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
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
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
as it were the flower of Mankind which guide themselves by perfect reason could hold nothing or have no Faith That is the Church must onely be made up of ignorant and undiscerning persons which would make her little better than a Congregation of Phanaticks 15. Especially the Church having many Adversaries skild in natural Sciences who will not stick to oppose her all they can and conquer her too could they take any just advantage against her and no greater advantage being possible to be gained or more deadly wound to be given her than to prove her Faith uncertain which is done by showing the Ground of it as far as concerns our Knowledge that is the Rule and Means to come to Faith possible to be false For this at once enervates her Government vilifies her Sacraments weakens all the motives to the love of Heaven which she proposes and by consequence quite enfeebles the vigour of Christian Life or rather this made manifest by reason of temptations to the Love of Creatures perpetually and on all sides besieging us endangers to extinguish it utterly and lastly makes Christians the most ridiculous people in the world to believe such high mysteries above their reasons upon uncertain Grounds T is manifest therefore that the only safeguard and all the strength of the Church and Christian Religion is placed in the absolute Certainty of the Rule of Faith T is made therefore and ordained to ascertain Faith that it it has in it what is fit for this end that is it is of its own nature absolutely certain that is absolute Certainty is found in the nature and notion of the Rule of Faith or which is all one is signified or meant by those words thoroughly understood 16. And lastly Faith being a Virtue mainly conducing to Bliss as is seen § 8. and its Influence towards Bliss which we call its Merit consisting in this that it makes us submit our Understanding to the Divine Veracity and by that means adhere unwaveringly to such Truths as raise us to Heaven so that the Divine Authority apply'd is the Principal Cause or Motive of this submission assent or adhesion and every Cause producing its effect better and stronglier by how much the nearer and closer 't is apply'd and all the application of it to us consisting in the Rule of Faith whose office it is to derive down to us those doctrines Christ taught and to assure us that Christ said them and the application of a thing closely to a Judging Power being performed by Certifying it which makes it sink into it become an intimate Act of that Power whereas Uncertainty can only admit it to swim as it were upon the surface of the Soul much after the manner of a bare Proposal or simple apprehension or at best as a Probability not having weight enough of motive to settle deep into its solid substance which is Cognoscitive and so become there a fixt Judgement it follows that the Virtue of Faith and its Merit are incomparably advantaged by the absolute Certainty of the Rule of Faith and very feeble and inefficacious without it This Rule then must be absolutely-Certain of its own nature that is the notion of absolutely-Certain is involv'd in the Rule of Faith 17. Summing up then the full account of our Discourse hitherto it amounts to this that out of the genuine meaning of the word Rule which as used by us denotes an Intellectual Rule much more out of the meaning of the word Faith it is clearly evinced that the Rule of Faith must have these several conditions namely it must be plain and self-evident as to its Existence to all § 3 4 9 10. Evidenceable as to its Ruling Power to enquirers even the rude vulgar § 5. 11. apt to settle justify undoubting persons § 12. to satisfy fully the most Sceptical Dissenters § 13. and rational Doubters § 14. and to convince the most obstinate and acute Adversaries § 15. built upon unmoveable Grounds that is Certain in it self § 6. 15 16. and absolutely ascertainable to us § 5 11 13 14. SECOND DISCOURSE Showing the two first Properties of the Rule of Faith utterly incompetent to Scripture 1. HAving attained so clear a Description of the Rule of Faith and acquaintance with it by particular marks we may with reason conceive good hopes of knowing it when we meet it Especially not having a great croud from which we are to single it out the pretenders to that title being very few and indeed but two are owned namely Tradition and Scripture though if we look narrowly into it the Private Spirit Private Reason Testimonies of Fathers or whatsoever else is held the ascertainer of Scriptures sence ought to have a place among the pretenders to be the Rule of Faith since t is those which are thought to give the reliers on them all the security they have of Gods sence that is of Points of Faith and so are or ought to be to them a Rule of Faith 2. But to speak to them in their own Language who say Scripture is their Rule we must premise this Note that they cannot mean by Scripture the Sence of it that is the things to be known for those they confess are the very Points of Faith of which the Rule of Faith is to ascertain us When they say then that Scripture is the Rule of Faith they can onely mean by the word SCRIPTURE that Book not yet senc't or interpreted but as yet to be senc't that is such and such Characters in a Book with their Aptness to signifie to them assuredly Gods Mind or ascertain them of their Faith For abstracting from the sence or actual signification of those words there is nothing imaginable left but those Characters with their Aptness to signifie it This understood let us apply now the Properties of the Rule of Faith to Scriptures Letter that we may see how they will fit 3. And the first thing that occurrs is its Existence or An est that is whether those Books pretended to be Gods Word bee indeed Scripture that is written by men divinely inspired Of which 't is most manifest the very rudest sort cannot be Certain by Self-evidence nor can it be easily evidenceable to those Doubters that are the ordinary sort of the Vulgar by any skill they are capable of nor even to more curious and speculative Scarchers but by so deep an inspection into the sence of it as shall discover such secrets that Philosophy and Human Industry could never have arrived to Besides all the seeming Contradictions must be solved ere they can out of the bare nature of the Letter conclude the Scripture to be of Gods enditing and so worthy to be a Rule to solve which literally plainly and satisfactorily the memories of so many particulars which made them clearer to those of the Age in which they were written and the matter known must needs be so worn out by tract of time that t is
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
to a lesser one in the margent and that to Luke 19. 22. And David's cutting of Goliah's Head with his own Sword a story known undoubtedly by all that were like to read his Sermon shall be secured from being thought a piece of a Romance or Knight-errantry by a punctual Citation in the open margent 1 Sam. 17. 51. And to omit diverse of the like pleasant strain lest any Unbeliever should be so impious as to doubt that his THEOPNEVST AHOLIAB was an Embroiderer you shall see it as plain as the nose on a man's face in an express Text Exod. 35. 30. 34. 11. But why insist I thus on so poor a foolery in a Book I design'd for solid or what advantage can I gain to my cause by so sleight an Animadversion I'answer â—Tis my temper when I see an odd action done without reason to trace it to its Original and to search after its proper Cause And upon consideration I finde none so proper for this Effect as a certain kinde of humour of quoting in D. Pierce and others of his Brethren so strongly possessing them and even naturaliz'd into them that so they be quoting they matter not much whether it be to purpose or not This I have shown in the whole bead-roll of his Citations the usefullest part as he sayes of his whole performance and that not one of those which he call Evidences is conclusive that is worth a straw or to purpose But because every one will not be capable to see it in those Citations he brings for Proofs I let them see it in those his late quotations of Scriptures In which he so pittifully betraies his silly and vain humour of quoting to no imaginable end but to satisfy his customary habit or Fancy and as in his Citations so in these imagins the Application of them to his Cause in stead of showing it that I conceive no Universitie-wit but will see in this carriage of his that Dr. Pierce's head is not too Scientiâ—ical nor himself a fit man to to demonstrate against the Papists SECOND APPENDIX Animadversions On Some Passages in Mr. Whitby 1. I Beg pardon of my Reader for my late Merriment and Children's play with aiery bubbles and Feathers Both D. Pierce's manner of writing and his Carriage towards Catholicks merited this kind of return I hope the passages in Mr. Whitby I have design'd to answer will give me occasion to speak more solidly And that they may do so I will pick out those which aim at some point of Concernment I have a particular respect for the person and am sorry his growing hopefulness receiv'd a foil by his Book against Mr. S. C. and this though a threefold disadvantage the badness of his Cause the Patronage of Dr. Pierce's malice and his impar congressus with so learned an Antagonist 2. My Designe leads me to take notice especially of that passage p. 93. Sect. 4. where he begins a discourse about the Soveraignty of Reason and explicates rather than proves it ought to be so what is his Rule and Guide to Faith Which because it look't plausibly yet was prudently neglected by Mr. S C. who hearing of more Eminent Antagonists writing against him judg'd it wisest to reserve himself to answer the Protestanrs second and best Thoughts in Them in case they were found to deserve it and because on the other side the Challenge was made to all the Romanists in the World and many passages in it light cross to the Grounds I had laid I took leave to consider and examin it my way In a great part of it especially at the beginning the discourse is rightly made but in other places he confounds Guide with Rule Power with Motive and by straining a word in Mr. S. C. beyond its necessary signification imposes on us a false Tenet which he mainly builds upon So that I am forc't to begin my answer by putting down our true one which gives Faith and Reason both their due This done his Superstructutes on that Supposition will fall of themselves 3. Our Tenet then is that Faith is the same with Belief that Belief relies on Authority and Divine Faith or Belief on the Divine Authority as its Motive and on the Churche's as on the Applier of the other to my Understanding At next I hold that no Authority deserves Assent further than true Reason gives it to deserve and hence the Divine Authority being Essential Truth deserves in true Reason if possible Infinitely intense Assent or adhesion to its sayings from me and the Churches Authority being found by my Reason to be Certain it applies with Certainty that is closely the Divine Authority to my Understanding and so obliges it absolutely to believe the Truths God has told and to submit whatever reasons I may have against the Object reveal'd to this all-overpowering Authority of Essential Truth This being the First Cause of all those things whence my particular Reasons are taken Nay farther hence it is that I adhere more heartily and firmly to a point of Faith than to any Conclusion of any Science whatever because a more efficacious Cause equally closely apply'd is apt to produce a greater Effect and no Cause is or can be in 〈◊〉 reason comparable to that of the Divine Verâ—city in the point of causing Assent which is closely apply'd by me to the Churches assurance Hence my Faith is ever most Rational because â—is 〈◊〉 rational to believe a point for which the Divine Veracity is engag'd and highly rational to believe the Church assuring me that it is engagâ—d for such and such points Nor yet is the Divine Authority or the Church as Mr. Whitby p. 96. very mistakingly argues beholden to the judgment of my private reason for my belief of her Infallibility but on the contrary my private reason is beholden to them for that Judgment seeing I therefore come to have that Judgment because Those as Objects wrought upon my Apprehension and imprinted a conceit of them there as they were in themselves and so oblig'd my Reason to conclude and my Judgment to hold them such as they were This Rational Assent establishes my Faith against the assaulds of any doubts from Human Reasons resting assur'd thâ—â— the same God who told me this is the Maker of all things else and hath writ all Created Truths in the Things he hath made whence no created â—ruth can thwart my Faith unless He can contradict himself which is impossible Hence if I have true Science I am certain to find no part of it opposit to my Faith but on the contrary conformable to It as being a Child of the same Parent Essential Truth If I have not true Science I ought not to think so nothing therefore but mine own overweening can make me miscarry 4. Reason having thus playâ—d her part in bringing me to Faith deserts me not yet while I act in it nor I her my Acts of Belief are still rational because it was rational to believe at first