distinct Ideas The History of the Deluge is convey'd to us by Writings which had their Original from Revelation and yet no body I think will say he has as certain and clear a Knowledge of the Flood as Noah that saw it or that he himself would have had had he then been alive and seen it For he has no greater Assurance than that of his Senses that it is writ in the Book suppos'd writ by Moses inspired but he has not so great an Assurance that Moses writ that Book as if he had seen Moses write it so that the assurance of its being a Revelation is less still than the assurance of his Senses Ibid. l. 4. c. 18. § 4. A man ought to hearken to Reason even in immediate and original Revelation where it is suppos'd to be made to himself but to all those who pretend not to immediate Revelation but are requir'd to pay Obedience and to receive the Truths reveal'd to others which by the Tradition of Writings or Word of Mouth are convey'd down to them Reason hath a great deal more to do and is that only which can induce us to receive them Ibid. § 6. Whatsoever is divine Revelation ought to over-rule our Opinions Prejudices and Interests Whatever God hath reveal'd is certainly true no doubt can be made of it But whether it be a divine Revelation or no Reason must judge which can never permit the Mind to reject a greater Evidence for that which is less evident or preser less Certainty to the greater There can be no Evidence that any Traditional Revelation is of divine Original in the words we receive it and in the Sense we understand it so clear and so certain as those of the Principles of Reason Ibid. § 10. No Proposition can be received for divine Revelation or obtain the Assent due to all such if it be contradictory to our clear intuitive Knowledge Ibid. § 5. No Proposition can be receiv'd for divine Revelation which is contradictory to a self-evident Proposition The Third Letter p. 230. Give me leave to ask your Lordship Whether where there be Propositions of whose Truth you have certain Knowledge you can receive any Proposition for divine Revelation which contradicts that Certainty Ibid. p. 218. There is one sort of Propositions that challenge the highest degree of our Assent upon bare Testimony whether the thing proposed agree with common Experience and the ordinary Course of things or no. The Reason whereof is because the Testimony is of such an one as cannot deceive or be deceived and that is of God himself This carries with it Certainty beyond Doubt Evidence beyond Exception This is call'd by a peculiar Name Revelation and our Assent to it Faith which has as much Certainty as our knowledge it self and we may as well doubt of our own Being as we can whether any Revelation from God be true Only we must be sure that it be a Divine Revelation and that we understand it right Essay l. 4. c. 16. § 14. I think it is possible to be certain upon the Testimony of God where I know it is the Testimony of God The third Letter p. 133. All Divine Revelation requires the Obedience of Faith and all the parts of it are to be receiv'd with a Docility and disposition prepared to embrace and assent to all Truths coming from God Reasonab of Christan p. 302. Natural Religion in its full extent was no where that I know taken care of by the force of natural Reason It should seem that 't is too hard a thing for unassisted Reason to establish Morality in all its parts upon its true Foundation with a clear and convincing Light Ibid. p. 268. 'T is no diminishing to Revelation that Reason gives it Suffrage too to the Truths Revelation has discovered The Apostles delivered no Precepts but such as tho' Reason of it self had not clearly made out yet it could not but assent to when thus discover'd and think it self indebted for the Discovery Ibid. p. 281 284. I gratefully receive and rejoice in the Light of Revelation which sets me at rest in many things the manner whereof my poor Reason can by no means make out to me I readily believe what ever God has declared tho' my Reason find Difficulties in it which I cannot master The Third Letter p. 443 444. Though the Light of Nature gave some obscure glimmering some uncertain hopes of a Future state yet humane Reason could attain to no Clearness no Certainty about it but it was Jesus Christ alone who brought Life and Immortality to light through the Gospel Ibid. p. 439. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS Every one must observe how much Mr. Lock in his Essay speaks on the behalf of Natural Religion telling us that the Precepts of it are plain and very intelligible to all Mankind and seldom come to be controverted whereas says he reveal'd Truths are liable to the common and Natural Obscurities and Difficulties incident to Words and therefore he recommends the Precepts of natural Religion to our careful and diligent observation God says he farther hath spread before all Mankind such legible Characters of his Works and Providence and given them so sufficient a Light of Reason that they to whom this written Word never came could not whenever they set themselves to search doubt of the being of a God Thus Mr. Lock But how doth this last that they could not doubt of the Being of a God agree with that which he says other where viz. Essay l. 1. c. 4. § 8. concerning the Atheists among the Ancients and those at the Bay of Soldamia in Brasil c. who if he might be believed had not as much as any Notion of a Deity Mr. Lock perhaps will say of them of the Bay of Soldamia and Brasil that they did not set themselves to search but surely he will not say this of those reputed Atheists that were anciently among the inquisitive Greeks In like manner how can Mr. Lock say that the points of natural Religion were so seldom controverted Were there no Controversies among the ancient Greeks about things relating to Ethicks or Morality as well as about those that appertain'd to other parts of Philosophy Were not the several Sects of Philosophers divided about these things as well as about others Will he say that there were no Controversies among the inquisitive Heathen about the Nature and Immortality of the Soul and that the sufficient Light of Reason of which he speaks made all clear as to this No for contrariwise he tells us that Cicero enumerates several Opinions of the Philosophers about it and also how uncertain Cicero himself was about it and that Christ alone brought Immortality to light See the Third Letter p. 438 439. So as to Man 's chief Good or Happiness were there no Controversies no diversity of Opinions about that Doth not the same Cicero Tuscul. Quaest. l. 5. vers fin take notice of the various Sentiments about it Yea doth
Reason and so cannot be opposite to it He that believes without having any Reason for believing may be in love with his own Fancies and seeks not Truth as he ought Ibid. c. 17. § 24. Where I want evidence of things there yet is ground enough for me to believe because God hath said it The First Letter p. 227. S. Paul in his Epistles often puts Faith for the whole Duty of a Christian. Reasonab of Christian. p. 199. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS When Mr. Lock says that the Matter or Object of Faith is only Divine Revelation and nothing else if by Divine Revelation be meant the whole Scripture the Historical part of it together with the rest for all Scripture is given by the Inspiration of God 2 Tim. 3. 16. writ by Men inspired and guided by his infallible Spirit it is very true And as to that which he infers that then it cannot be said that it is matter of Faith and not of Reason to believe that such or such a Proposition to be sound in such or such a Book is of Divine Inspiration unless it be reveal'd that that Proposition or all in that Book was communicated by Divine Inspiration we need not contend much with him about it since in the place just now alledg'd viz. 2 Tim. 3. 16. we have a Divine Testimony or Revelation that all the Books of Scripture which were writ and receiv'd before the writing of the Second Epistle to Timothy which as is concluded by all was writ very late are divinely inspir'd Mr. Lock sometimes saith that Faith hath as much Certainly as our Knowledge it self and that it leaves no manner of Doubt or Hesitation yet other where he declaims against the Certainty of Faith Now I would know how he can reconcile himself to himself in this He says that to talk of the Certainty of Faith seems all one as to talk of the Knowledge of Believing that Certainty destroys Faith when it is brought to Certainty Faith is destroyed 't is Knowledge then and Faith no longer For to him to know and be certain is the same thing see his Second Letter p. 93. and Certainty the same thing with Knowledge see his Third Letter p. 122. Now if this be so if Certainty and Knowledge are the same thing then as he says that to talk of the Certainty of Faith seems all one as to talk of the Knowledge of Believing so he might have said that to talk of the Certainty of Knowledge seems all one as to talk of the Knowledge of Knowing and that to talk of certain Knowledge seems all one as to talk of known Knowing a way of speaking not easy to be understood Yea as often as Mr. Lock useth these Expressions Certainty of Knowledge and Certain Knowledge so oft he confutes this Fancy of his that Knowledge and Certainty are the same thing As when we say a certain Persuasion or a certain Truth these Expressions imply that there may be a Persuasion or a Truth not so certain so when we say Certain Knowledge it seems to imply that there may be a Knowledge not so certain And so when Mr. Lock says We certainly know and We have a more certain Knowledge Essay l. 4. c. 10. § 6. doth he not plainly imply that there is a Knowledge less certain So that it is clear from his own Expreshons that Knowledge and Certainty are not the same thing But that which I chiefly desire to know is How Mr. Lock will reconcile his denying Certainty to Faith with his saying that Faith hath as much Certainty as our Knowledge it self Whereas Mr. Lock says that he finds his Bible speaks of the Assurance of Faith but no where that he can remember of the Certainty of Faith I desire that he would please to let us know the difference between Assurance and Certainty or between Full Assurance and Certainty As to the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 10. 22. which is translated Full Assurance I suppose the Translators if they had pleased might have rendred it Full Certainty or Full Persuasion or Certain Persuasion as Erasmus and others render it by Certitudo As Mr. Lock craves leave to use the Words of Mr. Chillingworth so he ought to crave his Reader 's Pardon for not transcribing his Words so largely as he ought to have done For though it sufficiently appears from so much as he hath cited from him that Mr. Chillingworth makes against and not for him yet it would have been more apparent if he had alledg'd him more fully Mr. Chillingworth as Mr. Lock cites him says that there is not requir'd of us a Knowledge of the Articles of Faith and an Adherence to them as certain as that of Sense or Science In which Words if by an Adherence to them be meant an Assent to or Belief of them Certainty is plainly ascrib'd to Belief or Faith which Mr. Lock will not allow though not a Certainty equal to that of Sense or Science But let us take a view of Mr. Chillingworth's Words at large I do says he heartily acknowledge and believe the Articles of our Faith to be in themselves Truths as certain and insallible as the very common Principles of Geometry and Metaphysicks But that there is requir'd of us a Knowledge of them or an Adherence to them as certain as that of Sense or Science that such a Certainty is requir'd of us under pain of Damnation so that no Man can hope to be in the state of Salvation but he that finds in himself such a degree of Faith such a strength of Adherence this I have already demonstrated to be a great Errour and of dangerous and pernicious Consequence Thus Mr. Chillingworth c. 6. § 3. We see now what it is that this great Man saith viz. That a Certainty equal to that of Sense or Science is not requir'd of all Men under pain of Damnation so that no Man can be in a state of Salvation that hath it not But God may grant that degree of Certainty to some which he doth not require under pain of Damnation of all Mr. Lock farther tells us that there is not required of us a Knowledge of the Articles of our Faith and an Adherence to them as certain as that of Sense or Science and that for this reason among others viz. that Faith is not Knowledge no more than Three is Four but eminently contain'd in it so that he that knows believes and something more but he that believes many times does not know nay if he doth barely and merely believe he doth never know These are Mr. Chillingworth's own words Thus Mr. Lock And I grant that the words Faith is not Knowledge c. are Mr. Chillingworth's but these And that for this reason among others are not his but Mr. Lock 's own Mr. Chillingworth would never have offer'd such a Reason to prove that there is not requir'd of us a Knowledge of the Articles of our Faith and an Adherence to them as
should lose his Life but that he should be kept alive in perpetual exquisite Torments But the cases are not parallel for they that expound the Words Thou shalt surely die of a double Death say that he should both lose or depart out of this present Life and also after his Departure suffer those perpetual exquisite Torments Besides an earthly Lawgiver who can only kill the body when he says Thou shalt die cannot be supposed to mean that the Person should suffer such Torments but it cannot be inferr'd hence that when the heavenly Lawgiver who after he hath kill'd is able to destroy both Soul and Body in Hell says Thou shall die he may not fitly be suppos'd to threaten Eternal Death as well as Temporal But that which gives greatest Offence is still behind and that is that he describes that which we call a natural or temporal Death not only by losing all actions of Lise and Sense but also by ceasing to be His words are these By Death here I can understand nothing but ceasing to be the losing of all actions of Life and Sense see Reasonab of Christian. p. 6. And so again p. 15. This being the case that whoever is guilty of any Sin should certainly die and cease to be That when Men die their Bodies lose all actions of Life and Sense we need not be told but ceasing to be is a quite different thing and according to the known sense of the words can signify nothing but the being annihilated It will therefore concern Mr. Lock to find out some other Sense of the Words which we know not of for it seems very strange that he should make Death an Annihilation When Mr. Lock says that none are truly punished but for their own deeds Reasonab of Christian. p. 9. we may gather from that which immediately follows that his Meaning is that there will be no Condemnation to any one at the great Judgment but for his own Deeds but that Persons have suffer'd otherwise for the Sins of others there are sundry Instances in Holy Writ and Mr. Lock here alledges the Words of the Apostle affirming that in Adam all die CHAP. XVI Of the Law of Nature and of Moses's Law THe Law of Nature is a Law knowable by the Light of Nature i. e. without the help of positive Revelation It is something that we may attain to the knowledge of by our natural Faculties from natural Principles Mr. Lock Essay l. 1. c. 3. § 13. The existence of God is so many ways manifest and the Obedience we owe him so congruous to the Light of Reason that a great part of Mankind give Testimony to the Law of Nature Ibid. § 6. Every Christian both as a Deist and as a Christian is obliged to study both the Law of Nature and the revealed Law that in them he may know the Will of God and of Jesus Christ whom he hath sent Second Vindication p. 77. The Civil and Ritual part of the Law delivered by Moses obliges not Christians tho' to the Jews it were a part of the Law of Works it being a part of the Law of Nature that Man ought to obey every positive Law of God whenever he shall please to make any such Addition to the Law of his Nature But the moral part of Moses's Law or the moral Law which is every where the same the eternal Rule of Right obliges Christians and all Men every where and is to all Men the standing Law of Works Reasonab of Christian. p. 21 22. No one Precept or Rule of the eternal Law of Right which is holy just and good is abrogated or repeal'd nor indeed can be whilst God is an holy just and righteous God and Man a rational Creature The duties of that Law arising from the Constitution of his very Nature are of eternal obligation and it cannot be taken away or dispens'd with without changing the nature of things and overturning the Measures of Right and Wrong Ibid. p. 214. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS It is known to be Mr. Lock 's darling Notion That there are no innate Ideas and no innate Law and consequently according to him the Law of Nature is not innate but he tells us that the knowledge of it is attain'd by the light of Nature or by our natural Faculties from natural Principles But I would ask him Whence we have these natural Principles from which by our natural Faculties we attain to the Knowledge of the Law of Nature for he denies all innate Principles Will he say then that we owe them to the Superstition of a Nurse or the Authority of an Old Woman or our Educations for these he mentions Essay l. 1. c. 3. § 22. and 26. where he is giving an account how Men commonly come by their Principles If he say this I would know why he calls those which are taught us by Old Women or our Nurses Parents and School-Masters natural Principles If Mr. Lock please to satisfie us as to these Queries I may possibly farther consider his Description of the Law of Nature Farther I believe that there have been many that have not made use of the Light of Reason and the natural Faculties which God hath given them as they should have done and withal have not had the advantage of any Revelation or of being taught who yet have had some Knowledge of the Duties and Dictates of the Law of Nature and have assented to them as just and good as soon as they were proposed to them CHAP. XVII Of Natural and Revealed Religion or of the Light of Reason and that of Revelation IT is not to be wonder'd that the Will of God when cloath'd in words should be liable to that Doubt and Uncertainty which unavoidably attends that sort of Conveyance And we ought to magnifie his Goodness that he hath spread before all the World such legible Characters of his Works and Providence and given all Mankind so sufficient a light of Reason that they to whom this written Word never came could not whenever they set themselves to search either doubt of the being of a God or of the Obedience due to him Since then the Precepts of Natural Religion are plain and very intelligible to all Mankind and seldom come to be controverted and other reveal'd Truths which are convey'd to us by Books and Languages are liable to the common and natural Obscurities incident to Words methinks it would become us to be more careful and diligent in observing the former and less magisterial positive and imperious in imposing our own Sense and Interpretations of the latter Mr. Lock Essay l. 3. c. 9. § 23. Whatsoever Truth we come to the discovery of from the Knowledge and Contemplation of our own clear Ideas will always be certainer to us than those which are convey'd to us by Traditional Revelation for the Knowledge we have that this Revelation came from God can never be so sure as the Knowledge that we have from our own clear and
not Varro apud S. August de Civit. Dei l. 19. c. 1. speak of two hundred eighty eight Sects or several Opinions concerning it I might add That the legible Characters of God's Works and Providence spread before all the World of which Mr. Lock speaks have not prevented all Controversies among Heathens about God himself and therefore Cicero in the very beginning of his Books de Natura Deorum takes notice of the different Opinions about that Subject De qua tam variae sunt doctissimorum hominum tamque discrepantes sententiae c. I may conclude therefore that we have little reason to say that the Principles and Precepts of Natural Religion are so plain and very intelligible to all Mankind and so little controverted as Mr. Lock would make them to be And we have as little reason to be satisfied with that which Mr. Lock says of the Obscurity of the Truths of Revealed Religion His only reason here is because they are convey'd to us by Books and Languages and so liable to the common and natural Obscurities and Difficulties incident to Words And so a little before that it is not to be wonder'd that the Will of God when cloath'd in Words should be liable to that Doubt and Uncertainty which unavoidably attends that sort of Conveyance Essay l. 3. c. 10. § 23. So then according to Mr. Lock Doubt and Uncertainty Obscurities and Difficulties unavoidably attend Words they are not only common but even natural to them And so all the Will of God all Revealed Truths since they are convey'd by Words according to him are obscure difficult and uncertain So that Love God and Love thy Neighbour Fast and Pray Do as you would be done unto would have been according to him dark or obscure Instructions if they had all of them been reveal'd only and none of them also Precepts of the Law of Nature So Love your Enemies Bless them that curse you Do good to them that hate you Pray for them that persecute you and Blessed are ye when men shall reproach and persecute you and speak all evil against you fulsly for my sake for great is your reward in Heaven are all dark and obscure Yea finally all that Mr. Lock hath writ is obscure if this be true that Doubt and Uncertainty Obscurity and Difficulty do unavoidably attend Words and are natural to them for in Writing he makes use of Words Doth not Mr. Lock himself confute this Notion concerning the Obscurity of Words when he faith that Christ brought Life and Immortality to light by the Gospel see his Third Letter p. 439. for Christ and his Apostles made use of Words in preaching the Gospel as the Evangelists also did in writing it And when Ibid. p. 443. he so gratefully receiv'd and rejoic'd in the Light of Revelation I suppose he did not judge Revealed Truths to be so dark and obscure as he did when he writ his Essay If any would be satisfied about the Law of Nature and that of Scripture and the Plainness or Clearness of them I should advise them to read Mr. Hooker Eccles. Pol. l. 1. § 12. As to the Question Whether and how far Reason is to judge of Revelation we need not dispute it since now there is no new Revelation expected and it is certain that nothing which is already reveal'd in Holy Writ is contrary to Reason As to Mr. Lock he expresses himself very variously in this matter as 1. No Proposition can be receiv'd for Divine Revelation if it be contradictory to our clear intuitive Knowledge Essay l. 4. c. 18. § 5. 2. Nothing that is contrary to or inconsistent with the clear and self-evident Dictates of Reason has a Right to be urg'd or assented to as a matter of Faith Ibid. § 10. 3. No Proposition can be receiv'd for Divine Revelation which is contradictory to a self-evident Proposition The Third Letter p. 230. Perhaps he will say that Contradictory to our clear intuitive Knowledge and to the clear and self-evident Dictates of Reason and to a self-evident Proposition are in effect the same only different Expressions of the same thing To which I answer Suppose it be so yet if descending to Particulars we are uncertain whether such or such Propositions be self-evident or no of what Use is this Rule to us According to some such Propositions are self-evident but others will not allow that they are as for instance this that the essential Properties of a Man are to reason and discourse which others reckon among self evident Propositions yea Maxims is flatly deny'd to be such by Mr. Lock in his Third Letter p. 263. Mr. Lock in his Essay l. 4. c. 18. § 3. distinguishes between Original and Traditional Revelation The former he also calls Immediate because it is reveal'd immediately by God the latter is that which is deliver'd over to others by Word or Writing He also tells us Ibid. § 6. that a Man ought to hearken to Reason even in Immediate and Original Revelation and in Traditional Reason hath a great deal more to do But I would ask him Whether Abraham ought to have hearken'd to Reason in that Revelation concerning the offering Isaac It was Faith Heb. 11. 17. not Reason that induced him to receive it as a Divine Revelation Had he consulted Reason that would have told him positively that it could not come from God since it commanded that which was so clearly forbidden not only by the Laws which God himself had given to Noah and before him to Adam but also by the Law of Nature There could not be any thing more contradictory to the clear and self-evident Dictates of Reason than this Injunction which Abraham so readily obey'd was In his Essay l. 4. c. 18. § 4. he hath these Words No body I think will say that he has as certain and clear a Knowledge of the Flood as Noah that saw it or that he himself would have had had he then been alive and seen it And I readily grant that no Man who understands what he says will affirm that he has as clear a Knowledge of the Flood and of the Circumstances of it in every Particular as Noah had that saw it but this I shall be bold to say that I know not but that there may be some who as firmly and certainly believe that there was such a Flood as is describ'd in the Book of Genesis as if they had been then alive and seen it as I hope that there may now be some of those blessed ones who though they have not with the Apostle Thomas seen the Print of the Nails yet do as certainly and firmly believe our Lord's Resurrection as if they had seen it In the same Essay l. 4. c. 16. § 14. he writes thus The Testimony of God is call'd by a peculiar Name Revelation and our Assent to it Faith which has as much Certainly as our Knowledge it self Where I would have these last Words observ'd Faith has as
much Certainty as our Knowledge in self because otherwhere Mr. Lock denies all Certainty of Faith CHAP. XVIII Of Mysteries or Things above Reason I Wish I could say there were no Mysteries in the Holy Scripture I acknowledge there are to me and I fear always will be Mr. Lock in his First Letter p. 226 227. Things are distinguish'd into those that are according to above and contrary to Reason 1. According to Reason are such Propositions whose Truth we can discover by examining and tracing those Ideas we have from Sensation and Reflexion and by natural Deduction find to be true or probable 2. Above Reason are such Propositions whose Truth or Probability we cannot by Reason derive from those Principles 3. Contrary to Reason are such Propositions as are inconsistent with or irreconcilable to our clear and distinct Ideas Thus the Existence of one God is according to Reason the Existence of more than one God contrary to Reason the Resurrection of the Body after Death above Reason Above Reason also may be taken in a double Sense viz. above Probability and above Certainty and in that large Sense also contrary to Reason is I suppose sometimes taken Essay l. 4. c. 17. § 23. There being many things wherein we have very imperfect Notions or none at all and other things of whose past present or future Existence by the natural Use of our Faculties we can have no Knowledge at all these are beyond the Discovery of our natural Faculties and above Reason and Reason hath directly nothing to do with them Thus that part of the Angels rebelled against God and therefore lost their first happy Estate and that the Bodies of Men shall rise and live again these and the like are beyond the Discoveries of Reason Ibid. c. 18. § 7. OBSERVATIONS Mr. Lock in his Second Letter complains that he is join'd with Unitarians and the Author of Christianity not mysterious p. 7. and that therefore the World would be apt to think that he is the Person who argues against the Trinity and denies Mysteries p. 24. Wherefore that he might clear himself from this latter Imputation of denying Mysteries he says That there are Mysteries in Holy Scripture to him and he fears that there always will be But if hereby he only means that there are some things in Scripture hard to be understood and which he fears he shall never understand I know not but that the Author of Christianity not mysterious may say the same However he distinguisheth very well of things according to above and contrary to Reason but when in his Essay l. 4. c. 18. § 7. he had reckon'd this that the Bodies of Men shall rise and live again among things above Reason in his Third Letter p. 210. he tells us that in the next Edition of his Essay he shall change these words The Bodies of Men shall rise into these The dead shall rise But I shall take farther notice of this when I reflect upon his Doctrine of the Resurrection CHAP. XIX Of the Law of Works and the Law of Faith also of Justification THE Law of Works is that Law which requires perfect Obedience without any Remission or Abatement so that by that Law a Man cannot be just or justified without an exact performance of every tittle The Language of this Law is Do this and live Transgress and die no Dispensation no Atonement Under the Law of Works is comprehended also the Law of Nature as well as the Law given by Moses Nay whatever God requires any where to be done without making any allowance for Faith that is a part of the Law of Works So the forbidding Adam to eat of the Tree of Knowledge was part of the Law of Works The Civil and Ritual part of the Law delivered by Moses was to the Jews a part of the Law of Works but the moral part of Moses's Law or the Moral Law obliges all Men every where and is to all Men the standing Law of Works But Christian Believers have the Privilege to be under the Law of Faith too which is that Law whereby God justifies a Man for believing though by his Works he be not just and righteous i. e. though he come short of perfect Obedience to the Law of Works God alone does or can justifie or make just those who by their Works are not so which he doth by counting their Faith for Righteousness i. e. for a complete Performance of the Law The Difference between the Law of Works and the Law of Faith is only this that the Law of Works makes no allowance for failing on any occasion Those that obey are righteous those that in any part disobey are unrighteous and must not expect Life the reward of Righteousness But by the Law of Faith Faith is allowed to supply the defect of full Obedience and so the Believers are admitted to Life and Immortality as if they were righteous Were there no Law of Works there could be no Law of Faith For there could be no need of Faith which should be counted to Men for Righteousness if there were no Law to be the Rule and Measure of Righteousness which Men fail'd in their obedience to Mr. Lock Reasonab of Christian. p. 16 18 19 20 21 22. The Rule therefore of the Covenant of Works was never abolished tho' the rigour were abated The Duties enjoyn'd in it were Duties still Their Obligations never ceased Ibid. p. 225. The Law of Faith is for every one to believe what God requires him to believe as a Condition of the Covenant he makes with him and not to doubt of the Performance of his Promise Ibid. p. 24 25. Righteousness or an exact Obedience to the Law seems by the Scripture to have a Claim of Right to Eternal Life Ibid. p. 11. OBSERVATIONS Mr. Lock who thinks it our Duty as far as we deliver any thing for Revelation to keep close to the Words of the Scripture see his third Letter p. 210. doth not observe his own Rule when he says that God justifies a Man for believing this not being the Scripture-Language as far as I remember We are often said to be justified by Faith and if he will also just by Faith as Faith is oft said to be impated to Men for Righteousness and God is stil'd the justifier of him that believes but I do not find that the Scripture useth these Words that he is the justifier of any Man for believing Having said that exact Obedience to the Law seems to have a Claim of Right to eternal Life Mr. Lock alledges for it Rom. 4. 4. and Revel 22. 14. see his Reasonab of Christian. p. 11. In Rom. 4. 4. 't is said To him that worketh the reward is not reckon'd of grace but of debt In Rev. 22. 14. the Words in our Translation are Blessed are they that do his Commandments that they may have right to the tree of Life Mr. Lock adds in the same Character Which is in the Paradise of
God but nothing of this is in the Text. Besides the Word that is here translated Right is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which as is well known signifies License or Power as well as Right and not only by the Vulgar but also by the Syriack Arabick and AEthiopick it is rendred Power And this Signification agrees exactly with the Text Blessed are they that do his Commandments that they may have Power or Licence to eat of the tree of Life In this place therefore there is nothing concerning any Claim of Right and consequently it is not at all to the purpose I might have added that Mr. Lock speaks of exact Obedience to the Law and perhaps he would not find it an easie matter to prove that by Doing his Commandments here is meant such exact unsinning Obedience But tho' Rev. 22. 14. will not prove his Claim of Right yet if he use those words in a larger sense as they may denote a Right by Promise I do not deny that his former Text viz. Rom. 4. 4. may prove it To him that worketh the reward which God is suppos'd to have promised in the Covenant of Works is reckon'd as debt he may lay claim to it as his Right by virtue of that Promise But if he take them in the strict sense as if exact Obedience had properly merited the Reward and might have claim'd it of Right tho' no such Promise or Covenant had interven'd he will hardly prove that from Rom. 4. Yea our Saviour seems to have determin'd very plainly against such a Claim S. Luke 17. 10. When ye shall have done all things which are commanded you say We are unprofitable servants we have done that which was our duty to do CHAP. XX. Of Faith in general FAith is nothing else but an Assent founded upon the highest Reason Mr. Lock Essay l. 4. c. 16. § 14. The Matter of Faith being only Divine Revelation and nothing else Faith as we use the Word call'd commonly Divine Faith has to do with no Propositions but those which are suppos'd to be divinely revealed So that I do not see how those who make Revelation alone the sole Object of Faith can say that it is a matter of Faith and not of Reason to believe that such or such a Proposition to be found in such or such a Book is of divine Inspiration unless it be reveal'd that that Proposition or all in that Book was communicated by divine Inspiration Without such a Revelation the believing or not believing that Proposition or Book to be of divine Authority can never be matter of Faith but matter of Reason and such as I must come to the Assent to only by the use of my Reason Things beyond the discovery of our natural Faculties and above Reason are when revealed the proper matter of Faith Whatever Proposition is reveal'd of whose truth our Mind by its natural Faculties and Notions cannot judge that is purely matter of Faith Where the Principles of Reason have not evidenced a Proposition to be certainly true or false there clear Revelation as another Principle of Truth and ground of Assent may determine and so it may be matter of Faith Ibid. c. 18. § 6 7 9. Faith has as much Certainty as our Knowledge it self Faith is a settled and sure Principle of Assent and Assurance and leaves no manner of room for Doubt or Hesitation Essay l. 4. c. 16. § 14. To talk of the Certainty of Faith seems all one to me as to talk of the Knowledge of Believing a way of speaking not easie to me to understand Bring Faith to Certainty and it ceases to be Faith When it is brought to Certainty Faith is destroy'd 't is Knowledge then and Faith no longer The Second Letter p. 95 96. My Bible Heb. 10. 22. expresses the highest degree of Faith which the Apostle recommended to Believers in his time by Full Assurance I find my Bible speaks of the Assurance of Faith but no where that I can remember of the Certainty of Faith though in many places it speaks of the Certainty of Knowledge and therefore I speak so too and shall not I think be condemned for keeping close to the Expressions of our Bible The Third Letter p. 122 123. I say with Mr. Chillingworth c. 6. § 3. that I do heartily acknowledge and believe the Articles of our Faith to be in themselves Truths as certain and infallible as the very common Principles of Geometry and Metaphysicks But that there is not requir'd of us a Knowledge of them and an Adherence to them as certain as that of Sense or Science and that for this Reason among others given both by Mr. Chillingworth and Mr. Hooker viz. that Faith is not Knowledge no more than three is four but eminently contain'd in it so that he that knows believes and something more but he that believes many times does not know nay if he doth barely and merely believe he doth never know These are Mr. Chillingworth's own Words c. 6. § 2. That this Assurance of Faith may approach very near to Certainty and not come short of it in a sure and steady influence on the Mind I have so plainly declar'd Essay l. 4. c. 17. § 16. that no body I think can question it There I say of some Propositions wherein Knowledge i. e. in my sense Certainty fails us that their Probability is so clear and strong that Assent as necessarily follows it as Knowledge doth Demonstration Ibid. p. 124. Herein lies the Difference between Probability and Certainty Faith and Knowledge that in all the parts of Knowledge there is Intuition each immediate Idea each Step has its visible and certain Connexion in Belief not so Essay l. 4. c. 15. § 3. To say that Believing and Knowing stand upon the same grounds would be I think to say that Probability and Demonstration are the same thing The Third Letter p. 223. He that says he barely believes acknowledges that he assents to a Proposition as true upon bare Probability Ibid. p. 159. I think it is possible to be certain upon the Testimony of God where I know that it is the Testimony of God because in such a case that Testimony is capable not only to make me believe but if I consider it right to make me know the thing to be so and so I may be certain For the Veracity of God is as capable of making me know a Proposition to be true as any other way of Proof can be and therefore I do not in such a case barely believe but know such a Proposition to be true and attain Certainty Ibid. p. 133. Faith as contradistinguished to Reason is the Assent to any Proposition not made out by the Deductions of Reason but upon the Credit of the Proposer as coming immediately from God Essay l. 4. c. 18. § 2. Faith is nothing but a firm Assent of the Mind which if it be regulated as is our duty cannot be afforded to any thing but upon good
certain as that of Sense and Science He and other worthy Men of our Church who writ in his time were not wont to argue so loosly and withal he gives it as a Reason of something else see him cap. 6. § 2. There every one may also see that when he says Faith is not Knowledge he takes the word Knowledge in a different Sense from that in which he takes it § 3. where he speaks of the Knowledge of the Articles of our Faith When he speaks of Knowledge of the Articles of Faith he by Knowledge understands only an Apprehension or Belief but when he says Faith is not Knowledge he takes the Word properly and exactly in the Sense in which he uses the Word Science By this time Mr. Lock may see what the Task is that he hath set himself viz. He is to prove this Consequence Faith is not Knowledge therefore there is not requir'd of us under pain of Damnation an Apprehension or Belief of the Articles of Faith as certain as that of Sense or Science But since Mr. Lock mentions Mr. Hooker together with Mr. Chillingworth as if they countenanced his Notion of Faith and Certainty I have consider'd that which they say of this Matter and find that he hath no countenance at all from those excellent Persons He makes Knowledge and Certainty to be the same thing and Faith to be only Probability let him shew where either Mr. Hooker or Mr. Chillingworth doth either of these He distinguishes between Assurance and Certainty yea he makes full Assurance of Faith to come short of Certainty I would know where those excellent Persons do this He ridicules the Certainty of Faith but Mr. Hooker and Mr. Chillingworth ascribe a Certainty to Faith They both of them speak of a Certainty of Evidence and a Certainty of Adherence and when Mr. Hooker in his Sermon upon Heb. 1. 4. says that this Certainty of Adherence is greater in us than the other he plainly implies that both the one and the other Certainty is in us but not both in the same degree And as to Mr. Chillingworth when he says of this Hypothesis that all the Articles of our Faith were revealed by God we cannot ordinarily have any rational or acquired Certainty more than moral see him c. 1. § 8. he grants that we may have a moral Certainty of that Hypothesis But § 9. he adds Yet this I say not as if I doubted that the Spirit of God being implor'd by devout and humble Prayer and sincere Obedience may and will by degrees advance his Servants higher and give them a Certainty of Adherence beyond their Certainty of Evidence But what God gives as a reward to Believers is one thing and what he requires of all Men as their duty is another and what he will accept of out of Grace and Favour is yet another To those that believe and live according to their Faith he gives by degrees the Spirit of Obsignation and Confirmation which makes them know though how they know not what they did but believe and to be as fully and resolutely assur'd of the Gospel of Christ as those which heard it from Christ himself with their ears which saw it with their eyes which look'd upon it and whose hands handled the Word of Life If Mr. Lock will say thus much with Mr. Chillingworth more will not be requir'd of him I said that Mr. Lock makes Faith to be only Probability and I have in this Chapter transcrib'd sundry Passages from him which make this out Herein lies the Difference between Probability and Certainty Faith and Knowledge says he in Essay l. 4. c. 15. § 3. where as Knowledge is in his Sense Certainty so Faith is Probability So again He says he that says he barely believes acknowledges that he assents to a Proposition as true upon bare Probability And again To say that Believing and Knowing stand upon the same grounds is I think to sâ—y that Probability and Demonstration are the same thing See his Third Letter p. 159 223. Mr. Lock in his Third Letter p. 124. haâ—h these Words That this Assurance of Faith may approach very near to Certainty and not come short of it in a sure and steady influence on the Mind I have so plainly declar'd Essay l. 4. c. 17. § 16. that no body I think can question it If you ask in what words he declares it he tells us that speaking of some Propositions wherein Knowledge i. e. in his sense Certainty fails us he says that their Probability is so clear and strong that Assent as necessarily follows it as Knowledge does Demonstration Thus Mr. Lock But how does he so plainly declare that the Assurance of Faith may approach very near to Certainty and not come short of it in a sure and steady influence on the Mind when neither in the Words which he cites nor in that whole Section out of which he cites them there is any mention either of the Assurance of Faith or of Faith it self He speaks indeed of probable Mediums the probability of some of which may be so clear and strong that Assent necessarily follows it and perhaps he would have us to apply this to the probable Grounds of Faith for he will not allow the Grounds of Faith to be more than probable But as he saith of probable Mediums that they cannot bring us to the lowest degree of Knowledge so probable Grounds of Faith cannot bring us to the lowest degree of Certainty and so according to him our Faith cannot advance it self above Probability as was observ'd before When Mr. Lock says in his Third Letter p. 133. I think it is possible to be certain upon the Testimony of God where I know that it is the Testimony of God should he not rather have said It is impossible for him who knows that God is true yea Truth it self not to be certain upon the Testimony of God provided he know that it is the Testimony of God And after all what is this to us who live now since according to Mr. Lock it is impossible for us unless we had an immediate Revelation from God himself to know that it is the Testimony of God and so by this Proviso he makes it impossible for us without such an immediate Revelation to be certain upon the Testimony of God though we should be suppos'd to have a certain knowledge of his Veracity CHAP. XXI Of Abraham's Faith and the Faith of those that liv'd before our Saviour's time THE Faith for which God justified Abraham what was it It was the believing God when he engaged his Promise in the Covenant he made with him The Faith which God counted to Abraham for Righteousness was nothing but a firm Belief of what God declar'd to him and a stedfast relying on him for the accomplishment of what he had promised Abraham believ'd that tho' he and Sarah were old and past the time and hopes of Children yet he should have a Son by her and
jure aliis Discipulis tribui nequeant Prius concedi posse putamus posterius vero negamus id enim sufficit plusquam satis ad Primatum Petri quae ei si quis fuisset ridicule admodum stolide superstruitur Pontificis Romani Praerogativa evertendum Thus Episcopius And there are Protestant Divines of great Esteem for their Learning and Judgment and who have engaged as zealously as any other against the Papal Interest who have gone farther have not only made the Person of St. Peter to be meant by the Rock but also somewhat peculiar to be granted him and yet shew that this affords not the least Advantage to the Pope's Pretensions that he is Universal Pastor To omit some of our English Divines they that please may consult Cameron either in his Praelections in St. Matth. 16. 18. or in the great Criticks Episcopius says that this That the Church should be built on him as on a Rock was granted to Peter in common with the other Apostles And to the same purpose speaks Origen Tractat. 1. in Matth. If thou thinkest that the whole Church was built upon Peter alone what wilt thou say of John the Son of Thunder and every one of the Apostles Shall we dare to say that the Gates of Hell could not prevail against St. Peter only but could prevail against the rest And a little after If that saying To thee I will give the Keys was common to the other Apostles why was not the rest which was then said as to Peter common to them too So that this may be a fourth Exposition that by the Rock is meant St. Peter not alone but together with the other Apostles As he made that Confession Thou art Christ the Son of the living God not for himself only but also in the Name of the other Apostles so according to this Sense he receiv'd this Grant for the rest of the Apostles as well as for himself I have alledged the foresaid Testimonies to satisfie Mr. Lock That Persons of approved Piety as well as Learning have judged our Saviour's Words On this Rock I will build my Church capable of other Interpretations than that which is mention'd by him viz. That the Faith which was confessed by St. Peter 〈◊〉 those Articles That Jesus is the Christ and That he is the Son of the living God are the Rock on which the Church is built This is the only Interpretation that can do Mr. Lock any Service and therefore he takes no notice of the rest But he should not be himself guilty of that which he condemns so much in others i. e. the imposing his Interpretations of Scripture upon us And therefore he must not be displeas'd if we do not grant that which Mr. Lock here affirms without any Proof that this Proposition That Jesus is the Messiah the Son of the living God was that Rock on which our Lord said that he would build his Church Mr. Lock says that the Evidence that we deceive not our selves in ascribing a Revelation to God can never be so great as the Evidence of our own intuitive Knowledge where if his Meaning be that we can never be so certain that any Revelation suppose the Scripture is from God as we are of the Object of our intuitive Knowledge I must deny it for I firmly believe that there have been and may now be those who are as certain that the Scriptures are the Word of God as they can be of that which they clearly see and distinctly perceive by any other of their Senses And I am confirm'd in this Belief by the Words of Mr. Chillingworth c. 1. § 9. To those says he that believe and live according to their Faith God gives by degrees the Spirit of Obsignation and Confirmation and to be as fully and resolutely assur'd of the Gospel of Christ as those which heard it from Christ himself with their Ears which saw it with their Eyes which look'd upon it and whose Hands handled the Word of Life CHAP. XXIX Of Fundamentals and the Apostles Creed GOD alone can appoint what shall be necessarily believ'd by every one whom he will justifie and what he has so appointed and declared is alone necessary No body can add to these Fundamental Articles of Faith nor make any other necessary but what God himself hath made and declared to be so And what these are which God requires of those who will enter into and receive the Benefits of the New Covenant has already been shewn An explicit Belief of these is absolutely requir'd of all those to whom the Gospel of Jesus Christ is preached Mr. Lock Reasonab of Christian. p. 301. The Primitive Church admitted converted Heathens to Baptism upon the Faith contain'd in the Apostles Creed A bare Profession of that Faith and no more was required of them to be receiv'd into the Church and made Members of Christ's Body How little different the Faith of the ancient Church was from the Faith I have mention'd may be seen in these Words of Tertullian Regula fidei una omnium est sola immobilis irreformabilis credendi scilicet in unicum Deum omnipotentem mundi conditorem Filium ejus Jesum Christum natum ex Virgine Maria crucifixum sub Pontio Pilato tertia die resuscitatum a mortuis receptum in coelis sedentem nunc ad dextram Patris venturum judicare vivos mortuos per carnis etiam resurrectionem Hac lege Fidei manente caetera jam disciplinae conversationis admittunt novitatem correctionis Tert. de Virg. Velan in princip This was the Faith that in Tertullian's time sufficed to make a Christian. And the Church of England only proposes the Articles of the Apostles Creed to the Convert to be baptiz'd and upon his professing a Belief of them asks whether he will be baptiz'd in this Faith and upon the Profession of this Faith and no other the Church baptizes him into it The Apostles Creed is the Faith I was baptiz'd into no one tittle whereof I have renounced that I know And I heretofore thought that gave me title to be a Christian. Second Vindicat. p. 177 178 182. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS Mr. Lock tells us in Reasonab of Christian. p. 301. that it had been already shewn what the Fundamental Articles of Faith are But I ask How had it been shewn He had sometimes affirm'd positively that this that Jesus of Nazareth is the only Gospel-Article of Faith that was requir'd Reasonab of Christian p. 195. that Salvation or Perdition depends upon believing or rejecting this one Proposition that Jesus was the Messiah Ibid. p. 43. that this was all the Doctrine the Apostles propos'd to be believ'd Ibid. p. 93. At other times he had said that it was also requir'd for the attaining of Life that they should believe that Jesus is the Son of God Ibid. p. 194. He had also spoken of concomitant Articles viz. Christ's Resurrection Rule and coming again to judge the World saying that these