SURE-FOOTING In Christianity Or Rational Discourses On The Rule of FAITH With Short Animadversions on Dr Pierce's Sermon Also on some passages in Mr Whitby and M Stillingfleet which concern That RULE Ecce nos ex Patribus ad Patres per manus traditam fuisse hanc sententiam demonstravimus Athanasius By I. S. LONDON Printed in the Year 1665. To the QUEEN Madam THough the Faith I write for be far more firmly establish't then Heaven and Earth themselves as the Worlds great Master has by his own word assur'd us and so needs no Support but its own Invincible Strength Yet I am told by my reason that nothing so clears and recommends Religion to the Generality as the vertuous Life and eminent Devotion of Them that profess it But where shall I seek those happiest Effects and noblest Arguments of Truth If I consider them in their abstracted Idea's they are Invisible as Angels too subtle and delicate for vulgar eyes Where then may I hope to meet those excellent Forms vested with Bodies if I consult the common Judgment I expect to be sent to some Hermit's Cell or the private Oratory of some holy Votaress where I may find them indeed embody'd but withal half-bury'd Incomparable Lights but shut up in a kind of dark Lanthorn where they burn safely I confess but shine to few while Those I seek must be high and conspicuous to send forth their Beams and Influences over all the VVorld and in that regard Courts are the properest Firmament for such Illustrious Stars and Courts are easily seen but where 's the Star In this perplexity Madam it pleas'd the Goodness of Heaven to relieve me for as the mention of Courts brought immediately into my memory the happiness our Nation is blest with by Your Majesty's Residence among us so the Contemplation of Your Exemplar Life fill'd my soul with joy to have found at last those sublime and heroick Virtues whose perfect Conformity to the Rules of Catholick Religion is alone capable to convince the Certainty of its Truth Such an unwearied Constancy in Devotion such a degree of Fervor in that Constancy cannot possibly proceed from a luke-warm Probability in Faith such frequent Retirements to intimate Conversations with Heaven such Mortifications and contempt of Court-Entertainments and which is yet harder such Innocence and Purity amidst the necessary Admittances of them as they all conspire to speak Your Soul Angelical so they clearly prove the vigorous Activity of the Faith that breeds them far beyond the drowsy Indifferency of a probable Opinion Thus Madam while Schollars but discourse YOV live Demonstrations Permit me then to use not Your bare Name but Your Vertues as a Patronage to my Endeavours since the Motive of this my Dedicatory meant These for its Substance and Your Temporal Supremeness onely for a Circumstance Others Complement while they dedicate I Argue all the while nor intend I this for a farther Display of Your Excellent Vertues which already are sufficiently manifest to all the VVorld but to breed a more serious reflexion on Them in the minds of those against whom I write and other well-meaning but mis-led persons This advantage Your Majesty and the Practical Provers of Catholick Faith have above us Speculaters that Your whole Life is a Continual Argument for It while we are bound to expect Seasons and wait Opportunities Nor should I at this time have offer'd to appear had not the Multitude of Books lately Printed against Catholick Religion made it my plain and necessary Duty with all my little power to defend It VVhat I have endeavour'd I most humbly lay at Your Majesties feet and remain MADAM Your Majesties most dutiful Subject and most obedient Servant I. S. PREFACE To the Intelligent READER 1. He is little acquainted with the paths which lead to Science who knows not that the settling the First Principle in any Affair is of mainest Import towards Satisfaction in that particular because if such a Principle be not first settled the whole Discourse as relying on that Principle for its Certainty must needs waver and stagger Reflecting on this plainest Truth and withal on the manner how very many I wish I might not say most Controversies are manag'd that is by debating much about diverse Conclusions but very little about the first Principle in Controversie I cannot wonder if Disputes come slowly to an End when few of them were ever rightly begun Another mischief and even despair of entire Satisfaction springs from hence that seeing all Dispute Supposes an Agreement between the Disputers in some acknowledg'd Principle I much fear while things are carry'd on this fashion this Requisit is wanting to the Catholick and Protestant Controvertists For neither doth the Protestant from his heart hold witness the Books of their most extold Champions and even the 39. Articles to the contrary the Testimonies of Fathers and Councils Certain and Convictive nor even Scripture alwayes as to its Letter and the Sence they give it for they pretend Infallible Certainty of none of these much less does the Catholick agree that private Interpretations of Scripture or Citations from Fathers not speaking as Witnesses of the Churches Belief are of sufficient Authority to settle the True or overthrow a False or pretended Faith Yet notwithstanding all this each Antagonist permits the other to frame his Discourses upon these Grounds as if he held the Method were good and allowable which not being heartily granted by either what satisfaction can we expect but endless and fruitless contests for want of Agreement in some acknowledg'd Principle while this Method is follow'd Nay more were it suppos'd that both sides had agreed not to reject in their Disputes such a Principle yet still however one side might happen to foil the other so far as to make him contradict himself yet never so as to convince his Tenet of falshood unless the process were grounded upon some First that is Self-evident Principle by virtue of whose undoubtable Certainty the Discourse built on it might gain an establishment Whence also the result of this way of Discourse can be onely the Credit or Discredit of the Authours and touches not at all the Thing Which without some Evident Principle to establish or overthrow it hovers in its pure neutral condition of being as to Assent or Dissent just a bare saying and no more 2. The reason why the First Principle of Controversie is not more lookt into and clear'd appears to me evidently this that our modern Dissenters from the Church and her Faith seeing which is common to Them with all other maintainers of Errours that to begin with First or self-Evident Principles is the direct road to Science and therefore absolutely destructive of their Interest avoid as much as in them lies the laying any such Principles and instead of this apply their whole endeavours to aiery Descants upon Words by such means and Arts as are never likely to give them any determinate Sence by which craft the way
it self To omit here that he makes it the very temper of a Christian mind not to question Tradition he maintains Continuance of Time to be so far from weakening the Certainty of Traditionary points that it contributes to strengthen them more And the reason is because the Churches Doctrin spreads by Time and so the sway of Tradition's descent is ampler besides that every new Degree of Continuance establishes its Title to Possession and makes it hainouser to revolt from it And Effects show our discourse true for there were more variety of Heresies that is Renouncers of Tradition in the first 400 years after the Apostles than we read of in any 400 years since Nor that we may use a familiar Instance in Human Tradition does I conceive any man living more doubt now of Mahomets or Iulius Caesar's existence than within an 100 years after they liv'd 15. A few Notes well weigh'd will strengthen the force of these Allegations which even at first sight seem to look very favourably on our Cause I mind my Reader then First That almost every Citation alledg'd is of Councils or Fathers speaking directly against Hereticks that is in such Circumstances as put them to declare what fixt them Catholicks and what made the other Hereticks Secondly That though some Fathers and Councils speak highly of Scripture as that it contains all Faith c. 'T is first to be markt whether they speak of Scripture Senc't or as yet to be Sencâ—t and if the later by whom or whether any Fathers say that Scripture wrought upon by private Interpretation and Human Wit is apt to ascertain Faith or be the Rule of Faith which is the true point between the Renouncers of Tradition and us Thirdly They shall observe it frequent in Fathers to force Hereticks to accept the Sence of Scripture from those who gave them the Letter of Scripture and very frequent to Sence that Letter even when dark by Tradition but never to bend Tradition to the outward show the Scripture's Letter seems to bear as interpreted by human Skills or to say Universal Tradition is insufficient or uncertain unless the Scripture's Letter thus interpreted came to clear or assist it Lastly 't is impossible they should hold Scripture thus interpretable the Rule of Faith it being notorious that most Hereticks against whom they writ held it theirs And so had they held Scripture thus interpreted the Rule of Faith they could not have held them Hereticks since they adher'd stiffly to that Rule or Root of Faith however they might err in many particular Tenets Not to repeat how all the Properties of the Rule of Faith are urterly incompetent to Scripture's Letter This done all the Testimonies for Scripture against Tradition lose their edge That is if my discourse also hold the test it will appear by way of Fact as it did before by Argument that there is neither Reason nor Authority against Tradition So that I have no more to do but to show that our Church at present grounds her faith on Tradition as formerly which done it follows all the Substance of my foregoing Discourses is but an Explication of our Churches Sence 16. To know our Churches Sence in this point we will not fetch our Testimony from private Authours as is the Protestants mode when they would affix any thing upon her but we will attend to what her own living voice pronounc't in her late famous Representative the Council of Trent Where in every Session definitive of Faith It professes to follow TRADITION either in most express or equivalent Terms As Session 4th The Holy Synod clearly seeing that this Truth and Disciplin Christ's Doctrin is contain'd in the written Books and Traditions without writing which received by the Apostles from Christ's own mouth or from the very Apostles the Holy Ghost dictating as it were deliver'd by hands per manus Traditae have come down to us c. And Again Also the TRADITIONS both belonging to Faith and Manners as dictated orally by Christ or the Holy Ghost and conserved by CONTINVAL SVCSESSION in the Catholick Church c. Session 5. The Holy Council following the Iudgment aud Consent of the Church Ibid. § 4. As the Catholick Church where ever diffus'd hath alwayes understood it For by reason of this RVLE OF FAITH according to the TRADITION of the Apostles c. Session 6. It professes to follow that Doctrin which Christ taught the Apostles deliver'd and the Catholick Church the Holy Ghost suggesting perpetually or interruptedly retain'd Session 7. The Holy Synod adhering to the Holy Scripture the Traditions of the Apostles and the Consent of Councils and Fathers Session 13. The sound and sincere doctrin which the Catholick Church hath ever kept and will ever keep to the end of the World And again For so ALL OVR ANCESTOVRS that ever were in the tru Church of Christ most openly have profest And yet again cap. 3. This Faith was ever in the Church So cap. 4. It was ever held in God's Church More such like Expressions are found in the same Session But to proceed Session 14. chap. 1. The Consent of ALL the Fathers EVER understood c. Chap. 5. The Church of God NEVER taught nor held c. Chap. 5. The Vniversal Church EVER understood that c. Chap. 7. It was ever held in God's Church Chap. 8. It was PERPETVALLY COMMENDED by our Fathers to Christian people No Catholick EVER held c. And in the same Session concerning Extream Unction alledging S. Iames his Text it adds By which words AS THE CHVRCH HATH LEARNED BY TRADITION RECEIV'D DOWN BY HANDS he teacheth c. And Can. 3. As the Catholick Church EVER understood from the beginning c. Can. 6. Which the Catholick Church ever observ'd from the beginning and doth observe c. Session 21. chap. 1. The Council professes to follow the Iudgment and CVSTOME of the Church Chap. 2. It declares that this power has PERPETVALLY been in the Church Session 22. That the antient Faith and doctrin may be retain'd in the Church Ibid. cap. 1. As the Catholick Church EVER understood and taught Chap. 1. According to Apostolical TRADITION Session 23 Holy Writings show it and the TRADITION of the Catholick Church ever taught it Chap. 2. They are known to have been in use from the very Beginning of the Church Session 24. The Holy Fathers Councils and the VNIVERSAL TRADITION of the Church have ALWAYES taught And speaking of some Errors It pronounces them different from the Catholick Church and from the CVSTOME approved SINCE THE APOSTLES TIME Session 25. The Catholick Church instructed by the Holy Ghost teaches out of Sacred Writings and the ANTIENT TRADITION of the Church c. According to the use of the Catholick and Apostolick Church TRADITAM deliver'd from the first or Primitive times of Christian Religion c. More Expressions of the like strain are found in this Session And to close up all in their Acclamation they use this
and my Grounds why I then believ'd rest still unchang'd nay are unchangeable But yet Reason acts much differently now then â—ormerly Before I came at Faith she acted about her own Objects Motives or Maxims by which she scand the Authorities we spoke of But in Acts of Faith she hath nothing to do with the Objects of those Acts or Points of Faith She is like a dimsighted man who us'd his Reason to find a trusty Friend to lead him in the twi-light and then reli'd on his guidance rationally without using his own Reason at all about the Way it self To make this clearer we may distinguish two sences in the word Reason one as 't is taken for that natural Faculty which constitutes Man which Faculty never deserts or ought to desert us in any action that is Manly or virtuous The other as 't is taken for that Power wrought upon by motives under its own ken in the same sence we call it human Reason by which is not meant the natural Power unactuated or abstractedly for then the word human were a Taâ—tology but Reason as conversant with such objects or inform'd by such knowledges as are commonly found within the sphere of our natural condition as Men such as are those which beget Science And this leaves us when we have once found the Authority now spoken of the Objects of Faith formally speaking being out of her reach nor is she thus understood the motive of our Assent to the verity of the Point of Faith but AVTHORITY onely Wherefore into Authority onely Faith as such is resolvd finally though if you go about to resolve the Rationalness of assenting to the Authority it self it will light into those Evident Reasons which your naturall power of reason as yet uninform'd by Faith but by motives or maxims within its own sphere was capable to wield 5. Reason therefore taken for my natural Power is my Eye or interiour sight as inform'd by common Principles or Maxims antecedent to Faith my Guid to bring me to believe Authority and those motives or Maxims are the Rules to my Reason by attending to which she hath virtue or skill to set her own thoughts right that is to guid me in my way to Faith but when I have once come to beleeve Authority that is come to Faith not Reason but Authority is my Guid for I follow Authority and not my Reason in judging what is Faith what not and though the Light of that naturall power never deserts me yet Reason as rul'd by her own natural maxims is useless to me as a Guid or those Maxims as a Rule for I apply neither of these to the mysteries of Faith to scan their verity or falsity by but purely rely upon Authority and beleeve them Authority then is my Guid and in the Infallibility of that Authority consists the power or virtue it has to guide me right that is to regulate or rule me as one of the Faithfull or as one who must have such Certain Grounds of my Assent as I may securely build my Salvation on This Authority then as it is Inâ—allible is also my Rule in my beleeving or the Rule of my Faith This of my Rule of Faith in Common against Adversaries of Faith in common But with Protestants who grant Christ to be God and consequently his words or doctrine true the onely Rule and Guid we need is to lead us into the Knowledge of what he said and assure it to us We affirm then that the Catholick Church is the Guid we follow and her Infallibility consisting in Tradition our Rule of Faith Hence all Catholicks profess her doctrin uninterruptedly succeeding from the Apostles time and so to continue to the end of the World hence with one voice they lay claim to Christs gracious Assistance to her in defending her from over-growing Errors against Faith or Heresies hence all profess to hear and follow her and pledge undoubtingly even the security of their salvation by relying on the Certainty of her Living Voice for their Tenets and on her Disciplin for the Practice of their Faith And though some Schoolmen make Scripture a partial Rule of Faith yet they can mean onely materially not formally that is that some part of Faith is signifi'd by Scripture's Letter not that Scripture's Letter alone is sufficient securely to signify it to private understandings so as to beget that most strong firm Assent found in Divine Faith as is evident by this that all hold no Scripture is of private Interpretation all hold the living voice of the Church and her constant Practice are the best Interpreters of Scripture Now Faith being Tenets and Sence that must be 〈◊〉 the Rule of Faith which ascertains us of Christs Sence not the materiall Characters which that Certain Interpreter we call the Church works upon and by her Practicall Tradition interprets 6. 'T is high time now to look back upon Dr. Pierce and his party how justly they deal with us and how mistakingly they discourse when they come to the Grounds of their Faith 7. First by the tenour of his discourse he would seem to obtrude upon us a Tenet which none but perfect mad-men could hold namely that we profess we have no reason why we believe the Church which devolves to this that we must profess we have as much reason to believe an old wife's dream as our Faith since there can be no less reason than none at all And hence he will needs assure the Reader that therefore the Enthusiastick Sectaries are in part Romish Proselytes c. And indeed upon so gross a calumny layd down for his principle and a sober Truth what might he not conclude with equal reason he might have inferr'd that all Bedlam were Catholicks and that to turn mad were to turn a Romanist But his carriage to put this upon Mr. S. C. is strangely unjust since he knows and hints it that he writ a Book upon his declaring himself Catholick entitled Motives of his Conversion does he think the word Motives does not signify Reasons or that to write an whole Book of Reasons why he adhea'd to the Catholick Church signifies that he renounc't all reason why he believ'd her 8. Next as for his own tenet he layes this for his Ground that Reason alone is Iudge in all cases I will propose him one case and 't is the Existence of a Trinity To work now with your Reason about this object and see how you evince it I doubt your best reasons will crack ere you make all ends meet But you mean you must have Reason to believe it I conceive speaking properly you should rather say you must have Reason to believe the Authority and Authority to believe It for Belief is as properly relative to Authority as Science is to an Act of true Reason or Evidence Whence 't is as incongruous to say I must have Reason to believe such a Point as to say I know such a point Scientifically by Authority
Again for God's love who ever deny'd they ought to have reason to believe the Churches Authority Is any thing more frequent in our Controvertists and Divines treating of the Ground of Faith than large Discourses concerning Motives of Credibility 9. Thirdly he saies that disputing with Romanists whether Scripture be the sole Rule he means t is so limitedly that is between Christians who have already acknowledged Scripture a Rule of Faith By which I see Mr Whitby guides him self by sounds though he must need know if he knows any thing of Catholick Tenâ—â—â— our sence is quite different I beseech you Sir deal fairly with us Is not that speaking formally and properly the Rule of Faith which gives us Christs sence and does not that give us the Sence of Scripture which regulates us in the Interpretation of it Did ever Catholick then hold that Scripture interpreted on any fashion much less on your fashion by private Judgments or reasons regulated by Grammatical skill Criticisms and such like verbal knowledges is a Rule of Faith nay do not we constantly abhor this way as the Source of Heresy Take us right then we hold not Scripture's Letter alone a Rule but Scripture interpreted by the Church that is indeed the Church formally speaking and so you see you mistake our Principle Yet upon our joint-agreement in this your Discourse against us proceeds Retrive it then you see your Errour Again you tell us Scripture is your new Rule but forget quite in your discourse to tell us that your Reason assures you Scripture is to be the onely Rule or why it should be so since besides what I have demonstrated to the Contrary in my former Discourses 't is evident Christian Religion had descended many steps ere the Scripture's parts were much scatter'd much less the Whole collected and no less clear that that can never be a Rule or Way to Faith which many follow yet their thoughts straggle into many several Judgments not in indifferent points but in that of the Trinity amongst the rest as your self profess of the Socinian that he rejects not the Trinity in the first place because it seems a contradiction but because 't is not clearly discover'd in Scripture by which you see he adheres firm to your Rule and so ought to be acknowledg'd one of your Church since though he hap to differ in some points yet he holds fast the Rule common to both which is the substantiallest Principle of a Church as such being the Ground of all Faith And indeed your Kindness to him here and your tender care not to displease him shows you have a true brotherly affection for him Though I fear he he will con you small thanks for making his Principle run thus That which is not clearly revealâ—d in Scripture and is coniradictory ti reason is not to be believ'd which seems to imply that were it clear in Scripture yet contradictory to Reason then he would notwithstanding belive it An over-strain of Piety no Socinian was ever guilty of and I can assure you no learned Catholick Divine I ever heard of ever made such an Act of Faith But 't is another case if it onely seems contradictory and is not judg'd by him to be evidently such for then there is room left in his mind for the contrary Assent of Faith to settle there 10. You say you prescribe not the doctrin imputed to the Socinians because it makes Reason the Iudge of Faith but the Rule of Faith Pray take pains to consider what you say He that judges must have some Principles in his head by which he is regulated in making such a Judgment those Principles then must be his Rule in that Action and if that Judgment be an adhesion to a point of Faith those Principles are his RULE OF FAITH Examin now well your own thoughts whether your Principles by which you find out certainly by interpreting Scripture this is God's sence or a point of Faith be not Maxims of your human Reason I am sure in disputes against us you prove and defend your Faith by such skills as Languages History and other Knowledges got by Human Learning and consequently hold It your selves upon the tenour of those skills which therefore are your Rule of Faith and not upon the bare Letter You I know will deny it But I beg your second thoughts to reflect that a Rule to such an Effect is the immediate Knowledge to the Power as conversant about that Effect and that if another intervene it regulates the former which thereupon becomes the thing ruled not the Rule Do then these skills clear the Letter of Scripture that is make known Gods Sence to you If so since their Immediate effect is to clear it 't is impossible to deny but they are at least part of the Revelation for revealing is clearing and God's Sence was not clearly revealed but by those means that is by human maxims and so they are at least the more formal part of your Rule of Faith Again I ask might you not have mistaken the true Sence without those Human Maxims If so then They and not Scripture's Letter were your Rule If not then onely common Sence is requisit to understand clearly what 's reveal'd in Scripture and then either your Brother Socinian or you want Common Sence which I think you 'l scarce say 11. But will you see you still hold Reason your Rule notwithstanding you cry up the Written word Find you not there expresly that God has hands feet nostrils and passions like ours and this in clear terms Why is it not then a point of Faith You will not answer sure it is against Maxims of Reason you renounc't them formerly p. 94. when you had found out your new Rule and onely allow'd your Reason power to judge if a point were sufficientlie reveal'd that it is most rational to 〈◊〉 it self though it seem to contradict or thwâ—â—â— Reason Now this is sufficiently reveal'd being plainly writ in your Rule of Faith and the direct Letter of Scripture why will you not then captivate your Reason and believe it I see you do but complement with God's incomprehensible Knowledge in speaking so highly of it and so humbly of your own shallow Intellâ—ct Will you deny a point of Faith so plainly reveald for your own capricho or conceit Perhaps you 'l say 't is not clearly reveal'd because the contrary is plain in Scripture too I ask is it as plain if not it cannot overthrow the title of This to be a point of Faith If as plain why should you not believe both Be valiant Sir and believe a contradiction it being clearly reveal'd Perhaps it seems but such and then your own profession p. 94. obliges you to admit it You that can acknowledge an Infinit extension of space when you say all the world besides does so too sure you thought all the World was in your Fancy may also hold Materia ab aeterno and that it is onely a part
with such a person were not he mad that is a renouncor of Reason or Man's Nature who should not believe them You see then these Witnesses have power to propose such an Object as can oblige to Belief You see the Dissenters are Irrational that their act of dissenting springs from some Passion or Vice and Vice is punishable and so is the Effects of that Dissent if it be in such a matter as is highly pernicious to Mankind's best concerns Now our Church makes account she is able to propose an Authority incomparably more ample than the Attestation now spoken of for the true Descent of her Faith and judges such a proposal founded on the eye-sight of all those Witnesses to be able to oblige to interiour Assent in such a degree as to render them most highly wilful vicious and irrational who should disbelieve it hence the crime intrenching upon the order to mankind's Salvation the highest concern imaginable both to edify those dissenters by correcting their vice and the circumstant Faithful by breeding a conceit in them through the punishment of the others of the sacredness of Faith and its Rule and the hainousness of Pride of understanding the ready way to all Heresies they may nay ought punish their Interiour Dissent Not out of an height of Authority without motives as Mr. Whitby conceits but because that Authority is her self such a motive to Belief that onely irrational vicious and wilfully-blind persons can recede from it by disbelief And hence our Churches procedure is rational natural sweet and charitable tending to amend an enormity of Will not bred from a rationally but passionate dissatisfy'd Understanding Nay Mr. Whitby's discourse justifies Our Churches procedure who seems to allow his Church a power to require a positive Assent when the case comes to be such that the denier of it must needs be held wilfull and our Church neither sayes nor acts otherwise 15. By this Discourse I would not have Mr Whitby imagin that I am about proving our Churches Infallibility in this place but onely showing that holding She can evidence her Authority She goes rationally to work and consonantly to her self in requiring Assent to her Proposals whereas Theirs confessing her self fallible even in interpreting Scripture upon which all both her Faith and Authority as a Church depends were self-condemn'd irrational and tyrannical if She should go about to require any such Interiour Assent Now though he in big words denies this to be her carriage asking when did they meaning Bishops Convocations or Parliaments challenge any power over our minds and Consciences and alledges the consent of their Divines for it yet I wonder what he thinks of the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy made by a Protestant Parliament is there no obligation there to hold any thing Yes as strong as Oath can tye it And which is worse 't is more Irrational to go about to bind Our Assents who are not of their Church than to bind their own Subjects This in practice is perform'd towards all but so imprincipled a procedure that their Church waves it when it comes to a rational scanning in a Dispute and Controversy acknowledging so their want of Grounds to make it good Which shows that the Authority of their Church sprang from the Parliament or Secular State in regard She professes her self very heartily content with external Obedience let the Interiour Assent goes where it will most unlike the Church settled by the Wisdome of the Eternal Father and constituted the Pillar and Ground of Truth who provided in the first place for the Churches Power to hold us to the same Tenets which are the Principles of our Actions knowing that unless the Root of Faith be sound the Actions its branches must needs be rotten and unconscientious and that no Congregation could long hold together nor indeed longer than the plain force of the Secular Sword aw'd them unless by power to evidence its Authority it had power to oblige men's Understandings connaturally to an Unity in the same Faith which done all else would follow And hence we may see confessedly in the Protestant Principles the reason of their present and past distractions and divine of the future for men's Fancies being naturally various and no power in her to keep them in an Union they must needs ramble into multitudes of dissenting Sects which to strive to unite into one were to force both Nature and Conscience too Nature in striving to unite their Understandings in Faith without offering them Evidence of Authority Conscience in binding them to Act as Protestants do whereas they are ready to stake their Salvation upon it that their best reasons working upon the very Rule of Faith Protestants recommend obliges them to the contrary and that to force them to act with Them is to force them to sin So that the Protestants at once profess they will not or cannot oblige their Vnderstandings and yet at the same time contend by force to oblige their Wills without nay against their Understandings 16. In a word let Protestants write talk quote words as long as they will Plainest Common Sence tells them and every man who considers it that unless they settle some undisputable Method of arriving at Christ's Sence or Faith that is some self-evident and so all-obliging Rule of Faith the Protestant Church can never hope for Power to reduce their Dissenters nor to hold together or govern efficaciously their own Subjects that is they can never hope for Unity within themselves nor lastly Union with them that have it and charitably endeavour they may have it too THIRD APPENDIX Animadversions On Some Passages in Mr. Stillingfleet 1. THe loud Fame of Mr. Stillingfleet's Book preventing its Publication and withall the report of his good parts coming from diverse Judicious Persons bred in me a great Impatience to see something of his other Writings that so I might have more solid Ground to build my Expectation on than common rumour or commendation of acquaintances A Protestant Friend show'd me a little Treatise of his concerning Excommunication I perus'd the beginning of it and immediately told him Mr. Stillingfleet was a very ingenious person and writ the best I ever yet saw any Protestant For he settled first his notion or the true nature of the Thing and thence attempted by intrinsecal mediums to draw immediate Consequences which show'd that his head lay right for Science But withal I assur'd my Friend 't was impossible he could write against us and take that method the nature of his Cause not enduring so severe a Test. His Book coming forth and bearing in its Title a Rational Account of the Grounds of Protestant Religion my Expectation was more erected and till my self could get leasure to peruse it I told diverse both Catholicks and Protestants that they might expect from Mr. Stillingfleet's Wit the most that could be said either for the later or against the former But coming to over-look cursorily his Infallibility of Tradition
Part 1. Cap. 6. and The. Protestants Way of resolving Faith Cap. 7. I had quite lost Mr. Stillingfleet and instead of him had found a Dr. Hammond Dr. Pierce or a Dissuader who talk not out of Nature or Things but Words Imagination I plainly discover'd there was not one proposition in those two Discourses which could be a solid Ground for a rational understanding that would be true to it self to settle and rely on and was desirous to show it had it not been uncivil to put my sickle into another man's harvest and crop the victory due to another's Learning and Industry Victory I say For he that defends his Cause no better in effect yields it lost Yet I beg leave of the judicious Authour of Labyrinthus Cantuariensis to maintain one Breach where I find my self more directly assaulted Oral Tradition being the Post I have taken upon me to explicate further defend because I conceive it the solid Ground on which the Church or all Catholicks both Learned and Unlearned rely as Faithful however some School-men abounding in their own Sence ground also their Explication of the Churches Infallibility on somthing besides 2. Mr Stillingfleet then Part 3. Chap. 5. § 4 5. sets himself to oppose Oral Tradition whose Infallibility he opposes to Doctrinal Infallibility in Pope or Councils Where if by Doctrinal Infallibility he means that which they have as Doctors or Schollers he may reflect that no Catholick makes such an Infallibility proper to the Church or Church-Governours as such however it may be somtimes necessary to proceed upon it in some signal occasions Now take away this Infallibility there is none left but the Infallibility of Tradition perform'd by Testifying It being Evident that we have but two wayes of ordinary Knowledge by Acts of our Soul or Operations on our Body that is by Reason and Experience the former of which belongs to Speculaters or Doctors the second to Deliverers of what was receiv'd or to Testifiers Whence M. Stillingfleet may see he stumbles at the very threshold by counterposing Doctrinal Infallibility to Traditionary since that which we call Ecclesia docens professes constantly to ground her self on Tradition witness the Council of Trent in every Session where she defines Faith 3. No wonder then if grounding on this mistake Mr Stillingfleet declares himself unsatisfi'd He asks therefore whether he is bound to believe what the present Church delivers to be Infallible I understand him not Had he instead of the word Infallible put receiv'd as deliver'd ever or Infallibly true I had for Fallibility and Infallibility belong to the Knowing Power or the Persons that have it not to the Object The Object being neither deceiv'd nor not deceiv'd but we Well but suppose he means by it deliver'd ever or which is equivalent certainly true for what came from Christ must be so In that case we answer Affirmatively He asks again on what account is he bound to believe it And he makes our Answer to be Because the present Church cannot be deceiv'd in what the Church of the former Age believ'd nor That in the precedent and so up till Christ. This is indeed part of our Answer The other part is that the Church in no Age could conspire against her Knowledge to deceive that Age immediately following in matter of Fact evident in a manner to the whole World Upon this he falls into two new Demands which take up this whole paragraph 4. The first is how we can assure him the present Church obliges him to believe nothing but onely what and so far as it receiv'd from the former Church I answer by her manifest Practice never refusing Communion to any man that could approve himself to believe all the former Age did I could here distinguish the word Believe but I refer it till I come to speak of de fide He proceeds What Evidence can you bring to convince me both that the Church alwayes observ'd this Rule and could never be deceiv'd in it For the later I hope I need bring no greater Evidence than this that men in all Ages had Eyes Ears and other Senses also common Reason and as much memory as to remember their own names and frequently-inculcated Actions If you disprove this I doubt we have lost mankind the subject we are speaking of And till you disprove it neither I nor any man in his wits can doubt that this Rule depending on Testifying that is Sence or Experience can possibly permit men to be deceivable The former part I shall speak to when I come to show the Obligation not to vary from Faith His Scruple springs hence that he sees the Roman Church asserts things to be de fide in one age which were not in another c. that this is the common Doctrin and the deniers ill-look't on I beg leave to distinguish the words de fide which may either mean Christian Faith or Points of Faith taught by Christ and then you see 't is nonsence to say they can be in one Age and not in another for what Christ has taught he has taught and the preteritness of the Thing has so fixt its Existence to its proper time that 't is not now obnoxious to variation Quod factum est infectum fieri non potest Or de fide may mean obligatory to be believ'd In this later sence none I think denies things may be de fide in one Age and not in another in the former sence none holds it What 's now become of your difficulty I believe you are in some wonderment and think I elude it rather then answer it I shall endeavour to unperplex you 5. Christianity ayms not to make us Beasts but more perfectly Men and the perfection of our Manhood consists in using our Reasons Since then natural Consequences are apt to spring from natural Principles by the operation of Reason and we cannot but think that the Consequences apt to flow from Supernatural Principles or Points of Faith deliver'd down from Christ onely which are de fide in the former Sence are of incomparably greater Excellency than Natural Truths it follows that Christianity or Christian Faith is so far from hindring the Faithful from deducing out of them that both out of their nature as Supream Truths or Principles and out of their high Excellency they invite and prompt most strongly to it Now these Points deduct out of Principles of Faith are of two sorts The former those which need no more but Common Sence or the ordinary natural Light of Reason to discover their arising thence nor any piece of Skill or Science to infer them but are seen by the bare Principle of Faith or rather in it being indeed but a Branch or Part of that Principle The later are those which need besides the Maxims of some Science got by Speculation to infer them An Example of the former sort is that against the Monothelites of Christ's having an Human Will for common Experience tells
multitudes of Knowers if no possible consideration can awaken in our reason a doubt that they conspire to deceive us Now in the way of Tradition all deliverers or immediate Forefathers are Knowers as appears in those who immediately heard the Apostles all the Knowledge requisit being of what they were taught and practic 't accordingly all their lives of which 't is impossible the rudest person should be ignorant who ever had any Effect of such a Teaching wrought upon him Nor can any unless their brains rove wildly or be unsettled even to the degree of madness suspect deceit where such multitudes unanimously agree in a matter of fact look seriously when they speak act themselves and practice accordingly and show in the whole course of their carriage that they hope to be sav'd themselves and to save others whom they thus instruct by relying on this Truth that their Forefathers thus taught them which amounts to this that Nature or common Reason at unawares steals into them a solid apprehension that Tradition is of a certain kind of Nature and so that while Fathers thus taught Children it was ever such that is that Tradition is a certain Rule of conveying down Faith which is all we study to evince at present I may add that Nature telling them by their own experiences that Parents generally would be apt to teach their Children what themselves had been taught and believ'd to be good and true needfull to their eternal Salvation their natural thoughts would lead them by a downright procedure to judge that Tradition was ever in some considerable Body of Deliverers who stuck to it and own'd it and that those had true Faith or truly that doctrin which Christ and the first Planters of Christianity taught But of this point more hereafter 10. If it be objected that this multitude of plain honest-meaning Souls are as much justify'd for believing Scripture I answer that if you mean their Faith conceiv'd to be found in Scripture or a determinate Sence of Scripture's Letter it cannot with any show of reason be pretended that they are as much justifiable for believing any setting aside Tradition's help for without this it totally depends on the inward Judgments Fancies or Skills of men which they are unqualify'd to judge of not on open verdict of Senses to wield the Certainty or Uncertainty of which lies clearly within the reach of their common reason And as for Scripture's Letter they cannot possibly be justify'd in reason for believing even the Substantial Truth of it without Tradition's assisting hand and preserving care And the reason is the same because the common course of human Experience tells them that Judgments or Opinions often disagree but their plain Sensations especially if frequently repeated never Whence a Jury of the plainest High-shoes would upon the Evidence of the sight of six Witnesses without more ado condemn a Malefactor but not upon the Judgments of a thousand men if a Testimony grounded on Sense were not brought Now take away Tradition and all ground from Certain Sence fails us either for the meaning or even Letter of Scripture and all is left to men's Judgments built on latent Skills or Fancy or at least on Sense liable to great and numerous mistakes as hath been shown Disc. 4. § 3. Again seeing every one apprehends the most vulgar have reason enough to believe there was such a one as K. Iames and Q. Elizabeth of which they are no otherwise ascertain'd but by Tradition why are not they as much or more justify'd for believing points of Faith received down by the same tenour whereas if you go about to pump their common Reason about the Authority of the Statute-Book or the Truth of its Letter you shall find them blunder and at a â—oss being pos'd beyond their sphere of 〈◊〉 Nature by a question entrenching upon skill to which they can never answer with a steady assuredness inwardly and if they do so outwardly 't is manifest that some Passion and not their Reason breeds that irrational Profession The third Condition then of the Rule of Faith which was to be apt to settle and justify unreflecting and undoubting vulgar is manifestly found agreeing to Tradition 11. I put next the 6th Condition because the proof of it evidently proves the fourth fifth and seventh For what is built on immovable Grounds or Certain in its self has in it wherewith to settle and satisfy the most piercing Witâ— convince the most obstinate Adversaries and to ascertain us absolutely To prove that Tradition has Certain and Infallible Grounds it may suffiâ—â— to note that Disc. 1. § 13 14 15. it being evidently proved Faith must be Infallible to us anâ— no less evident that it cannot be such without having Infallibly-câ—â—tain Grounds since nothinâ— can be firmer to us than the ground it stands on now the Rule of Faith is its Ground It follow evidently that This must likewise be Infallibâ—â— certain There being then onely two Ground or Rules of Faith owned namely Deliver of it down by Writing and by Words anâ— Practice which we call Oral and Practical Tradition 't is left unavoydably out of the imposibility that Scripture should be Infallible as Rule that Tradition must be such 12. Though this Conclusion supposing thâ— Truth of the Propositions I assume as alreadâ— prov'd be sufficiently consequent to those Adversaries against whom I contest at present thâ— Certainty of Tradition in regard they do 〈◊〉 stick to grant that either Scripture or Tradition must be the Rule of Faith Yet I foresee more will be expected from a pretender to demonstrate its Certainty and that he should frame his Discourse from intrinsecal Mediums Reflecting then on the nature of Tradition as before explicated we shall observe that it hath for its Basis the best Nature in the Universe that is Man's the Flower and End of all the rest and this not according to his Moral part defectible by reason of Original Corruption nor yet his Intellectuals darkly groping in the pursuit of Science by reflected thoughts or Speculation amidst the misty vapours exhal'd by his Passion predominant over his rational Will but according to those faculties in him perfectly and necessarily subject to the operations and stroaks of Nature that is his Eyes Ears handling and the direct Impressions of Knowledge as naturally and necessarily issuing from the affecting those Senses as it is to feel heâ—â— cold Pain Pleasure or any other material Quality Again those Impressions upon the Sense are not made once but frequently and in most many times every day Moreover to make these more express and apt to be taken notice of their lives are to be fram'd by the Precepts they hear and conformable Examples they see so that Faith I mean the substance of it or that solid plain Knowledge as far as 't is apt to cause downright Christian 〈◊〉 comes clad in such plain matters of Fact that the most stupid man living cannot possibly be ignorant of it