not-Fundamental may overspread the Church or at least a great and considerable part of it and why Several Instances of such Errors in the Roman Church Sect. 12. That the Holy Scripture or Written Word of God is the Rule of Faith That Tradition is a necessary means whereby to attain to the certain knowledge thereof That the Multitude or weakest sort of Christians are not able of themselves without the help of others to resolve Faith aright or be rationally assur'd what the Doctrine of Salvation is Sect. 13. The harm that may arise to the Church from the belief of an Error not-Fundamental to be an Article of Faith The true stating of the difference between the Church of England and the Church of Rome The Church of England clear'd from the guilt of Schism and the Roman justly blam'd for being Cause of the separation That the joynt Concurrence of Scripture and Oral Tradition or the practical Delivery of Christs Doctrine was recommended by the Blessed Apostles to the Church the Restauration of which Concurrence 't is humbly conceiv'd would be a firm Foundation for re-uniting dissenting Christians in Matters of Religion and the Continuance of it a lasting Means for perpetuating Christianity in i'ts Ancient native Purity Errata In the Contents Sect. 6. l. 2. read for Reformed Reformation Sect. 8. l. 8. for intelligent intelligible Pag. 9. l. 15. r. but impious p. 17. l. last viz. p. 31. l. 1. r. Canonical Scripture p. 32. l. 12. 13. r. Church diffusive p. 40 l. 16. r. Efforts p. 47. l. 6. r. formerly p. 62. l. 5 6. r. to be perform'd actually p. 72. l. 7. r. so often as p. 82 l. 2. r. as prone as possible p. 91. l. 17. blot out if p 97. l. 10. r. die l. 11. r. sedet p. 99. l. 1. r. de scendit l. 13. r obtemperantibus p. 100. l. 1. r. Act. 4. 12. p. 101. l. 11. r. nascetur p. 106. l. 3. r. descendet p. 112. l. 15. r. in Scripture as l. 16. Traditionist p. 113. l. 5 r. Traditionist p. 121. l. 18. r. ascension p. 122. l. 2. r. ascension p. 126 127 r. of what validity Four are p. 128. l. 3. r. thus l. 14. those p 141. l 15 16. r. in the Creed there set forth l. 18 and that also p. 142. l. 23. r. or it is not p. 143. l. 14. r. Latins l. 19. Lombard p. 144. l. 4 5. r. ineandem nobiscum l. 8. unam eandemque fore sententiam p. 145. l. 1. r. Quaest 36. p. 146. l. 5. r. disertè dicant p. 154. l. 20. r. as an Article p. 158. l. 7. r. superfluous p. 161. l. 9. soever there be p. 162. l. 10. r. and not to be extended p. 170. l. 2. r. in such case p. 171. l. 16. r. spilt p. 179. l. 19. r. what they teach p. 183. l. 4. r. Distinction p. 192. l. 10. r. Lawd p. 195. l. 13. r. Polemical The rest are more obvious literal mistakes in appearences yeild adhear oblid'g Antichrist Writting all be it vulger with some small characters for great and great for small The several Ways of resolving Faith in the Roman and Reformed Churches With the Authors impartial thoughts upon each of them And his own Opinion at length shown wherein the Rule of Faith doth consist Which clears upon rational Grounds the Church of England from criminal Schisme and lays the Cause of the separation upon the Roman SECT I. There is a Rule of Faith instituted by God Three different Opinions among the Learned of the Roman Religion wherein that Rule doth consist SInce it was the Almighties good pleasure to create Man a reasonable Creature it became his Divine Wisdome and Goodness not only to ordain an End convenient for Him with Means likewise available thereto but also to constitute a Way by which he might come to the certain Knowledge of both for in vain would the two former have been instituted without the last when by this alone both the other were to be made known unto Him That therefore there is a Way ordain'd by God whereby to understand aright Mans Chief End and the proper Means available to it remains without dispute Yet such notwithstanding is the difference and disagreement amongst divers men of greatest Wit and Learning about it that through their subtil Arguments and eager Zeal to defend every one his espous'd Opinion not a few sober well minded Christians are brought into a Labyrinth of intricate difficulties and doubts what they ought to beleeve whilst the Controvertists in Religion though in general they acknowledge that the Gospel of Christ published to the World declares wherein Mans Felicity and the Means thereof consist yet are at perpetual discord what the particular Doctrines necessary to the Salvation of Mankind contain'd in that Gospel or Revelation be and that because they cannot agree where the Way which leads to the certain knowledge of Christs Doctrine is to be found or as for brevity 't is phras'd what the Rule of Faith is This gave the occasion of my undertaking the following Inquirie the designe whereof is to endeavour to the utmost of my power the gaining a well-grounded satisfaction in a matter of so great Concern as the Rule of Faith is to be truely known For the compassing of which longing desire of my heart I judge it the best expedient I know of to take an equal and impartial view of the differing Opinions about it that either by comparing them together I may be enabled to make a rational choice of some one before the rest or els to gather from the whole disquisition that satisfaction is not to be expected without a further enquiry to be made wherein the Rule of Christian Faith doth really consist The first difference worthy of notice about the Rule of Faith or the Way which guides and directs to the clear knowledge of Christs Doctrine is concerning the nature of the assurance which it is to afford some affirming that it ought to give infallible certainty whilsts others say that it needs only yield a Moral certitude or such an assurance as is sufficient to remove actual doubting but not which renders it impossible to be deceiv'd in Matters of Faith Those that hold the Rule of Faith to administer infallible certainty of Christian Doctrine are part of them of the Roman and part of the Reformed Church Those who maintain the contrary are only some of the Reformed As to the merit of either opinion I 'le leave the discussion of it to another place and at present shew wherein the Romish Controvertists of which there are three distinct sorts place the Rule of Faith The first sort maintain that A General Council confirm'd by the Pope or as the Proposition is rendred by some The Pope defining in a General Council cannot erre and so make The Definition of a General Council confirm'd by the Pope or The Definition of the Pope in a General Council The Rule of Faith is the same thing
their Sacred Office to use and exercise the same to it 's proper End whereas others generally speaking neither have the like aduantages to understand it as it ought to be nor so great Motives and Obligation to promote the true intendment and design thereof Have not then the People even every particular person of them it might well be ask'd a Judgement of Discretion in the choice and matters of Religion If by Judgement of Discretion be meant That they are to do nothing but what they themselves approve of I readily yield they have But in case they set themselves to oppose their own Judgement to the Judgment of the Clergy in Matters of Faith their Judgment will be found a Judgment of intolerable and pernitious Indiscretion For to make a true discovery of an Error in Faith the Rule of Faith must be well consulted and the Point in question duly apply'd to 't to be try'd by it so that if either the Rule it self be mistaken or the Thing to be regulated by it be not rightly apply'd no Doctrine concerning Faith can rationally be discover'd whether it be an Error or a Truth And 't is ridiculously absurd to think that the vulgar sort consisting of Servants Labourers Mechanicks and others generally busied and spending their days about Temporal affairs should be more sufficient and able to understand the Rule of Faith aright and to apply things doubted of thereto so as truely to determine of their rectitude or obliquity by it then the grave and Learned Prelats with the profound Doctors and others of the more Ancient and Reverend Divines who have spent many of them thirty several of them fourty and some amongst them fifty years or more in the study for the most part of sacred Learning being legally also call'd to the Office of teaching and directing Mankind as Christian by a Mission successively deriv'd from Christ and his Apostles which none besides the Clergy how Learned or Pious soever can justly make claim to Would it not then astonish and work compassion in any man of sobriety to see the ignorant people grossly misled to believe They are able enough of themselves to understand the Scripture in all things necessary to Salvation when as 't is principally for instructing them aright in those very things and keeping them to the due observance of them that they have spiritual Guides and Governours set over them by God and his Holy Church Which yet they are many of them poor souls being strangely infatuated with a conceit of their own endowments so farr from having any regard to that although they dayly see before their eyes That the wise and gracious God in the Oeconomy of his great Family the World has provided and placed several men skill'd in several things some in Civil Government some in Laws some in Physick and others in other Professions all for the Good of the Community in assisting men in those things wherein they are presum'd not to have skill enough to do the best for themselves yet nevertheless they will not understand and discern a necessity of some skilfuller then they themselves be to advise direct and order them in those grand Matters which are of more Weighty and lusting Concern to them then all the things in the whole World besides but in contradiction to the Analogy of Providence seen round about them despiseing those who ought to have the oversight of their Belief and Manners make themselves their own Instructors and Rulers in the Learning and Management of those things wherein if they finally miscarry they are ruin'd to eternity SECT XIII The harme that may arise to the Church from the belief of an Error not-Fundamental to be an Article of Faith The true stating of the difference between the Church of England and the Church of Rome Whether or no the Church of England be justly accus'd of criminal Schism That the joynt Concurrence of Scripture and Oral Tradition or the practical Delivery of Christ Doctrine was recommended by the Apostles to the Church the Restauration of which Concurrence 't is humbly conceiv'd would be a firm Foundation for re-uniting dissenting Christians in Matters of Religion and the Continuance of it a lasting Means for perpetuating Christianity in ' its ancient native Purity I have now only one Scruple more remaining concerning Matters of Faith and it arises from what my self concluded before which was That no Fundamental Error could ever get a setled footing without disturbance but should perpetually meet with opposition from Orthodox Christians so that all necessary Truths shall be continually nourish'd in the Bosom of the visible Church In which if I have said right what harm may it with great appearance of reason be ask'd can be found to accrew upon it if an Error not fundamental chance to creep into the Church and grow by degrees to be held at length an Article of Faith seeing the belief thereof is not in it's self destructive of Salvation I answer there is this great harm in it if no other that in case it at any time come to be discover'd and National Churches be thereupon divided about it one holding it to be an Article of Faith another taking it to be an Erroneous Doctrin there will unavoidably a Schism happen upon it because that Church which thinks it to be an Article of Faith will conceive herself oblig'd to deny Communion to the other which rejects it as an Error and that other which rejects it as an Error must needs judge it to be an heinous Sin to acknowledge and profess that She beleeves a Doctrin to be an Article of Faith which in truth she holds to be an Erroneous Opinion and yet without such acknowledgment and answerable profession she cannot be admitted to Communion with the Church that believes it to be an Article of Faith Upon this very account it is that the Divisions between the Church of Rome and Church of England as to the Doctrinal Part of Religion are continued for I find that the most cautious and wary Vindicators of the English Church from the guilt of Schism which the Romanists incessantly accuse her of allege in excuse for her Separation that the Church of Rome requires as necessary Conditions of her Communion the acknowledgment of some erroneous Doctrins to be Articles of Faith together with a publick profession of them which Doctrins although not damnable in their own nature because not directly repugnant to any Fundamental Truth yet would become damnable to those who judging them to be Errors should acknowledge and profess them contrary to their Judgments to be Articles of Faith To this purpose writes the learned Bishop Montague the renowned Arch-Bishop Laud Doctor Ferne Doctor Hammond the late Lord Primat of Ireland Bishop Bramhal with others whereunto I 'le add one Cantrovertist more of the present time Doctor Stillingfleet of which two last mentioned not to multiply needless quotations about a thing so well known I 'le here transcribe two Passages
is not if it be not Tradition is no way concern'd let the Greeks and Latins too hold whether way they please about it If it be an Article of Faith and that the Greek and Latin Churches agree in the substance and sence of it and differ only in the manner of the expression there has been no failure of Tradition in the Greek Church concerning the procession of the Holy Ghost Forasmuch then as it remains only to be known whether the Greeks and Latins agree in Sence though they differ in words or the Greeks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 per Filium be the same in effect with the Latin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 á Filio let 's see what the Roman Doctors who we may be sure will be no more favourable to the Greeks then 's fitting say to 't Peter Lombert writing of the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son saith Sciendum est quòd Graeci confitentur Spiritum Sanctum esse Filii sicut Patris quia Apostolus dicit Spiritum Filii Veritas in Evangelio Spiritum Veritatis Sed cùm non sit aliud Spiritum Sanctum esse Patris vel Filii quà m esse à Patre Filio etiam in hoc in eandem nobiscum Fidei sententiam convenire videntur licet in verbis dissentiant Unde etiam quidam eorum Catholici Doctores intelligentes unam eandémque fore sententiam praedictorum verborum quibus dicitur Spiritus Sanctus procedere à Filio esse Filii professi sunt Spiritum Sanctum etiam procedere à Filio Lib. 1. Sentent Distinct 11. D. E. Where the same Author goes on to shew That several eminent Greek Fathers Athanasius Didymus Cyrillus and Chrysostom accord even in expressions also about the Procession of the Holy Ghost Aquinas propounding the Question Utrum Spiritus Sanctus procedat à Patre per Filium concludes affirmatively and answers Objections made to the contrary as is to be seen Part prima Quaest 26. Artic. 3. Yea and Mr. White however in the Apologie for Tradition he calls the Greeks assertion concerning the Holy Ghosts Procession as is truely said of him a meer negative Tradition or a Denial that they have any such Tradition that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son yet explicating els where the sacred Mystery of the Blessed Trinity averrs it to be a more significant Speech to say that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father by the Son then from the Father and the Son which in illustrating the Doctrine of the Trinity by Cognitum Cognitio Amor he thus shews Patet vim motivam quae est in Bono cognito esse totam in ratione Boni rationem veró cognitionis non esse nisi conjunctionem hujus virtutis ad movendum quare alio modo dicitur tertia Persona Procedere à Patre alio modo à Filio quasi directè principaliter à Patre à Filio non nisi concomitanter seu tanquam à modo Causae Unde non mirum si Christus Dominus aliqui Patres disertè dicant eum procedere à Patré sine mentione Filii unde intelligitur quòd sit magis expressiva locutio dicere quòd procedit à Patre per Filium quà m quòd procedit à Patre Filio Cùm enim per quasi viam medium denotet impossibile est procedere per Filium non à Filio quia omnis pars viae respectu termini habet rationem termini à quo principii unde ly pèr explicat esse à à non primo principio SECT XI What rational assurance we have That Scripture is not corrupted in Necessaries to salvation The way to know what things have been ever Orally taught Two Reasons given why Tradition though it be of an indefectible nature should not be the Rule of Faith Whether a fundamental Error can ever obtain a a setled quiet possession in the visible Church An offer from Reason for the impossibility of the thing Errors not-fundamental may overspread the Church and why Several instances of such Errors in the Roman Church THe practical delivery of Christs Doctrine never as has been seen failing it may by carefully searching the Scripture be known what things contain'd in it are of necessity to be generally believ'd and practic'd because no more is so but what has been always believ'd and practic'd by Christians provided assurance may be had what has been ever practically deliver'd and that Scripture is not corrupted in such places of it as contain the Necessaries to salvation or Articles of Catholick and Apostolick Faith For the latter which I 'le first insist on That Scripture is not corrupted in necessary Points I shall briefly say but this Since the actings of Gods Providence are not known to us but as they are seen in second Causes the most rational account we have That Scripture is come safe to our hands without Corruption in all things of necessity to be generally believ'd and practic'd is from hence that Scripture being constantly read by multitudes of Knowing Christians could not possibly be corrupted in Texts containing such things as were perpetually taught repeated and practic'd in the Church of which sort the Necessaries to Salvation are without being taken notice of and if occasion requir'd rectified As for satisfaction in the other difficulty viz. What things have been ever orally taught this in general from what has been sayd appears certain that no Point of Christ's Doctrin shall ever fail And although in this or that Place the continuance of Christian Faith be not necessary yet where ever there has been a visible great Society of Christians wherein it was once firmly setled and which has had a constant succession of Pastors continued in it nothing held by that society to be an Article of Faith could totally cease to be so esteem'd unless so vast a Body in which there would be in every Age a considerable number of wise and pious men could either be universally impos'd on by fraud or forc'd by violence or that all it's Members would carelessly neglect or wilfully forsake what they believ'd to be a necessary Means to save themselves and their Posterity from endless Torment and to bring them to everlasting Jay Universally then such a Body could neither desert nor loose it's Faith in any necessary Point And in case any remarkable Member or Part thereof should ever do it 't would be known and presently oppos'd by the sound Part adhering to the Truth as constant Experience has made evident in the timely resisting of all Heresies This if granted to be true plain reason will enforce our assent that the Latin or Western Church being such a Society as is before mentioned did at the begining of the Reformation and still does hold and maintain all the Articles of Catholick and Apostolick Faith Obiection If the Latin or Western Church when the Reformation begun did really hold all the
with that which others of them name confirming whilst both place the suppos'd infallibility in the Popes assent which assent those who call it defining think perhaps they make the Proposition more obviously denote that Prelats infallibility as exclusive of all the rest thereby SECT III. The second Opinion amongst the Romanists viz. That a General Council conciliary proceeding is infallible in Matters of Faith taken into consideration and it 's double meaning explain'd the truth of which in one of them only is here brought to the Test the certainty of it in it's other sense being left to be examin'd in other Sections THis Assertion of the Second sort of Romish Controvertists that A General Council conciliarly proceeding cannot erre in Points of Faith may be taken in a two-fold sense either as the words conciliarly proceeding include Tradition which the Traditionists say and then the meaning of it is That A General Council defining according to Tradition or the living voice of the Church cannot erre in which sense the consideration of it belongs to some following Sections Or els as they are intended only to denote the exclusion of all fraudulent and forcible ways us'd to procure the votes of the Prelats so as that the Definition of the Council being left to it's own freedom will be infallibly true although the Means preparative to it were not at all so Against That whatsoever was deliver'd to the primitive Christians by Christ and his Apostles as a Point of Faith hath been perpetually handed down from time to time without interruption till our days as such and it 's assign'd proof the indefectibility of Tradition I shall say nothing here but remit the discourse I intend upon them to another place and at present enquire Whether the present Church of Rome does indeed depend on this Maxim for the certainty of the purity of her Faith That Christs Doctrine was deliver'd to her as descending without interruption from Christ and his Apostles For if it appear upon trial made she doth not then however indefectible Tradition be it may notwithstanding fall out that new Articles of Faith may be introduc'd into the Church upon some other Ground not firm and safe such as the Traditionists will I know grant That the Definition of a General Council not founded on Oral Tradition but on this Presumption That the Bishops effectually proceeding to define are immediatly inspir'd from Heaven is And that the Roman Church does not rely on the mentioned Maxim for the certainty of the purity and uncorruptedness of her Faith I have somthing which seems considerable and of moment to alledge in proof It will not I presume be deny'd That Cardinal Bellarmin and the learned Romish Controvertists more generally taken notice of after him ever since the Reformation till Rushworths Dialogues came to light for all that they made it their business to resolve Faith according to the belief and practice of their Church did not conclude and averr Tradition to be the alone safe Means of conveying Christs Doctrine to the knowledge of succeeding Ages And if such great Lights among the Roman Clergy mistook the Rule of Faith how can we reasonably think that the inferiour Pastors and Laics in their time knew it aright And if they knew it not neither could they rely on it as such For although it were granted which some say that Bellarmin himself and all the learned Clerks of the Roman Church no less then the other Clergy and Lay-men did practically rely on Tradition in as much as they were Orally taught their Religion by the preceding Generation and that again by the next before it and so still backwards one Age of another ever since the very first beginning of Christianity yet unless they also knowingly did it when once they came to make enquiry upon what stedfast Ground the Christian Faith was to be embrac'd they would no longer rest upon the instruction they had when they first in their younger years believ'd if so be upon search made they conceiv'd as it seems the chiefest of them besides many more if not the generality did that the certainty of Faith was not sounded on Oral Tradition their first Instructor in it but on something els Yea I think I shall not mistake the truth if I say that it was not the private opinion of some great Doctors and their followers only but the sense of the Council of Trent it self also That Faith is not resolv'd into Tradition as it 's adequate Rule whilst in consulting the first Decree of the fourth Session of that Council I find two Passages which seem to make it out The former of them is this Sacrosancta Oecumenica Generalis Tridentina Synodus c. perspiciens hanc nempe Christianam veritatem Disciplinam contineri in Libris scriptis sine Scripto Traditionibus quae ex ipsius Christi ore ab Apostolis acceptae aut ab ipsis Apostolis Spiritu Sancto dictante quasi per manus traditae ad nos usque pervenerunt Orthodoxorum Patrum exempla secuta omnes Libros tam veteris quám novi Testamenti cùm utriusque Deus sit Author necnon Traditiones ipsas tum ad Fidem tum ad Mores pertinentes tanquam vel ore tenus a Christo vel à Spiritu Sancto dictatas continuâ successione in Ecclesia Catholica conservatas pari pietatis affectu ac reverentiâ suscipit ac veneratur The latter Passage closeth up the Decree thus Si quis Libros ipsos integros Scripturae scilicet cum omnibus suis partibus prout in Ecclesia Catholica legi consueverunt in veteri vulgata Latina Editione habentur pro Sacris Canonicis non susceperit Traditiones praedictas sciens prudens contempserit anathema sit Omnes itaque intelligant quo ordine via ipsa Synodus post jactum Fidei Fundamentum sit progressura quibus potissimùm Testimoniis ac Praesidiis in confirmandis Dogmatibus instaurandis in Ecclesia Moribus sit usura In both these Passages Scripture and Apostolical Traditions are plainly contradistinguish'd as equally relating some way or other to Christian Faith and Manners And although in the former place they seem to be principally oppos'd as the Written and unwritten Word of God yet not without this apparent intimation also that as the Books or written Words call'd Scripture leade to the sense or Doctrine contain'd in them so likewise the unwritten words wherein Apostolical Traditions are taught guide to the meaning couch'd in them so that as Scripture and Traditions taken in the former sense are held by the Council to be equally the Word of God so are they moreover in the latter sense held to be equally significative and expressive of the Doctrine of Salvation delivered by them But in the latter rehearsed place of the Decree Scripture and Traditions are chiefly to be understood of written and unwritten words directing to the knowledge of the Objects of Faith as appears
and Nurses the sure Conveyers of Christianity as the Traditionists tell us from Age to Age should know what it is to have a Character or spiritual signe imprinted in the Soul and without that they could not declare it in various forms of speech as was requisit they should in regard that one main reason given by the Traditionists why Christs Doctrine cannot fail in the conveyance is because it is express'd so many several ways that the generality of the Hearers cannot chuse but understand it aright I see small cause to think especially when I reflect That the great Master of the Traditionary Disciples in his Institut Sacr. Tom. 2. Lect. 4. thus teacheth Ponere signa spiritualia ie invisibilia contra ipsam rationem signi est quod pro materiali oportet esse notum visibile pro eô veró quod significat lateris unde non nisi inter homines qui colligunt scientiam ex objectis reperiuntur non possunt esse spiritualia sed ex necessitate sensibilia And in the page following the same learned Author asserteth Ipsam personam esse subjectum Characteris cúm actio sit communis corpori animae i. e. totius If perchance it should be said That the scope of the Canon is only to declare that there is an appropriation or appointment of a mans whole life to some solemn Engagement or Action as by Baptism to be a Christian by Confirmation to undergoe couragiously the Christian warfare by Order to Preach the Word to administer the Sacraments c. so that not any of them is to be iterated and this Christians generally know for who is ignorant that none us'd to be Baptiz'd none confirm'd none ordain'd more then once I reply If the Tradition of the Church be plac't wholy in that then in case the Council has defin'd more it could not ground the same upon the uninterrupted delivery thereof And that the Council has defin'd more appears from this That the Canon further declares two things which whosoever denies incurrs an Anathema the one is That the Character given in the three nominated Sacraments is a spiritual sign the other That the soul alone is the subject thereof for although the word alone be not in the Canon yet it is necessarily imply'd because a spiritual sign cannot be imprinted in a corporeal substance and therefore as to these the Council could not ground the Definition upon Tradition SECT V. The Controvertists of the Reformed Church make Scripture the Rule of Faith Two main different tion is a like impossible as that multitudes of people should not in every Age be truly desirous of their own and their Posterities everlasting Happiness seeing as I have shew'd 't is a thing easy and necessary to Salvation to be perform'd to prepetuate Christs Doctrin by a continued practical Delivery of it till the Consummation of all things However clear the truth of this may seem yet in regard I meet with four grand Arguments urg'd stiffly against the indefectibility of Tradition two of which are thought by some to be grounded on firm Reason the other two on certain Experience 't will be requisit well to consider of them and to try their strength The first is That Moral Causes work not necessarily and therefore it cannot be certainly concluded that however strongly the Motives for the practical continuance of Christs Doctrin be appli'd to the mind the Will will undoubtedly embrace them and act according to them This first Argument is sufficiently I think answer'd Section 7. yet for fuller conviction I will add this here that the same Argument if appli'd to Scripture would prove as much every jot against Scriptures preservation as against the continuance of Tradition If it be repli'd that Gods Goodness is engag'd for the preservation of Scripture I grant it if man use his own endeavours otherwise God is not I conceive concern'd to preserve it for I presume no man of sound Reason will say that God is oblig'd by his Goodness immediatly to save it Himself or to commit the safeguard of it to the sole care of Angels when Men whose Concern it is to preserve it are sufficient if there be no default in themselves for the work If Mans endeavours therefore for the conservation of it be free in that sence which the Objection supposes every action of Man to be there will be no more certainty of the continuance of Scripture then of the practical Delivery of Christs Doctrine throughout all Generations and if the Church should at any time be without it's Rule of Faith 't would either dwindle away to nothing or become a meer Babel of Anarchy and Confusion The second Argument to prove That Tradition is not of an indefectible nature is this If men be not free it is no virtue at all in them to be wrought upon by Moral Motives for what virtue can it be in any man to entertain the Christian Doctrine and adhere to it whether he will or no I willingly grant it is no virtue in any man to do a thing whether he will or no for to do a thing whether a man will or no is according to the common use of the Phrase to do it against his Will which as to the actus elicitus of the Will involves this manifest Contradiction to will and nill at once the same thing The words therefore whether he will or no must be interpreted to mean here in the Objection no more then necessarily or rather in propriety of Speech certainly for I take a necessary effect in the most strict and proper notion of it to be an effect wrought in a Subject wholly passive whereas the Will is an active Principle and always determines it self however powerfully the Motives work upon it Whence it is that even the blessed Saints and Angel's in Heaven though their affections be most strongly and unalterably fix'd on God are not necessitated thereto without their own great good-liking and active tendency to the enjoyment of their Sovereign Good If then the fruition of the very End be so voluntary that the Will is active therein 't is certainly so in respect of the Means conducing to it to the choice whereof deliberation is prerequir'd the office of which deliberation is to consult what means will be most available to obtain the design'd End by the principal of which in Morals is Mans Summum Bonum or sovereign Good namely the fruition of God whereunto as well the Moral as Theological Vertues are conducible Means so that to be actually virtuous is to act for the enjoyment of the Chief Good in a way proper for the attaining of it which to do the more stedfastly constantly and certainly were not I should think to do less but rather more virtuously yet without infringing the Liberty of the Will which retains always it's native power when it so likes to do otherwise But in case the habit of Virtue in any man grow so strong and potent that
Articles of Catholick and Apostolick Faith by vertue of Oral Tradition communicating the same unto it what good cause can be shewn why Tradition should not be the Rule of Faith even without having the Doctrins it delivers confirm'd by parallel Texts of Holy Writ Answer since the Rule of Faith must doubtless be that into which it is ultimatly resolv'd as the best and highest Means of ascertaining Christs Doctrin to Mankind and that the same must contain in it no Error this Inference I think will be clear that in case Oral Tradition or the Living voice of the Church either be not the best and highest means whereby to ascertain Christs Doctrin to Mankind or that it may deliver or teach an Error under the notion of an Article of Faith it cannot be in justice esteem'd the Rule of Faith And that Oral Tradition or the Living voice of the Church is not the best and highest means whereby to ascertain Christs Doctrin to Mankind the following Paragraph I think will make good Where two Testimonies both averr and attest the same thing if the one be of Divine the other but of Humane Authority the Testimony that is Divine ought of Right to have the preeminence and the relyance for the verity of what is witnessed by them is to be ultimatly cast upon it Seeing then the Testimony of Scripture is Divine as being ex confesso the Word of God and Tradition but an Humane Witness forasmuch as it is said to be the Delivery of Christs Doctrine in the various expressions of Pastors Parents Tutors Masters of Families and Nurses 't is most reasonable that Faith should be finally resolved into Scripture and not into Tradition as it 's Rule Yea and albeit Tradition may peradventure in some things be thought more plain then Scripture as for example suppose in the Point of Christs Divinity these words of the Nicene Creed Deum de Deo Lumen de Lumine Deum verum de Deo vero genitum non factum consubstantialem Patri per quem omnia facta sunt yet that Scripture should be still esteem'd the Text and Tradition but the best and most certain Comment upon it I gather from hence That it cannot well be otherwise thought but that even the Disciples of the Apostles after the Books of the New Testament were publish'd and receiv'd among Christians would themselves confirm to their Auditors what they told them they had been Orally taught by the Apostles out of the written Word because the very sayings of Christ himself and his divinely inspir'd Apostles would in common prudence be thought to be of greater weight and authority with them then their own although beleiv'd to be esteem'd by the people as true and certain as any whatsoever not of more then Humane Authority Having found then I suppose one reason why Tradition ought not to be held the Rule of Faith I 'le make tryal if in another sense also it be not incapable of being justly so reputed for if the present Church of any one Age can teach us an Article of Faith what is not so but indeed an Error then is not Tradition the Rule of Faith Now to find out whether the Church in any one Age can do so or not this will be a sure way to try if discovery can be made That any Error has been ever taught by the Catholick Church or by any known and acknowledg'd Part of it as an Article of Faith for if that can be done the possibility of the thing is put out of doubt thereby To make a clear discourse on this subject 't will be expedient to consider That there be two sorts of Errors in Matters of Religion Fundamental and not Fundamental By Fundamental I mean such as either immediatly and directly or at least by necessary and apparent Consequence contradict some Articles of Catholick Faith by not-Fundamental I mean such as evidently do neither This Distinction premis'd and allow'd of since 't is clear as I take it by what has been said of the Motives and Means of perpetuating Christs Doctrin in the World that no Article of Catholick Faith can ever perish or cease to be beleiv'd 't will follow that no Fundamental Error can at any time get a setled and quiet possession in the Church but shall always after it is taken notice of find opposition by Orthodox Christians because they cannot chuse but see that the embracing of it would necessarily destroy the contrary Divine Truth firmly held by so many at least as rightly consider the matter to be necessary to Salvation Of the assured certainty of this we have a famous Instance in the Arian Heresie which though eagerly promoted by the Wit and industry of most cunning and restless Heretics and stiffly back'd and countenanc'd by the Authority of several great Prelats assisted with the might and power of Temporal Potentates and Princes yet was still oppos'd and when fraudulent and violent means had tyr'd and spent themselves the opposit Truth prevail'd and shew'd it self more glorious then before But as for Errors not-Fundamental or whose opposition to any Article of Faith is not seen because too remotely contradictory thereto to be easily discern'd if such once come to be receiv'd as pious Opinions and promoted by the Schoolmen I do not understand why they may not in long continuance of time be advanc'd to the repute of being esteem'd Articles of Faith For proof of the truth of which I 'le produce some few Instances in the Doctrin of the Church of Rome The first shall be this That the Council of Trent has desin'd Sess 7. Can. 9. That there is a Character or certain spiritual sign or mark imprinted in the souls of all that are Baptiz'd Confirm'd and Ordain'd which yet I find disprov'd by an eminently Learned Gentleman of the Romish Church if I understand the Council and Him aright in his Institut Sacr. Tom. 2. Lect. 4. Pag. 32. as was shewn before in Sect. 4. of this Treatise and so superfluously to be here again set down A second Instance is the Belief of freeing souls from Purgatory and bringing them thence to Heaven before the day of Judgement which Opinion the last mentioned Author Thomas Albius in his Book De medio animarum statu has prov'd to be erronious 'T is true indeed he saies That it is no Article of the Roman Faith and I find the Trent Council in disertis verbis to affirm only this Purgatorium esse animà sque ibi detentas fidelium suffragiis potissimùm verò acceptabili Altaris Sacrificio juvari Decret de Purgatorio Sess 25. But the Popes granting InIndulgences and Priviledg'd Altars Priests saying of Masses and the Peoples praying and giving Alms for the delivery of souls out of Purgatory should better an indifferent person would be apt to think expound and declare the Churches sense or intention of Pastors Parents Tutors Master of Families and Nurses of the word juvari then any privat Doctor whatsoever Yea and if