THE Christian Belief Wherein is Asserted and Proved That as there is Nothing in the GOSPEL contrary to REASON yet there are some DOCTRINES in it Above REASON and these being necessarily enjoyn'd us to Believe are properly call'd MYSTERIES IN Answer to a BOOK INTITULED Christianity not Mysterious But we speak the Wisdom of God in a Mystery even the hidden Mystery of God LONDON Printed by W. Onley for Alex. Rosvile at the Dial against St. Dunstan 's Church in Fleet-street MDCXCVI THE CONTENTS BEING ARTICLES Most of 'em advanced In Opposition to the Positions of our Adversary THe Measures and Extent of Human Knowledge in Objects of Sence Page 2. Transubstantiation why to be rejected p. 6. The Knowledge of Spiritual Objects ib. Of Finite and Infinite Objects p. 11. Of Matters of Revelation p. 14. Three Inferences p. 15. A Vindication of the Maxim in Adoring when we cannot Comprehend p. 18. The Vse of Reason in Religion p. 22 23. 41 42. Matters of Revelation not so easily nor clearly comprehended as the Phaenomena of Nature p. 23. 25. His Notion of Things contrary to Reason rejected and disproved p. 33. Two Limitations to be observed before we can pronounce any thing contrary to Reason p. 33 34. Both confirmed and illustrated by the Article of our Saviour's Divinity p. 40. The Difference between a seeming Contradiction and real one asserted p. 46 Contradictions not to be pronounced in Matters of Revelation because they do not comport with common Ideas in Objects of Sence p. 47 48. Revelation a Motive of Assent as well as mean of Information p. 49. Matters of Revelation how far intelligible and possible p. 51. The Difference between Divine and Human Revelation on that account p. 52. The true Notion of a Mystery as applied to Things Incomprehensible p. 56. 61. His Notion of a Mysteryexploded p. 58. Mystery stated with respect to Inadequate Ideas p. 59. 60 62. And proved against him on his own Principles p. 62. The Notion of comprehending Things stated p. 67. The true State of the Controversie with respect to Scripture p. 73 74. Authorities of Scripture where Mystery is applyed to Incomprehensible Truths 1 Cor. 2. 7. p. 81. 1 Tim. 3. 10. p. 84. Doctrines or Divine Truths contained in Scripture that are represented as Mysterious and proved from Scipture to be so p. 89. The first Instance from 1 Cor. 1. 23. 24. second Instance 1 Cor. 13. v. 9. p. 94. And 2 Cor. 12. 4. p. 96. And Col. 2. 23. p. 97. All which are expounded at large and each Exposition ratified by the Iudgment of the Fathers The Opinions of the Fathers for the three first Ages produced against him even of those he has cited p. 105 106. How far the Knowledge of the Object is required in Faith p. 118 119. That Faith is opposed to Knowledge or Science and sometimes in Scripture implys an Assent to revealed Truths as they exceed the Sphere of Human Perception p. 121 122. This proved from Scripture and the Authority of the Fathers p. 123 124. The Belief of the Creation instanced p. 120. Mysteries proved from the Nature of Faith p. 134. Miracles not to be admitted contrary to the Testimony of the Sences and why ib. Miracles an Argument a majore That there are Mysteries in the Christian Religion p. 136 137. His Historical Account of Mysteries exploded p. 138. The Methods of Initiation in the Christian Faith and the Discipline Rites and Sanctions of the Primitive Church cleared from the Imputation of Paganism or Imposture p. 140. These neither the Cause nor Product of Mystery p. 143. The Lawfulness of Ceremonies especially such as the Establish'd Church of England enjoyns p. 145. The Authority of 'em asserted p. 146. Not opposite to Christianity p. 147. The pernicious Design of his Treatise detected p. 149 150. The Conclusion in a Vindication of the present Methods of Answering by Instances p. 151. Editions of the Fathers Clemens Alexandrinus Ed. Par. 1629. Justin Martyr Par. 1615. Irenaeus Ed. Erasmi Basil. 1560. Tertullianus Ed. Par. 1675. Origen contra Cels. Edit Cant. 1677. Dionys. vulgo Areopag Antw. 1634. Johan Chrysost. Par. 1621. Isiodor Pelysiot Par. 1638. Theophilact Lond. 1636. Origen Comment Rothomag 1668. Athanasius ex Officina Commeliana 1601. CERTAIN Christian Doctrines Properly call'd Mysteries And to be Esteem'd Above REASON c. BEFORE I make any Formal Returns to the Positions advanc'd by this Zealous Advocate for REASON I shall endeavour to fix or state the several Measures and Principles of Human Knowledge I mean with respect to the Objects of it as it includes the Knowledge of Objects of Sence of Corporeal and Spiritual Substances of Finite and Infinite and of Revealed Truths And first I can freely grant what has cost our Adversary some Pages to prove viz. That nothing in Nature can come to our Knowledge but by some of these four Means viz. the Experience of the Senses the Experience of the Mind Humane and Divine Revelation Sect. 1. Cap. 3. But yet I think it very absurd to advance one Rule or Standard for every Part or Branch of Humane Knowledge and thereupon form Arguments and charge Contradictions and Absurdities without making the least allowance or distinction with respect to the nature of the Object or the methods of knowing it Here is the Source of all our Adversary's Mistakes and Miscarriages whereby as will anon more fully appear he has cast a Cloud upon Reason rather than improv'd its Native Lustre and Glory And First as for the Knowledge of Objects of Sense it 's certain the Mind of Man the proper Seat as well as Principle of Humane Knowledge is here entertain'd by the Objects of the Material World for Nothing but Matter in the ordinary course of Natural Knowledge make an Impression upon the outward Senses so as to transmit and fix an Idea in the Mind suitable to the nature of the Object And certainly here is the great original Stock of Humane Knowledge for the Senses are not only the standing Vehicles to all those Ideas that are lodg'd in the Mind since even Faith and Revelation come by Hearing but these very Ideas if positive and formed on Things and Substances are little else but the Resemblances of material Sensations or the Ideas of some Object of Sense However exalted and refined may be the Ideas of Angels and glorified Spirits that have things presented to the view of the Mind by an immediate Intuition it 's manifest we that are cloath'd with Senses and Matter and those of a very coarse allay must have all our Ideas tinged with material Adumbrations These are that Glass upon the Mind through which we see darkly and that wonderfully incrassates and disguises the Images of Things It 's true in Objects of Sense our Ideas must be comparatively clear and exact because we are seated in the very heart or center of the material World where its Objects perpetually crowd in upon our Senses and are continually presented to
Arguments the Subject of which being chiefly Finite Objects The present Enquiry then is after the Knowledge of Infinite Objects and here certainly the Nature of the Being that thinks and knows will determine the Case I mean demonstrate the Imperfection of Humane Knowledge for it 's an Absurdity in Terms as well as in the Nature of the Thing to imagine that a Finite Mind should gain a perfect Comprehension of an Infinite Being insomuch that it seems no Presumption to affirm That GOD by vertue of His Omnipotence after He hath instated us in the Beatifick Vision and discover'd things that Eye hath not seen nor Ear heard nor Heart conceiv'd or in a word after we have seen Him as He is cannot possess us with an adequate Idea of His Immense and Infinite Being So that with respect to the Godhead we must affirm That our Ideas are made up of Negatives and consequently with Clemens Alex. affirm That we rather know God by concealing what He is not than what He is Or at least if we attempt any positive Conceptions we are forced to shadow 'em forth by some Finite Ideas which we have taken up and are already implanted in us Thus the Divine Attribute of Wisdom we are forc'd to resemble by a Faculty of Discerning and Comprehending infinitely surpassing the Sphere of Humane Knowledge Thus the Immensity of God by a vast space or an Idea that is without Bounds or Limits or is not to be circumscrib'd Thus Eternity by an endless Succession of Time Thus we see after our nicest Conceptions and after the most accurate Characters and Descriptions from Revelation it self we are forced to call in Finite Objects and measure the Blessed Attributes of our Creator by Finite Ideas an Undertaking so unworthy of him that it seems to be a piece of petty Larceny or rather a lesser sort of Idolatry as 't is a kind of Representation of the Invisible GOD by things that are seen by a kind of Gold or Wood or Stone graved in the shallow Understandings of Impotent Men. Here our Weakness our Blindness plainly discovers it self for tho' Knowledge in Finite Objects may appear bright and shining here it must suffer an Eclipse and lye confounded in depth of Mystery and in a word humbly make St. Paul's Recognition O the depth of the Riches of the Wisdom and Power and Immenseness of God! how unsearchable c. But Fourthly let us descend to the last Stage of Humane Knowledge I mean that about matters of Revelation And first it 's certain that pure Matters of Revelation are things of which the Mind by its own intrinsick Light can form no Ideas and consequently we cannot pretend to know any thing more of them than GOD in a reveal'd way is pleas'd to communicate It 's true He seems to be obliged to communicate Himself in such a manner that His Revelations at least may bear a resemblance to some of those Ideas we have already conceiv'd or by the Power of Natural Reason can attain to Thus does He reveal a Saviour that is GOD-Man he 's oblig'd to ascribe such Characters of Divinity to him as are agreeable to the reveal'd Characters of the Godhead and those Ideas we can form of it and in like manner as to his Humanity for otherwise I cannot conceive how any reveal'd Truth can be imprinted on the Mind without Special Inspiration But then on the other hand when God publisheth a reveal'd Truth in such Characters as suffice to inform us what he intends by it viz. a Saviour that is GOD-Man or the like he is not oblig'd neither is it any way requisite to the reception of a reveal'd Truth to demonstrate the modus of the Vnion of the two Natures First Because the Subject of Revelation being Matters not attainable by Reason and GOD the Author of them as long as we have an Idea of the thing or an Idea of what GOD proposes to be believ'd the modus of it is to be placed on the Infinite Power and Veracity of God Secondly Because a leading Design of Revelation being to establish a Confidence in God's Power and Veracity in order to an absolute Obedience and Worship He did not intend to make us Philosophers but reveal'd what was useful and necessary and directs us to adore when we cannot comprehend From what has been deliver'd we may form two or three Inferences 1st With respect to this last Argument Whatever our Attainments may be in Matters of Sense and Natural Reason it appears that pure Matters of Revelation lye at a great distance from us and consequently Knowledge cannot penetrate much beyond the Surface since they are not only things in their own nature profound and intricate but all our Discoveries rest on the good Will and Pleasure of GOD that communicates ' em And therefore if Revelation itself tells us we know but in part or imperfectly we may safely affirm it and place all Difficulties on the Imperfections of Humane Knowledge or the Depths and Mysteriousness of Reveal'd Truths 2dly It 's a notorious Absurdity to argue from Ideas of Objects of Sense or Material Objects against Immaterial ones or Finite against Infinite much more against Reveal'd ones For it manifestly appears that the Measures of Humane Knowledge are to be taken from each respective Object for as every Object hath a distinct Essence or Nature so it hath distinct Properties and Modes peculiar to its Nature and the Ideas we conceive of the one may not reach or measure the other This is even so clear that even in Properties that are common to several Objects such as Spirits and Bodies when apply'd to their respective Objects carry no manner of Resemblance to each other Thus it 's an inseparable Property of a Spirit and Body to occupy a Place and yet the manner of existing in a Place is no doubt vastly different insomuch that I cannot find how any Ideas of the Vbi of Bodies can conclude any thing against that of Spirits much less measure or define it And by a Parity of Reason we may say as much of the Unity of a Body and the Unity of an Infinite Spirit for the Unity of the Godhead or the Divine Essence may be preserv'd and yet communicate it self to Three Personal Subsistences and it must be absurd to deny this because it will not comport with our common Ideas of the Unity of a Body 3dly In Matters of Revelation it 's as absurd to Argue against Reveal'd Truths when the thing reveal'd is describ'd in such a manner that we may know what is intended by it because we cannot comprehend the Modus of it since this would oblige us to reject several things even in Objects of Sence that are hitherto Vnquestionable What I have hitherto deliver'd is by way of Principle and I shall stand by it as such in defiance of the utmost Attempts of our assuming Reasoner and having laid this Foundation I promise my self Success in unraveling his Arguments and
our view and observation But yet in Objects of Sense which we daily see and converse with we can by no means pretend an adequate Knowledge for we cannot comprehend or penetrate into their proper Essences or radical Substances no we can go no further than Properties Powers or Faculties that discover themselves in their Effects strike the Senses and leave an Impression whence a distinct Idea is form'd Again We cannot pretend to discover the true Modes of these Properties Powers or Faculties so as to discern wherein the precise Nature of 'em consists for at least we can only resemble it by some Ideas that are form'd by the noblest of Senses that of Seeing thus of Smells and Tasts and the like So that we see the highest Philosophical Exercitations even in matters of Sense are at last wrap'd up in that we can justly call a MYSTERY It s true Objects of Sense tho' form'd from Effects and Properties create a very certain and indisputable Knowledge because confirm'd by daily and continued Observation and because the proper Objects of that part which as before concluded is not only the Vehicle but first Elaboratory of all Ideas I mean the outward Senses And therefore in Objects of Sense we must receive and embrace a Thing as it presents itself to the view of our Senses since we are assur'd that GOD has appointed no other way of communicating matters of this nature to Mankind And to receive an Object of Sense contrary to the Testimony of all our Senses tho' upon the pretended Authority of Revelation must overturn all the Measures and Principles of Humane Knowledge obliterate the Notices and Distinctions of Truth and Error raze the prime Faculties and Motrements of Reason and reduce Man the Glory of the Creation and GOD's Image and Representative infinitely below the level of Brutes that perish For this reason we may reject the Doctrine of Transubstantiation notwithstanding the highest Pretences to Miracle or Mystery since it implies a Contradiction of the Testimony of all our Senses in matters of Sense But Secondly let us consider Humane Knowledge as engag'd about the Objects of the Spiritual World or Spiritual or Immaterial Beings for this must very much alter the Scene of Knowledges and fix it upon new Measures and Principles And 1st It 's indisputably evident that our Knowledge of Spirits is of a mix'd nature since it takes its rise partly from the Powers of Natural Reason and partly from Revelation The Knowledge of God and our own Souls may in some measure be traced from the Powers of Natural Reason The Frame of our own Beings as well as that of the Universe will instruct us That there must be an Eternal All-wise and All-powerful Mover agreeable to the Sacred Language The invisible things of Him from the Creation of the World are clearly seen being understood by the things that are made even His Eternal Power and Godhead Rom. i. 20. but as for the Existence of other Beings we call Spirits or their Orders and Societies we must wholly receive it from Revelation Again As for the Nature and Ideas of a Spirit this must certainly rest on the Instructions of Reason and Revelation and after the best that can be given God knows our Attainments are very lame and imperfect the excellency of our own Faculties and Operations tell us That we are acted by a Principle within that must be highly distinct from Matter or least that we see and handle much more from that Great GOD whose Workmanship is this very Reason that thus dictates This very Argument sufficiently instructs us We ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto Gold or Silver or Stone graven by Art and Man's Device Acts xvii 29. But now tho' from good Arguments we may conclude That a Spirit is a Being somewhat distinct from Matter yet our most exalted Idea will be but a meer Negative or if Positive a Resemblance of a refined Aerial kind of Matter so that our Ideas of a Spirit is much more abstruse imperfect and conjectural than that of a Body notwithstanding the utmost assistances of Revelation And here I 'm oblig'd to make some Returns to what this Infallible Reasoner with the Authority of a Great Man on his side as he calls him has deliver'd on the Subject it amounts to this We have as clear an Idea of Spirits as Bodies since both are only to be known by their Properties and the Properties of a Spirit are as clear as those of a Body See Sect. 3. Cap. 2. N. 16 17 19. But with Submission to the Infallible Chair though some Properties which belong to those Beings we call Spirits are clearly known and agreed upon yet they are not so many nor yet so distinguishing as those of Bodies for besides the Properties of particular Bodies that distinguish each other there are Properties certainly known that belong to a Body as a Body and distinguish it from Spirit and every Being that can be imagined such are extension of Parts and a Faculty of possessing a Place in proportion to ' em These are for the most part Objects of Sense and Self-evident but we cannot decipher or determine any peculiar Properties that belong to a Spirit as a Spirit and distinguish it from Body or Matter and every thing else We may indeed conceive Spirits as Finite Beings by the resemblance of Bodies and consequently make 'em exist in a place and possess sometimes one place and sometimes another but we can form no Idea how they exist in places as we do of Bodies As for Thinking Reasoning and Willing these seem to be too remote to be the distinguishing Properties of a Spiritual Substance as such being Faculties that seem to slow after its Radical or Original Properties are given I am sure they cannot be so in the Opinion of my Author 's Great Man since in one place he tells us It 's impossible without Revelation to discover whether Omnipotency has not given to some Systems of matter fitly dispos'd a Power to perceive or think And again I see no Contradiction in it That the first Eternal Thinking Being or Omnipotent Spirit should if he pleas'd give to certain Systems of created sensless Matter put together as he thinks fit some degrees of Sense Perception and Thought Lock 's Human Vnderstanding Lib. 4. Cap. 3. N. 6. And therefore I think it appears there 's a vast Difference between the Knowledge of Spirits and Bodies insomuch that we may justly pronounce That no positive Ideas can be formed of Spirits as Spiritual Substances but what carry the resemblances of Matter in 'em other Ideas must be form'd by comparing 'em with Matter and pronouncing what they are not rather than what they are But Thirdly let us examin the Measures and Extent of Humane Knowledge with respect to the Object as it is Finite or Infinite As for the Knowledge of Finite Objects an Estimate may be taken from what has been deliver'd on the two preceeding
hence I pass to N. 9. for nothing intervenes that directly concerns the present Controversie or at least has not had a Reply to it And here I cannot joyn with him when he affirms That a seeming Contradiction even in Matters of Revelation is to us as much as a real one for I think the Difference is palpable in all cases but especially in Contradictions upon the Nature of Things for We call that a seeming Contradiction when there 's a Repugnancy discovers itself but we have not a clear and perfect Conviction of it And I suppose this must arise for want of a clear and perfect Idea of each Term or rather Object of the Contradiction and till this is gain'd Reason must suspend and neither determine that she is in the right or wrong till fresh Evidence offers to turn the Scale But now a real Contradiction or rather a clear Contradiction for it should pass under this Name with respect to our knowledg of it is When we have a clear and unquestionable Idea of both parts of it or both Objects and thence conceive an irreconcilable Repugnancy But now in matters of pure Revelation whose Nature is spiritual and infinite I cannot see how Reason can direct us to pronounce or determine real or clear Contradictions between them and Common Notions because we cannot pretend to an adequate or clear Idea I mean that which is comparatively so with respect to those of Objects of Sence and consequently cannot decree what real Repugnancy lies between them And therefore if seeming Contradictions or Difficulties arise by comparing reveal'd Truths with common Ideas or Notions Reason cannot as this Author would have it pronounce a real Contradiction and suspect there can be no reveal'd Truth especially when there are the clearest Characters of the thing corresponding with Ideas of the same nature Here Reason must oblige us to place the Contradictions on our Inabilities in comprehending Matters of this nature and yield an Assent upon the Authority of Infinite Power and Veracity For when Revelation has set forth the thing in the clearest Characters and the very same in which the fundamental Article of all Revelation is represented to us I mean that of the Godhead if seeming Contradictions must be suffer'd to discard it it 's impossible we can yield any Assent to the Being of a GOD for where the Characters are as clear for one as the other and both rest on the same Authority that of Revelations to dispute the one must call in question the other Proceed we in the next place to consider what is deliver'd on the Authority of Revelation he means that which is Divine Cap. 2. N. 11. And here I cannot be reconcil'd to the Distinction he gives us Revelation is not a necessitating Motive of Assent but a Mean of Information Now truly I can see no Absurdity in saying That the same thing may be a Mean of Information and a Motive of an Assent too for an Information carries an Assent along with it proportionable to the Credit or Authority of the Informer Now Revelation is certainly a Mean of Information since it presents us with new Objects which Natural Reason could never discover But besides this it is an Information that proceeds from Infinite Veracity attended with Infinite Power Wisdom and Goodness Herein it 's distinguish'd from Human Revelation And therefore when once we are assur'd so as to yield a firm Assent that such a particular Article is reveal'd it becomes the most necessitating Motive of Assent I mean to the Truth of it because this being granted here 's Infinite Veracity Wisdom Power and Goodness against our Imperfect Conceptions and the seeming Difficulties founded in ' em When once we assent or yield it to be Divine Revelation I think we may safely affirm against this Reasoner We may believe purely upon his Word without Evidence at least such as he requires in the things ' emselves Here the Authority of him that speaks not my Conception of the thing or what he says is the Ground of my Perswasion But to proceed as for what this Reasoner says of GOD's Omnipotence and Contradictions N. 13. no one is so silly to imagine that real Contradictions are an Object of Omnipotence but there may be Contradictions which we apprehend as real that in truth are but seeming ones and particularly when we cannot fully comprehend the nature of both the Terms or Objects and it 's already concluded that in matters of Revelation Reason will often direct us to suspect our Judgments and esteem 'em as such And then I hope there 's no Absurdity in Pronouncing seeming Contradictions and Impossibilities a proper Subject of God's Omnipotence Thus far our Saviour will bear us out for all things are possible with God Matt. xix 26. But to pursue him a little further he tells us N. 16. speaking of GOD's Revelations His Words must be intelligible and the Matter possible And as for unintelligible Relations we can no more believe them from the Revelation of GOD than from that of Man for the conceiv'd Ideas of Things are the only Subjects of believing and therefore all Matters reveal'd by GOD or Man must be equally intelligible and possible We are then to expect the same degree of Perspicuity he means with respect to the knowledge of the Object from GOD as from Man tho' more of Certitude from the first than the last he means with respect to the Veracity of the Publisher Answ. What has already been deliver'd upon Matters of Revelation I hope will satisfie any reasonable Man how far a reveal'd Truth is requir'd to be intelligible It 's concluded GOD has discover'd so much of the Nature of reveal'd Truths as is useful or necessary and consequently He has at least discover'd so much as is sufficient to inform us upon Principles of Revelation what He proposes to our Belief but He did not intend to make us Philosophers so as to enable us to comprehend the Modus of reveal'd Truths or form an Idea of the Manner of Existence in order to believe the Truth of ' em This we cannot pretend even in Physical Disquisitions nay I think it 's justly concluded that in Matters of Revelation which are for the most part Spiritual and Infinite we are not to dispute the Possibility of their Existence by measuring 'em by Objects of Sence for in reality this is the same with comprehending the Modus of their Existence since we cannot absolutely declare against the Possibility of their Existence without a Faculty of comprehending and determining the Modus of it and passing an Estimate upon it as absurd and impossible And therefore we say That Matters of Revelation are to be understood so far as to conceive what GOD proposes to our Belief but not to comprehend the Modus of their Existence such Ideas are not the necessary Subjects of Faith Again In Humane Revelation the Object is Matters of Fact and thing we attain to by the Testimony of our
they saw 'em thro a Veil or in St. Paul's Language with respect to further Discoveries thro a Glass darkly And what is this but that they knew them in part or by inadequate Ideas I 'm sure our Knowledge is as much cramp'd in several of those Instances produc'd by our Author from the Intricacy and Immensity of the Things ' emselves as those Gospel-truths shut up from the Iews by the Mosaick Veil of Types and Figures And consequently why is not the one as much a Mystery to us as the other to the Iews and for this very reason because we know them inadequately But to go a little further with him I remember in the State of his Question as well as in other places he gives us to understand That all Reveal'd Matters may be judg'd of even by common Notions both as to their Manner and Existence as easily as the ordinary Phoenomena of Nature and therefore concludes That there 's nothing in the Gospel contrary to Reason or above it and That no Christian Doctrine can be properly call'd a MYSTERY This is the State of the Question and what he asserts must be a Criterion in judging what is mysterious or above Reason So that we may hence conclude and that upon his own Principles too That that Thing whose Manner or Existence cannot be conceiv'd even with as much ease and clearness as the ordinary Phoenomena of Nature is a Mystery and above Reason Certainly here is a fair Concession and such as will make things mysterious because we can but form inadequate Ideas for as this Author confesses we can form Ideas of the Beings of Things and know as much as is useful from their Properties and Effects whilst we are ignorant of the manner of their Existence or Production See N. 8 11. the one of Plants and the other of Rain Here he manifestly fixes our inadequate Ideas upon the Modus of Things with respect to their Operations and Existence that is our Ideas are inadequate because we cannot decipher wherein their Modus consists tho' we know their principal Properties by their Effects and Uses And now we may call in his own Principles to conclude against him and affirm That inadequate Ideas must necessarily imply a Mystery for inadequate Ideas imply our Ignorance as to the Modus of Things and that thing whose Modus cannot be comprehended according to his own Principles is mysterious and above Reason Here I think he pretends to Out-do the most improv'd Arts of Priestcraft whilst he declares for nothing but Reason and banishes Mystery out of the World and yet imposes things that surpass the highest Mystery since he labours to make the World embrace his Contradictions for the undoubted Decrees of Reason This is in his own language trifling with a witness or pitiful shifting or fooling or what not and such as discovers a mighty Scarcity of good Arguments N. 13. But he hath not done with us yet and therefore concludes with an obliging Proposal If they will still be fooling and call these things Mysteries I 'm willing to admit as many as they please in Religion if they will allow me likewise to make mine as intelligible to others as these are to me Ib. I hope I have made good the first part That there are true and proper Mysteries even in the Schools of Nature And if so it 's manifest notwithstanding his vain Triumphs we have an Argument à majori That there are Mysteries in Revelation I say it 's a majori to every one but him that has the Face to assert That an infinite incomprehensible Spirit is an Object equally intelligible with Objects of Sence or with Wood or Stone As for the last part of his Proposals I believe every one will consent That he shall make all those reveal'd Truths we call Mysteries as intelligible as he 's able provided he 'll promise not to reject 'em because he fails in his Undertaking or in a word because he cannot make them compare with common Ideas or Notions And now I hope I have said enough to invalidate all the Arguments of this Chapter But lest he should think me rude or that I neglect him too much I shall make some short Returns to a few Passages that are yet behind And 1st He instructs us what it is to comprehend a Thing viz. When it s chief Properties and their several Vses are known to us for to comprehend in all correct Authors is nothing else but to know and as of what is not knowable we can have no Idea so is it nothing to us I shall for once admit that in the common Notion of Humane Perception or Comprehension we think we know or comprehend a Thing sufficiently when its chief Properties and their several Uses are known to us but may we not at the same time discern that there are others we cannot conceive and that the Modus or precise Nature of those we know are inconceivable And so we may without Offence or in a strict and proper way of Speech affirm That there 's a great deal mysterious in the thing and above Reason and yet we do not pronounce it above Reason as he suggests ib. because we know no more than concerns us but because there 's something inconceivable tho' to conceive it does not so directly concern us But 2dly as for that which is mysterious even in Matters of Revelation we do not pretend that it is any thing to us I mean as if we were oblig'd to comprehend or define the precise Modus of the thing This is to be a Mystery and no Mystery However since we discern in certain reveal'd Truths something which we cannot comprehend we may believe those reveal'd Truths to be so far mysterious and they so far concern us as to pay the Obedience of Faith to 'em and not reject the Whole because we cannot comprehend Every-thing that belongs to ' em This ought to be an Eternal Rule to our Author in matters of Revelation because it 's founded upon his own Words and Principles We believe the Divinity of our Saviour because we have not only its Uses set forth but we have it represented in the principal Properties of the Godhead even such as are ascrib'd to GOD the Father and consequently in the Sence of this Author we may be said to comprehend or know this Divine Truth Therefore if any thing arises as to the Modus of its Existence or otherwise that is mysterious not knowable or of which we can have no Idea his own Rule directs him that this is nothing to him and consequently is by no means to be an Argument against this Divine Truth I 'm sure if 't is not ridiculous not to supersede our Disquisitions in matters that do not directly concern us another Assertion of his ib. it 's undoubtedly ridiculous to make Disquisitions in such Cases and make them an Argument for rejecting the clearest reveal'd Truths which is the constant Practice of the Modern Reasoners
above Reason And therefore if this Reverend Father is not mistaken in the purport of the Holy Ghost as we have good Reason to conclude he is not the New Testament does contain the Thing if not the Word we contend for I mean proposes to our Belief Things that are Incomprehensible or above the Comprehension of Human Reason The last Argument I shall produce is two or three Passages of Scripture which because they bear an Affinity to one another I shall examine and conclude them under one Argument I begin with St. Paul's account of Humane Knowledge even under this last State of Revelation for he includes himself and the whole College of Apostles who undoubtedly enjoyed the Special Assistance of the Spirit of God nay St. Paul had been caught up into the Third Heaven where he was almost overwhelm'd with abundance of Revelations 2 Cor. 12. And yet he tells us We know but in part and we Prophesie in part 1 Cor. Cap. 13. ver 9. and the Reason assigned is We see through a Glass darkly ver 12. so that the Impediment seems to lie upon the Mind or the Immenseness of the Object not in God that denies us a competent Revelation for this is the last Revelation of himself and therefore this Glass argues an Imperfection or Inability in comprehending some of those Truths that are revealed but if this Glass be a Veil which God casts before our Eyes like that upon the Iews in as much as he does not impart in this Life a clear Discovery of certain Gospel-Truths then according to the Mind of our Author there are still Mysteries in the Gospel in the highest Sence but truly St. Clemens fixes it upon the Imperfections of Humane Knowledge since he represents the Mind in this Earthly Tabernacle as viewing Things through Sences after a gross corporeal manner whereas in another World our Knowledge will be highly enlarged for then it will be Face to Face or as he expresses it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is by a pure and naked Application of the Mind or Intuition Again it 's manifest the Object of this Imperfect Knowledge is the deep things of GOD or in plain terms the fundamental Revelations of the Gospel for the Apostle must at least comprehend if not principally intend them when he tells us And we Prophesie but in part that is those Truths we publish to the World are only reveal'd in part since we can only pretend to know or comprehend them in part And truly St. Clement asserts as much of St. Paul himself notwithstanding his abundance of Revelations for thus on his words 2 Cor. xii 4. where no doubt he receiv'd the chiefest Instructions of his Apostolick Office He was caught up into Paradise and heard unspeakable words which it is not lawful for Man to utter he observes that there was no Law nor Precept given that obliged him to stifle any of those Christian Truths GOD had committed to him so that in saying it is not lawful he intended to represent the Ineffability of the Divine Nature or the things of GOD 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And to confirm this Notion he cites three Passages that represent the Incomprehensibleness of the Divine Nature Rom. xi 33. Oh! the depth of the Riches both of the Wisdom and Knowledge of God! And again But we speak the Wisdom of God in a Mystery That is even when we speak it else it proves nothing in this place 1 Cor. ii 7. And lastly Colos. ii Ver. 23. To the Acknowledgment of the Mystery of God in Christ as you have it in the Ancient Readings in whom are hidden all the Treasures of Wisdom or Knowledge This is a very remarkable Passage and therefore I must beg leave to enlarge upon it As for the Sence of St. Clement it 's visible he looks upon it to be a Mystery tho' reveal'd and acknowledg'd and to be a Mystery because it contains something in it which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for otherwise it can be no Argument to prove what he had just before asserted Indeed our Adversary thinks he has evaded the Force of this Exposition by telling us without any tolerable Proof That the Words are to be understood of the Gospel of CHRIST but if it be the Gospel of CHRIST it may be stiled a MYSTERY in respect of its Fundamental Truths inasmuch as they contain in 'em something that 's hidden or mysterious for thus much the following Verse apparently hints 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. in which if this Exposition obtains are hidden 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It 's manifest the Apostle speaks of it as reveal'd nay as it is when acknowledg'd and embrac'd and yet there is something hidden or mysterious Thus we may conclude against our Reasoner that Mystery may be put for the Gospel and yet call'd so because it contains certain Truths whose Nature cannot be fully comprehended or certain Truths that contain something in 'em that to us is incomprehensible But yet for all his majesterial decisive way of expounding Scripture I think the words more naturally point at the Mystery of our Redemption in the Incarnation of the Son of GOD especially if we add hereto the ancient Reading used by these Fathers St. Austin and St. Ambrose to the Acknowledgment of the Mystery not Knowledge of Mystery as this vain Disputer of this World would have it of GOD in CHRIST for 1st 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which immediately follows must more naturally be apply'd to Christ not to Mystery agreeable to our Translation In whom all the Treasures c. This is agreeable to the Sentiments of Origen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In Hierom. Hom. 8. pag. 99. 2dly If the Gospel of Christ and not Christ himself was intended it would be improper to say that the Treasures of Wisdom are hid in it being a reveal'd Institution Therefore we may justly conclude pursuant to the Mind of St. Clement That the Incarnation of our Redeemer the Foundation of our Redemption and Fountain whence all the Treasures of Wisdom and Knowledge derive is the Mystery of GOD in Christ which is to be acknowledg'd not unravel'd or fully comprehended for since it is expresly propos'd as a Mystery and remains one when embrac'd or acknowledg'd it must be so because it carries in it something that is hidden or incomprehensible Indeed Origen manifestly joyns in this Notion for in his Comment on Matt. xiii 44. he makes the Field to be the Holy Scriptures that set forth all the Means of Salvation with the greatest clearness but the Treasure to be CHRIST because in Him all the Depths of Wisdom are hid in Him in a Mystery citing this very Passage of St. Paul by way of Proof 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dissertis verbis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And now give me leave to make an Appeal as he does to all Equitable Persons N. 35. Whether by as good Reason and Authority it does not appear That
semper discat quae sunt a Deo Here by way of Confirmation he cites St. Paul 1 Cor. xiii v. 13. Semper enim fides quae est ad magistrum nostrum permanet firma asseverans nobis quoniam solus vere Deus and afterwards concludes si secundum hunc modum quem diximus quaedam quidem quaestionum Deo commiserimus fidem nostram servabimus omnis Scriptura ideo nobis data consonans nobis invenietur Lib. 2. Adv. Haer. cap. 47. Ed. Eras. I have cited this at large because I find every thing agreeable to the Hypothesis I have hitherto advanc'd As 1st Mystery is indisputably apply'd to reveal'd Truths beyond the reach of Humane Comprehension 2dly Such reveal'd Truths apparently deliver'd in Scripture are not to be rejected because we cannot resolve the Difficulties that seem to accompany the Belief of 'em but to embrace 'em as the Word of GOD and consequently as founded in infinite Wisdom and Veracity 3dly Our Unskilfulness not to say Inabilities in comprehending Objects of Sence or Physical Matters is made an Argument that there are Mysteries in Matters of Revelation I have hitherto confin'd my self to his Rule i. e. the Fathers of the Three First Centuries but truly I can see no just reason why the Fathers of after-Ages may not be admitted into the present Controversie at least as Witnesses if not Judges I 'm sure there can nothing abstract but his groundless Fiction of a general Combination to resolve all Religion into Mystery For as for the received Use or Signification of the Word certainly after-Ages may be as competent Judges as those of the First Century And as for the Controversie itself Whether there 's any Doctrine in Christianity mysterious certainly that Age ought to be appeal'd to that had a more special occasion to bring the Controversie upon the Stage and this the Arrian Age and those that follow'd it for in this Age it 's well known those Doctrines we contend are mysterious were more nicely controverted I shall therefore add to those Passages already cited a few more which prove the Use of the word to be apply'd to things incomprehensible and that there are Doctrines in Christianity pronounc'd Mysteries and that too for the Incomprehensibleness of ' em The first I shall instance in is Dionys. Areop where in one place he describes our Saviour's Incarnation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cap. 4. de Coelest Hierarch In another place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sect. 9. Cap. 2. de Divinis Nomin The second Instance is from a Tract entitl'd Expositio Fidei rejected indeed as a Piece of Iustin Martyr yet from Leontin's and other concluding Arguments justly esteem'd to be the Product of the Arrian Age He stiles the Unity and Trinity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and confesses it cannot be unfolded by Words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and upon the Incarnation of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And in such deep Research at last concludes with this Rule 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And now we may conclude this Chapter much in the same strain that he does N. 45. I do not find but the Fathers of the three first Centuries have exactly the same Notions of Mystery as well as those that follow them and for an Allay to his Jealousies I think they are pretty consistent as well as unanimous but then this Consistency and Unanimity happens to be against a trifling Reasoner and therefore I must take the Reverse to his concluding Period and justly hope by this time the Cause of Incomprehensible and Inconceivable or Mysteries in Religion will be more zealously maintain'd by all that sincerely respect Fathers Scripture or Reason I come now to the Fourth Chapt. Sect. 3. which is an Answer to some Scripture-Objections and particularly from the Nature of Faith I now find this Discourse swells upon me beyond Expectations and therefore as for the Scripture-passages cited by him tho' there is more in 'em than he has suggested yet I shall pass 'em especially because I think the Merits of the Cause does by no means turn upon 'em I shall therefore take up his Friend's Arguments concerning the Nature of Faith and try if he may not be compel'd by dint of Argument since he would not embrace the Advice of his Friend N. 51. And first As for what he has delivered N. 52 53. I find nothing but what has already received an Answer particularly what is cited Sect. 2. c. 2 7. or at least but what amounts to no more than will be concluded by what I 'm going to offer and therefore he may take it for a full or competent Answer viz. Reason is a necessary Handmaid or Instrument of Faith insomuch that we must believe upon Rational Motives and Convictions And thus far I know no Son of the Church of England that will dissent from him As for what is delivered N. 54. That Faith consists of two parts Knowledge and Assent I think no one will be so absurd to deny it for I 'am perswaded there can be no Assent without Knowledge Therefore in a word had I known his Design I should have excused the labour of citing so many Texts to prove it and in a few words grant That in those things we call the pure Credenda of Religion we are at least to know so much as will enable us to form an Imperfect Idea of what it is God proposes to our Belief but it does not imply such a Knowledge as enables to unravel and comprehend the whole Nature of the Object or the very Modes of its Existence or Properties or much less give a Rationale of every thing that belongs to it No if we know as much as instructs us what it is God proposes to our Belief we submit all the Difficulties that may arise from the Belief of it to God's Power and Wisdom and yield an Assent notwithstanding some seeming Absurdities upon the Infinite Veracity of God This distinguisheth Faith from a bare rational Assent in common Matters and all this is consistent with what he has delivered N. 55 56. and therefore I shall not ingage in a particular Examination of what is there offered To proceed then in order to a clear Demonstration of this Notion of Faith I shall not consider the Case of Abraham's Faith being the next thing that offers it self but shall instance in the Belief of the Creation Thro' Faith we understand that the Worlds were framed by the Word of God so that Things which are seen were made of Things which do not appear Heb. xi v. 3. Here I think is a vast difference between God's creative Power in raising the World out of nothing and restoring a dead Person to Life again before the corruptible part was any wise dissolved Indeed I cannot conceive how we can form an Idea of the possibility of such a Production that God should raise so vast a stock of Matter even all created Nature and every thing that we can form any
tolerable Ideas of and yet without any Materials to work upon can never be comprehended The Platonist supposed a Soul to the World and the Aristotelian a first Mover but could never give any tolerable account of the Rise of Mundane Matter without making it eternal In short they always taught That an Agent necessarily supposes a Patient really distinct from the Patient especially in external Actions And we know in Numbers it 's universally true Ex nihilo nihil est And we can conceive no otherwise in Nature at least the Reasoner cannot on his Principles pretend to it for he tells us we can form no manner of Idea of nothing and therefore how it is possible to form an Idea of the Creation by common Ideas when all our Ideas take their rise from Created Beings even that of the Infinite and Eternal Being are resembled by Objects of his own production It 's true we say this is an effect of Infinite Power but we have no notion of the Thing unless we apply Infinite Power to that which is the Subject of it which is nothing into every thing and when all is done we form an Idea of this Infinite Power purely by the Effects of it in Finite Beings So that upon the whole it 's evident the Belief of the Creation that implys a Production of all things out of nothing is an Object that exceeds Humane Comprehension and consequently we may conclude that Faith which yields an Assent to the Doctrine of the Creation often implys an Assent to a Thing that contains something in it that is Incomprehensible And indeed that Objects of Faith contain Things that exceed Humane Comprehension is a Truth so indisputable that Faith in the Judgment of the Primitive Church-Writers was on this account distinguished from Knowledge or Science It 's true In all Objects of Faith we are to know so much of 'em as to direct us what it is God proposes to our Belief And Secondly We are to believe That it is God that proposes ' em Thirdly In all Acts of Faith we are to yield an Assent to the Truth or Being of Things and this supposes that we have formed at least an imperfect Idea of their Nature but for the Quomodo sint that is for the Manner of their Being or Existence that may be an act of Knowledge or Science but not of Faith so that if seeming Contradictions or Absurdities arise on this account and consequently are thus far justly Incomprehensible Faith throws us upon the Infinite Veracity of God All this I shall endeavour to confirm by the Authorities of the Primitive Church And First The Passage already cited from Irenaeus manifestly instructs us That there are Difficulties and MYSTERIES in Revealed Truths which Humane Reason cannot comprehend and obliges us to commit all such Matters to GOD because they were delivered by his Word and Spirit and what is this but to embrace and believe upon his Infinite Veracity And at last concludes That if we observe the Method Fidem nostram servabimus omnis Scriptura à Deo nobis data consonans nobis invenietur Does not this imply that there are things contained in Matters of Faith that are Incomprehensible Yea rather that all seeming Difficulties or Absurdities that arise from 'em when scann'd by common Notions or Ideas are to be committed to God as the best Expedient to preserve a right Faith see Pag. 64. But Secondly Clemens Alexand. seems to state the Notion of Faith more clearly in opposition to Science And first he fixes the Foundation of Faith in the Word of GOD or the Holy Scriptures and represents it as an Irrefragible Foundation that carries the highest Demonstration in it and that we are to enquire no further than Ipse dixit upon which he advances this Maxim 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And to let us see how far he extends it he instances in the fore-cited Passage to the Heb. Cap. xii v. 12. and thence proceeds to state the Difference between Science and Faith thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vid. Stro. Lib. 2. P. 362 3 4. and in his 5th Book he 's more full 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Here we see Faith is resolved into the Infinite Power and Veracity of GOD insomuch that we are obliged to believe as soon as we know it to be the Word of GOD or as soon as we know GOD proposes any thing to our Belief Here we find Science and Faith opposed the one requiring Demonstration or Arguments drawn from the Nature of the Thing the other not so Therefore we must conclude That if GOD proposes any thing to our Belief that contains Matters incomprehensible or not reconcileable with common Notions Faith in the Opinion of this Father will command an Assent insomuch that his Infinite Power and Veracity must over-ballance all seeming Absurdities and Contradictions But to conclude this Argument I shall produce the Judgment of St. Chrysostom Thus he assigns the Reason why the Natural Man cannot receive the Things that be of GOD 1 Cor. ii v. 14. viz. For the Immensity of the Things ' emselves far exceeding the Comprehension of the most Improved Reason and for the want of Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hom. 7. And upon the Article of the Creation Heb. xi v. 3. he tells us The Mind that is prepared for the Reception of Faith must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 she must be elevated above Sence and all sensible Objects and pass over the Weakness of Humane Reasonings and afterwards Whereas says he Faith is vilified as a Thing that is void of Demonstration 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or rather a Thing full of Folly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Apostle shews us in this one Instance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the very Article says he is not established by Reason but rather the contrary 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hom. 22. In Epist. Heb. Again we find him describing Faith under the very same Notion Hom. 23. in Ter. Iohan. where upon Nichodemus's Words How can a Man be born when he is old v. 4. he observes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Upon which he enlarges and tells us It is the Question of Hereticks upon the Incarnation of our Blessed Saviour demanding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that by the weakness of common Notions or Reasonings destroy his Immense Nature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and at last concludes That such Practices or Questions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And on the Second Part of the Question about entring the Womb a Second time he observes When a Man proceeds upon common Notions or Reasonings in Spiritual Matters and does not receive the Dictates of Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He talks like a Drunken or Mad-man uttering the most absurd and ridiculous things And now certainly we may conclude what St. Chrysostom's Notion of Faith was without drawing Inferences and that it every way agrees with that of Clemens Alexandrinus It 's therefore manifest Faith is distinguished from Knowledge or Science not only
as the Objects of it are Matters of Revelation but as they contain Things that are incomprehensible and yet it yields an Assent upon the Infinite Veracity of the Word of GOD I 'm sure this Great Man has dropt such unlucky Words against our Adversary's Principles or his Methods of Examining Divine Truths as if he were risen from the Dead and were preparing to accuse him of Heresie or some sly Maxims that look that way I should therefore advise him to weigh the Opinion of so Great a Person before he advances too far and yet when I consider what severe Censures he has past upon the Writers of this Age I despair of Success in giving Advice in this kind for I cannot think he 'll ever be perswaded to take his Measures of Faith from an Age or any Writer in it when he makes 'em as it were to have entred into a League to turn all Religion into Mystery and this another to be Name for Imposture or Priestcraft If this be true to be instructed by such a Race of Men is in plain English to take up one's Faith from those that have fallen away from the Faith but of this I shall say more in the last Chapter To return then It 's now abundantly evident that the Notion of Faith which we now contend for is not a Thing contrived to advance a particular Hypothesis or serve a particular Design but by no means such a one as he suggests viz. To stop the Mouths of such as demand a Reason where none can be given and to keep as many in Ignorance as Interest shall think convenient See N. 48. But I hope an Impartial Reader will find it establish'd upon a good Foundation or in a word upon such Reasons as he is not able to subvert or remove beside if it be a Contrivance we have this Apology that it is not a late Forgery since we have traced it almost as far as any Ecclesiastical Records besides those of Scripture admit of and this is a considerable Presumption of the Injustice of such foul-mouthed Aspersions 'till he gives us a better Set of Arguments to remove it which is the next Thing that should be examined but truly there appears so little in 'em that I think they scarce deserve a distinct Examination The First is If Faith were not a Perswasion resulting from the previous Knowledge and Comprehension of the Thing believed there could be no Degrees nor Differences of it Now First It 's manifest the Argument is advanced on a false Supposition and that which runs thro' all his Observations viz. That we deny all Degrees of a previous Knowledge of the Object whereas we say there must be at least such a previous knowledge of the Object as instructs us what it is GOD proposes to our Belief but there 's no necessity of Comprehending the Absolute Nature of the Thing so as to be able to give a Rationale of every Thing that really belongs to it and that too by trying it by common Notions And moreover we say the different Degrees of Faith do by no means rise from such a Comprehensive Knowledge No when once we know what GOD proposes to our Belief the Degrees of Faith arise from the Application of GOD's Veracity to our Minds and Consciences if the Mind is possessed with a deep Sence of it as to engage us to place an absolute Confidence in it tho' we cannot form a Rationale of the Thing yet we may embrace it with the highest Degrees of Faith I 'm sure this is the Doctrine which this Man of Reason might have learn'd from S. Paul in the Case of Abraham Who against Hope believed in Hope and being not weak in Faith he considered not his own Body now dead nor yet the Deadness of Sarah's Womb he staggered not at the Promise thro' Vnbelief but was strong in Faith giving Glory to GOD and being fully perswaded that what he had promised he was also able to perform and therefore it was imputed to him for Righteousness Rom. iv 18 19 20 21. 2d Arg. The Subject of Faith must be intelligible to all since the Belief thereof is commanded under no less a Penalty than Damnation As for the Intelligibleness of Objects of Faith I have already stated how far that is necessary but with Submission I think the Sin and Damnation of Unbelief arises not because GOD has furnish'd us with a perfect Rationale of the Nature of every Object of Faith and we reject it but because he hath furnish'd us with Means sufficient to know what he hath proposed to our Belief and to know that he hath proposed them and we will fully reject 'em and consequently what he proposes but more especially because he hath asserted the Truth of 'em by the highest Demonstrations of the Spirit in mighty Signs and Wonders This was the Case of the Iews but now ye say Ye see therefore your Sin remaineth 4th Arg. Except Faith signifies an Intelligible Perswasion we cannot give others a Reason of the Hope that is in us The Inference is apparently false for we certainly give a Reason and that too according to the Mind of St. Peter of any Article of Faith when we prove that it is Revealed by GOD and that we yield an Assent to the Truth of it tho' we cannot remove every Difficulty that may arise from it upon the Authority of Infinite Veracity As for his Third and Fifth Observations I shall Appeal to any unprejudiced Reader whether there 's any thing in 'em that deserves a particular Reply more than in those Objections he first framed and then answered For as the former prove nothing against the Incomprehensibleness of Matters of Faith so the latter were never advanced to prove the Necessity of admitting such Objects of Faith Upon the whole then I think it appears there are Matters of Faith that contain Things in 'em which are Incomprehensible and yet Faith yields an Assent upon the Authority of Infinite Veracity and consequently it 's an uncontroulable Argument there are Mysteries in the Christian Religion The next thing to be considered is his Reply to the Argument of Miracles Cap. 5. Sect. 3. And First he entertains you with the Nature of a Miracle And as for the Description he gives us I find in the Main no Reason to except against it after this he guards it with some Limitations The First of which is That a Miracle is not to be admitted contrary to Reason I suppose he means contrary to common Notions or those Idea's which Reason has formed from Sence Experience or Instruction And no doubt this is a very just Limitation For a Miracle is performed upon Objects of Sense and 't is an Address to our Senses or a Demonstration accommodated to the outward Senses by some sensible Effects or Operations and consequently nothing is to be admitted as a Miracle that contradicts the Testimony of the Senses and we are at least so far Judges of its possibility