bide by us and we by it all our whole lives till we arrive at our future state the Region of Light where we shall see facie ad faciem who sees not that it must be held and so since there can be no Necessity to hold a thing to be what 't is not must be Impossible to be false for otherwise were we to hold it that is were it self possible to be False it ought to be held Alterable when ever more Light should appear discovering it to be an Errour To evince this Truth I have produc't multitudes of Arguments in Faith vindicated none of which has been thought fit to be reply'd to though mine and Faith's opposers still craftily persist to insinuate the contrary Errour But I will at present make use only of one which will I conceive best conclude the Point between us For Dr. St. makes Scripture the Rule of Faith and so speaks of Faith as standing under what he conceives the firmest and clearest Ground and which was left by God for Mankind to embrace Faith I do the same when I assert the Churches Testimony or Tradition to be the Rule So that neither of us speak of the particular odd ways by which some persons casually come to have Faith nor of Faith as had by such means but of the common road-way left by God for Mankind to attain to Faith and of Faith as standing under such a Means or Rule Upon this Agreement if we joyn issue and proceed it seems that nothing but evident Obstinacy against manifest Truth can hinder us from agreeing in our Conclusion For since if we may be deceiv'd in beleeving even while we follow the direction of that Rule which God himself has appointed to light us to Faith it would follow that there is no means imaginable likely to do that effect as also that God himself had deceived us which is both Blasphemous and Impossible it must follow That Faith built upon the Rule left by God whether Scripture or Tradition must be Impossible to be an Errour and consequently its Ground or Rule must be Impossible to be False or Erroneous Wherefore Dr. St. is oblig'd as well as I am to hold heartily this double Conclusion and if he attempts to discourse of that point to make it out that the Rule he assignes is such as cannot leave us in Errour and our Infinitely-perfect God in the blame How far short he hath fallen hitherto of making out his pretended Rule of Faith viz. Scripture as standing under the Judgement of every private person to be Impossible to suffer men to err while adhering to that way is already shown How heartily now he asserts Faith it self built on the Means or Rule left by God to be Impossible to be Erroneous or False comes next to be examined 20. No mans Faith can therefore be Infallible meerly because the Proponent is said to be Infallible because the nature of Assent doth not depend upon the objective Infallibility of any thing without us but is agreeable to the Evidence we have of it in our mindâ—s for Assent is not built on the nature of things but their Evidence to us This Principle begins with a Fallacy of non causa pro causa For what man in his Witts ever said or held that Faith must therefore be Infallible meerly because the Proponent is said to be Infallible must a meer saying that is a saying neither self-evident nor prov'd be held a competent Ground to build the Existence of any thing upon But let us suppose that Dr. St. by the words is said to be meant is or prov'd to be as is indeed our true Tenet let 's see how he confutes us Our Tenet is that in case the Proposer of Faith be Infallible all that rely on It for that particular are by so doing Infallible likewise He argues against us from the nature of Assent which he sayes depends not on the Objective Infallibility of any thing without us but is agreeable to the evidence we have of it in our minds If he means by the words depends not such a dependence as is Immediate I grant it For our Assent being an effect wrought in our Soul and a Result of some foregoing knowledges notions or natures of things within us which produce that Assent if it be a Conclusion or compound it if a First Principle 't is impossible any thing without us and staying there without evidencing it self to our minds or breeding some Interiour discovery of itâ—elf there should beget any Assent at all concerning it But if he means by those words that our Assent depends not mediately or depends not at all on the Object without us as his large Expression seems to signify then 't is absolutely deny'd For the Evidence of the Thing in us is an Effect of the nature of the Thing without us nor could evidence of the Thing in us cause Assent without such dependence on the Object or Thing without us for unless by means of the Object and dependence on it this Evidence it self could not be The last words For Assent is not built on the nature of things but their evidence to us is but a Tautology or short rehearsall of the reason lately given and so needs no new Answer Yet however D. St. for want of Logick expresses himself ill confusedly there is notwithstanding a kind of knot in in his discourse and I shall lend my best Assistance to loose it but first it will be necessary to put down his three next Principles since they all seem to club into one Dilemma against Infallibility 〈◊〉 Proponent 21. It is therefore necessary in order to an 〈◊〉 Assent that every particular person be infallibly assisted in judging of the matters proposed to him to be beleeved so that the Ground on which a necessity of some Externall Infallible Proponent is asserted must rather make every particular person Infallible if no Divin Faith can be without an Infallible Assent and so renders any other Infallibility useless 22. If no particular person be Infallible in the Assent he gives to matters proposed by others to him then no man can be Infallibly sure that the Church is Infallible and so the Churches Infallibility can signify nothing to our Infallible Assurance without an equal Infallibility in our selves in the belief of it 23. The Infallibility of every particular person being not asserted by those who plead for the Infallibility of a Church and the one rendring the other useless for if every person be Infallible what need any representative Church to be so and the Infallibility of a Church being of no effect if every person be not Infallible in the belief of it we are farther to inquire what certainty men may have in matters of Faith supposing no externall Proponent to be Infallible Ere I begin my Discourse I am to note Dr. St's shuffling way of contriving his Sentences here or of penning his Principles as he call's them His 21st contends 't is necessary
by him and what 's agreeable can Now who sees not that this signifies nothing either to the Exclusion or Admission of any particular Way unless we subsume thus But this or that is most agreeable or disagreeable to the said Attributes whence follows therefore it is to be admitted or rejected by him Whence 't is clearly seen that no Argument can be drawn from those Attributes alone without taking in the consideration of the nature of the Way it self and its sufficiency or insufficiency as Dr. St. himself confesses in common at the end of the 8th Principle though he perpetually avoids to examin the particular nature of his Way and its Fitness of mankind to build Faith upon its evidence Yet let us see at least though it be so plain a point how weakly he proves that we are not to argue from those Attributes It being says he in the power of God to make choice of several ways c. we ought not to dispute from the Attributes of God the necessity of one particular c. so that the Argument stands thus Because 't is within the extent of Gods Power therefore it crosses not but agrees with all those other Attributes otherwise if it did we could with good reason argue from them against Gods having made choice of such a way Now this reason of his is so palpably absurd that I admire the meanest Divine living could stumble upon it For what man who holds God Omnipotent can doubt but that his Power can reach to reveal his Will to every single man by hourly Apparitions the flying of Birds nocturnal Dreams or throwing of Dice upon a Fortune-book yet no wise man will doubt but were we to inquire what is the way fit for God to reveal his Will to mankind by we should reject these as misbecoming Gods Wisdom c. and for the same reason all others but one in case noneX but that one were of it self qualified to do that Effect as it ought and so befitting Gods Wisdome to make choice of it and yet notwithstanding all this it might lie within the the compass of the Power of God to chuse several others It follows but we ought to enquire what way God himself hath chosen and whatever he hath done we are sure cannot be repugnant to Infinit Iustice Wisdom Goodness and Truth All this is yeilded to unless he means this to be the only way of arguing from Gods Attributes as he would seem which I must deny and demand of him why 't is not equally Argumentative to say This way of Revealing or Rule of Faith as both Experience and Reason shows is evidently incompetent to give Faith that Certainty which its Nature and the many Effects to be produc'd by it and Obligations incumbent on it require it should have therefore I am sure 't is repugnant to Gods Justice Wisdom Goodness and Truth and so can never have been chosen by him Or thus God is infinitly Wise Good Iust and True therefore he hath not chosen a way so Incompetent to those Ends. In the same manner as out of the known Incapacity of a sieve to draw water or to ferry one over the Sea to the Indies we may conclude demonstratively that 't is unbeseeming Gods Infinite Wisdome Goodness Justice and Truth to assign that for a Means to attain that End Or if God in some extraordinary case intends such a Miracle 't is necessary all those who are to use those means be absolutely assur'd of this wonderful Assistance otherwise if they compass not that End but perish in the Sea they may blame their own presumptuous rashness which would needs tempt God for their miscarriage and not God who never bound himself by promise in frequent and ordinary transactions to bring about Effects miraculously by Imcompetent Causes How weakly Dr. St. presumes rather than proves that God has chosen Scriptures Letter to be the Rule of Faith will be seen hereafter 8. Whatever way is capable of certainly conveying the Will of God to us may be made choice of by him for the means of making known his Will in order to the happiness of Mankind So that no Argument can be sufficient à priori to prove that God cannot chuse any particular way to reveal his mind by but such which evidently proves the Insufficiency of that means for conveying the Will of God to us First Taking the words certain conveying to mean Absolute Certainty as I prov'd before in this and in divers Treatises of mine to be requisit I am next to distinguish the word capable which may either mean that the Way in common may possibly bear it in case it shall please God to use his best Power to improve it and make up its defects with all the Assistances it can need Or it may mean that such a way or manner as it stands now on foot in the world for example the Scriptures Letter as 't is now contriv'd is of it self capable of conveying the will of God to us with absolute Certainty without needing any other Thing to regulate us in the understanding it Whatever is capable in the later sense I grant may be made choice of by God for the means of making known his will For this being suppos'd to have in it self actually all that is requisite for such an effect is fitting to be made use of by God whose Wisdome and Goodness it becomes when he acts not miraculously to use every thing as it is or according to its nature establish'd by the same Wisdome But I deny that what is capable in the former sense may alwaies be thus made choice of by God For however such a way in common may be made capable to do that effect if it should please God to exert his Power to support its natural defectiveness as is exemplifi'd before in Dreams Apparitions and those other odd methods there mention'd yet 't is unsuitable to Gods Wisdome Goodness or other Attributes to show himself so extraordinarily in things which reach the Generality of Mankind and this for a perpetuity and so ought to be allow'd onely his ordinary Concourse especially if other means be already plac'd in the world able to perform this with a constant orderly and connatural assistance If then we can prove the Insufficiency of any Particular means taking it alone as 't is now found extant belonging to such a way in Common for example of the Scriptures Letter as it now is to give Mankind Absolute Certainty of Gods sense or Faith then however the way of Writing in Common can possibly be supported by Gods Infinit Power so as to be able to work the Effect of thus Certifying us of its sense yet not being such of its own nature taking it as it stands now thus contriv'd 't is not a fitting Instrument for Gods ordinary Providence to make use of for such a general Effect as is the Certifying all sorts of people of their Faith 9 There are several ways conceivable by us how
Certainty we have of all that concerns it ought by consequence be better grounded and firmer then any or all it's superstructures Also 't is ill Divinity to counterpâ—se matters of Faith to the Means to keep men from sin in their lives since Matters of Faith or Christ's doctrin is the very best of those Means or to pretend that Errours in Opinion I suppose he means in Faith that being the point are not more dangerous to mens Souls than a vicious life for this supposes Faith no part of a Christian Life nor Infidelily Heresy Iudaism or Turcism to be vices which by consequence degrades Christian Faith from being a virtue contrary to the Sentiment of all Christianity since the beginning of the Church I shall hope from any impartial and Intelligent Reader who is a Christian that he will acknowledge these Posiâ—ions of mine bear a clear Evidence either in theâ— sâ—lves or in their Prâ—ofs and consequently that the opposite ones advanc't either Explicitely or Implicitly by Dr. St. are both Obscure and which is worse Vntrue The Total Account of Dr. St's Principles THus have I spoken distinctly and fully to Dr. St's Principles It were not amiss to sum up their merits in brief and give a short character of them that so it may be seen how infinitly short they fall of deserving so Honorable a Name But first we are to speak a word or two to the Principles agreed on by both sides of which the First and Third are great Truths and the word God and Obedience due to God now then barely nam'd but no kind of Conclusions are drawn from those two particular Propositions influential to the End intended viz. to reduce the Faith of the Protestants to Principles whence though they are most Certain Truths yet as standing here they are no Principles The 2d and 4th which concern God's Attributes are not at all us'd neither For he cannot use them alone to evince Scripture's Letter is the Rule unless he first prove that Scripture's Letter is the fittest for that End and that therefore it become Gods's Attributes to chuse it which he no where does and whereas he would argue thus Princ. 7. God hath chosen it for a Rule therefore 't is agreeable to his Attributes 't is both Frivolous because all is already concluded between us if he proves God has chosen Scripture for that end for then 't is granted by all it must be agreeable to his Attributes and also Preposterous for he makes that the Conclusion which should be in case he argu'd from God's Attributes the Principle For his Argument ought in that case to run thus Gods Wisdom and Goodness has chosen that for a Rule which is wisest and best to be chosen but Scriptures Letter is such therefore he has chosen it for a Rule The 4th and 5th are either never made use of by him as Principles or else they make directly against himself For Fallible Certainty only which having discarded that which is Infallible he sustains can never make any one know what is God's will This is an ill beginning and a very slender Success hitherto let us see next whether he has better luck with his own Principles The first taking the words literally and Properly as they ought to be taken in Principles is against himself for he confesses there that such a way of Revelation is in it self neccessary to our Intire Obedience to God's will as may make us know what the will of God is but common sense tells us that Fallible Certainty which only having rejected Infallible Certainty he can maintain is farr from making us Know This Principle therefore is either against himself or if he means to go less by the word Know than what is apt absolutely and truly to ascertain 't is nothing to his purpose for so it can only settle Opinion and not Faith The second is Useless Impertinent and in part False The Third is False and Impertinent to boot The Fourth is Ambiguous and taken in that sense when distinguish't which he seems to aym at 't is absolutely False The 5th is Absurâ—d Preposterous and against all Art in putting us to argue from what 's less known to what 's more known and withal totally False The 6th is Sophiâ—tically Ambiguous and in great part False The 7th builds on a groundless pretence and contains a notorious 〈…〉 The 8th is to no purpose or sinâ—â— as appears in the Process of his discourse he means by the words Certainly and Know only Fallible Certainty which is none at all he cannot possibly advance by such a discourse towards the settling us a Certain Rule of Faith Besides he either supposes Scripture as it now stands Sufficient which is to beg the Question or else he confounds God's Ordinary Power working with the Causes now on foot in the world which only concern'd the present point with his Extraordinary or what he can possibly effect by his Divine Omnipitence The 9th only Enumerates the several ways how God may be conceiv'd to make known his will and in doing so either minces or else quite leaves out the Tradition of Gods Church as if it were Vnconceivable God should speak to men by their Lawfull Pastors in the Church whereas yet himself must confess that in the beginning of the Church Faith either was signify'd and certify'd by that or no way The 10th goes upon a False Supposition and includes two Fallaces call'd by Logicians non causa pro causa or assigning a wrong Cause and omitting the True one Also 't is in part False in saying words are equally oapable of being understood spoken or written and lastly it confounds again God's Ordinary Power with his Extraordinary The 11th makes account there is no benefit of Divine Writings but in being the Rule of Faith which is against Common sense and daily Experience The 12th comes home to the point but 't is perfectly Groundless Unprov'd False and as full of Absurdities of severall sorts as it can well â—old The 13th begins with a False Position proceeds with a False and unprov'd Supposition and endeavours to induce a most Extravagant Conclusion only from Premisses granted kindly by himself to himself without the least Proof The 14tb contains three False and unprov'd Suppositions viz. that God promis't his Church to deliver his whole will in Writings or that the Writers of Scripture had any order from God to write his whole will explicitly or that the primitive Church beleev'd it to have such a perfection as to signify without needing the Church all saving Truth to every sincere Reader with such a Certainty as is requisit to Faith The 15th begins again with a False and unprov'd Supposition and draws thence a consequence not contain'd in the Proof and in part against the interest of his own Tenet and Lastly brings in confirmation of it an Instance which makes against himself The 16th putts upon Catholicks a Tenet they never held and is wholly False Irrational and Absurd assuming
The Twelfth has nothing new but what is built on this Manifest Truth None can be assur'd without Means to assure which since Means speaks that by virtue of which as a necessary requisit an End s to be compas't that is without which it cannot be compas't amounts to this self-evident Truth That cannot be done which cannot be done § 13. The Thirteenth has for it's Basis this undeniable Verity 'T is presumable that they who constantly maintain a Tenet do hold the same Tenet and judge it available to their Cause or for their purpose and that They who write against it and vilifie it do not hold it in their hearts nor judge it to be available to their Cause Both which are perfectly the same with this Proposition which Practice makes self-evident Men not Frantick or in some high Passion will not act directly against their own Interest or to their own overthrow or to this which is self-evident speculatively Rational Agents left to their nature will act as they are that is rationally The rest of this § is shown to be self-evident in our Discussion of the 11th § 14. The Fourteenth supposing the Evidence of the 11th 13th and 10th is reduc't to this clear Truth They act irrationally and unjustifiably who relinquish a Rule Infallibly-Certain upon Vncertain Grounds or that 'T is better to proceed upon Certainty than Vncertainty which Nature teaches all Mankind § 15. The Fifteenth contains these two Truths for it's supporters both of them self-evident practically That charge is Irrational which is grounded on a Thing unknown to the Accusers and that Rational which is grounded on matter of Fact notorious to the whole Christian world § 16. The Sixteenth subsists by vertue of this Evident Truth An Vniversal Change in matters both manifest to sense and most concerning must needs be Notorious which engages that Principle Man is Sensitive or an Animal Whence this being a direct part of the Definition of Man 't is consequently Self-evident § 17. The Seventeenth is reduc't to this plain Proposition Men of Reason cannot hold and own themselves and propose to others Points most difficult to believe upon pretence that they came from Christ and yet yield nor own any reason why they held they came from Christ or thus Men either have or else yeeld no Reason where there is most need of both which comes to this that A pressing Necessity which is the most violent of Causes which in our case strains Humane Nature if it act nor frustrates it of it's end has no Effect at all which destroys all Causality and consequently all Science in the World § 18. The Eighteenth is as plain as it is that Mankind amongst which were in all Ages persons of great Wit Goodness in matters of highest moment and which require the best and surest Ground can continue to hold such things and yet confess the Ground on which they hold it naught and Insufficient or upon second Thoughts going about to settle a better palpably and directly contradict their own pretence which is to say Where there is most need of reason men do not use it at all And since Effects are not done without Causes which in our case are Motives and the greatest Necessity is the most powerful of Motives or Causes if that move them not to act rationally nothing will do it and so it implies by consequence the contradictory to this Identical Proposition Rational Agents are capable to act rationally § 19. The Nineteenth has the same Basis with the 16th and 17th § 20. The 20th is meerly this Identical Proposition dilated All in any kind are the Vniversality or All in that kind § 21 The Twenty First and Second are Grounded on those Evident Truths Those who have Means to arrive at an End can arrive at that End and those who have not means cannot And since Means speaks that which makes an End compassable they amount to this That whâ—â—â—câ—â— be done can be done and that which cannot cannot § 22. The last Paragraph supposing the fore-going ones True is of the same strain and full as evident as it is that None can arrive at an End without what 's Necessary to arrive at that End or that That cannot be done which is Impossible to be done Postscript Having thus attempted to reduce the main Parts of my Discourse concerning the Ground of my Faith to First Principles it is required of Dr. St. that in maintaining his he would not decline the same Test This if he thinks it safe to undertake it will quickly and evidently appear on whose side Truth stands And this is mainfestly his Task who pretends to Principles For he must either vouch those he produces to be First Principles or reducible to the First else he must confess them to be none at all I have little hopes he will think it fit to expose his Discourses to this Noon-day-Evidence nor indeed will the Genius of Errour endure such a Triall as the going about to connect it with First and Self-evident Truths for what Communication can that Darkness have with this Clearest Light and I conceive it was Clearness of Style that is a Grammatical or Rhetorical Clearness and not a Logical or Rational one which consists in resolving his Discourse into First Principles that Dr. Tillotson boastingly attributed to him in his Sermon-Preface for himself as is evident by his whole way of writing never dream't of any other 'T is more to Dr. St's purpose which is to keep things from being understood to avoid by all means this discovering Method and all arguing from the nature of the Thing whence he foresees no small danger of too great Evidence is likely to spring and to leade his Reader into a Wilderness of Words whole Libraries of Authors where by his way of managing Citations which is by Criticising upon ambiguous words and phrases they may dance in the Maze till they be weary I hear he is about this stratagem and that he ayms out of some high Expressions of the Fathers concerning the Excellency and Self-sufficiency of the Scriptures to prove the Vselesness of the Church to ascertain Faith But alas how he will be defeated Not one Testimony of any Authority will be found which comes home to his purpose or proves that private men need not the Churches Interpretation ere they can securely build their Faith on it To save him therefore the labour of collecting and Printing multitudes of these to no purpose and his Readers from the fruitless toil of troubling themselves with Impertinences I produce him one out of Vincentius Lirinensis worth thousands for it speaks with as high Reverence of Scripture and of it's Fulness Perfection and Self-sufficiency as any perhaps more and so he cannot not with any reason except against it and being intended purposely to speak to this Point must needs be the most apposit decider of the Question that can be not to add the Acceptation and Esteem that Excellent Treatise