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
concerning them for there is no Verb for this Nominative Case Men ignorant of Words c. But I suppose that it is to be supply'd out of that which follows so that his Meaning is this When it shall be made out that Men ignorant of Words or untaught by the Laws and Customs of their Country and all Men whatsoever do actually know and allow that it is part of the Worship of God not to kill a Man not to know more Women than one not to procure Abortion not to expose their Children not to take from another what is his tho' we want it our selves but on the contrary relieve and supply his Wants and whenever we have done the contrary we ought to repent be sorry and resolve to do so no more When I say all Men shall be prov'd actually to know and allow all these and a thousand other such Rules all which come under these two general Words Vertues and Sins there will be more Reason for admitting these and the like for common Notions and practical Principles Thus Mr. Lock who seems to deal very hardly with the Lord Herbert's third and fourth Propositions in that he will not admit them to be common Notions or as much as practical Principles until it be prov'd that all Men in the World even those that are ignorant of Words and untaught by the Laws and Customs of their Country do actually know and also allow of all these and a thousand other such Rules Methinks if all Men did actually know these and but half a thousand other such Truths we might see very great Reason for admitting those two Propositions to be of great use for directing our Practice and consequently to have a good Title to be accounted practical Rules or Principles St. Paul Rom. 1. instanceth in many things which the Gentiles actually knew to be ill Actions that will draw on Punishment upon the Doers and consequently according to Mr. Lock Sins for having enumerated them from v. 24. to v. 32. he says v. 32. that they knew that those who do such things are worthy of Death Now must not every one confess that the Lord Herbert's fourth Proposition That Men must repent if they would have those Sins forgiven and escape the Punishment due for them would have been of very great use to them Yea if Men have but Means to know that many things are Vertues or Vices the two fore-mention'd Propositions must not be deny'd to be practical Principles and such as might be very useful in Humane Life because through their own Default many do not actually know that they are Vertues or Vices The Lord Herbert makes that golden Rule St. Matth. 7. 12. Whatsoever things ye would that Men should do unto you do ye so to them to be a common Notion writ in the Hearts of Men and would they but call it frequently to mind and apply it to particular Actions by the Light of this they might know whether they have the Nature of Sin or no. The Application of this Rule to particular Actions would help us to the Knowledge of a great part of our Duty toward our Neighbour and therefore our Saviour says that this is the Law and the Prophets All my Duty toward my Neighbour depends upon it the whole Law concerning that is fulfill'd in it it is the Foundation of all Justice and Charity to Men. Hence it was that the Emperour Severus Alexander having heard this Sentence from the Jews or Christians we may rather think Christians caus'd it to be proclaim'd by the Cryer and to be writ on the Palace and on Publick Works see Jul. Capitolinus in Alexandro Severo To conclude then according to the Lord Herbert as that Proposition They must repent of their Sins if they would have God aton'd to them is writ upon the Hearts of Men so also is this Sentence All things whatsoever ye would that Men should do to you do ye likewise to them By which if they be not wanting to themselves they may know in a great measure what particular Actions are Sins and what they ought to do so that if that Proposition be not useful and instructive to them it is their own Fault Mr. Lock having said that when all Men shall be prov'd actually to know and allow all these and a thousand other such Rules there will be more Reason for admitting these for common Notions lest this Concession should be too liberal adds Yet after all universal Consent were there any in Moral Principles to Truths the Knowledge whereof might be attain'd otherwise would scarce prove them to be innate which is all I contend for Thus Mr. Lock But I do not well understand the meaning of the last words which is all that I contend for Doth which relate to that which is here express'd viz. that universal Consent to Truths the Knowledge whereof might be attain'd otherwise will scarce prove them to be innate so that this is all that he contends for Or doth it refer to something not express'd Mr. Lock having a Privilege to use Words otherwise than ordinary Persons are allow'd to do To this latter I incline that it is his meaning that he contends for no more than this that the Lord Herbert's Propositions are not innate tho' this is not express'd But let the one or the other be his meaning unless we were certain that by his Notitiae communes or Catholick Truths written in the Minds of Men the Lord Herbert meant the same that Mr. Lock doth by his innate Principles we cannot say that that honourable Person is at all concern'd or that Mr. Lock 's Conclusion doth contradict any thing that he hath deliver'd Thus I have consider'd all that Mr. Lock hath said in these five Sections wherein he hath to do with the Lord Herbert And now must it not seem strange that he should take upon him to examine what is written by a Person so eminent for his Parts as well as his Quality and after all have so little to say against him He only toucheth very slightly upon three of his Propositions or Notitiae communes viz. the first second and fifth and as to the third and fourth he had done better if he had pass'd them by as slightly unless he had said something more to the purpose Yea he is so far from confuting that he comes very far up toward the confirming all that the honourable Person design'd For he says plainly § 15. that all the five Propositions are such Truths as if rightly explain'd a rational Creature can hardly avoid giving his Assent to Now of such things as so soon as they are alledged all Men acknowledge them to be true or good they require no Proof or farther Discourse to be assured of the Truth or Goodness of them we need not fear to say that they seem to have a good Title to be receiv'd for common Notions or Catholick Truths written in the Hearts of Men which is all that the Lord Herbert contends
knowing intelligent Being in the World There was a time then when there was no knowing Being and when Knowledge began to be or else there has been also a knowing Being from Eternity If it be said There was a time when no Being had any Knowledge when that eternal Being was void of all Understanding I reply That then it was impossible there should ever have been any Knowledge it being impossible that things wholly void of Knowledge and operating blindly and without any Perception should produce a knowing Being Thus from the Consideration of our selves and what we infallibly find in our own Constitutions our Reason leads us to the knowledge of this certain and evident Truth that There is an eternal most powerful and most knowing Being which whether any one will please to call God it matters not the thing is evident Mr. Lock Essay l. 4. c. 10. § 1 2 3 4 5 6. There is no Truth which a Man may more evidently make out to himself than the Existence of a God Essay l. 1. c. 4. § 22. We have a more certain Knowledge of the Existence of a God than of any thing our Senses have not immediately discover'd to us Nay I presume I may say that we more certainly know that there is a God than that there is any thing else without us The being of a God is so fundamental a Truth and of that consequence that all Religion and genuine Morality depend thereon Essay l. 4. c. 10. § 6 7. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS Though the Essay says so much of our certain Knowledge of the Existence of a God yet it also tells us that he hath given us no innate Ideas of himself he has stamp'd no original Characters on our Minds wherein we may read his Being So l. 4. c. 10. § 1. It also informs us that Navigation hath discover'd whole Nations amongst whom there was to be found no Notion of a God adding that perhaps if we should with attention mind the Lives and Discourses of People not so far off we should have too much reason to fear that many in more civiliz'd Countries have no very strong and clear Impressions of a Deity upon their Minds See l. 1. c. 4. § 8. Now as to the second of these The Discovery of whole Nations amongst whom there was to be found no Notion of a God some think that Mr. Lock had done better if he had not urg'd it for they judge that it tends to the invalidating the Argument which is made use of not only by Christians but also as they tell us by the wisest and greatest Men among the Heathens to prove the Existence of a Deity The Argument is drawn from the universal Consent of Mankind as to the Being of a God What says Mr. Lock to this He denies that he doth invalidate it and it concern'd him to deny it for he who had said in his first Letter that no Arguments that are made use of to work the Persuasion of a God into Mens minds should be invalidated granting it to be of ill consequence should be very careful that he do not invalidate any such Arguments But I ask Doth not Mr. Lock invalidate the Argument from the universal Consent of Mankind who says expresly that besides the Atheists taken notice of amongst the Ancients and left branded upon the Records of History Navigation hath discover'd whole Nations amongst whom there was to be found no Notion of a God Can there be an universal Consent when besides particular Persons there are whole Nations that do not consent Yea so far they are from consenting that they have not so much as any Notion of a God Yet notwithstanding all this Mr. Lock asserts that he hath not said one word that does in the least invalidate the Argument for a God or does at all tend to the invalidating it For says he I think that the universal Consent of Mankind as to the being of a God amounts to thus much That the vastly greater Majority of Mankind have in all Ages of the World actually believ'd a God that a Majority of the remaining part have not actually disbeliev'd it and conquently those who have actually oppos'd the Belief of a God have truly been very few See his Third Letter p. 447 448. Where some perhaps would ask 1. What Mr. Lock means by the vastly greater Majority of Mankind If he had said A very great Majority of Mankind he might have been understood but The vastly greater Majority of Mankind implies that we may divide Mankind into two Majorities the one of which is vastly greater than the other 2. They may perhaps also ask Whether all that do not actually oppose the Being of a God or not actually disbelieve it do consent to it If they all do not then though they that actually oppose be truly very few yet they that consent not to it may be many and though it should be granted to be true that the majority of those that believe not that there is a God do not yet actually disbelieve it it will not follow that the Majority of them do consent to it for I am prone to think that none do truly and inwardly consent to it who do not believe it And therefore that which Mr. Lock says of not disbelieving and the fewness of those that oppose doth not help the matter at all 2. The Question then is Whether to use his own Words in respect of the incomparably greater Majority of those who have own'd the Belief of a God it may be said to be the universal Consent of Mankind Or Whether that can be said to have the universal Consent of Mankind to which besides particular Persons whole Nations do not consent Now I think there are very few that will not answer it in the Negative I cannot imagine that they who have urg'd the universal Consent of Mankind as an Argument did believe that besides particular Persons whole Nations did not consent And therefore it this which Mr. Lock urgeth be true the Argument from universal Consent seems to be totally invalidated Wherefore it will be necessary to examine how he hath acquitted himself in the proof of it viz. That there have been not only particular Persons Atheists but also whole Nations who had no Notion of a God 1. He mentions the Atheists taken notice of amongst the Ancients and left branded upon the Records of History but this only in general if he had descended to Particulars perhaps it would have been found that at least some of them were branded with Atheism because they did not favour the Heathen Polytheism or because they thought those that were accounted Gods not to be Gods which was the Accusation against Socrates See Diog. Laert. in vit Socrat. And 't is very observable that Cicero De Natura Deorum l. 1. names only two that thought there were no Gods viz. Diagoras Melius and Theodorus Cyrenaicus and Clemens Alcxandrinus defends them saying that they were Men of
in his First Letter p. 119. he clearly determines it in the Negative saying That the Complex Idea for which the sound GOD stands will not prove the real Existence of a Being answering that Idea as p. 121. he tells us that he thought it would not prove it when he writ his Essay I take notice of this because hereby he invalidates another Argument for proving the Existence of a Deity when but a little before viz. p. 114. he had affirm'd it to be of ill Consequence to invalidate any Arguments that are made use of to work the Persuasion of a God into Mens Minds and when otherwhere viz Essay l. 4. c. 10. § 7. he blames others for endeavouring to invalidate such Arguments Why then doth he that himself which he condemns in others He tells us in his First Letter p. 115. That when he writ his Essay he was unwilling to shew the Weakness of the Argument from the Idea of God but when he writ that Letter he had taken Courage and pronounceth roundly that the Idea mentioned will not prove the Existence of a God But to conclude how blame-worthy soever Mr. Lock may be for weakening these two Arguments made use of to prove the Existence of a Deity the one from the universal Consent of Mankind as to the Being of a God the other from the Idea that we have of him yet we should not judge charitably if we concluded thence that he doth not believe a God CHAP. II. Of the Attributes of God I Do not pretend to say how the Attributes are in God who is infinitely beyond the Reach of our narrow Capacities They do without doubt contain in them all possible Perfection Mr. Lock Essay l. 2. c. 17. § 1. His Wisdom Power and Goodness His Power Wisdom and Goodness are inexhaustible incomprehensible c. Essay l. 2. c. 17. § 1. I judge it as certain and as clear a Truth as any can any where be deliver'd That the invisible things of God from the Creation of the World are clearly seen being understood by the things that are made even his eternal Power and Godhead Essay l. 4. c. 10. § 7. He has in his Hand Rewards and Punishments and Power enough to call to Account the proudest Offender Essay l. 1. c. 3. § 6. What God can do must not be limited to what we can conceive of it This would be to make our Comprehension infinite or God finite If you do not understand the Operations of your own finite Mind do not deem it strange that you cannot comprehend the Operations of that eternal infinite Mind who made and governs all things Essay l. 4. c. 10. § 19. God is truly above all passive Power Essay l. 2. c. 21. § 2. He knows our Frailty pities our Weakness and requires of us no more than we are able to do and sees what is and what is not in our Power and so will judge as a kind and merciful Father Essay l. 2. c. 21. § 53. His Knowledge Happiness and Veracity The Eternal Being must also be Knowing and all other Knowing Beings must depend on him and have no other Ways of Knowledge or Extent of Power than what he gives them And if he made those he made also the less excellent Pieces of this Universe all inanimate Beings whereby his Omniscience Power and Providence will be established and all his other Attributes necessarily follow Essay l. 4. c. 10. § 12 13. God sees Men in the dark Essay l. 1. c. 3. § 6. Perception and Knowledge in that One Eternal Being where it has its Sourse 't is visible must be essentially inseparable from it the Third Letter p. 410. God Almighty is under the Necessity of being Happy Essay l. 2. c. 21. § 50. The Veracity of God is a Demonstration of the Truth of what he hath revealed the Third Letter p. 420. An infinitely Powerful and Wise being cannot but be Veracious Besides I speak in more Places than one of the Goodness of God another Evidence as I take it of his Veracity Answ. to Remarks p. 3. He cannot deceive nor be deceiv'd the Third Letter p. 147. His Immateriality Eternity and Ubiquity 'T is past all doubt that every one that examines and reasons right may come to a Certainty that God is perfectly Immaterial the Third Letter p. 147. The Idea of an Eternal Actual Knowing Being hath a Connexion with the Idea of Immateriality the First Letter p. 139. God fills Eternity and 't is hard to find a Reason why any one should doubt that he likewise fills Immensity His Infinite Being is certainly as boundless one way as another Essay l. 2. c. 15. § 3. We can conceive the Eternal Duration of the Almighty far different from that of Man or any other Finite Being His Duration being accompanied with Infinite Knowledge and Infinite Power he sees all things past and to come and they are no more distant from his Knowledge no farther removed from his Sight than the present They all lie under the same View And there is nothing which be cannot make exist each moment he pleases Essay l. 2. c. 15. § 12. We apply our Idea of Infinite to the First and Supreme Being primarily in respect of his Duration and Ubiquity Essay l. 2. c. 17. § 1. Motion cannot be attributed to God not because he is a Spirit but because he is an Infinite Spirit Essay l. 2. c. 23. § 21. His Infinity and other Perfections The great God of whom and from whom are all things is incomprehensibly Infinite but yet when we apply to that First and Supreme Being our Idea of Infinite in our weak and narrow Thoughts we do it primarily in respect of his Duration and Ubiquity and I think more figuratively to his Power Wisdom Goodness and other Attributes which are properly inexhaustible and incomprehensible c. For when we call them Infinite we have no other Idea of this Infinity but what carries with it some Reflexion on and Intimation of that Number or Extent of the Acts and Objects of God's Power Wisdom and Goodness which can never be supposed so great or so many which these Attributes will not surmount and exceed let us multiply them in our Thoughts with all the Infinity of endless Number Essay l. 2. c. 17. § 1. Whatsoever is first of all things must necessarily contain in it and actually have at least all the Perfections that can ever after exist Essay l. 4. c. 10. § 10. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS When Mr. Lock says that God is truly above all passive Power I shall not trouble my self to enquire whether the Expression Passive Power be proper or no His Meaning is that he can receive no Change That is most true which he saith of the Eternal Duration of God That we can conceive it far different from that of Man or any other Finite Being for his Duration hath not either Beginning or End of Days which agrees to no Finite Being neither to
Particularly Will Mr. Lock say that he was not cloath'd with it after his Resurrection If so I ask whether he will not plainly contradict our Blessed Saviour who told his Disciples after his being risen from the Dead that he had Flesh and Bones S. Luke 24. 39. It may then concern him to explain himself as to this also Mr. Lock 's Meaning also is not very plain when he says that the chief End of Christ's coming was to be a King and to be receiv'd as such It is most true that the Prophets foretold that he should be a King and it may be said that he came to fulfil the Prophecies that had been of him as it is also true that he was a King But I do not remember that it is said that the chief End of his coming was to be a King It is written that he came into the World to save Sinners to seek and to save that which was lost that whosoever believes in him should not perish but have everlasting Life that he was manifested to take away our Sins and to dissolve the works of the Devil 1 Joh. 3. 5 8. that he appear'd to put away Sin by the sacrifice of himself Heb. 9. 26. And when Pilate ask'd him whether he was a King he did not answer For this cause came I into the World that I might be a King but For this cause I came into the World that I should bear witness to the Truth S. John 18. 37. Among these several Ends I do not find the being a King expresly mention'd for one as every one of these is much less is it call'd the chief End Finally Mr. Lock himself Reasonab of Christian. p. 241. mentions something else as the great End His words are Pardon and Forgiveness of Sins and Salvation by him was the great End of his coming CHAP. VII Of our Advantages by Christ. IT will possibly he ask'd What Advantage have we by Jesus Christ Answ. 1. He found the World in a state of Darkness and Error in reference to the true God but the clear Revelation he brought with him dissipated the Darkness made the one invisible true God known to the World 2. A clear knowledge of their Duty was before wanting to Mankind but now there needs no more but to read the inspired Books all the Duties of Morality lie there clear and plain and easie to be understood There is not I think any of the Duties of Morality which he has not somewhere or other by himself and his Apostles inculcated over and over again to his Followers in express terms 3. The outward Forms of worshipping the Deity wanted a Reformation to this also our Saviour brought a Remedy in a plain spiritual and suitable Worship 4. Another great Advantage receiv'd by him is the great Encouragement he brought to a vertuous and pious Life great enough to surmount the Difficulties and Obstacles that lie in the way to it viz. by bringing Life and Immortality to light and by putting into the Scale on the side of Vertue an exceeding and immortal weight of Glory 5. One Advantage more we have by Jesus Christ is the promise of Assistance If we do what we can he will give us his Spirit to help us to do what and how we should Thus Mr. Lock Reason of Christian. p. 257 263 267 284 285 286 287 290 291 292. See also p. 234. OBSERVATIONS Here where Mr. Lock is treating purposely and largely of the Advantages that we have by Christ it is justly thought strange that he should not once make mention of his being a propitiation through faith in his blood Rom. 3. 25. A propitiation for our Sins yea also for the sins of the whole World 1 Joh. 2. 2. Our having Redemption through his Blood the forgiveness of Sins Eph. 1. 7. Col. 1. 14. Such an unconceivable Advantage as this that we have by him should not have been forgotten If Mr. Lock say that otherwhere in his Reasonableness of Christianity he doth mention our Redemption by Christ I grant it but 1. I do not at present remember that he any where in it mentions Redemption through his blood 2. If he do speak of it otherwhere how easie had it been for him to have nam'd it here among other Advantages and to have referr'd his Reader to the places where he had spoken of it If Mr. Lock say again that he set down as much as his Argument requir'd I answer That he did not Having moved the Question What Advantages we have by Christ and making it his business to answer it his Argument requir'd that such a transcendent Advantage as this should not have been omitted The truth is innumerable are the Advantages that we have by Christ so that it would not have been expected that he should give an account of them all To instance in some Beside the Benefits mention'd above we have by him Vocation Repentance Justification Peace with God Adoption Sanctification Audience of our Prayers Acceptance of our Persons Victory over Persecutions Afflictions and Death it self Salvation or Glorification c. And therefore that Mr. Lock though he intimates that our Advantages by Christ are great and many should insist only upon four or five and overlook all the rest especially that he should take no notice of that which is the foundation of many of the other viz. Christ's redeeming us by his Blood and being the Propitiation for our Sins is thought strange by others whatsoever he himself may think of it CHAP. VIII Of the Death and Satisfaction of Christ. HE that hath incurred Death by his own Transgression cannot lay down his Life for another as our Saviour professeth he did Mr. Lock Reasonab of Christian. p. 208. He declares Joh. 10. 1. 21. the laying down his life for both Jews and Gentiles Ibid. p. 118. He freely gave up himself to Death for us Second Vindicat. of Reason of Christian. p. 400. The Design of his coming was to be offer'd up a Lamb blameless and void of offence Ibid. p. 75. Satisfaction may plainly be collected out of several places in my Reasonab of Christian. Some whereof which I took out of the Gospels I mention'd in my Vindication p. 5. and others of them which I took out of the Epistles which I shall point out to you now As I say the design of our Saviour's coming was to be offer'd up and again I speak of the work of our Redemption words which in the Epistles are taken to imply Satisfaction Second Vindicat. of the Reasonab of Christian. p. 157. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS It had been taken notice of that Mr. Lock mentioning the Advantages of Christ's coming into the World hath not one Syllable of his Satisfying for us Mr. Lock in Vindication of himself among other things says that Satisfaction may be plainly collected out of his Reasonableness of Christianity where he alledges some Passages out of the Gospels and some out of the Epistles and he adds that those in the
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
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
the Worshipers of him ought to worship in Spirit S. John 4. 24. i. e. with their Minds or with application of Mind as Mr. Lock interprets it in his Reasonab of Christ. p. 286. which Minds are likewise spiritual immaterial Substances CHAP. XXVI Of Conscience Consideration and Freedom COnscience is nothing else but our own Opinion of our own Actions Mr. Lock Essay l. 1. c. 3. § 8. 'T is a Mistake to think that Men cannot change the displeasingness or Indifferency that is in Actions into Pleasure and Desire if they will do but what is in their Power A due Consideration will do it in some cases Any Action is render'd more or less pleasing only by the contemplation of the End and the being more or less persuaded of its tendency to it or necessary connexion with it This is certain that Morality establish'd upon its true Foundations cannot but determine the choice in any one that will but consider and he that will not be so much a rational Creature as to reflect seriously upon infinite Happiness and Misery must needs condemn himself as not making that use of his Understanding he should Ibid. l. 2. c. 21. § 69 79. By a due Consideration and examining any Good propos'd it is in our power to raise our Desires in a due proportion to the value of that Good whereby it may come to work upon the Will and be persued The Mind having in most cases as is evident dent in Experience a Power to suspend the Execution and Satisfaction of any of its Desires and so all one after another is at liberty to consider the Objects of them examine them on all sides and weigh them with others In this lies the Liberty Man has and from the not using it right comes all that variety of Mistakes Errours and Faults we run into in the Conduct of our Lives and our Endeavours after Happiness whilst we precipitate the Determination of our Wills and engage too soon before Examination Were we determined by any thing but the last Result of our Minds judging of the Good or Evil of any Action we were not free If we look upon those superiour Beings above us who enjoy perfect Happiness we shall have reason to judge they are more steadily determin'd in their choice of Good than we and yet we have no reason to think they are less happy or less free than we are Even the Freedom of the Almighty hinders not his being determin'd by what is best The constant desire of Happiness and the constraint it puts upon us to act for it no body I think accounts an Abridgment of Liberty or at least an Abridgment of Liberty to be complain'd of The suspending any particular Desire and keeping it from determining the Will and engaging us in Action is standing still where we are not sufficiently assur'd of the way Examination is the consulting a Guide the Determination of the Will upon Enquiry is following the direction of that Guide and he that hath a power to act or not to act according as such Determination directs is a free Agent such Determination abridges not that Power wherein Liberty consists The Care of our selves that we mistake not imaginary for real Happiness is the necessary Foundation of our Liberty and the stronger Ties we have to an unalterable Persuit of Happiness in general which is our greatest Good and which as such our Desires always follow the more are we free from any necessary Determination of our Will to any particular Action or from a necessary Compliance with our Desire set upon any particular and then appearing greater Good till we have duely examin'd whether it has a tendency to or be inconsistent with our real Happiness Let not any one say that he cannot govern his Passions nor hinder them from breaking out and carrying him into Action for what he can do before a Prince or a great Man he can do alone or in the presence of God if he will Ibid. § 46 47 48 49 50 51 53. God having reveal'd that there shall be a Day of Judgment I think that Foundation enough to conclude Men are free enough to he made answerable for their Actions and to receive according to what they have done The Third Letter p. 444. Thus Mr. Lock OBSERVATIONS When Mr. Lock writ his Essay he had not tied himself so strictly to use the Scripture-Language in speaking of matters of Religion as he had when he writ his Third Letter This appears as from other Instances so from his Definition or Description of Conscience If he had been so much for the using Scripture-Language then as he was afterward he would not have describ'd Conscience to be nothing else but our own Opinion of our own Actions He had spoke more consonantly to Scripture-Language if he had put the Word Knowledge or Testimony or Judgment instead of Opinion For according to Scripture Conscience is that within us which knows and also witnesses and judges of our Actions Conversations c. as it also judges of the Actions and Conversations of others 1. Knowledge is in Scripture attributed to the Heart or Conscience Thus Eccles. 7. 22. Thine own Heart knows that thou thy self hast cursed others The Vulgar reads Thy Conscience knows c. Heart is frequently put for Conscience see 1 Sam. 24. 5. and 2 Sam. 24. 10. and 1 Joh. 3. 19 20 21 c. The Hebrew Word which both the Seventy and also our Translation in the Margin renders Conscience Eccles. 10. 20. viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 denotes Knowledge as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word which the Chaldee Paraphrast there useth also doth they both coming from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Curse not the King no not in thy thought so our Translation hath it in the Text but in the Margin instead of Thy Thought we have Thy Conscience and so the Meaning is Curse not the King though thou do it so secretly that none but thine own Heart or Conscience can know it And it is observable that Gen. 43. 22. where Joseph's Brethren say We know not who put our money in our sacks instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We know not the Vulgar hath Non est in nostra Conscientia 2. Conscience is frequently said in Scripture to bear witness My Conscience bearing me witness so the Apostle Rom. 9. 1. who also 2 Cor. 1. 12. speaks of the Testimony of his Conscience and Rom. 2. 15. says of the Heathens that their Conscience did bear witness 3. Judging is also attributed to the Heart or Conscience in Scripture Thus 1 John 3. 20. If our Heart i. e. our Conscience condemn us and so again If our Heart or Conscience condemn us not So S. Paul 1 Cor. 8. 7. Some with Conscience of an Idol to this hour eat of somewhat as offered to an Idol With Conscience of an Idol i. e. their Conscience judging that an Idol was something And so S. Peter If a man for Conscience toward God endure
grief 1 Pet. 2. 19. For Conscience toward God i. e. because his Conscience judgeth that he ought to obey God Thus we read of Conscience its knowing witnessing and judging but where will Mr. Lock find any thing that favours his Description viz. that it is nothing else but our Opinion c. In his Essay l. 4. c. 15. § 3. he makes Opinion to be the receiving a Proposition for true without certain Knowledge that it is so But Conscience both knows as we have seen and also certainly knows There is one indeed that is greater than our Consciences and knows all things and with such Certainty as that nothing can compare with him But that transcendent Certainty of the Divine Knowledge being excepted there is no Knowledge that can pretend to greater and more absolute Certainty than that of Conscience And therefore even according to Mr. Lock it is impossible that Conscience should be an Opinion But this is not the only Fault in Mr. Lock 's Description of Conscience It is says he our own Opinion of our own Actions as if Mens Consciences had to do only with Actions yea only with our own Actions But Conscience will not have its Authority or Jurisdiction confin'd within so narrow Limits It will sit as Judge not only upon Mens Actions but also upon their Speeches yea upon our Thoughts Affections Aims Purposes or Intentions and the Sincerity of them None of these is or can be hid from the Eye of Conscience which knows them all and is thereby qualified to be both Witness and Judge of them St. Paul Rom. 9. 1 2. appeals to his Conscience as witness of his speaking the Truth and of the great Affection he bare to his Country-men I say the Truth in Christ I lye not my Conscience bearing me witness that I have great Heaviness and continual Sorrow in my Heart c. And in like manner 2 Cor. 1. 12. he tells of his Conscience's bearing Testimony of his Conversation and Sincerity Our Rejoycing is this the Testimony of our Conscience that in Simplicity and godly Sincerity we have had our Conversation in the World I add That tho' Mr. Lock only mentions our own Actions yet it is apparent even from Scripture that Conscience also judgeth of the Actions and Conversations of others We commend our selves to every Man's Conscience says the Apostle 2 Cor. 4. 2. i. e. We endeavour to order our Speech Actions and Conversation so as that every Man's Conscience cannot but judge and think well of them So 2 Cor. 5. 11. We says he are made manifest to God and I trust that we are also made manifest in your Consciences q. d. God knows and is Witness of our sincere Purpose and I hope that your Consciences are also satisfied of it and ready to bear Testimony to it Add to these 1 Cor. 10. 28 29. If any Man say to you This is offer'd in Sacrifice to Idols eat not for his sake that shew'd it and for Conscience sake Conscience I say not thine own but the others for why is my Liberty judg'd of another Man's Conscience In this Case tho' I am satisfied in mine own Conscience that I am at liberty and may lawfully eat yet I must forbear for the sake of the other Man's Conscience For why should my Liberty be judged by another's Conscience i. e. Why should I use my Liberty and eat then when another Man's Conscience will judge that I have sinn'd in eating and entertain Jealousies or hard Thoughts of me This may suffice for Mr. Lock 's Description of Conscience He might have express'd himself more plainly than he has done when he says That Morality establish'd upon its true Foundations cannot but determine the Choice in any one who will but consider He hath not plainly told us what those true Foundations are but if he mean by them that infinite Happiness and Misery those Rewards and Punishments of another Life which he mentions in the Words following I would ask whether it be not rather the Consideration of those Foundations which so effectually determines the Choice than the Consideration of the Morality that is established upon them I the rather ask this Question because Mr. Lock in this very Place Essay l. 2. c. 21. § 70. says expresly That the Rewards and Punishments of another Life which the Almighty hath establish'd as the Enforcements of his Laws are of weight enough to determine the Choice against whatever Pleasure or Pain this Life can shew He speaks also of the Foundations of Morality in Essay l. 4. c. 3. § 18. but there likewise he doth not acquaint us what those Foundations are His Words are these The Idea of a Supreme Being Infinite in Power Goodness and Wisdom whose Workmanship we are and on whom we depend and the Idea of our selves as understanding rational Creatures being such as are clear in us would I suppose if duly considered and persued afford such Foundations of our Duty and Rules of Action as might place Morality amongst the Sciences capable of Demonstration wherein I doubt not but from Principles as incontestable as those of the Mathematicks by necessary Consequences the Measures of Right and Wrong might be made out Mr. Lock says in Essay l. 2. c. 21. § 48. Were we determin'd by any thing but the last Result of our own Minds judging of the good or evil of any Action we were not free Now if this be true that the last Result of our Mind judging of the good or evil of any Action determines us and nothing else how comes it that he affirms Ibid. § 31 33 34. That Uneasiness determines the Will and also takes so much Pains to prove it Ibid. § 36 37 38 39 40 I would know whether Uneasiness doth determine the Wills of those who enjoy complete Happiness as the Spirits of Just Men made perfect do Tho' I do not deny that too many Mens Desires and sensual Appetites causing uneasiness in them do determine them to act contrary to the last Result of their Minds judging the Action to be evil And so to use Mr. Lock 's Words Ibid. § 35. they are from time to time in the State of that unhappy Complainer Video meliora proboque deteriora sequor which Sentence is allow'd for â—rue and made good by constant Experience Therefore in the Heathen Poets we meet with many such Complaints The Words immediately preceding those Video meliora c. are these Sed trahit invitam nova vis aliudque Cupido Mens aliud suadet That unhappy Wretch viz. Medea complains that tho' her Mind saw and approv'd and persuaded her to the better yet the Vehemence of her Desire persuaded yea even hurried her to the worse and made her unwillingly follow it In like manner in Euripides's Medea Act 4. vers fin she complains that her Passion overcame her Reason 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Yea we find the like Complaints in Holy Writ I delight in the Law of God after the inward Man
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
difficult to be known And therefore this can be but a very uncertain Rule of Humane Practice and serve but very little to the Conduct of our Lives and is therefore very unfit to be assign'd as an innate practical Principle § 18. For let us consider this Proposition as to its meaning for it is the Sense and not sound that is and must be the Principle or common Notion viz. Vertue is the best Worship of God i. e. is most acceptable to him which is Vertue be taken as most commonly it is for those Actions which according to the different Opinions of several Countries are accounted laudable will be a Proposition so far from being certain that it will not be true If Vertue be taken for Actions conformable to God's Will or to the Rule prescribed by God which is the true and only Measure of Vertue when Vertue is us'd to signifie what is in its own Nature right and good then this Proposition That Vertue is the best Worship of God will be most true and certain but of very little use in Humane Life since it will amount to no more but this viz. That God is pleased with the doing of what he commands which a Man may certainly know to be true without knowing what it is that God doth command and so be as far from any Rule or Principle of his Actions as he was before And I think very few will take a Proposition which amounts to no more than this viz. That God is pleased with the doing of what he himself commands for an innate moral Principle writ on the Minds of all Men how true and certain soever it may be since it teaches so little Whosoever does so will have Reason to think Hundreds of Propositions innate Principles since there are many which have as good a Title as this to be receiv'd for such which no body yet ever put into that Rank of innate Principles § 19. Nor is the Fourth Proposition viz. Men must repent of their Sins much more instructive till what those Actions are that are meant by Sins are set down For the Word Peccata or Sins being put as it usually is to signifie in general ill Actions that will draw on Punishment upon the Doers what great Principle of Morality can that be to tell us we should be sorry and cease to do that which will bring Mischief upon us without knowing what those particular Actions are that will do so Indeed this is a very true Proposition and fit to be inculcated on and receiv'd by those who are suppos'd to have been taught what Actions in all kinds are Sins but neither this nor the former can be imagin'd to be innate Principles nor to be of any use if they were innate unless the particular Measures and Bounds of all Vertues and Vices were engraven in Mens Minds and were innate Principles also which I think is very much to be doubted And therefore I imagine it will scarce seem possible that God should engrave Principles in Mens Minds in Words of uncertain Signification such as are Vertues and Sins which amongst different Men stand for different things Nay it cannot be in Words at all which being in most of these Principles very general Names cannot be understood but by knowing the Particulars comprehended under them And in the practical Instances the Measures must be taken from the Knowledge of the Actions themselves and the Rules of them abstracted from Words and antecedent to the Knowledge of Names which Rules a Man must know what Language soever he chance to learn whether English or Japan or if he should learn no Language at all or never should understand the use of Words as happens in the Case of dumb and deaf Men. When it shall be made out that Men ignorant of Words or untaught by the Laws and Customs of their Country that it is part of the Worship of God not to kill another Man not to know more Women than one not to procure Abortion not to expose their Children not to take from another what is his tho' we want it our selves but on the contrary to relieve and supply his Wants and whenever we have done the contrary we ought to repent be sorry and resolve to do so no more When I say all Men shall be proved actually to know and allow all these and a thousand other such Rules all which come under these two general Words made use of above viz. Vertues and Sins there will be more Reason for admitting these and the like for common Notions and practical Principles yet after all universal Consent were there any in Moral Principles to Truths the Knowledge whereof might be attain'd otherwise would searce prove them to be innate which is all I contend for Thus far Mr. Lock and this is all that he answers to the Lord Herbert it remains that I briefly reply to it Ad. § 15. Here in his Text Mr. Lock speaks of the Lord Herbert's assigning innate Principles giving Marks of these innate Principles and saying so or so of them Also in his Margin he hath these Words Lord Herbert's innate Principles examined and the very same Words are found again in his Margin ad § 19. And yet I do not observe that the Lord Herbert either in his Treatise de Veritate or in that which he intitles Religio Laici doth as much as once mention either the Expression Innate Principles or the Word Innate nor doth Mr. Lock direct us to any Place in either of those Treatises where he doth mention them 'T is true that in his Treatise de Veritate there is frequent mention of Communes Notitiae and in his Religio Laici of Veritates Catholicae and we may suppose that Mr. Lock took these common Notions or Notices and Catholick Verities to be the same with his innate Principles In which if he be mistaken he both makes the Lord Herbert to say that which he doth not and withal while he goes about to prove that those Catholick Verities are not innate Principles he says nothing at all against that Honourable Person who never affirm'd them to be so If it be said that the Lord Herbert affirms these Catholick Verities to be written by God upon the Hearts of all Men which is the same with their being innate I answer that it is very true that he doth say more than once that they are in foro interno or in foro interiori descriptae in mente humana a Deo O. M. descriptae but I question whether it will be for Mr. Lock 's Advantage to say that the being written by God in the Heart and being innate are the same for it may endanger the Overthrow of all that he says concerning innate Principles and force him to quit his darling Opinion that there are none For if the Question be put whether there be any Principles written in the Hearts of Men St. Paul seems to resolve it affirmatively that there are Rom. 2. 14 15. When