodo aspicientes sed verba quoque ejus tenentes nam verbis ejus defraudari