You reply'd That it should not be written unless it were by Consent And you did not consent because Mr. T declar'd now more loudly than before that he was fully satisfi'd and desir'd to propose a new Question to Mr. G Thus Mr. G was forc'd to break off and thus ended that Point which was design'd for the whole Subject of the Conference but whether with much Glory to you or much Shame to Mr. G I leave the most partial of my Readers to judge Certainly when you had given leave for Mr. G s Fifth Question you ought to have permitted his Sixth since it tended only to obtain that Answer which you could not but perceive was aim'd at by his Fifth viz. What Churches you look'd on as Members of the Christian Church I have here laid before you the most material Passages and Circumstances of this First Disputation as sincerely I call God to Witness as I have been able and as succinctly according to my Judgment as the Nature of the Thing would bear and could agree with that fulness in the Account which I promised at first I have indeed been somewhat the more Particular in it in regard that you say little or nothing thereof whereas one would have expected that whilst you pretend to give a True Account of this Conference you would not have pass'd by in silence so considerable a Part of it not to say in a manner the Whole I am sure that if you have any reason to complain that Mr. G s Copies were imperfect he hath much more to say that your True Account is so For if in his Paper there be a Twig missing in one of the Branches the very Trunk or Body of the Tree is wanting in your Account So easie it is to imagine Faults in others and so hard to see them in our selves And so true that the Mote is more discernible to us in our Brothers Eye than the BEAM in our own Having finish'd what I had to say concerning this First and Chief Controversie I shall use the same Sincerity in giving you both Copies of the Second in which as it happen'd when the Spirits of the Disputants grew warmer so especially towards the Conclusion as I have said above the Noise and Wrangling might hinder the Writers from being so exact However even here the Difference is so inconsiderable that an ordinary Charity would rather lay the blame of it on a casual Error than any wilful Mistake Mr. G s Copy Dr. St 's Copy 1. Qu. HOw do you prove the Church of Rome to be Infallible 1 Qu. HOw do you prove the Church of Rome to be Infallible 1. Ans By the Church of Rome I mean all the Churches in Communion with Rome and this Church I hold to be Infallible by following the Vniversal Testimony of all Traditionary Christians that is to say by holding the same Doctrin to Day that was delivered Yesterday in Faith and so up to the Time of our Blessed Saviour For if they follow this Rule they can never Err in Faith and therefore are Infallible 1 Answ By the Church of Rome I mean all the Churches in Communion with Rome and this Church I hold to be Infallible by following the Universal Testimony of all Traditionary Christians that is to say by holding the same Doctrin to day that was delivered yesterday in Faith and so up to the time of our blessed Saviour for if they follow this Rule they can never err in Faith and therefore are Infallible 2. Qu. How do's it appear that the Church of Rome is Infallible in Tradition 2 Qu. How do's it appear that the Church of Rome is Infallible in the sense and meaning of Tradition and is this Tradition a Rule of Faith distinct from Scripture or no 2. Ans All Traditionary Christians that is all Bishops all Priests all Fathers and all People following this Rule and receiving Faith because it was received the Day before could not Innovate in Faith unless they could all either forget what they received the day before or out of Malice change it therefore because no cause can be assigned for such an effect they cannot Innovate If there can Assign it 2 Answ All Traditionary Christians that is all Bishops all Priests all Fathers and all People following this Rule and receiving Faith because it was received the day before could not innovate in Faith unless they could all either forget what they received the day before or out of Malice change it therefore because no cause can be assigned for such an effect they cannot innovate If they can Assign it 3 Qu. Whether the Greek Church did follow from Father to Son the Tradition in matters of Faith or no 3 Qu. Did not the Greek Church follow Tradition from Father to Son and yet err in matters of Faith so that a Church pretending to follow Tradition may err in matters of Faith 3 Answ Till they left that Rule and took up another and so fell into Error as the Calvinists did 3 Answ The Greek Church followed Tradition till the Arians left that Rule and took up a new one that is Scripture privately interpreted  Dr. St I speak not of the Arians but of the present Greek Church The chief defect which you here seem to complain of in Mr. G s Paper is in the Third Question viz. That it being set down Whether the Greek Church did follow Tradition from Father to Son or no The inference which you drew from it is left out Now it is so palpably evident to any one who reads the preceding Questions and Answers for what reason you asked that Question and consequently What inference you drew from it that it cannot be imagined Mr. G's Amanuensis should have any design in leaving out those words unless it were to spare unnecessary pains it being manifest that you produced the example of the Greek Church to disprove what had been said before touching the Infallibility of Tradition So that in my Opinion this ought not to have been the occasion of any misunderstanding between you But whereas you say that Mr. G grants you in his Answer that the Greek Church followed Tradition If you mean that they followed it even when they fell into error I find no such thing in his Answer neither according to his Copy nor yours But if you mean That the Greek Church followed Tradition till they erred This is no plainer in your Copy than it is in his To your Instance of the Greek Church I remember Mr. G answered That they adhered to Tradition till the time of the Arians but whether or no he dictated his Answer in those terms when it came to be written down I have forgotten Neither do I remember that your last saying viz. I mean not the Arians c. which is left out in Mr. G's Copy was written down I believe that neither Mr. T nor the Gentleman who wrote for Mr. G had it in their Copies Neither do I think that
he aimed at the Glory of a Conqueror by those Papers since you cannot but see that according to the Tenor of them the Victory lies on neither Side I say this on presumption that those Papers which came to your hands were true Copies of that which was given out by Mr. G But because it may be otherwise and that a great part of your Spleen on this Occasion may be raised by a mistake I shall here subjoin a true Copy of Mr. G 's Paper And that you may examine the Fidelity of it with more Convenience a Copy likewise of your own which I had from a Protestant Gentleman of great worth and integrity shall be set down by it in a Parallel Column That on a due Comparison and maturer thoughts you may judge whether Mr. G in truth deserve so black a Note of insincerity as you are pleased to lay upon him or on the other side you be obliged to make some amends for an ungentile and unchristian Insinuation Mr. G s Copy Dr. St 's Copy 1 Qu. VVHether you are absolutely Certain that you hold now the same Tenets in Faith and all that our Saviour taught to his Apostles 1 Qu. VVHether you are absolutely certain that you hold now the same Tenets in Faith and all that our Saviour taught to his Apostles 1 Answ We are absolutely certain that we now hold all the same Doctrin that was taught by Christ and his Apostles 1 Answ We are absolutely certain that we now hold all the same Doctrin that was taught by Christ and his Apostles 2 Qu. By what certain Rule do you hold it 2 Qu. By what certain Rule do you hold it 2 Answ By the Divine Revelations contained in the writings of the New Testament 2 Answ By the Divine Revelations contained in the writings of the New Testament 3 Qu. By what certain Rule do you know that the New Testament we now have does contain all the Divine Revelations of Christ and his Apostles 3 Qu. By what certain Rule do you know that the New Testament which we now have does contain all the Divine Revelations of Christ and his Apostles 3 Answ By the Universal Testimony of the Christian Church from the Apostles time downwards 3 Answ By the Universal Testimony of the Christian Church from the Apostles time downward 4 Qu. Was that Vniversal Testimony an Infallible Rule to assure us certainly down to our time that the New Testament contained all the Divine Revelations of Christ and his Apostles 4 Qu. Was that Universal Testimony an Infallible Rule to assure us certainly down to our time that the New Testament contained all the Divine Revelations of Christ and his Apostles 4 Answ The Vniversal Testimony of the Christian Church concerning the Book of Scripture and the Doctrin contained therein is a sufficient ground to make us certain of all matters that are necessary for our Salvation 4 Answ The Universal Testimony of the Christian Church concerning the Book of Scripture and the Doctrin contained therein is a sufficient ground to make us certain of all matters that are necessary to our Salvation 5 Qu. Being the word Christian Church may be taken in several Latitudes by persons of different Religions I desire to know how you desine the Christian Church Or what it is whose Testimony is sufficient to make us absolutely certain of all matters that are necessary to our Salvation 5 Qu. Being the words Christian Church may be taken in several Latitudes by persons of different Religions I desire to know what that Christian Church is whose Testimony concerning the Book of Scripture and the Doctrin contained therein is a sufficient ground to make us certain of all matters that are necessary to our Salvation 5 Answ By the Universal Testimony of the Christian Church concerning the Books of Scripture which are our Rule of Faith as to matters of our Salvation I mean the Vniversal Testimony of all Christian Churches from the Apostles downward 5 Answ By the Universal Testimony of the Christian Church concerning the Books of Scripture which are our Rule of Faith as to matters of Salvation I mean the Universal consent of all Christian Churches from the Apostles time downward  Here Mr. T the Person for whom the Conference was being well satisfied in the Doctors Answers desired to ask Mr. G some Questions saying he was confirmed in the Truth of his own Church and therefore demanded how he proved theirs You have here the whole and entire Writings of the first longest and most Methodical Controversie as well according to Mr. G s Edition as your own wherein the difference is so trivial that I dare appeal even to your own subtilty who are as apt to find a Knot in a Bulrush as another whether or no you have here any cause for complaint And his exactness in this Copy ought to have been an Argument with you that such Errors as you found in the other were rather to be attributed to the Confusion wherein that second Dispute ended or some other Accident than to any wilful falsification unless perhaps you imagined that the issue of the first Dispute was such as that Mr. G could have no temptation for any Forgery in the account of it which is not greatly for your Credit since this Dispute as I have said was that for which the Conference was designed and that wherein the whole time in a manner was taken up it being carried on as far as you were pleased to give it leave At the end of that Copy of your Paper which I received from the abovementioned Protestant Gentleman I found these words Here Mr. T. the person for whom the Conference was being well satisfied in the Doctors Answers c. And therefore I have likewise added them in this Transcript left I also might pass with you for a Disperser of imperfect Copies tho' I think the Gentleman told me that those words were only his own Memorandum of what you imparted to him by word of Mouth concerning that Dispute And this too I say left on the other hand you should arraign me for any Addition So scrupulously careful it behoves a man to be when for the punishment of his Sins he falls into those circumstances where not only the least inadvertence is improved into a crime but even when nothing else will serve the turn the clearest innocence is render'd guilty And now to shew the World how willing I am to do you all the right imaginable I must freely acknowledge that Mr. T at the end of your last Answer in this Dispute as he had done a Question or two before declared according to what is set down in the abovewritten Memorandum that he was fully satisfied with your Answers Neither did Mr. G ever pretend the contrary But then I hope in return you will give us and others leave to judge who give every man leave to judge in things of far greater consequence and difficulty how far this satisfaction of Mr. T
Conferences especially when they are faithfully Penn'd down and so expos'd to the general View And this for the following-Reasons 1. Few Men have Leisure or at least Industry enough for the perusal of large Treatises whereas one of these Conferences seldom reaches to above a Sheet of Paper 2. Men are commonly so well perswaded of the Truth of their own Party or else so willing to be perswaded of it that for the most part they only Read their own Authors and so become at best but partial Judges especially when they happen to be on that Side which stands in need of some insincere Dealing for its support Whereas in these Conferences the Arguments on both Sides being interchangeably set down and mixt with one another it will not be possible for the Reader to read and understand the one without reading and considering the other 3. The strength of the Arguments is more perspicuous when they are thus plac'd by one another according to the Maxim Contraria juxtà se posita magis elucescunt As it is also when they are laid before us naked and stript of all those artificial Ornaments of Rhetorick and Satyr which make up a great part of our late Controversial Volumes and serve for nothing else than to amuse and deceive an unwary and unskilful Reader who is inclin'd to think that he who says most hath most to say and that he who hath the best Jest hath likewise the best Argument 4. In these Conferences the Disputants have not so great an opportunity of wresting and perverting one anothers Arguments as they have when each Party sitting in his Study and as it were on his own Dunghil hath his Adversary at his Mercy and makes him speak what he hath a mind to by disguising and misrepresenting his Arguments or else changeth the State of the Question and imposeth a new Task upon him dealing with him as Conjurers are said to do with the Devil who when they have rais'd him are taught never to let him rest but as soon as one Business is dispatch'd or even before 't is quite done to employ him in another lest otherwise he might want Work and then destroy the Conjurers to keep himself from Idleness And we have not far to go for some Instance of this nature For you are pleas'd to say that the Conference whereof we now speak depended on two things to be prov'd by Mr. G 1. That you Protestants have no absolute Certainty as to the Rule of your Faith viz. The Scripture altho' you have a larger and firmer Tradition for it viz. The Consent of all Christian Churches than we Catholics can have for the Points of Faith in difference between us 2. That the Tradition from Father to Son is an infallible Conveyance of Matters of Faith notwithstanding the Greek Church is charg'd by us Catholics with Error which adher'd to Tradition Now as to the First it is not deny'd That there is in truth an absolute Certainty for that Scripture wherein you agree with us but that according to your Principles who at the time of your Reformation charg'd all Christian Churches with Errors not only in other Articles of their Belief but even in the Tradition or Delivery of Scripture and yet rely on the Tradition of these Churches for it any such Certainty can be shewn We say farther that whereas you pretend to an absolute Certainty as to the Rule of your Faith from the Consent of all Christian Churches you seem to forget that your Rule is Scripture not as Interpreted or to be Interpreted by the Church but as understood or to be understood without a necessity of submitting to the Interpretation of the Church by every sober Enquirer tho' of the meanest capacity for which Rule as you know well enough you are very far from having the Consent of all Christian Churches To which purpose I spoke before Lastly we desire to know according to what I have likewise said above what those Christian Churches are whose Testimony is required towards the assuring us what is Scripture and what not and by what mark you distinguish them from others Since we cannot suppose that in this Case you require the Concurrence of all Heretical Congregations which may profess a Belief in Christ and call themselves Christians forasmuch as these amongst them some denying one Book of Scripture and some another either have or may deny the whole Canon And for this reason you ought to shew us by what Rule we are able to discern the Orthodox Deliverers of Scripture from the Heterodox lest otherwise we may be deceived by receiving too little or too much for Canonical And this was that Task which remained on your hands when the first Disputation broke off But here instead of finishing it you finely disguise it and by a certain Controversie-juggle put it into the hands of your Adversary as tho' it belonged to him In the second Point you would make the World believe that it lay on Mr. G to prove that supposing The Greek Church erred whilst it adhered to Tradition a Church adhering to Tradition could not err Whereas Mr. G never acknowledged that the Greek Church erred whilst it adhered to Tradition and therefore to suppose it as you do was to beg the Question and misrepresent the State of the Argument Wherefore to stay no longer on this Subject I beg of my Readers to weigh your two Propositions and compare them carefully with the two Disputations to which they belong and if after that they shall conclude that each Question is rightly Stated by you and that the Proof in both is incumbent on Mr. G as you would have it I will be contented that my Fourth Reason against Disputing by Books viz. the hazard of Misrepresentation shall go for nothing Fifthly Much time is spent by Controversie-Writers not only in proving certain Propositions which would be granted them by their Adversaries but also in raising silly Objections which their Adversaries neither have nor are like to make Which two things besides the loss of Time which is no small mischief are very apt to misguide one who is not resolved to hear both sides by making him think that what his Author is so solicitous to prove must necessarily be denied by the adverse Party and that what the one labors to refute the other must have Objected or at least be likely to Object And what an erroneous Idea must such a person have of his Authors Adversaries whilst he takes those weak Affirmations and Denials to be Theirs which are not so in effect Now these Inconveniences are avoided by a Personal Conference where nothing is proved but what is denied and nothing refuted but what is really Objected Hereby the loss of time is prevented the just reputation of the Disputants and the due merits of each Cause preserved and what is most considerable a great hindrance to the discovery of Truth removed Sixthly The multiplication of large Volumes of Controversie is apt to